On Messes, Systems Thinking, and Evaluation: A Response to Patton. (June 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Miller, Robin Lin
• Is Part Of: American journal of evaluation. Volume 37:Number 2(2016:Jun.)
• Page Start: 266
• Page End: 269
• Publication Date: 2016-06
• Subjects: developmental evaluation -- evaluation use -- evaluation theory -- evaluation practice -- system evaluation; Evaluation -- Periodicals; Public administration -- Evaluation -- Periodicals; Educational evaluation -- Periodicals; Social sciences -- Methodology -- Periodicals; 300.72
• DOI: 10.1177/1098214015626294
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1098-2140

Abstract

To help evaluation professionals better understand what an authentic attempt at Developmental Evaluation (DE) ought to look like and when it is appropriate to use, Michael Patton's provocative essay (this issue) offers evaluators eight sensitizing concepts to call on as guides. Patton states these concepts succinctly define DE and persuasively argues each must be unequivocally evident for an evaluation to earn the DE label. But are these eight concepts sufficient to clarify when and how to conduct DE? At the request of the editors, I comment on the adequacy of sensitizing concepts for evaluating in the context of emergent innovation.