Promoting evaluation capacity building in a complex adaptive system

Lawrenz, Frances; Kollmann, Elizabeth Kunz; King, Jean A.; Bequette, Marjorie; Pattison, Scott; Nelson, Amy Grack; Cohn, Sarah D.; Cardiel, Christopher L. B.; Iacovelli, Stephanie; Eliou, Gayra Ostgaard; Goss, Juli; Causey, Lauren; Sinkey, Anne; Beyer, Marta; Francisco, Melanie

doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.04.005

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this chapter, we share highlights from the second focus, which is of the most interest for understanding ECB in the ISE field. Further findings from this study, which used observations, detailed interviews, and document analysis, are published elsewhere (Grack Nelson et al., ; Lawrenz et al., ).…”

Section: What Can We Learn From a Field‐wide Effort To Build Evaluatimentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation Capacity Building for Informal STEM Education: Working for Success Across the Field

Bequette

Cardiel

Cohn³

et al. 2019

New Drctns Evaluation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Informal STEM education (ISE) organizations, especially museums, have used evaluation productively but unevenly. We argue that advancing evaluation in ISE requires that evaluation capacity building (ECB) broadens to include not only professional evaluators but also other professionals such as educators, exhibit developers, activity facilitators, and institutional leaders. We identify four categories of evaluation capacity: evaluation skill and knowledge, use of evaluation, organizational systems related to conducting or integrating evaluation, and values related to evaluation. We studied a field‐wide effort to build evaluation capacity across a network of organizations and found it important to address individuals’ evaluation capacities as well as capacities at the organizational level. Organizational factors that support ECB included redundancy of evaluation capacities across multiple people in an organization, institutional coherence around the value of evaluation, and recognition that ECB can be led from multiple levels of an organizational hierarchy. We argue that the increasing emphasis on evaluation in the ISE field represents an exciting opportunity and that, with targeted strategies and investments, ECB holds great promise for the future of ISE and ISE evaluation.

show abstract

Section: What Can We Learn From a Field‐wide Effort To Build Evaluatimentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation Capacity Building for Informal STEM Education: Working for Success Across the Field

Bequette

Cardiel

Cohn³

et al. 2019

New Drctns Evaluation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Ecb Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nylen and Sridharan (2020) examined the added value of collaborations and highlighted how knowledge had diffused externally to spread beyond the program's boundaries. Another set of articles (e.g., Grack Nelson et al, 2019;Lawrenz et al, 2018) used a complex adaptive system perspective to examine ECB in a network of science education organizations. Grack Nelson et al (2019) found that using a STCS lens facilitated, and later made visible, the complex flows and impact of information across participants and groups within the network; these findings may not have been as evident using traditional ECB and evaluation theories.…”

Section: Ecb and Stcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although there has been increased literature related to doing STCS‐informed evaluation, there has not been a corresponding increase in literature on how to strengthen participants’ capacity to do STCS‐informed evaluation. The exception includes a small number of recent studies (e.g., King, 2020; Lawrenz et al., 2018; Sridharan & Nakaima, 2020) that have paid significant and purposeful attention to the intersection of STCS and ECB. Consequently, Nakaima and Sridharan (2020) appealed for improved stories of the “dynamics of organizational capacity building from specific case studies of organizations” (p. 3).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Applying a systems and complexity lens to building evaluation capacity: Learning from a multicountry donor's experience

Vang¹,

Moore

Nicklin

2021

New Drctns Evaluation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the evaluation field has increasingly integrated systems thinking and complexity science (STCS) into its work, little has been published on how capacity is built to do STCS‐informed evaluation. The chapter helps address this gap by exploring paired concepts drawn from the STCS and evaluation capacity building (ECB) literature: adaptive action and culture; boundaries and systems and structures; interrelationships and leadership; and perspectives and communication. The ideas are grounded with illustrative examples from a reflective case narrative of an international donor organization and the system surrounding it. Ultimately, the case shares how STCS can reimagine ECB and how increased capacity of the participants and organization can change the broader system.

show abstract

“…Borra and Boult (2017) stressed knowledge swapping between companies and external talents that allows for innovation and the creation of value of new products and services (p. 12). According to Lawrenz et al (2018) "Together, these aspects made partners open to trying out new products and practices" (p. 56). This is further supported by Grack Nelson et al 2018who reported that the organization could adjust their practices based on partners' feedback and needs, revising goals for moving ahead accordingly.…”

Section: Theme 3: Feedback Loopsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capacity-Building for Sustainability

Shah-Nelson

Mayo

Ebuwei

2020

International Journal of Technology-Enabled Student Support Services

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An American K-12 cooperative educational services provider (“The Agency”) has an issue: partner school districts are saving money by building internal capacity for professional development, rather than fully utilizing expertise from the Agency. The aim of this evidence-based case study is to inform the Agency on capacity-building for innovation. The researchers performed three separate rapid evidence assessments, followed by a standard systematic review process to synthesize findings across 31 studies. Key findings identified from the research include (1) organizational capacity and program evaluation lead to organizational sustainability, (2) agency leadership should guide strategic organizational change in order to establish a shared vision for evaluation and feedback, and (3) organizations benefit from practicing continuous and ongoing learning through feedback loops. The findings of this study may be generalizable to other similar educational service providers or non-profits looking to strengthen organizational capacity and partnerships.

show abstract

Promoting evaluation capacity building in a complex adaptive system

Cited by 9 publications

References 17 publications

Evaluation Capacity Building for Informal STEM Education: Working for Success Across the Field

Evaluation Capacity Building for Informal STEM Education: Working for Success Across the Field

Applying a systems and complexity lens to building evaluation capacity: Learning from a multicountry donor's experience

Capacity-Building for Sustainability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About