Editorial
| DOI | 10.1177/1035719X20931250 |
| Date | 01 June 2020 |
| Published date | 01 June 2020 |
| Subject Matter | Editorial |
https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X20931250
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
2020, Vol. 20(2) 63 –67
© The Author(s) 2020
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1035719X20931250
journals.sagepub.com/home/evj
Editorial
Keryn Hassall, Amy M Gullickson,
Ayesha S Boyce and Kelly Hannum
“So what harm would be done if evaluators ignored values? In one sense, no harm would
be done, because evaluations would still have values implicit in them. Values inevitably
permeate the selection of independent and dependent variables, the choice of questions
and stakeholders, and the social and political context from which many evaluations
arise. Evaluators cannot avoid values even if they try. But in another sense, real harm is
done if evaluators deal with values naively or poorly through their implicit choices.”
Shadish, 1994, p. 35
The evaluation community is increasingly talking about values in evaluation, and the
need to be more explicit about values. In these two special issues of the Evaluation
Journal of Australasia, we aim to extend the discussion on values in evaluation and
recognise the challenges of dealing with values. The papers in these issues show some
of the choices evaluators have made, both in how they conceptualise values and how
they engage with values in evaluation, in very different contexts. In this issue, the
paper by Caitlin Blaser Mapitsa, Aisha Ali and Linda Khumalo considers the role of
social and political values in establishing national evaluation systems. In the praxis
papers, three authors reflect on their experiences working in a variety of evaluation
contexts as they engage with stakeholder values. David Week discusses how multiple
values perspectives can create insights and encourages evaluators to be open to seeing
other cultures and viewpoints as valid. Robyn Thomas Pitts focuses on the extent to
which responsiveness should be centred as a key value for evaluators. Aileen Reid
contemplates negotiating and surfacing stakeholder values in a context in which cli-
ents may not understand the benefits of engaging an evaluator.
The papers in this special issue reflect ongoing discussions on the role of values in
evaluation. Some evaluation theorists have been writing about values since the 1970s,
encouraging evaluators to pay attention to values, and to consider the questions of
‘whose values’ and ‘which values’ should be prioritised in evaluation (Greene, 1997;
House & Howe, 1999; MacDonald, 1974; Mertens, 2009; Schwandt, 1989; Stake
et al., 1997).
One question that appears to be missing from the discussion on values in evaluation
is – what do we mean when we talk about values? The word ‘values’ is used to
label a broad range of concepts such as attitudes, needs, social norms, personal goals,
931250EVJ0010.1177/1035719X20931250Evaluation Journal of AustralasiaHassall et al.
editorial2020
Editorial
To continue reading
Request your trial