Hello, I am Matthew Sanscartier, Director of Professional Learning at the Canadian Evaluation Society (CES).
The Program Evaluation Standards (PES) play a crucial role in the CES’ required competencies for evaluators seeking credentialing. The CES recently updated its five-year strategic plan to align with the changing context of evaluation work, emphasizing three core values: upholding the rights and well-being of persons, peoples, and nature; seeking truth, honesty, and transparency; and being responsible to all engaged in or affected by their evaluation work.
The PES, particularly the Utility and Propriety Standards, are essential in connecting Canadian evaluators to the CES’s ideals. However, since the third edition of the PES was published fourteen years ago, the Canadian context has recognized the need for active engagement in promoting equity, diversity, inclusion, and environmental sustainability (EDIES).
The Canadian political landscape has transformed substantially, with increasing recognition of the harms and deprivation of political voice experienced by Indigenous Peoples. Genuine reconciliation requires settler and non-Indigenous allies to actively seek self-education and opportunities to advance this relationship meaningfully. In evaluation, this means actively engaging diverse groups and peoples beyond ‘devoting attention to’ or ‘being responsive to’ the stakeholders impacted by evaluation.
There are two issues with this kind of language, which we find in the current iteration of the PES. The first is that it assumes, first, evaluators hold the power in these kinds of relationships. Part and parcel of the CES strategic plan is to horizontalize this power as much as possible so that ‘stakeholders,’ a largely passive term, become partners, participants, and so on. Second, it takes for granted both a willingness and an ability to vie for evaluators’ attention when one or neither of these might be present—even if an evaluation will significantly impact a group. Hence, part of the shift in thinking requires placing the onus on the evaluator, rather than evaluands, to seek out potential conflicts, tensions, and other knots that may be uncomfortable to navigate, but are nevertheless critical.
Additionally, there is a growing interest among CES members in incorporating sustainability principles into evaluations, even those seemingly unrelated to environmental concerns. There is also a push to recognize non-human beings as valuable in themselves, rather than solely within anthropocentric frameworks.
As a member of the Joint Committee and CES National Board of Directors, my goal is to ensure that CES members feel comfortable actively integrating the PES, many of which are already excellent and continue to be highly applicable to CES membership, into their work. In conjunction with the rest of the Joint Committee, my ultimate goal is to examine and revise the PES to ensure that both organizations continue to mutually reinforce their excellent work.
Rad Resources
CES statement on Commitment to Reconciliation
CE designation landing page (note that the Evaluation Standards are prominent at the bottom)
This week, we’re diving the Program Evaluation Standards. Articles will (re)introduce you to the Standards and the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (JCSEE), the organization responsible for developing, reviewing, and approving evaluation standards in North America. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org. aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.