President'S Message
| Author | Penny Hawkins |
| DOI | 10.1177/1035719X0200200202 |
| Published date | 01 December 2002 |
| Date | 01 December 2002 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Evaluation Journal of Australasia, Vol. 2 (new series), No. 2, December 2002
4
1
from the president
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE
Rajan of the New Zealand Department of Labour,
identifies that there may be significant emotional
impacts on those participating in a difficult evaluation,
including on those conducting the evaluation.
Cognitive dissonance and distress are possible in
the experience of conducting any difficult project. But
an evaluation is grounded in the deepest depths of the
cognitive capacity where we find the values of the
programs, participants and the practitioners.
Would not such distress warrant a respite service?
Perhaps the AES needs a mentorship program? Well at
least we evaluation researchers, and the AES should
listen more empathically to the evaluation
practitioners’ needs.
Colin Sharp
Editor, Refereed articles
AES 2003
International
Evaluation
Conference
The 21st AES annual conference will be held in
Auckland in 2003.
Conference:
Tuesday 16 September to Thursday
18 September
Workshops, Wananga, Fono Pasifika and pan-
Pacific meetings:
Saturday 13 to Monday
15 September.
The official theme for the conference has yet to
be finalised. However, proposals are invited on
topics connected with the political context (and
nature?) of evaluation.
Sub-themes include:
•What is evaluation really for?
•What does it actually take?
•What’s the use of evaluation?
Two international speakers have accepted our
invitation to give keynote addresses:
•Michael Quinn Patton (USA)
•Nicoletta Stame (Italy).
Call for papers notifications will be out early in
2003.
For more information visit our website,
www.aes.asn.au, regularly – updates and full
conference details will be posted as they
become available.
This is only the second AES annual conference
to be held in New Zealand, so it will be a special
occasion. Plan to be there!
14–18 September
Auckland, New Zealand
Meeting emerging needs
for evaluation in the 21st
century1
As I pondered the title of this
address and thought about
‘emerging needs’ for evaluation,
naturally as an evaluator, I thought
about questions. There seemed to
me to be two questions to consider:
■What are the needs
for
evaluation?
■What are the needs
of
evaluation?
What I have to say in response to these questions is
from a practitioner’s perspective. I have been struck by
the emphasis on theoretical concerns at American and
European conferences. One of the things that I think
characterises the Australasian evaluation community is
that we are much more concerned with issues that
face us in our
practice
and our conferences usually
reflect those concerns. More about this later.
What are the needs
for
evaluation?
Times change. When I started out in evaluation many years ago, I
remember having to persuade program managers and practitioners
that they needed evaluation and meeting with some hefty resistance.
No-one really seemed to want evaluation at that time. Much like
auditors, we were unpopular and viewed with narrow-eyed suspicion.
The tables have turned. Now everybody wants evaluation. So now I
often find myself having to dissuade policy makers and managers who
are eager for evaluation that perhaps their needs could be met another
way: a bit of monitoring, maybe?
This need to manage the demand has arisen partly because
evaluation is now seen as almost essential when new policies are
implemented, and partly because the demand is now so great that
with our limited capacity we are unable to respond to everyone’s
evaluation needs. Given finite resources it’s better, I think, to do fewer
evaluations and do them well.
Evaluation is needed:
To make judgements about merit, worth and value
For accountability purposes this is generally described as: to
determine the efficiency and effectiveness of public policies and
programs. The call for greater accountability and an increased focus
on results has driven the need and demand for evaluation as a way of
providing evidence that taxpayers’ funds have been spent well. But
there are different views about this, summarised by Lois-ellin Datta
as being:
Between those who see evaluation as a quest for social justice
requiring advocacy for the disenfranchised and those who see
To continue reading
Request your trial