Evaluating in a Fragmented Society

E. House
{"title":"Evaluating in a Fragmented Society","authors":"E. House","doi":"10.56645/jmde.v16i36.653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Over decades American society has become increasingly fragmented, distrusting, and unequal. Distrust and inequality interact with institutions performing improperly to weaken the society. \nPurpose: To suggest ways to strengthen evaluation’s role in a changing society \nSetting: Evaluation has entered a post normal phase where evaluations are losing credibility and effectiveness. \nIntervention: Analyze the changing society and suggest adjustments that evaluators might make. \nResearch design: Collate and synthesize empirical studies about society and the implications for evaluators. \nData collection and analysis: Collect and interpret seminal empirical economic, sociological, and political studies of beliefs and inequality in the United States. \nFindings: To strengthen the potency of evaluations of any type, evaluators could act as moral fiduciaries, practice transparency, cultivate cognitive empathy, focus on deep stories and deep values, and mitigate inequalities in the evaluation space. They can act as critics of evaluation practices inside and outside the evaluation space. They should avoid technical, social, and situational biases, including racism, sexism, and conflicts of interest, to increase the honesty and credibility of evaluations. They should not allow career concerns to prevent them from doing the right thing. These professional ethics and practices can be applied singly or collectively to most evaluation approaches to strengthen the evaluator’s role and address major societal problems. \nKeywords: moral fiduciary; cognitive empathy; post normal; inequality; transparency; distrust; deep stories; values","PeriodicalId":91909,"journal":{"name":"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v16i36.653","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: Over decades American society has become increasingly fragmented, distrusting, and unequal. Distrust and inequality interact with institutions performing improperly to weaken the society. Purpose: To suggest ways to strengthen evaluation’s role in a changing society Setting: Evaluation has entered a post normal phase where evaluations are losing credibility and effectiveness. Intervention: Analyze the changing society and suggest adjustments that evaluators might make. Research design: Collate and synthesize empirical studies about society and the implications for evaluators. Data collection and analysis: Collect and interpret seminal empirical economic, sociological, and political studies of beliefs and inequality in the United States. Findings: To strengthen the potency of evaluations of any type, evaluators could act as moral fiduciaries, practice transparency, cultivate cognitive empathy, focus on deep stories and deep values, and mitigate inequalities in the evaluation space. They can act as critics of evaluation practices inside and outside the evaluation space. They should avoid technical, social, and situational biases, including racism, sexism, and conflicts of interest, to increase the honesty and credibility of evaluations. They should not allow career concerns to prevent them from doing the right thing. These professional ethics and practices can be applied singly or collectively to most evaluation approaches to strengthen the evaluator’s role and address major societal problems. Keywords: moral fiduciary; cognitive empathy; post normal; inequality; transparency; distrust; deep stories; values
在一个支离破碎的社会中评估
背景:几十年来,美国社会变得越来越分裂、不信任和不平等。不信任和不平等与机构的不当行为相互作用,从而削弱社会。目的:建议如何在不断变化的社会中加强评价的作用环境:评价已进入后正常阶段,评价正在失去可信度和有效性。干预:分析不断变化的社会,并建议评估人员可能做出的调整。研究设计:整理和综合有关社会的实证研究及其对评估者的影响。数据收集和分析:收集和解释对美国信仰和不平等的开创性实证经济、社会学和政治研究。研究结果:为了加强任何类型评估的效力,评估者可以充当道德受托人,练习透明度,培养认知同理心,关注深层故事和深层价值观,并缓解评估空间中的不平等。他们可以充当评价空间内外评价实践的批评者。他们应该避免技术、社会和情境偏见,包括种族主义、性别歧视和利益冲突,以提高评估的诚实性和可信度。他们不应该让职业问题妨碍他们做正确的事情。这些职业道德和做法可以单独或集体应用于大多数评价方法,以加强评价者的作用并解决重大社会问题。关键词:道德诚信;认知移情;正常后;不平等透明度不信任深层故事;价值观
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信