The Role of Evaluation Theory and Practice in Narrowing the Research-to-Practice Gap

IF 1.1 3区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Tiffany Berry, Brittany Hite, Michelle Sloper, Haley Umans
{"title":"The Role of Evaluation Theory and Practice in Narrowing the Research-to-Practice Gap","authors":"Tiffany Berry, Brittany Hite, Michelle Sloper, Haley Umans","doi":"10.1177/10982140231213529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The research-to-practice gap describes the well-documented phenomena of researchers and practitioners working in silos, embedded in vastly different contexts. This “cultural divide” has several causes, including ineffective collaboration, inadequate understanding of context, and insufficient dissemination and translation of research. Evaluation theory and practice have been largely absent from discussions about solving the research-to-practice gap, despite remarkable alignment between these efforts and the core principles and goals of evaluation. In this article, we describe why the research-to-practice gap exists, current models and frameworks to address the gap, and how evaluation aligns with, and extends, efforts to create a bi-directional bridge between research and practice. This article is a call-to-action for professional evaluators who are poised to narrow this gap given that they work at the intersection of research and practice. Through authentic collaboration, researchers, practitioners, and evaluators can leverage our collective strength to address the pressing challenges faced by our communities.","PeriodicalId":51449,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10982140231213529","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The research-to-practice gap describes the well-documented phenomena of researchers and practitioners working in silos, embedded in vastly different contexts. This “cultural divide” has several causes, including ineffective collaboration, inadequate understanding of context, and insufficient dissemination and translation of research. Evaluation theory and practice have been largely absent from discussions about solving the research-to-practice gap, despite remarkable alignment between these efforts and the core principles and goals of evaluation. In this article, we describe why the research-to-practice gap exists, current models and frameworks to address the gap, and how evaluation aligns with, and extends, efforts to create a bi-directional bridge between research and practice. This article is a call-to-action for professional evaluators who are poised to narrow this gap given that they work at the intersection of research and practice. Through authentic collaboration, researchers, practitioners, and evaluators can leverage our collective strength to address the pressing challenges faced by our communities.
评价理论与实践在缩小研究与实践差距中的作用
研究与实践之间的鸿沟是指研究人员和实践人员在迥然不同的环境中各自为政的现象。造成这种 "文化鸿沟 "的原因有很多,包括合作不力、对背景的理解不足以及研究成果的传播和转化不足。尽管评价理论和实践与评价的核心原则和目标有着显著的一致性,但在有关解决研究与实践之间差距的讨论中,评价理论和实践在很大程度上是缺席的。在这篇文章中,我们阐述了研究与实践之间存在差距的原因,解决这一差距的现有模式和框架,以及评价如何与研究和实践之间的双向桥梁保持一致并加以扩展。这篇文章是对专业评估人员的呼吁,因为他们在研究与实践的交叉点上工作,已经做好了缩小差距的准备。通过真正的合作,研究人员、从业人员和评估人员可以利用我们的集体力量来应对我们社区所面临的紧迫挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Journal of Evaluation
American Journal of Evaluation SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
11.80%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Evaluation (AJE) publishes original papers about the methods, theory, practice, and findings of evaluation. The general goal of AJE is to present the best work in and about evaluation, in order to improve the knowledge base and practice of its readers. Because the field of evaluation is diverse, with different intellectual traditions, approaches to practice, and domains of application, the papers published in AJE will reflect this diversity. Nevertheless, preference is given to papers that are likely to be of interest to a wide range of evaluators and that are written to be accessible to most readers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信