Collaborative Approaches to Evaluation. Группа авторов

      Volume Editors’ Introduction

      One of the challenges faced by evaluators is that professional evaluation is complex work that looks deceptively simple. The general public has had ample opportunity to engage in informal evaluation practice. These experiences include, for example, using Amazon reviews to decide which new toaster to buy, evaluating classroom teaching drawing from both the public discourse and our own personal experiences in school, making decisions about which policies to support at the polls based on arguments from public intellectuals, and analyses of the likely outcomes from trusted sources, etcetera. In short, everyone has had some type of experience with informal evaluation, which is one of the reasons why many in our field claim that evaluation is an ancient practice, but a new discipline (Mathison, 2005; Scriven, 1991). An argument for the complexity of professional evaluation therefore requires an understanding of what differentiates informal evaluation practice the public engages in on a daily basis from the work that occurs in formal evaluation studies.

      In an effort to demarcate the boundaries of professional evaluation and describe that work, for the past 60 years or so, academics and practitioner-academics have focused on the demands of evaluation practice, arguing that professional evaluation requires a great deal of expert knowledge that is specific to the work that evaluators do (Schwandt, 2015). We see this, for example, in the evaluation theories and approaches that have proliferated, which are arguments about what the work of professional evaluators ought to look like. We also see this in studies of evaluation education in formal and informal settings, which are arguments about how evaluators are or ought to be trained to carry out formal evaluation studies. More recently, we see this in the current drafts of evaluator competencies or capabilities documents, all of which have a section specifically devoted to what makes evaluators distinct as practicing professionals (see also, American Evaluation Association, 2017; United Nations Evaluation Group, 2016). These efforts have resulted in a large body of work meant to establish and inform the theoretical, technical, and practical aspects of evaluation practice.

      At the same time, as noted in the editors’ introduction for other volumes in this series, there is a need for additional resources that fill a gap between academic publications and general textbooks. The Evaluation in Practice series was born out of a recognition that there are core topics in evaluation, which are fundamental to the work of evaluators, but that have not yet received the focus they deserve. Instead, these topics are often treated as a subheading or a subtheme situated within a larger conversation. Professional practice is at the heart of this series.

      In Collaborative Approaches to Evaluation: Principles in Use, the third volume in this series, J. Bradley Cousins and colleagues have presented a rich, empirically derived description of how the conceptual, technical, and practical tools of evaluation are enacted by experts in the everyday aspects of professional work. We expand on this in order. Conceptual tools are the theories, approaches, effectiveness, and moral principles or guidelines that evaluators use to guide their evaluation practice decisions. The conceptual tool that is the focus of this volume is Collaborative Approaches to Evaluation (CAE) principles. In the first chapter of this book, readers are presented with an overview of CAE principles. This chapter lays out what the CAE principles are, describes their evolution, and offers examples of potential uses. Importantly, these principles are grounded in research on evaluation (RoE), that is, studies that examine evaluation as the object of inquiry.

      Technical tools are the research designs, measurement techniques, and analysis strategies that evaluators use to guide their evaluation practice decisions. Across the chapters, technical tools are used in two ways: the technical tools used to carry out the evaluation and the technical tools used to engage in RoE. For the chapters that are grounded in a specific evaluation, almost all (Chapter 3, Chapter