Quality as praxis

Summative meta-evaluation is known to be more commonly practiced than formative meta-evaluation. While evaluation theorists speak to the importance of formative meta-evaluation, examples of how to do this are rarely specified in the evaluation literature. This paper aims to (1) further explore form...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Amy C. Jersild, Michael A. Harnar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: The Evaluation Center at Western Michigan University 2022-12-01
Series:Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation
Subjects:
Online Access:https://journals.sfu.ca/jmde/index.php/jmde_1/article/view/697
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Summative meta-evaluation is known to be more commonly practiced than formative meta-evaluation. While evaluation theorists speak to the importance of formative meta-evaluation, examples of how to do this are rarely specified in the evaluation literature. This paper aims to (1) further explore formative meta-evaluation as a means for quality assurance, with implications for both developing the capacity of evaluators and for advancing evaluation as a field of practice; and (2) to present a model with the intent to move toward a more deliberate formative quality evaluation practice. Discussion focuses on the relationship between evaluator and commissioner and how the development and use of a deliberate approach to formative meta-evaluation, through examination of the proposed model, can lead to a more egalitarian and inclusive approach to defining and promoting evaluation quality. Lastly, formative meta-evaluation is discussed as an important tool for evaluators in exercising professional judgment and for taking an active role in advancing the evaluation field.
ISSN:1556-8180