IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v79y2020ics0149718919303210.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What do we know about evaluator education? A review of peer-reviewed publications (1978–2018)

Author

Listed:
  • King, Jean A.
  • Ayoo, Sandra

Abstract

This article reviews peer-reviewed writings on evaluator education from 1978 to 2018. Despite the topic’s presumed importance, scholars to date have not extensively addressed it in peer-reviewed publications. The article first describes the methods used to select articles and the conceptual framework for their analysis. It then presents the content of 64 articles selected for review, divided into two major categories: research studies, and reflective case narratives. We further divide research studies into program directories and empirical studies; the case narratives provide information on programs, curriculum, and instruction and minimally on students/faculty. The article concludes with thoughts on next steps for research on evaluator education.

Suggested Citation

  • 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).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:79:y:2020:i:c:s0149718919303210
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101785
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718919303210
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101785?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. Willer, Barry S. & Bartlett, Donald P. & Northman, John E., 1978. "Simulation as a method for teaching program evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 221-228, January.
    2. Morris, Michael, 1992. "Field experiences in evaluation courses : Increasing their value to students and sponsors," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 61-66, January.
    3. Froncek, Benjamin & Mazziotta, Agostino & Piper, Verena & Rohmann, Anette, 2018. "Evaluator competencies in the context of diversity training: The practitioners’ point of view," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 122-128.
    4. Weeks, Edward C., 1982. "The value of experiential approaches to evaluation training," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 21-30, January.
    5. Kelley, John M. & Jones, Brian J., 1992. "Guest editors' introduction : Teaching evaluation by doing it: A multiple-utility approach," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 55-59, January.
    6. 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.
    7. 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. Ayoo, Sandra, 2023. "Perceptions of evaluator professional autonomy in North American evaluation practice," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    2. King, Jean A. & Clinton, Janet, 2022. "Introduction to the special issue on evaluator education," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    3. 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).
    4. Connors, Susan C. & Komaie, Goldie & Proctor, Jeff, 2023. "Exploring the value of pro bono evaluation work as a method to build evaluator competencies and strengthen organizational capacity," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 100(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. 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).
    2. 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).
    3. 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).
    4. P. Ann Pauley & Stan Cohen, 1984. "Facilitating Data-Based Decision-Making," Evaluation Review, , vol. 8(2), pages 205-224, April.
    5. King, Jean A. & Clinton, Janet, 2022. "Introduction to the special issue on evaluator education," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    6. Morris, Michael, 2004. "Not drinking the poison you name: reflections on teaching ethics to evaluators in for-profit settings," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 365-369, August.
    7. Diaz, John & Chaudhary, Anil Kumar & Jayaratne, K.S.U. & Assan, Elsie, 2020. "Expanding evaluator competency research: Exploring competencies for program evaluation using the context of non-formal education," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    8. 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).
    9. LaVelle, John M. & Lovato, Chris & Stephenson, Clayton L., 2020. "Pedagogical considerations for the teaching of evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    10. Connors, Susan C. & Komaie, Goldie & Proctor, Jeff, 2023. "Exploring the value of pro bono evaluation work as a method to build evaluator competencies and strengthen organizational capacity," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 100(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:s0149718919303210. 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.