在不同的环境中进行正确的评估

Q2 Social Sciences Evaluation Journal of Australasia Pub Date : 2023-06-22 DOI:10.1177/1035719x231185286
J. Guenther
{"title":"在不同的环境中进行正确的评估","authors":"J. Guenther","doi":"10.1177/1035719x231185286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our September 2023 issue of the Evaluation Journal of Australasia offers articles from Australian, Canadian and New Zealand contexts. They offer implications for evaluation practice and partnerships, with a particular focus on public/allied health and community-based program implementation. As I read these articles, I see how the authors are grappling with ‘ getting evaluation right ’ , not just from a pragmatic and technical perspective but also from a philosophical and ethical perspective. The practice article by Katina D ’ Onise and Katherine Pontifex provides an in-sightful re fl ection on a response to population health needs in the context of COVID-19 vaccination strategies. The urgency associated with various COVID-19 responses has led to innovations and rapid, fl exible approaches that otherwise might not have been considered (see also Iyamu et al., 2023; Kelly, 2023). And in this regard, D ’ Onise and Pontifex ’ s article demonstrates a similar dynamic. What is different here though is the application of the ‘ Lean start-up model ’ , which is designed to work with development of new products in uncertain contexts. The approach employed ‘ evaluative thinking ’ as a way of critically thinking and acting on evidence as it rapidly emerges (see also Cole, 2023 in the last issue for a detailed discussion of this topic). As I read through the lessons learned, the bene fi t of the approach used lies in its ability to quickly respond in a rapidly changing environment to implement policy initiatives, which include an evidence base. However, there are risks, as there are with any innovation. Haste and authoritative mandates may result in corners being cut, which may compromise ethical imperatives. Nevertheless, one of the key learnings from this work is that evidence can be quickly generated where there is a need for an urgent response to a complex problem. The","PeriodicalId":37231,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":"11 1","pages":"123 - 125"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Getting evaluation right in diverse contexts\",\"authors\":\"J. Guenther\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1035719x231185286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Our September 2023 issue of the Evaluation Journal of Australasia offers articles from Australian, Canadian and New Zealand contexts. They offer implications for evaluation practice and partnerships, with a particular focus on public/allied health and community-based program implementation. As I read these articles, I see how the authors are grappling with ‘ getting evaluation right ’ , not just from a pragmatic and technical perspective but also from a philosophical and ethical perspective. The practice article by Katina D ’ Onise and Katherine Pontifex provides an in-sightful re fl ection on a response to population health needs in the context of COVID-19 vaccination strategies. The urgency associated with various COVID-19 responses has led to innovations and rapid, fl exible approaches that otherwise might not have been considered (see also Iyamu et al., 2023; Kelly, 2023). And in this regard, D ’ Onise and Pontifex ’ s article demonstrates a similar dynamic. What is different here though is the application of the ‘ Lean start-up model ’ , which is designed to work with development of new products in uncertain contexts. The approach employed ‘ evaluative thinking ’ as a way of critically thinking and acting on evidence as it rapidly emerges (see also Cole, 2023 in the last issue for a detailed discussion of this topic). As I read through the lessons learned, the bene fi t of the approach used lies in its ability to quickly respond in a rapidly changing environment to implement policy initiatives, which include an evidence base. However, there are risks, as there are with any innovation. Haste and authoritative mandates may result in corners being cut, which may compromise ethical imperatives. Nevertheless, one of the key learnings from this work is that evidence can be quickly generated where there is a need for an urgent response to a complex problem. The\",\"PeriodicalId\":37231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evaluation Journal of Australasia\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"123 - 125\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evaluation Journal of Australasia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x231185286\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719x231185286","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们2023年9月刊的《澳大拉西亚评价杂志》提供来自澳大利亚、加拿大和新西兰的文章。它们为评估实践和伙伴关系提供了启示,特别侧重于公共/联合卫生和以社区为基础的项目实施。当我阅读这些文章时,我看到作者是如何努力解决“正确评估”的问题的,不仅是从实用主义和技术的角度,而且是从哲学和伦理的角度。Katina D ' Onise和Katherine Pontifex的实践文章对在COVID-19疫苗接种战略背景下应对人口卫生需求进行了深刻的反思。各种COVID-19应对措施的紧迫性导致了创新和快速灵活的方法,否则这些方法可能不会被考虑(另见Iyamu等人,2023;凯利,2023)。在这方面,D ' Onise和Pontifex的文章展示了类似的动态。这里的不同之处在于“精益创业模式”的应用,该模式旨在与不确定环境下的新产品开发一起工作。该方法采用“评估性思维”作为一种批判性思维方式,并根据迅速出现的证据采取行动(参见科尔,2023年最后一期关于该主题的详细讨论)。在我阅读这些经验教训时,所采用的方法的好处在于它能够在快速变化的环境中迅速作出反应,实施政策举措,其中包括一个证据基础。然而,就像任何创新一样,风险也是存在的。匆忙和权威的命令可能会导致偷工减料,这可能会损害道德要求。尽管如此,从这项工作中得到的一个重要教训是,在需要对复杂问题作出紧急反应的地方,可以迅速产生证据。的
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
Getting evaluation right in diverse contexts
Our September 2023 issue of the Evaluation Journal of Australasia offers articles from Australian, Canadian and New Zealand contexts. They offer implications for evaluation practice and partnerships, with a particular focus on public/allied health and community-based program implementation. As I read these articles, I see how the authors are grappling with ‘ getting evaluation right ’ , not just from a pragmatic and technical perspective but also from a philosophical and ethical perspective. The practice article by Katina D ’ Onise and Katherine Pontifex provides an in-sightful re fl ection on a response to population health needs in the context of COVID-19 vaccination strategies. The urgency associated with various COVID-19 responses has led to innovations and rapid, fl exible approaches that otherwise might not have been considered (see also Iyamu et al., 2023; Kelly, 2023). And in this regard, D ’ Onise and Pontifex ’ s article demonstrates a similar dynamic. What is different here though is the application of the ‘ Lean start-up model ’ , which is designed to work with development of new products in uncertain contexts. The approach employed ‘ evaluative thinking ’ as a way of critically thinking and acting on evidence as it rapidly emerges (see also Cole, 2023 in the last issue for a detailed discussion of this topic). As I read through the lessons learned, the bene fi t of the approach used lies in its ability to quickly respond in a rapidly changing environment to implement policy initiatives, which include an evidence base. However, there are risks, as there are with any innovation. Haste and authoritative mandates may result in corners being cut, which may compromise ethical imperatives. Nevertheless, one of the key learnings from this work is that evidence can be quickly generated where there is a need for an urgent response to a complex problem. The
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
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
Evaluation Journal of Australasia Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Utilising existing data for a pilot social return on investment analysis of the family wellbeing empowerment program: A justification and framework Evaluation at the cutting edge: Driving innovation and quality The best medicine: Lessons from health for policy randomistas Evaluator perspective: Meet an Australian Evaluation Society Fellow – Nan Wehipeihana Meta-evaluation: Validating program evaluation standards through the United Nations Evaluation Quality Assessment (EQAs)
×
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