重新审视实地考察标准:实施框架

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY American Journal of Evaluation Pub Date : 2022-02-24 DOI:10.1177/10982140221079266
Rachael R. Kenney, L. Haverhals, Krysttel C Stryczek, Kelty B. Fehling, Sherry L Ball
{"title":"重新审视实地考察标准:实施框架","authors":"Rachael R. Kenney, L. Haverhals, Krysttel C Stryczek, Kelty B. Fehling, Sherry L Ball","doi":"10.1177/10982140221079266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Site visits are common in evaluation plans but there is a dearth of guidance about how to conduct them. This paper revisits site visit standards published by Michael Patton in 2017 and proposes a framework for evaluative site visits. We retrospectively examined documents from a series of site visits for examples of Patton's standards. Through this process, we identified additional standards and organized them into four categories and fourteen standards that can guide evaluation site visits: team competencies and knowledge (interpersonal competence, cultural humility, evaluation competence, methodological competence, subject matter knowledge, site specific knowledge), planning and coordination (project design, resources, data management), engagement (team engagement, sponsor engagement, site engagement), and confounding factors (neutrality, credibility). In the paper, we provide definitions and examples from the case of meeting, and missing, the standards. We encourage others to apply the framework in their contexts and continue the discussion around evaluative site visits.","PeriodicalId":51449,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Site Visit Standards Revisited: A Framework for Implementation\",\"authors\":\"Rachael R. Kenney, L. Haverhals, Krysttel C Stryczek, Kelty B. Fehling, Sherry L Ball\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10982140221079266\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Site visits are common in evaluation plans but there is a dearth of guidance about how to conduct them. This paper revisits site visit standards published by Michael Patton in 2017 and proposes a framework for evaluative site visits. We retrospectively examined documents from a series of site visits for examples of Patton's standards. Through this process, we identified additional standards and organized them into four categories and fourteen standards that can guide evaluation site visits: team competencies and knowledge (interpersonal competence, cultural humility, evaluation competence, methodological competence, subject matter knowledge, site specific knowledge), planning and coordination (project design, resources, data management), engagement (team engagement, sponsor engagement, site engagement), and confounding factors (neutrality, credibility). In the paper, we provide definitions and examples from the case of meeting, and missing, the standards. We encourage others to apply the framework in their contexts and continue the discussion around evaluative site visits.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51449,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Evaluation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10982140221079266\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10982140221079266","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

实地考察在评估计划中很常见,但缺乏关于如何进行实地考察的指导。本文回顾了Michael Patton在2017年发布的网站访问标准,并提出了一个评估网站访问的框架。我们回顾性地检查了一系列实地考察的文件,以寻找巴顿标准的例子。通过这一过程,我们确定了额外的标准,并将其分为四类和十四个标准,可以指导评估现场访问:团队能力和知识(人际能力、文化谦逊、评估能力、方法论能力、主题知识、网站特定知识)、规划和协调(项目设计、资源、数据管理)、参与(团队参与、赞助商参与、网站参与)以及混淆因素(中立性、可信度)。在本文中,我们从符合标准和不符合标准的案例中提供了定义和例子。我们鼓励其他人在他们的背景下应用这个框架,并继续围绕评价性实地考察进行讨论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Site Visit Standards Revisited: A Framework for Implementation
Site visits are common in evaluation plans but there is a dearth of guidance about how to conduct them. This paper revisits site visit standards published by Michael Patton in 2017 and proposes a framework for evaluative site visits. We retrospectively examined documents from a series of site visits for examples of Patton's standards. Through this process, we identified additional standards and organized them into four categories and fourteen standards that can guide evaluation site visits: team competencies and knowledge (interpersonal competence, cultural humility, evaluation competence, methodological competence, subject matter knowledge, site specific knowledge), planning and coordination (project design, resources, data management), engagement (team engagement, sponsor engagement, site engagement), and confounding factors (neutrality, credibility). In the paper, we provide definitions and examples from the case of meeting, and missing, the standards. We encourage others to apply the framework in their contexts and continue the discussion around evaluative site visits.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Evaluation
American Journal of Evaluation SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Evaluation (AJE) publishes original papers about the methods, theory, practice, and findings of evaluation. The general goal of AJE is to present the best work in and about evaluation, in order to improve the knowledge base and practice of its readers. Because the field of evaluation is diverse, with different intellectual traditions, approaches to practice, and domains of application, the papers published in AJE will reflect this diversity. Nevertheless, preference is given to papers that are likely to be of interest to a wide range of evaluators and that are written to be accessible to most readers.
期刊最新文献
The Garden of Evaluation Approaches From the Section Editors: Teaching & Learning Section Vision: Innovate, Evaluate, Disseminate From the Co-Editors: Evolving Evaluation Theory, Methods, and Practice Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis as a Methodological Framework in Academic–Clinical Partnership Evaluation A Protocol for Participatory Data Use
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1