In this paper we share our reflections, as evaluators, on an evaluation where we encountered Excessive Evaluation Anxiety (XEA). The signs of XEA which we discerned were particularly evident amongst the program head and staff who were part of a new training program. We present our insights on the evaluation process and its difficulties, as well as our suggestions for coping with them. We suggest that signs of XEA and its consequences can be reduced by means of developing a detailed contract based on clear rules that is acceptable to all parties (evaluators, evaluands, clients and stakeholders) and would address ethical as well as technical issues. Finally, we propose a guide for formulating such evaluation contracts.
AlpertB.BecharS.HyoshT.Mero-JaffeI.Paul-BinyaminI. (2009). The collaborative aspects of evaluation in educational settings. In OrtizM.RubioC. (Eds.), Educational evaluation: 21st century issues and challenges (pp. 197–229). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved fromhttp://www.depression-guide.com/dsm4.htm
5.
Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. (2010). Tri-council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans. Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved fromhttp://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf/eng/tcps2/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf
6.
ChelimskyE. (2008). A clash of cultures: Improving the “fit” between evaluative independence and the political requirements of a democratic society. American Journal of Evaluation, 29, 400–415.
7.
ConleyS.GlasmanN. S. (2008). Fear, the school organization, and teacher evaluation. Educational Policy, 22, 63–85.
8.
DarabiA. (2002). Teaching program evaluation: Using a systems approach. American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 219–228.
9.
DaviesR. (2004). Scale, complexity and the representation of theories of change. Evaluation, 10, 101–121.
10.
DonaldsonS. I. (2007). Program theory-driven evaluation science: Strategies and applications. London, England: Routledge.
11.
DonaldsonS. I.GoolerL. E.ScrivenM. (2002). Evaluation strategies for managing evaluation anxiety: Toward a psychology of program. American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 261–273.
Geva-MayI.ThorngateW. (2003). Reducing anxiety and resistance in policy and programme evaluations: A socio-psychological analysis. Evaluation, 9, 205–227.
14.
GubaE. G.LincolnY. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
HallidayJ.AsthanaS. N. M.RichardsonS. (2004). Evaluating partnership: The role of formal assessment tools. Evaluation, 10, 285–303.
16.
HopeD. A.HeimbergR. J. (1990). Dating anxiety. In LeitenbergH. (Ed.), Handbook of social and evaluation anxiety (pp. 217–246). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
17.
HouseE. R. (1997). Evaluation in the government marketplace. American Journal of Evaluation, 18, 37–48.
LayM.PapadopoulosI. (2007). An exploration of fourth generation evaluation in practice. Evaluation, 13, 495–504.
20.
LeitenbergH. (1990). Handbook of social and evaluation anxiety. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
21.
Levin-RozalisM. (1999). On feedback as the process of project evaluation. In RazA. (Ed.), Handbook for organizational learning (pp. 1–20). Beersheba, Israel: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev. (In Hebrew)
22.
LincolnY. S. (2003). Fourth generation evaluation in the new millennium. In DonaldsonS. I.ScrivenM. (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the New Millennium(Claremont Symposium on Applied Social Psychology Series) (pp. 77–90). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
MäättäM.RantalaK. (2007). The evaluator as a critical interpreter: Comparing evaluations of multi-actor drug prevention policy. Evaluation13, 457–476.
24.
MacionisJ. J. (2010). Sociology (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
25.
MatthewsB.Jones HubbardD.LatessaE. (2001). Making the next step: Using evaluability assessment to improve correctional programming. The Prison Journal, 81, 454–472.
26.
MorrisM. (2008). Evaluation ethics for best practice: Cases and commentaries. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
27.
MorrisM. (2011). The good, the bad, and the evaluator: 25 years of AJE ethics. American Journal of Evaluation, 32, 134–151.
28.
NewmanD. L.BrownR. D. (1995). Applied ethics for program evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
NortonP. J.BurnsJ. A.HopeD. A.BauerB. K. (2000). Generalization of social anxiety to sporting and athletic situations: Gender, sports involvement, and parental pressure. Depression and Anxiety, 12, 193–202.
30.
RogersP. J. (2008). Using programme theory to evaluate complicated and complex aspects of interventions. Evaluation, 14, 29–48.
31.
SampsonA. (2007). Developing robust approaches to evaluating social programmes. Evaluation, 13, 477–493.
32.
SchwarzC.StruhkampG. (2007). Does evaluation build or destroy trust? Insights from case studies on evaluation in higher education reform. Evaluation, 13, 323–339.
33.
SimonsH. (2006). Ethics in evaluation. In MarkM. M.GreenJ. C.ShawI. (Eds.), Sage handbook of evaluation (pp. 243–265). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
34.
SkinnerD. (2004). Primary and secondary barriers to the evaluation of change: Evidence from two public sector organizations. Evaluation, 10, 7–15.
35.
StameN. (2004).Theory-based evaluation and types of complexity. Evaluation, 10, 58–76.
36.
StufflebeamD. L. (2000). Lessons in contracting for evaluations. American Journal of Evaluation, 21, 293–314.
37.
TautS.BraunsD. (2003). Resistance to evaluation: A psychological perspective. Evaluation, 9, 247–264.
38.
ThurstonW. E.GrahamJ.HatfieldJ. (2003). Evaluability assessment: A catalyst for program change and improvement. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 26, 206–221.
39.
Van der KnaapP. (2004). Theory-based evaluation and learning: Possibilities and challenges. Evaluation, 10, 16–34.
40.
Van VoorhisP.BrownK. (1996). Evaluability assessment: A tool for program development in corrections. Washington, DC: National Institute of Corrections.
41.
VolkovB. B. (2011). Beyond being an evaluator: The multiplicity of rolls of the internal evaluator. In VolkovB. B.BaronM. E. (Eds.), Internal evaluation in the 21st century. (pp. 25–42). New York: Wiley.
42.
VolkovB. B.BaronM. E. (2011). Issues in internal evaluation: Implications for practice, training, and research. In VolkovB. B.BaronM. E. (Eds.), Internal evaluation in the 21st century. (pp. 101–111). New York: Wiley.
