The Best of Both Worlds: Using Multiple Evaluation Approaches to Build Capacity and Improve a Museum-Based Arts Program

  • Don Glass
  • Patti Saraniero


This chapter features the inter-connected stories of two evaluators who worked on improving a museum-based Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Math (STEAM) program. The education staff was eager to evaluate the program impact and redesign the STEAM program. Initially, the two evaluators worked on separate parts of the project, but ultimately developed complementary evaluation strategies that measured program impact and made practical appraisals to guide the redesign.

The evaluators discuss their designs and discuss how they influenced each other in improving the program, building evaluation capacity, and developing a potentially more useful hybrid evaluation that featured the best of both approaches.


STEAM Hybrid design Museum-based Developmental evaluation 


  1. Blythe, T., Allen, D., & Powell, B. S. (1999). Looking together at student work: A companion guide to assessing student learning. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bryk, A. S., Gomez, L. M., Grunow, A., & LeMahieu, P. G. (2015). Learning to improve: How America’s schools can get better at getting better. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.Google Scholar
  4. Dolkart, J. F. (2012). To see how the artist sees: Albert C. Barnes and the experiment in education. In Masterworks: The Barnes Foundation. New York, NY and Philadelphia, PA: Skira Rizzoli Publications, Inc., and The Barnes Foundation.Google Scholar
  5. DuFour, R., DuFour, R., & Eaker, R. (2008). Revisiting professional learning communities at work: New insights for improving schools. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.Google Scholar
  6. Elmore, R. F. (2002). Bridging the gap between standards and achievement: The imperative for professional development in education. Washington, DC: Albert Shankar Institute.Google Scholar
  7. Enomoto, E., & Bair, M. (1999). The role of the school in the assimilation of immigrant children: A case study of Arab Americans. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 1, 45–66.Google Scholar
  8. Fetterman, D., & Wandersman, A. (2005). Empowerment evaluation principles in practice. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  9. Gopalakrishnan, S., Preskill, H., Gopal, S., & Lu, S. (2013). Next generation evaluation: Embracing complexity, connectivity, and change, a learning brief. FSG.Google Scholar
  10. Langley, G. J., Moen, R. D., Nolan, K. M., Nolan, T. W., Norman, C. L., & Provost, L. P. (2009). The improvement guide: A practical approach to enhancing organizational performance (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  11. McDonald, J. P., Mohr, N., Dichter, A., & McDonald, E. C. (2003). The power of protocols: An educators guide to better practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  12. Meyer, A., Rose, D. H., & Gordon, D. (2014). Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. Wakefield, MA: CAST Professional Publishing.Google Scholar
  13. Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Patton, M. Q. (2011). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  15. Patton, M. Q. (2015). State of the art and practice of developmental evaluation: Answers to common and recurring questions. In M. Patton, K. McKegg, & N. Wehipeihana (Eds.), Developmental evaluation exemplars: Principles in practice (pp. 1–24). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  16. Smylie, M. A., Allensworth, E., Greenberg, R. C., Harris, R., & Luppescu, S. (2001). Teacher professional development in Chicago: Supporting effective practice. Chicago, IL: Consortium on Chicago School Research.Google Scholar
  17. Spradley, J. (1980). Participant observation. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
  18. Wei, R., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Orphanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas, TX: National Staff Development Council.Google Scholar
  19. Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). A guide to managing knowledge: Cultivating communities of practice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School.Google Scholar
  20. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Don Glass
    • 1
  • Patti Saraniero
    • 2
  1. 1.The Kennedy CenterSilver SpringUSA
  2. 2.Moxie ResearchSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations