The 2009 Claremont Debates: The Promise and Pitfalls of Utilization-Focused and Empowerment Evaluation
Background: Hundreds of evaluators visit the Claremont Colleges in southern California each year to discuss a wide range of topics related to improving the quality of evaluation practice. Debates between thought leaders in the field have been one of the most popular and informative ways to advance u...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
The Evaluation Center at Western Michigan University
2010-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation |
| Online Access: | https://journals.sfu.ca/jmde/index.php/jmde_1/article/view/260 |
| _version_ | 1797812698266730496 |
|---|---|
| author | Stewart I. Donaldson Michael Q. Patton David M. Fetterman Michael Scriven |
| author_facet | Stewart I. Donaldson Michael Q. Patton David M. Fetterman Michael Scriven |
| author_sort | Stewart I. Donaldson |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background: Hundreds of evaluators visit the Claremont Colleges in southern California each year to discuss a wide range of topics related to improving the quality of evaluation practice. Debates between thought leaders in the field have been one of the most popular and informative ways to advance understanding about how best to practice evaluation in contemporary times. Purpose: The purpose of this article is to provide a written transcript of the 2009 Claremont Evaluation Debates. The first debate is between Michael Quinn Patton and Michael Scriven on the promise and pitfalls of utilization-focused evaluation. The second debate is between David Fetterman, Michael Quinn Patton, and Michael Scriven on the promise and pitfalls of empowerment evaluation. Setting: The debates occurred at the Claremont Graduate University on August 23-24, 2009. Several hundred evaluators from around the world also viewed and participated in the debates via a live webcast. Intervention: Not applicable. Research Design: Not applicable. Data Collection and Analysis: Not applicable. Findings: Not applicable. Keywords: utilization-focused evaluation, empowerment evaluation, evaluation theory
|
| first_indexed | 2024-03-13T07:41:15Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-f7f3c95c93eb46a2a7a12274f803d63d |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1556-8180 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-13T07:41:15Z |
| publishDate | 2010-01-01 |
| publisher | The Evaluation Center at Western Michigan University |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation |
| spelling | doaj.art-f7f3c95c93eb46a2a7a12274f803d63d2023-06-03T07:10:03ZengThe Evaluation Center at Western Michigan UniversityJournal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation1556-81802010-01-0161310.56645/jmde.v6i13.260The 2009 Claremont Debates: The Promise and Pitfalls of Utilization-Focused and Empowerment EvaluationStewart I. DonaldsonMichael Q. PattonDavid M. FettermanMichael ScrivenBackground: Hundreds of evaluators visit the Claremont Colleges in southern California each year to discuss a wide range of topics related to improving the quality of evaluation practice. Debates between thought leaders in the field have been one of the most popular and informative ways to advance understanding about how best to practice evaluation in contemporary times. Purpose: The purpose of this article is to provide a written transcript of the 2009 Claremont Evaluation Debates. The first debate is between Michael Quinn Patton and Michael Scriven on the promise and pitfalls of utilization-focused evaluation. The second debate is between David Fetterman, Michael Quinn Patton, and Michael Scriven on the promise and pitfalls of empowerment evaluation. Setting: The debates occurred at the Claremont Graduate University on August 23-24, 2009. Several hundred evaluators from around the world also viewed and participated in the debates via a live webcast. Intervention: Not applicable. Research Design: Not applicable. Data Collection and Analysis: Not applicable. Findings: Not applicable. Keywords: utilization-focused evaluation, empowerment evaluation, evaluation theory https://journals.sfu.ca/jmde/index.php/jmde_1/article/view/260 |
| spellingShingle | Stewart I. Donaldson Michael Q. Patton David M. Fetterman Michael Scriven The 2009 Claremont Debates: The Promise and Pitfalls of Utilization-Focused and Empowerment Evaluation Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation |
| title | The 2009 Claremont Debates: The Promise and Pitfalls of Utilization-Focused and Empowerment Evaluation |
| title_full | The 2009 Claremont Debates: The Promise and Pitfalls of Utilization-Focused and Empowerment Evaluation |
| title_fullStr | The 2009 Claremont Debates: The Promise and Pitfalls of Utilization-Focused and Empowerment Evaluation |
| title_full_unstemmed | The 2009 Claremont Debates: The Promise and Pitfalls of Utilization-Focused and Empowerment Evaluation |
| title_short | The 2009 Claremont Debates: The Promise and Pitfalls of Utilization-Focused and Empowerment Evaluation |
| title_sort | 2009 claremont debates the promise and pitfalls of utilization focused and empowerment evaluation |
| url | https://journals.sfu.ca/jmde/index.php/jmde_1/article/view/260 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT stewartidonaldson the2009claremontdebatesthepromiseandpitfallsofutilizationfocusedandempowermentevaluation AT michaelqpatton the2009claremontdebatesthepromiseandpitfallsofutilizationfocusedandempowermentevaluation AT davidmfetterman the2009claremontdebatesthepromiseandpitfallsofutilizationfocusedandempowermentevaluation AT michaelscriven the2009claremontdebatesthepromiseandpitfallsofutilizationfocusedandempowermentevaluation AT stewartidonaldson 2009claremontdebatesthepromiseandpitfallsofutilizationfocusedandempowermentevaluation AT michaelqpatton 2009claremontdebatesthepromiseandpitfallsofutilizationfocusedandempowermentevaluation AT davidmfetterman 2009claremontdebatesthepromiseandpitfallsofutilizationfocusedandempowermentevaluation AT michaelscriven 2009claremontdebatesthepromiseandpitfallsofutilizationfocusedandempowermentevaluation |