我们可以通过审议来改变评估系统吗?咨询小组如何促进政策变化

IF 1 4区 计算机科学 Q4 COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE
Peter Dahler-Larsen
{"title":"我们可以通过审议来改变评估系统吗?咨询小组如何促进政策变化","authors":"Peter Dahler-Larsen","doi":"10.1177/13563890231156955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One of the most dominant trends in the field of evaluation in recent years is the institutionalization of evaluation under headlines such as “evaluation culture,” “evaluation policy,” and “evaluation systems.” There has been less interest in how evaluation systems can be changed, modified, or improved, not to mention deinstitutionalized, if necessary. Can a variety of stakeholders deliberate about the consequences of an evaluation system, and can it lead to policy change? A case study of a ministerial advisory group on national tests in Denmark shows how specific challenges were dealt with, such as the design of the deliberative process, the potential dominance of experts, and the distinction between technical-evaluative and practical-political arguments, and how these maneuvers paved the way for policy change. Based on the case study, the article discusses the prospects for democratic deliberation about evaluation systems.","PeriodicalId":19964,"journal":{"name":"Performance Evaluation","volume":"17 1","pages":"144 - 160"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can we use deliberation to change evaluation systems? How an advisory group contributed to policy change\",\"authors\":\"Peter Dahler-Larsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/13563890231156955\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One of the most dominant trends in the field of evaluation in recent years is the institutionalization of evaluation under headlines such as “evaluation culture,” “evaluation policy,” and “evaluation systems.” There has been less interest in how evaluation systems can be changed, modified, or improved, not to mention deinstitutionalized, if necessary. Can a variety of stakeholders deliberate about the consequences of an evaluation system, and can it lead to policy change? A case study of a ministerial advisory group on national tests in Denmark shows how specific challenges were dealt with, such as the design of the deliberative process, the potential dominance of experts, and the distinction between technical-evaluative and practical-political arguments, and how these maneuvers paved the way for policy change. Based on the case study, the article discusses the prospects for democratic deliberation about evaluation systems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19964,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Performance Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"144 - 160\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Performance Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890231156955\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"计算机科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Performance Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890231156955","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来评估领域最主要的趋势之一是在“评估文化”、“评估政策”和“评估体系”等标题下的评估制度化。人们对如何改变、修改或改进评估系统的兴趣越来越少,更不用说在必要时将其去机构化了。各种利益相关者是否能够考虑评估系统的后果,是否能够导致政策变化?对丹麦国家考试部长级咨询小组的案例研究显示了如何处理具体挑战,例如审议程序的设计、专家的潜在主导地位、技术评估和实际政治论点之间的区别,以及这些操作如何为政策变革铺平道路。本文以案例研究为基础,探讨了评价制度民主审议的前景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Can we use deliberation to change evaluation systems? How an advisory group contributed to policy change
One of the most dominant trends in the field of evaluation in recent years is the institutionalization of evaluation under headlines such as “evaluation culture,” “evaluation policy,” and “evaluation systems.” There has been less interest in how evaluation systems can be changed, modified, or improved, not to mention deinstitutionalized, if necessary. Can a variety of stakeholders deliberate about the consequences of an evaluation system, and can it lead to policy change? A case study of a ministerial advisory group on national tests in Denmark shows how specific challenges were dealt with, such as the design of the deliberative process, the potential dominance of experts, and the distinction between technical-evaluative and practical-political arguments, and how these maneuvers paved the way for policy change. Based on the case study, the article discusses the prospects for democratic deliberation about evaluation systems.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Performance Evaluation
Performance Evaluation 工程技术-计算机:理论方法
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
审稿时长
24 days
期刊介绍: Performance Evaluation functions as a leading journal in the area of modeling, measurement, and evaluation of performance aspects of computing and communication systems. As such, it aims to present a balanced and complete view of the entire Performance Evaluation profession. Hence, the journal is interested in papers that focus on one or more of the following dimensions: -Define new performance evaluation tools, including measurement and monitoring tools as well as modeling and analytic techniques -Provide new insights into the performance of computing and communication systems -Introduce new application areas where performance evaluation tools can play an important role and creative new uses for performance evaluation tools. More specifically, common application areas of interest include the performance of: -Resource allocation and control methods and algorithms (e.g. routing and flow control in networks, bandwidth allocation, processor scheduling, memory management) -System architecture, design and implementation -Cognitive radio -VANETs -Social networks and media -Energy efficient ICT -Energy harvesting -Data centers -Data centric networks -System reliability -System tuning and capacity planning -Wireless and sensor networks -Autonomic and self-organizing systems -Embedded systems -Network science
×
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