To progress as a field, evaluators must be able to describe their work to nonevaluators, and to persuade an audience they have something unique and valuable to offer. Yet anecdotal reports suggest many evaluators have difficulty describing their work. Through 42 interviews with practicing evaluators, we aimed to better understand evaluators’ experiences discussing their work, examining how evaluators describe their work to nonevaluators and the perceived challenges they face doing so. Findings suggest there are common threads linking evaluator descriptions of their work, with many evaluators presenting evaluation as a tool to help social programs, policies, and organizations. And, although many evaluators described layperson reactions that centered on confusion, disinterest, and fear, others also described experiences characterized by understanding, interest, and gratitude. Strategies for enhancing communication in this domain are described.
AbbottA. (1998). The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
2.
ArmstrongD.GoslingA.WeinmanJ.MarteauT. (1997). The place of inter-rater reliability in qualitative research: An empirical study. Sociology, 31, 597–606.
3.
BeckerH. S. (1970). The nature of a profession. In BeckerH. S. (Ed.), Sociological work (pp. 87–103). Chicago, IL: Adine.
4.
BeywlW. (2006). The role of evaluation in democracy: Can it be strengthened by evaluation standards? A European perspective. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 3, 10–29.
5.
BickmanL. (1997). Presidential address: Evaluating evaluation: Where do we go from here?Evaluation Practice, 18, 1–16.
BucherR.StraussA. (1961). Professions in process. American Journal of Sociology, 66, 325–334.
8.
CastroM. P.FragapaneS.RinaldiF. M. (2016). Professionalization and evaluation: A European analysis in the digital era. Evaluation, 22, 489–507.
9.
ConnorR. F.DickmanF. B. (1979). Professionalization of evaluative research: Conflict as a sign of health. Evaluation and Program Planning, 2, 103–109.
10.
CronbachL.SnowR. (1977). Aptitudes and instructional methods: A handbook for researchon interactions. New York, NY: Irvington.
11.
DeweyJ. D.MontrosseB. E.SchröterD. C.SullinsC. D.MattoxJ. R. (2008). Evaluator competencies what’s taught versus what’s sought. American Journal of Evaluation, 29, 268–287.
12.
DonaldsonS. I. (2001). Overcoming our negative reputation: Evaluation becomes known as a helping profession. The American Journal of Evaluation, 22, 355–361.
13.
FriedsonE. (1970). Profession of medicine. New York, NY: Dodd, Mead.
14.
GarganiJ. (2016, 11). Presidential address. American Evaluation Association Conference, Atlanta, GA.
15.
GauthierB.BarringtonG.BozzoS.ChaytorK.DignardA.LaheyR.…RoyS. (2010). The lay of the land: Evaluation practice in Canada in 2009. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 24, 1–49.
16.
Harries-JenkinsG. (1970). Professionals in organization. In JacksonJ. A. (Ed.), Professions and professionalization (pp. 53–107). Cambridge, England: University Press.
17.
HoggM. A. (2016). Social identity theory. In McKeownS.HajiR.FergusonN. (Eds.), Understanding peace and conflict through social identity theory: Contemporary global perspectives (pp. 3–17). Switzerland: Springer International.
18.
HouseE. R. (1993). Professional evaluation: Social impact and political consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19.
JacobS. (2008). Cross-disciplinarization: A new talisman for evaluation?American Journal of Evaluation, 29, 175–194.
20.
JacobS.BoisvertY. (2010). To be or not to be a profession: Pros, cons and challenges for evaluation. Evaluation, 16, 349–369.
21.
KaminskyA. (2000). Beyond the literal: Metaphors and why they matter. New Directions for Evaluation, 2000, 69–80.
22.
KingJ. A. (2003). The challenge of studying evaluation theory. New Directions for Evaluation, 2003, 57–68.
23.
KirpalS. (2004). Work identities of nurses: Between caring and efficiency demands. Career Development International, 9, 274–304.
24.
LarsonM. S. (1977). The rise of professionalism: A sociological analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.
25.
LaVelleJ. M. (2011). Planning for evaluation’s future: Undergraduate students’ interest in program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 32, 362–375.
26.
LeCompteM. D.GoetzJ. P. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52, 31–60.
27.
Levin-RozalisM.Shochoto-ReichE. (2009). Professional identity of evaluators in Israel. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23, 141–177.
28.
MerriamS. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley.
29.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldañaJ. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
30.
Montrosse-MoorheadB.GriffithJ. C. (2017). Toward the development of reporting standards for evaluations. American Journal of Evaluation, 38, 577–602.
31.
MooreW. E. (1970). The professions: Rules and roles. New York, NY: Russell Sage.
32.
MorellJ. A.FlahertyE. W. (1978). The development of evaluation as a profession: Current status and some predictions. Evaluation and Program Planning, 1, 11–17.
33.
PattonM. Q. (1990). The challenge of being a profession. Evaluation Practice, 11, 45–51.
34.
PattonM. Q. (2000). Overview: Language matters. New Directions for Evaluation, 2000, 5–16.
35.
PattonM. Q. (2002). A vision of evaluation that strengthens democracy. Evaluation, 8, 125–139.
36.
PicciottoR. (2011). The logic of evaluation professionalism. Evaluation, 17, 165–180.
37.
RossiP. H.LipseyM. W.FreemanH. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38.
SchwandtT. A. (2015). Evaluation foundations revisited: Cultivating a life of the mind for practice. Stanford, CA: Stanford University.
39.
SmallM. L. (2009). “How many cases do I need?” On science and the logic of case selection in field-based research. Ethnography, 10, 5–38.
40.
SturgesK. M. (2014). External evaluation as contract work: The production of evaluator identity. American Journal of Evaluation, 35, 345–363.
41.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (2004). The social identity theory of intergroup behaviour. In JostJ. T.SidaniusJ. (Eds.), Political psychology: Key readings, key readings in social psychology (pp. 276–293). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
