1 original post with 2 scholarly citations (300 words), 2 peer replies
“The textbook author has identified five SCREAM values that should be part of every evaluation, discuss them.”
The textbook author has identified five SCREAM values that should be part of every evaluation, discuss them.
Peer reply needed for discussion 1
Brun outlined the acronym SCREAM to help stakeholders prioritize the key values which should guide evaluation decisions. SCREAM represents the following value sets: strengths, culture, resources, ethics, agreement, and multiple systems. These value sets are important to apply as work is done on exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory evaluation systems (Brun, p57, 2016).
It is important to focus on values as they guide our decision making on an individual, organizational, and other relevant levels. “Values are deeply held views that act as guiding principles for individuals and organizations. When they are declared and followed, they are the basis of trust. When they are left unstated, they are inferred from observable behavior.” (Pendleton and King, 2002). Specifically, when considering evaluation, decision-makers should consider the following regarding the SCREAM value sets:
- Strengths – these are behaviors and beliefs that help individuals and groups reach their optimal level of social functioning. From an evaluation standpoint, strengths can be included in many different types of evaluation systems and is a known measurement category. Strengths can demonstrate where we expect programs to show productive returns against program investment. StrengthsFinders 2.0 is an interesting tool from the Gallup Organization that’s widely used as a way to understand individual and group level strengths which could contribute to shared values.
- Culture – Culture is an important component of evaluation as it indicates a level of connectedness within a group that might be included for evaluation. It can be based upon many different demographic or even psychographic characteristics. It is important for evaluators to understand their own cultural perspective prior to measuring another group, mainly to be conscious of any potential bias.
- Resources – are the time, materials, training, budget and other key factors in place to complete the evaluation process. Resources provide the means to complete the evaluation task(s) appropriately. Without proper resources, I would argue that the entire system falls apart. In fact, one of the biggest challenges I have seen organizations face is the lack of a clear ability to appropriate resources efficiently.
- Ethics – Obviously we need evaluation systems to occur within an ethical framework that is known among stakeholders. Ethics provide boundaries of operations, and evaluation processes can help keep the system on track vs ethical standards. Without ethical norms and shared values, the system may lack face validity.
- Agreement – Are key stakeholders aligned and agreed to the assessment process? Lack of agreement can stop an evaluation process cold. Stakeholder agreement ensures that all parties feel the evaluation system is fair and will produce meaningful insight.
- Multiple Systems – Within any evaluation multiple systems will be impacted, and failure to measure across system domains will miss key learning opportunities. Evaluation processes should consider the interplay between systems.
When evaluators can consider all the value domains above, they will have a comprehensive set of principles to move forward with during any program review.
Brun, C. F. (2016). A Practical Guide to Evaluation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Pendleton, D., & King, J. (2002). Values and leadership. BMJ, 325(7376), 1352–1355.
Peer reply need for discussion 2
During this week’s lesson, we discuss the scope of evaluation and the scream values. Our textbook author Carl Brun calls SCREAM values, a somewhat labored, but useful, acronym for measuring strengths, respecting cultures, working within the limits of resources, following professional codes of ethics, reaching agreement with stakeholders about decisions, and measuring change across multiple systems (Brun, 2001).
Strengths- Employers evaluate the strengths of employees when making decisions for promotions, pay raises and participation on special projects. Exhibiting the strengths an employer values can help workers advance in their careers. Any workers seeking a new position should highlight activities that illustrate the strengths, such as leading a group or work on team projects. As much information you can distribute to your employer to identify your strengths the better.
Cultures- Today’s workplaces bring together people of different ages, ethnicities, education, income levels, and physical abilities. It is no wonder we often encounter difficulties when sharing ideas, working on group projects or communicating effectively with our co-workers. When diversity is not acknowledged and valued, it can breed resentment, low morale and draw separations between employees. Employers and employees working together to support and show respect for differences will lay the groundwork for encouraging creative ideas, building cohesive teams and fostering the values and experiences of a diverse workforce. You can’t implement diversity until you appreciate it!
Resources- It is important to develop an estimate of the resources that are available for evaluation and what will be required to do the evaluation well. The resources needed for an evaluation include: existing data, funding to engage an external evaluator or evaluation team or pay for specific tasks to be undertaken and for materials and travel, and time, expertise and willingness to be involved of staff, partners, technical experts and the wider community, whether as part of the evaluation team, the evaluation governance processes and/or key informants and data sources.
Ethics- Promoting ethical practices in assessment is considered a very important goal of the organizations involved in assessment. Codes are intended to increase the awareness of ethical
practice among their memberships and to promote ethical uses of assessment in various contexts: teaching, counseling, evaluation, research, among others (AERA, 1992).
Agreement- this is when an employee for example submits an idea to his or her boss then promises to evaluate it. After the evaluation, the boss will either enter into an agreement to exploit the idea or promise not to use or disclose the idea.
Multiple – The multiples approach is also referred to as the “multiples analysis” or “valuation multiples.” In order to build a multiple, your organizations that are similar to each other need to be identified first, and each of their market values evaluated.
In closing, I will conclude that Scream Values are the basis for defining what aspects of the evaluation should be considered in a particular context. They are something, which is in principle or quality intrinsically valuable or desirable. So in evaluation, factual premises describe performance, while value premises can be thought of as the qualities that, when converted to standards, determine the degree to which the performance was good or bad, worthwhile or worthless, and significant or insignificant (Brun, 2001). Value premises can be validated using commonsense or based on such things as the severity of needs, resource efficiency, legal requirements, professional requirements, and so on.
Brun, C.,& Rapp, R. C. (2001). Strengths-Based Case Management: Individuals’ Perspectives of Strengths and the Case Manager Relationship. Social Work, 46 (3), 278-288.
American Educational Research Association (1992). Ethical standards
of the American Educational Research Association. Washington,