An Interdisciplinary and Interagency Evaluation Team: Benefits for Other-Discipline Specialists

Abstract

Agriculturalists are agricultural scientists who use basic agri cultural research techniques derived from physical and biological sciences as they seek new knowledge to improve the food and fiber system. This empirically based knowledge is the major source of information that the Cooperative Extension service communi cates to people in agriculturally related occupations. To facilitate such communication, programs are developed as vehicles for communicating and applying agricultural research findings to Rockwell improve agricultural practices. Cooperative Extension System program evaluators strive to ascertain how effective and useful these programs are by using empirical evaluation processes grounded in the social sciences. Consequently, while agriculturalists and extension program evaluators are both committed to empiricism, their research orientations are as different as are the social and the biological/ physical sciences. This article reports how—notwithstanding this difference—14 agriculturalists were benefitted as they performed an evaluator's role on a team that examined eight water quality demonstration projects. This study suggests that collaborative efforts between evaluators and agriculturalists strengthen study recommendations, are beneficial to the organization, and are personally rewarding to the participating specialists.

Collaboration and partnerships: developing the evidence base

“…1996). Although the benefits include gaining insights into job‐specific tasks and interagency collaboration, as well as acquiring broader professional skills, the stresses involved are the tensions surrounding the evaluation goals and objectives, time commitments and the differing perceptions about the appropriateness of the evaluation methods (Rockwell & Buck 1995).…”

Sustainability‐Ready Evaluation: A Call to Action

“…Having expertise from both systems in the evaluation team will provide assurance to external and internal interests that the team is legitimate and the methods credible. It is important that the representatives of natural system knowledge are integrally involved with all aspects of the evaluation including determining the evaluation questions and research design (Rockwell & Buck, ). Assume that human and natural systems have different scales and units of account. An evaluation needs to be clear on this from the outset—it is part of defining the evaluand.…”

Cross-Disciplinarization: A New Talisman for Evaluation?

“…This means that the manager must identify the strengths of each group member and deploy each at the right moment and in synergistic combination with the skills of others. The benefits are generally worth the effort because at the conclusion, more often than not, participants report being satisfied with their involvement in the process and judge the resulting information to be useful (Rockwell & Buck, 1995). The evaluator should contribute to making a climate that permits each team member to gain some understanding and appreciation into the insights and concerns of other disciplines.…”