کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
322539 | 540085 | 2012 | 8 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
This article explores how we can enhance our understanding of the moral responsibilities in daily, plural practices of responsive evaluation. It introduces an interpretive framework for understanding the moral aspects of evaluation practice. The framework supports responsive evaluators to better understand and handle their moral responsibilities. A case is introduced to illustrate our argument.Responsive evaluation contributes to the design and implementation of policy by working with stakeholders and coordinating the evaluation process as a relationally responsible practice. Responsive evaluation entails a democratic process in which the evaluator fosters and enters a partnership with stakeholders. The responsibilities of an evaluator generally involve issues such as ‘confidentiality’, ‘accountability’ and ‘privacy’. The responsive evaluator has specific responsibilities, for example to include stakeholders and vulnerable groups and to foster an ongoing dialogue. In addition, responsive evaluation involves a relational responsibility, which becomes present in daily situations in which stakeholders express expectations and voice demands. In our everyday work as evaluators, it is difficult to respond to all these demands at the same time. In addition, this article demonstrates that novice evaluators experience challenges concerning over- and underidenfitication with stakeholders. Guidelines and quality criteria on how to act are helpful, but need interpretation and application to the unique situation at hand.
► This study critically reflects on the relational practice of responsive evaluators.
► It explores moral dimensions of relationships in responsive evaluation.
► It examines this in depth by two reflective narratives of a responsive evaluator.
► Quality criteria and guidelines on how to act need interpretation in practice.
► A framework for understanding moral aspects of the evaluation practice is presented.
Journal: Evaluation and Program Planning - Volume 35, Issue 1, February 2012, Pages 97–104