Pub Date : 2024-07-24DOI: 10.1177/1035719x241264582
{"title":"Evaluator perspective: A conversation with the managing director of the Australian Centre for Evaluation (ACE) – Eleanor Williams","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/1035719x241264582","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x241264582","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":508734,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":"51 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141807042","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-19DOI: 10.1177/1035719x241266964
Kizzy Gandy
When it comes to qualitative evaluation data, is more always better and what determines value for money? This article proposes two steps for evaluators and those responsible for procuring evaluations to answer the question ‘how many interviews or focus groups are enough?’ Step 1 is to consider the nature of the evaluation question to determine the sampling goal, importance of thematic saturation, and an appropriate sampling strategy. The article provides guidance on how many interviews and focus groups are needed to achieve different levels of thematic saturation based on empirical tests in the published literature. Step 2 is to check the skills of the evaluator, including whether they integrate behavioural science into their discussion guide and analysis to mitigate bias. This will determine – regardless of the number of interviews and focus groups – whether they will be able to generate useful insights for decision-making from the data. The article concludes that it is not sufficient to assess an evaluation plan’s value for money by sample size alone and consideration also must be given to the characteristics of the evaluation design and the skills of the evaluators undertaking the project.
{"title":"How many interviews or focus groups are enough?","authors":"Kizzy Gandy","doi":"10.1177/1035719x241266964","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x241266964","url":null,"abstract":"When it comes to qualitative evaluation data, is more always better and what determines value for money? This article proposes two steps for evaluators and those responsible for procuring evaluations to answer the question ‘how many interviews or focus groups are enough?’ Step 1 is to consider the nature of the evaluation question to determine the sampling goal, importance of thematic saturation, and an appropriate sampling strategy. The article provides guidance on how many interviews and focus groups are needed to achieve different levels of thematic saturation based on empirical tests in the published literature. Step 2 is to check the skills of the evaluator, including whether they integrate behavioural science into their discussion guide and analysis to mitigate bias. This will determine – regardless of the number of interviews and focus groups – whether they will be able to generate useful insights for decision-making from the data. The article concludes that it is not sufficient to assess an evaluation plan’s value for money by sample size alone and consideration also must be given to the characteristics of the evaluation design and the skills of the evaluators undertaking the project.","PeriodicalId":508734,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":"4 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141822369","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-15DOI: 10.1177/1035719x241254628
Pauline Phiri
{"title":"The institutionalisation of evaluation in Asia-Pacific","authors":"Pauline Phiri","doi":"10.1177/1035719x241254628","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x241254628","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":508734,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":"117 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140977935","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-23DOI: 10.1177/1035719x241242199
{"title":"Evaluator perspective: A conversation with Australian Evaluation Society fellow – John Guenther","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/1035719x241242199","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x241242199","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":508734,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":"100 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140669856","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-18DOI: 10.1177/1035719x241239972
Rose Whitau, Latoya Bolton-Black, Olivia Slater
Education and engagement programs for Aboriginal young people tend to propagate Western, colonial paradigms: Aboriginal populations are targeted, yet Aboriginal voices are rarely heard throughout the planning, delivery, and evaluation stages of program implementation. It is essential that the voices of program participants – and the communities within which these programs serve – are provided a platform to determine what those outcomes are to be, and how they are to be achieved. Shooting Stars is a holistic engagement program for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander girls based in 20 remote and regional schools in Western Australia and South Australia. Shooting Stars staff (85% Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) facilitate yarning circles with program participants, local steering committees, and broader community groups in order to tailor program delivery to local needs and assess the effectiveness of the program. From 2020 to 2021, we yarned with our participants, communities, and localised steering committees about their definitions of success and how Shooting Stars can help to grow successful young women. In this article, we explore a complex, multidimensional definition of success defined by program participants and their communities, and describe how we are reflecting and implementing this definition across program delivery and evaluation.
{"title":"‘Fanning the flame’: Aboriginal girls, women, and their communities define success for the Shooting Stars empowerment program","authors":"Rose Whitau, Latoya Bolton-Black, Olivia Slater","doi":"10.1177/1035719x241239972","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x241239972","url":null,"abstract":"Education and engagement programs for Aboriginal young people tend to propagate Western, colonial paradigms: Aboriginal populations are targeted, yet Aboriginal voices are rarely heard throughout the planning, delivery, and evaluation stages of program implementation. It is essential that the voices of program participants – and the communities within which these programs serve – are provided a platform to determine what those outcomes are to be, and how they are to be achieved. Shooting Stars is a holistic engagement program for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander girls based in 20 remote and regional schools in Western Australia and South Australia. Shooting Stars staff (85% Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander) facilitate yarning circles with program participants, local steering committees, and broader community groups in order to tailor program delivery to local needs and assess the effectiveness of the program. From 2020 to 2021, we yarned with our participants, communities, and localised steering committees about their definitions of success and how Shooting Stars can help to grow successful young women. In this article, we explore a complex, multidimensional definition of success defined by program participants and their communities, and describe how we are reflecting and implementing this definition across program delivery and evaluation.","PeriodicalId":508734,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":" 17","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140687344","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-04-03DOI: 10.1177/1035719x241244810
J. Guenther
{"title":"Evaluation management: How to commission and conduct evaluations that matter","authors":"J. Guenther","doi":"10.1177/1035719x241244810","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x241244810","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":508734,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":"13 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140747965","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-03-07DOI: 10.1177/1035719x241237326
David Turner, Julie Elliott, Jill Thomas, Susan Garner, Martina Donkers
This article describes an online peer-group mentoring program to support career-long professional development, professional identity development, and stronger experiential peer-to-peer learning. It was developed in response to ongoing interest among members of the Australian Evaluation Society (AES), a professional association that aims to improve the theory, practice, and use of evaluation. It is intended to complement the technical training that can be provided through workshops or professional training and conventional one-on-one mentoring that members may access in other ways. Now in its third year, the program refined its focus and major objectives from promoting technical skills and knowledge to a broader focus on building professional networks, reducing professional isolation, and enhancing professional confidence. Two distinct approaches emerged from the first two years of the program, with each approach appealing to different participants. Some groups focused broadly on career development and professional network building, while others focused on topics of particular interest to participants. The peer-group approach is relevant to other professional associations in which practitioners tend to work alone or in small groups. Evaluation findings can inform other such associations about designing and implementing online group mentoring programs for their members.
{"title":"Online peer-group mentoring: An innovative mentoring program within an Australian professional association","authors":"David Turner, Julie Elliott, Jill Thomas, Susan Garner, Martina Donkers","doi":"10.1177/1035719x241237326","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x241237326","url":null,"abstract":"This article describes an online peer-group mentoring program to support career-long professional development, professional identity development, and stronger experiential peer-to-peer learning. It was developed in response to ongoing interest among members of the Australian Evaluation Society (AES), a professional association that aims to improve the theory, practice, and use of evaluation. It is intended to complement the technical training that can be provided through workshops or professional training and conventional one-on-one mentoring that members may access in other ways. Now in its third year, the program refined its focus and major objectives from promoting technical skills and knowledge to a broader focus on building professional networks, reducing professional isolation, and enhancing professional confidence. Two distinct approaches emerged from the first two years of the program, with each approach appealing to different participants. Some groups focused broadly on career development and professional network building, while others focused on topics of particular interest to participants. The peer-group approach is relevant to other professional associations in which practitioners tend to work alone or in small groups. Evaluation findings can inform other such associations about designing and implementing online group mentoring programs for their members.","PeriodicalId":508734,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":"6 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-03-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140260761","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：