This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Levin-Rozalis, M. Articles by Rosenstein, B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

A Mentoring Approach to the One-Year Evaluation Course

Department of Education, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beersheba, Israel, rozalis{at}internet-zahav.net

Barbara Rosenstein

This article presents the conceptual scheme for a one-year evaluation course. The scheme is based on the experience of the authors in developing a single-year evaluation course over a period of four years. The task of the evaluation course is to teach the competencies required to conduct evaluations that provide the sense-making needed for informed decision-making. Such competencies include eliciting, conceptualizing, and providing information, as well as interactions, processes, and experiences required to conduct evaluations that provide the sense-making needed for informed decision-making. The authors have found that these competencies are based on four kinds of knowledge: theoretical, methodological, conceptualization of practice (including converting tacit to explicit knowledge) and practical personal knowledge. These knowledge categories entail a dialog between theory and practice. Hence, the authors have constructed a conceptual setting for teaching evaluation against the background of mentoring, a system that combines theory and practice. The article presents each kind of knowledge, explaining its role in evaluation, the type of learning needed to master it, and the format adopted in the course for teaching it, including the dilemmas that arose in the course of study and practice. Solutions for such dilemmas are offered and discussed. The article ends with a discussion of student feedback on the course.

American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 24, No. 2, 245-259 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/109821400302400208


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. T. Nadler and N. L. Cundiff Applied Research Consultants (ARC): A Vertical Practicum Model of Training Applied Research American Journal of Evaluation, December 1, 2009; 30(4): 592 - 602. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Tourmen Evaluators' Decision Making: The Relationship Between Theory, Practice, and Experience American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2009; 30(1): 7 - 30. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. L. Johnson, C. McGuinness, S. C. McCorkendale, and M. A. Laney Teaching Program Evaluation in the Visual and Performing Arts American Journal of Evaluation, December 1, 2007; 28(4): 546 - 557. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. Hurley, R. Renger, and B. Brunk Learning From a Challenging Fieldwork Evaluation Experience: Perspectives of a Student and an Instructor American Journal of Evaluation, December 1, 2005; 26(4): 562 - 578. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. S. Trevisan Practical Training in Evaluation: A Review of the Literature American Journal of Evaluation, June 1, 2004; 25(2): 255 - 272. [Abstract] [PDF]