6. Questions
• Please share one key point about your ECLIPS involvement that stood
out when you used the value creation story approach for reflection.
• What ideas emerged when you shared your stories with another
person?
• Wenger talks about five types of value
(immediate, potential, applied, realized, and reframing). Did you find
that the template helped you think about the value categories?
• What was your overall reaction to using this way to reflect on your
ECLIPS involvement?
• Are there changes you would make in the template to make it more
useful?
• How could you see using this approach to determining value in your
evaluation practice?
6
8. Expertise and Connections
Please indicate what knowledge/expertise and/or
connections you brought to the ECLIPS.
• Expertise in evaluation
• Expertise in teaching evaluation
• STEM evaluation experience
• Connections to PIs of STEM education evaluators
• Connections to PIs of STEM education projects/centers
• Knowledge of systems concepts
• Experience in applying systems concepts to evaluation
• Communications knowledge/experience
• Expertise in collaboration
8
9. Desired Outcomes
Desired outcomes of the partnership’s work include:
• Increased knowledge of systems dynamics
• Increased knowledge of systems thinking
• Increased knowledge of systems archetypes
• Increased knowledge of fuzzy logic models
• Increased knowledge of cultural responsiveness
• Increased knowledge of how to address surprises in evaluation
• Increased value of evaluation to stakeholders
• Increased understanding of your evaluand
• Integration of systems concepts into an evaluation
• New tools to integrate systems concepts into evaluation
• Increased connections to STEM education evaluators
• Increased connections to other evaluators
• Increased connections to AEA
9
11. Session Overview
• Introduction to session
• The ECLIPS model
• Small group discussions
• Key points from group discussions
• Discussants
11
12. Small Group Discussion Questions
• What Community-of-Practice models of learning have you engaged
in? How were they similar and/or different from the ECLIPS model?
• What aspects of the ECLIPS or related models particularly support
evaluators in making a fundamental change in their approach to
evaluation?
• Would this design work well in learning and applying other new
concepts (e.g., cultural responsiveness) to your evaluations? If
not, what modifications would be needed?
• How can AEA and other organizations and structures create and
support these ways of learning?
• How do you find time and other necessary resources to make deep
learning possible?
12
13. October Calls
• Rethinking your evaluation plans
• Involvement in the coming year
• Involvement in the new proposal
• Dissemination plans
• Review of October 28 agenda, preparation
tasks, logistics
13
14. October 28 Meeting
• Present your preliminary dissemination plan
drawing on your learning as reflected in fuzzy logic
models, value-creation stories, and redesigned
systems-informed evaluation plan/ tools
• Identifying the most valuable system concepts and
examples for collective dissemination
• Rethinking your evaluation plan
• Implications for next steps for ECLIPS
14
