Knowledge-for-action theories in evaluation: Knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation
Five knowledge‐for‐action theories are summarized and compared in this chapter for their evaluation implications: knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation. Usually dispersed across multiple fields and disciplines, these theories are gathered here for a common focus...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | New directions for evaluation 2009, Vol.2009 (124), p.7-20 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 20 |
---|---|
container_issue | 124 |
container_start_page | 7 |
container_title | New directions for evaluation |
container_volume | 2009 |
creator | Ottoson, Judith M. |
description | Five knowledge‐for‐action theories are summarized and compared in this chapter for their evaluation implications: knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation. Usually dispersed across multiple fields and disciplines, these theories are gathered here for a common focus on knowledge and change. Knowledge in some form (ideas, innovation, skills, or policy) moves in some direction (laterally, hierarchically, spreads, or exchanges) among various stakeholders (knowledge producers, end users, or intermediaries) and contexts (national, community, or organizational) to achieve some outcomes (intended benefits, unanticipated outcomes, or hijacked effects). Although rooted in different disciplines, sensitive to different key indicators, and following different process paths, these theories individually and collectively provide multiple lenses on the evaluation of complex interventions. A table compares key theory points of disciplinary roots, type of knowledge, movement of knowledge, contextual influences, and the added lens of each theory. These lenses are used to analyze the set of theories for evaluation implications. © Wiley Periodicals, Inc., and the American Evaluation Association. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/ev.310 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>eric_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1002_ev_310</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ866601</ericid><sourcerecordid>EJ866601</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2310-a368a6778d634582a464b2971cfa3813063960a8054a0e7b9929b225ba62ef253</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtPwkAQxzdGExH1E3joycSE4j66u603g4gPojGgcNtsy1RXS0t2y8tPb6GEm6d5_H_5T2YGoXOC2wRjeg2LNiP4ADUIZ4EfSj4-rHIcSV9IJo7RiXPfuAIl4Q20es6LZQaTT_DTwvo6KU2Re-UXFNaA80zuwUJnc71p33h72JuXJjO_23bLm5g0nbttaqazDKaQlzuptDp3KdiWp_NJXWVb6RQdpTpzcLaLTfR-3x12Hvz-a--xc9v3E1pt4WsmQi2kDCeCBTykOhBBTCNJklSzkDAsWCSwDjEPNAYZRxGNYkp5rAWFlHLWRJe1b2IL5yykambNVNu1Ilht7qVgoapJFXhRg2BNsoe6T6EQApNKvqrlpclg_Y-J6n7UVn7NGlfCas9q-6OqF0iuRi89NRiN78Rg9KaG7A-BnoSh</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Knowledge-for-action theories in evaluation: Knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation</title><source>Education Source</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Ottoson, Judith M.</creator><creatorcontrib>Ottoson, Judith M.</creatorcontrib><description>Five knowledge‐for‐action theories are summarized and compared in this chapter for their evaluation implications: knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation. Usually dispersed across multiple fields and disciplines, these theories are gathered here for a common focus on knowledge and change. Knowledge in some form (ideas, innovation, skills, or policy) moves in some direction (laterally, hierarchically, spreads, or exchanges) among various stakeholders (knowledge producers, end users, or intermediaries) and contexts (national, community, or organizational) to achieve some outcomes (intended benefits, unanticipated outcomes, or hijacked effects). Although rooted in different disciplines, sensitive to different key indicators, and following different process paths, these theories individually and collectively provide multiple lenses on the evaluation of complex interventions. A table compares key theory points of disciplinary roots, type of knowledge, movement of knowledge, contextual influences, and the added lens of each theory. These lenses are used to analyze the set of theories for evaluation implications. © Wiley Periodicals, Inc., and the American Evaluation Association.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1097-6736</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1534-875X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ev.310</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>San Francisco: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>Evaluation ; Evaluators ; Intervention ; Program Evaluation ; Program Implementation ; Theories ; Translation</subject><ispartof>New directions for evaluation, 2009, Vol.2009 (124), p.7-20</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company, and the American Evaluation Association</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2310-a368a6778d634582a464b2971cfa3813063960a8054a0e7b9929b225ba62ef253</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2310-a368a6778d634582a464b2971cfa3813063960a8054a0e7b9929b225ba62ef253</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fev.310$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fev.310$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ866601$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ottoson, Judith M.</creatorcontrib><title>Knowledge-for-action theories in evaluation: Knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation</title><title>New directions for evaluation</title><addtitle>New Directions for Evaluation</addtitle><description>Five knowledge‐for‐action theories are summarized and compared in this chapter for their evaluation implications: knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation. Usually dispersed across multiple fields and disciplines, these theories are gathered here for a common focus on knowledge and change. Knowledge in some form (ideas, innovation, skills, or policy) moves in some direction (laterally, hierarchically, spreads, or exchanges) among various stakeholders (knowledge producers, end users, or intermediaries) and contexts (national, community, or organizational) to achieve some outcomes (intended benefits, unanticipated outcomes, or hijacked effects). Although rooted in different disciplines, sensitive to different key indicators, and following different process paths, these theories individually and collectively provide multiple lenses on the evaluation of complex interventions. A table compares key theory points of disciplinary roots, type of knowledge, movement of knowledge, contextual influences, and the added lens of each theory. These lenses are used to analyze the set of theories for evaluation implications. © Wiley Periodicals, Inc., and the American Evaluation Association.</description><subject>Evaluation</subject><subject>Evaluators</subject><subject>Intervention</subject><subject>Program Evaluation</subject><subject>Program Implementation</subject><subject>Theories</subject><subject>Translation</subject><issn>1097-6736</issn><issn>1534-875X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2009</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kUtPwkAQxzdGExH1E3joycSE4j66u603g4gPojGgcNtsy1RXS0t2y8tPb6GEm6d5_H_5T2YGoXOC2wRjeg2LNiP4ADUIZ4EfSj4-rHIcSV9IJo7RiXPfuAIl4Q20es6LZQaTT_DTwvo6KU2Re-UXFNaA80zuwUJnc71p33h72JuXJjO_23bLm5g0nbttaqazDKaQlzuptDp3KdiWp_NJXWVb6RQdpTpzcLaLTfR-3x12Hvz-a--xc9v3E1pt4WsmQi2kDCeCBTykOhBBTCNJklSzkDAsWCSwDjEPNAYZRxGNYkp5rAWFlHLWRJe1b2IL5yykambNVNu1Ilht7qVgoapJFXhRg2BNsoe6T6EQApNKvqrlpclg_Y-J6n7UVn7NGlfCas9q-6OqF0iuRi89NRiN78Rg9KaG7A-BnoSh</recordid><startdate>2009</startdate><enddate>2009</enddate><creator>Ottoson, Judith M.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><general>Jossey-Bass</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>2009</creationdate><title>Knowledge-for-action theories in evaluation: Knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation</title><author>Ottoson, Judith M.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2310-a368a6778d634582a464b2971cfa3813063960a8054a0e7b9929b225ba62ef253</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2009</creationdate><topic>Evaluation</topic><topic>Evaluators</topic><topic>Intervention</topic><topic>Program Evaluation</topic><topic>Program Implementation</topic><topic>Theories</topic><topic>Translation</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ottoson, Judith M.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>New directions for evaluation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ottoson, Judith M.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ866601</ericid><atitle>Knowledge-for-action theories in evaluation: Knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation</atitle><jtitle>New directions for evaluation</jtitle><addtitle>New Directions for Evaluation</addtitle><date>2009</date><risdate>2009</risdate><volume>2009</volume><issue>124</issue><spage>7</spage><epage>20</epage><pages>7-20</pages><issn>1097-6736</issn><eissn>1534-875X</eissn><abstract>Five knowledge‐for‐action theories are summarized and compared in this chapter for their evaluation implications: knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation. Usually dispersed across multiple fields and disciplines, these theories are gathered here for a common focus on knowledge and change. Knowledge in some form (ideas, innovation, skills, or policy) moves in some direction (laterally, hierarchically, spreads, or exchanges) among various stakeholders (knowledge producers, end users, or intermediaries) and contexts (national, community, or organizational) to achieve some outcomes (intended benefits, unanticipated outcomes, or hijacked effects). Although rooted in different disciplines, sensitive to different key indicators, and following different process paths, these theories individually and collectively provide multiple lenses on the evaluation of complex interventions. A table compares key theory points of disciplinary roots, type of knowledge, movement of knowledge, contextual influences, and the added lens of each theory. These lenses are used to analyze the set of theories for evaluation implications. © Wiley Periodicals, Inc., and the American Evaluation Association.</abstract><cop>San Francisco</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><doi>10.1002/ev.310</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1097-6736 |
ispartof | New directions for evaluation, 2009, Vol.2009 (124), p.7-20 |
issn | 1097-6736 1534-875X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_1002_ev_310 |
source | Education Source; Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Evaluation Evaluators Intervention Program Evaluation Program Implementation Theories Translation |
title | Knowledge-for-action theories in evaluation: Knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T20%3A33%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-eric_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Knowledge-for-action%20theories%20in%20evaluation:%20Knowledge%20utilization,%20diffusion,%20implementation,%20transfer,%20and%20translation&rft.jtitle=New%20directions%20for%20evaluation&rft.au=Ottoson,%20Judith%20M.&rft.date=2009&rft.volume=2009&rft.issue=124&rft.spage=7&rft.epage=20&rft.pages=7-20&rft.issn=1097-6736&rft.eissn=1534-875X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ev.310&rft_dat=%3Ceric_cross%3EEJ866601%3C/eric_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ866601&rfr_iscdi=true |