Evaluator Competencies Reflection: Part 2

    As I am near the end of LDT 506, I have had the opportunity to revisit the Evaluator Self-Assessment. Before diving into my responses, I want to share a little about my experience with the course. I entered the course assuming I had applicable expertise in evaluation since I came from a primary education background. Boy, was I mistaken. I quickly realized that the evaluation I experienced was entirely different from the kind I’d engage in over the next several weeks. Reading Module 1’s required texts further opened my eyes, and I realized I had much to learn about evaluation.

    Initially, I was skeptical when completing the Evaluator Self-Assessment, especially after realizing I had no experience with evaluation. I had difficulty responding because I kept answering the questions as a teacher who evaluates and not as an evaluator on an evaluation team. Having engaged in challenging yet engaging learning experiences—analyzing Request for Proposals (RFP), designing surveys, reviewing a thematic analysis generated by my AI Mentor, and writing a data analysis report—I have a clearer understanding of what it means to think like an evaluator.

Where I See Myself Now

    On the 6-point scale used in the self-assessment, I currently place myself at a 3.5, which is near an advanced beginner and competent. I am not proficient or an expert, but I have significantly grown in technical and interpersonal areas of evaluation practice. I am confident in analyzing an RFP, identifying evaluation purposes, designing viable approaches, and communicating findings. For example, Module 2’s assignment involved analyzing three organizational evaluation proposals. It was a beneficial experience to review what an evaluation proposal entails and compare the strengths and weaknesses of each. This opportunity was helpful when participating in our group's external evaluation of the Building Climate Resilience through Ecosystem-based Adaptation Planning course. I also co-developed quantitative and qualitative survey tools that I later analyzed and discussed in my data analysis report.

    Although challenging and out of my comfort zone, the experience allowed me to participate in the data collection aspect of an evaluation. Data extends beyond its collection but requires interpretation, storytelling, and communication with stakeholders with actionable recommendations. Evaluation is not only a method, but an act of conveying results with the goal of future improvement.

 My Strengths and Weaknesses

    After completing the self-assessment the first time, I was concerned the course would be much more challenging than anticipated. I answered nearly all questions with a rating of 1. However, as described above, I have gained confidence in the evaluation process by the end. The post-course self-assessment highlighted many areas for growth, particularly systematic inquiry (Methodologies) and interpersonal competence. I now feel comfortable identifying the evaluation purpose and needs and determining and selecting appropriate methods to answer evaluation questions, identify relevant sources of evidence, and sampling procedures. I was especially impressed with my ability to interpret findings/results within the evaluation context.

    The interpersonal domain requires leadership when necessary and knowing when to listen and digest information. With no intention, I feel I took on the leadership role of my evaluation group. With that role, I was able to capture a better picture of what the interpersonal domain requires and expects. I have become more attuned to actively listening and engaging with diverse perspectives. These skills are essential when conversing with my team members, communicating with stakeholders, and conducting interviews. This is reflected in my scoring; I scored higher in communicating in meaningful ways that enhance the effectiveness of the evaluation.

    That said, I acknowledge there is room for improvement and growth. Like I previously said, I do not consider myself proficient in evaluation. Despite feeling more confident, I still do not fully understand many aspects. I may feel different if I were allowed to take this course in a non-expedited timeframe or if the course were broken into two parts. With that said, the competencies I think I have the most room for improvement are professional practice and contextual. Professional practice focuses on what makes evaluators distinct as practicing professionals. Given this was my first time participating in an evaluation, it goes without saying that with continued participation, I will mature within this domain. The same applies to the contextual components. Although I understand that each team member has a specific job within the evaluation, it isn't easy to experience what an evaluation entails, especially for your first evaluation. In the future, I would volunteer to complete a different task.

Surprising Competencies

    One of my most surprising competencies was the emphasis on actionable recommendations. The evaluation does not end with results and findings, but with conveying findings to all stakeholders. When presenting findings to stakeholders, evaluators must consider how the results will be used, by whom, and under what conditions. Findings can be reported with a written report; however, considering your audience is crucial when deciding whether other formats are valuable, such as a Zoom meeting, a recording, or a multimedia presentation.

Goals for Continued Growth

    I learn best by modeling and doing. Despite the unfamiliarity and challenges of this course, I learned significantly about evaluation. To gain more competence as an evaluator, I want to participate in additional training and mini-evaluations in the context of my current career. If I can evaluate an organization valuable to my teaching career, I feel it would be more meaningful. For example, evaluate a digital literacy workshop or an online professional development course. These small-scale evaluations would help refine my analysis and improve my ability to promote evaluation in practice.

Conclusion

    Overall, this course was the most challenging in the Instructional Design and Technologies program I have taken. It was also the least enjoyable; others may feel different. However, I do not see myself seeking jobs in the future that entail evaluating. Despite the challenges, I learned significantly about evaluation and the work that goes into conducting an evaluation. Perhaps I would feel different if this course were not expedited, and the evaluation were of something personally meaningful. Although LDT 506 is just one of the remaining courses in the program, it has given me a clearer sense of my identity in learning design.