|
||||||
 In reponse to the earlier post on genuine evaluation snippets from around the globe, Irene Guijt raised a very important question about the tensions between several hallmarks of genuine evaluation: Some important contrasts presented but also one that doesn’t entirely align – tell the whole story but cut to the chase? Include activities, Read the whole post –> Managing genuine evaluation paradoxes: Genuine reporting What does the term “genuine evaluation” mean to the rest of the planet, including those who don’t identify as “evaluators”? We’ve collated a few snippets from our Google Alerts file to give a picture that is sometimes humorous, sometimes actually very insightful. Of particular interest as we refine our thinking are the similar themes in the Read the whole post –> “Genuine evaluation” snippets from across the globe  A constant theme in this blog is exploring the many dimensions of what it means to do genuine evaluation. This week we have some inspiration from the contributions to Urban Read the whole post –> The Friday Funny: ‘Don’t get genuine with me’ and other Urban Dictionary gems  If you can’t be in the Netherlands this week for the conference on complexity and evaluation, you can follow it through the conference blog Read the whole post –> Evaluation revisited – conference this week on complexity and evaluation Michael Scriven has had us working our gray matter harder than usual this week trying to come up with a new ‘Copernican’ revolution for evaluation. The ensuing discussion has covered, among other things, the point that certain ['Northern' and especially 'North American'] views of the world (and their accompanying assumptions, methodologies) have, historically, been treated as ‘the default’. Let’s try for a very southern hemisphere-flavored candidate for rethinking evaluation globally – the realization that the various different evaluation theories, approaches, models, and methodologies are not in fact ideologies to which one swears lifelong allegiance. Rather, some of the best genuine evaluations are the ones that ’sample across the silos’ and combine approaches that were heretofore thought to be incompatible Read the whole post –> Rethinking evaluation’s intellectual silos Being able to learn from failure is an important part of Genuine Evaluation. A recent paper by Cannona and Edmondson explores technical and organizational barriers to doing this. Are there good examples of addressing these in monitoring systems or evaluation Read the whole post –> Learning from failure Just over 7 weeks ago we decided to stop just talking to each other about the notion of genuine evaluation and launch a blog where we could continue to talk about the ideas AND include others in the conversation, highlighting current examples of good and bad evaluation practice, recalling memorable examples from the past, and exploring different aspects of what it means to do evaluation that is not inaccurate, invalid, unevaluative, misdirected, insincere, or misconstrued. Where are our readers from? What’s been on the discussion menu so far? What’s planned for the next few Read the whole post –> Who’s reading Genuine Evaluation? When we think about the type of evaluation we want to do and to support, and the types we want to hold up for critique and as cautionary tales, five elements stand out: VALUE-BASED -transparent and defensible values (criteria of merit and worth and standards of performance) Read the whole post –> What is Genuine Evaluation? |
||||||
|
Copyright © 2010 Genuine Evaluation - All Rights Reserved |
||||||
Recent Comments