IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v79y2020ics0149718919303222.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing competency-based evaluation course impacts: A mixed methods case study

Author

Listed:
  • Poth, Cheryl N.
  • Searle, Michelle
  • Aquilina, Alexandra M.
  • Ge, Jenny
  • Elder, Alexa

Abstract

The contexts in which evaluators develop and apply their expertise are increasingly complex; evaluator education needs to provide robust opportunities to support and assess the progressive, lifelong development of relevant knowledge and skills. This mixed methods case study begins to address the dearth of empirical evidence assessing the impacts and learner experiences of competency-based approaches to evaluator education. A decade-in-the-making doctoral evaluation course based on the Canadian Evaluation Society’s Competencies for Canadian Evaluation Practice created an opportune study setting. We applied a systems perspective to Stufflebeam’s Context, Input, Process, and Product (CIPP) model to frame the case study analysis and presentation of the complex impacts generated by pre/post course competency self-assessments and reflections, integrated with an end-of-course focus group. Seven insights shed new light on the effective course design and implementation features for developing intended and unintended evaluator competencies. We conclude with a discussion of the theoretical, practical, and methodological implications for effective competency-based evaluator education.

Suggested Citation

  • Poth, Cheryl N. & Searle, Michelle & Aquilina, Alexandra M. & Ge, Jenny & Elder, Alexa, 2020. "Assessing competency-based evaluation course impacts: A mixed methods case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:79:y:2020:i:c:s0149718919303222
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101789
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718919303222
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101789?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carol A. Lundberg, 2003. "The Influence of Time-Limitations, Faculty, and Peer Relationships on Adult Student Learning: A Causal Model," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 74(6), pages 665-688, November.
    2. Altschuld, James W., 1995. "Developing an evaluation program: Challenges in the teaching of evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 259-265.
    3. Gullickson, Amy M. & King, Jean A. & LaVelle, John M. & Clinton, Janet M., 2019. "The current state of evaluator education: A situation analysis and call to action," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 20-30.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sowl, Stephanie & Amrein-Beardsley, Audrey & Collins, Clarin, 2022. "Teaching program evaluation: How blending theory and practice enhance student-evaluator competencies in an education policy graduate program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. King, Jean A. & Ayoo, Sandra, 2020. "What do we know about evaluator education? A review of peer-reviewed publications (1978–2018)," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    2. LaVelle, John M. & Davies, Randall, 2021. "Seeking consensus: Defining foundational concepts for a graduate level introductory program evaluation course," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    3. Peter Riley Bahr & Claire A. Boeck & Phyllis A. Cummins, 2022. "Is Age Just a Number? A Statewide Investigation of Community College Students’ Age, Classroom Context, and Course Outcomes in College Math and English," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 63(4), pages 631-671, June.
    4. King, Jean A. & Clinton, Janet, 2022. "Introduction to the special issue on evaluator education," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    5. Arlette Beltrán Barco & Karlos La Serna Studzinski, 2008. "¿Qué explica el rendimiento académico en el primer año de estudios universitarios? Un estudio de caso en la Universidad del Pacífico," Working Papers 08-09, Centro de Investigación, Universidad del Pacífico.
    6. Downes, Jenni & Gullickson, Amy M., 2022. "What does it mean for an evaluation to be ‘valid’? A critical synthesis of evaluation literature," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    7. LaVelle, John M. & Lovato, Chris & Stephenson, Clayton L., 2020. "Pedagogical considerations for the teaching of evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:79:y:2020:i:c:s0149718919303222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.