Debates on the professionalization of evaluation regularly fuel controversies. Evaluation literature contains varied points of view in favour of or against means of restricting access to the profession and quality control mechanisms. This article examines the aims pursued (e.g. institutionalization, quality improvement, ethical practice) and challenges faced by the promoters of the professionalization of evaluation. It also presents the mechanisms and means envisioned in Canada by the Société québécoise d’évaluation de programme (Québec Society of Programme Evaluation: SQEP) designed to address these points. These mechanisms include the drafting process of an evaluation charter, membership of a professional order and evaluator certification. This article is based on a documentary review and an analysis of semi-directed interviews conducted with current and former members of the SQEP and its administrative council. These results help to fuel debates in matters of the professionalization of evaluative practice which arise in most contexts where evaluation has reached a certain maturity.
AEA (2004) Guiding principles for evaluators. Retrieved Aug. 2009, from htpp://www.eval.org.
2.
Altschuld JW ( 1999a) The case for a voluntary system for credentialing evaluators . American Journal of Evaluation20(3): 507-17.
3.
Altschuld JW ( 1999b) The certification of evaluators: highlights from a report submitted to the board of directors of the American Evaluation Association . American Journal of Evaluation20(3): 481-93.
4.
Altschuld JW ( 2005) Certification, credentialing, licensure, competencies, and the like: issues confronting the field of evaluation. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation20(2): 157-68.
5.
Altschuld JW and Austin JT ( 2005) Certification. In: Mathison S (ed.) Encyclopedia of Evaluation . Thousand Oaks: Sage, 49-50.
6.
Bacon C. ( 2009) Professionnalisme et identité: des enjeux pour la formation. Éthique publique11(1): 95-110.
7.
Bard C., Bernier S., Johnson H., and Marceau R. ( 2005) Un projet de charte d’évaluation. Paper presented at the 14th SQEP’s annual conference.
8.
Berends L. ( 2007) Ethical decision-making in evaluation. Evaluation Journal of Australasia7(2): 40-5.
9.
Beywl W. ( 2006) The role of evaluation in democracy: can it be strengthened by evaluation standards? AEuropean perspective. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation3(6): 10-29.
10.
Bickman L. ( 1997) Evaluating evaluation: where do we go from here ? Evaluation Practice18(1): 1-16.
11.
Bickman L. ( 1999) AEA, bold or timid?American Journal of Evaluation20(3): 519-20.
12.
Bickman L. and Reich S. ( 2005) Profession of evaluation. In Mathison S (ed.) Encyclopedia of Evaluation . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 331-4.
13.
Bourgault J. and Parent E. ( 2008). Inspiring exemplary practices in Canada: Ken Kernaghan’s contribution to professionalism, pride, and recognition. In Siegel D and Rasmussen K (eds) Professionalism and Public Service. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 152-73.
14.
Conner RF and Dickman FB ( 1979) Professionalization of evaluative research: conflict as a sign of health. Evaluation and Program Planning2(2): 103-9.
15.
Cooper RW, Frank GL and Kemp RA ( 1997) The ethical envrionment facing the profession of purchasing and materials management. Journal of Supply Chain Management33(2): 2-11.
16.
Cousins JB, Cullen J., Malik S., and Maicher B. ( 2009) Debating professional designations for evaluators: reflections on the Canadian process. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation6(11): 71-82.
17.
Datta L.-E (1980) The examined life: evaluation as a self-renewing profession. Evaluation and Program Planning3(3): 171-3.
18.
Donaldson SI ( 2001) Overcoming our negative reputation: evaluation becomes known as a helping profession. American Journal of Evaluation22(3): 355-61.
19.
Donaldson SI and Christie CA ( 2006) Emerging career opportunities in the transdiscipline of evaluation science. In Donaldson SI, Berger DE and Pezdek K (eds) Applied Psychology: New Frontiers and Rewarding Careers. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 243-59.
20.
Fitzpatrick JL ( 2005) Ethical agreements. In Mathison S (ed.) Encyclopedia of Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 130-1.
21.
Graep (2007) Mémoire présenté au Conseil national de la Société canadienne d’évaluation (SCÉ). PLACE: GRAEP.
22.
House ER ( 1993) Professional Evaluation: Social Impact and Political Consequences . Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
23.
Jacob S. ( 2005) La volonté des acteurs et le poids des structures dans l’institutionnalisation de l’évaluation des politiques publiques (France, Belgique, Suisse et Pays-Bas). Revue française de science politique55(5-6): 835-864.
24.
Jacob S. ( 2008) Cross-disciplinarization: a new talisman for evaluation ? American Journal of Evaluation29(2): 175-94.
25.
Jones SC and Worthen BR ( 1999) AEA members’ opinions concerning evaluator certification . American Journal of Evaluation20(3): 495-506.
26.
Kirkhart KE ( 1981) On the future of the evaluation profession. American Journal of Evaluation2(3): 274-7.
27.
Leeuw FL ( 2005) Trends and developments in program evaluation in general and criminal justice programs in particular. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research11: 233-58.
28.
Levin-Rozalis M. and Shochot-Reich E. ( 2009) Professional identity of evaluators in Israel. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation23(1): 141-77.
29.
Lincoln YS ( 1985) The ERS standards for program evaluation: guidance for a fledging profession. Evaluation and Program Planning8(3): 251-3.
30.
Love AJ ( 1994) Should evaluators be certified? New Directions for Evaluation62: 29-40.
31.
Lysaght RM and Altschuld JW ( 2000) Beyond initial certification: the assessment and maintenance of competency in professions. Evaluation and Program Planning23(1): 95-104.
32.
Marceau R. ( 2007) L’expérience québécoise des trente dernières années en évaluation. In Jacob S, Varone F and Genard J-L (eds) L’évaluation des politiques au niveau régional. Brussels: Peter Lang, 143-55.
33.
Meiksins PF and Watson MJ ( 1989) Professional autonomy and organizational constraint: the case of engineers. Sociological Quarterly30(4): 561-85.
34.
Merwin JC and Weiner PH ( 1985) Evaluation: a profession?Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis7(3): 253-9.
35.
Modarresi S., Newman DL, and Abolafia MY ( 2001) Academic evaluators versus practitioners: alternative experiences of professionalism. Evaluation and Program Planning24(1): 1-11.
36.
Morell JA ( 1990) Evaluation: status of a loose coalition. Evaluation Practice11(3): 213-19.
37.
Morell JA ( 2005) Why are there unintended consequences of program action, and what are the implications for doing evaluation?American Journal of Evaluation26(4): 444-63.
38.
Morell JA and Flaherty EW ( 1978) The development of evaluation as a profession: current status and some predictions. Evaluation and Programm Planning1(1): 11-17.
39.
Morris M. ( 2005) Ethics. In Mathison S (ed.) Encyclopedia of Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 131-4.
40.
Newman DL and Brown RD ( 1996) Applied Ethics for Program Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
41.
Octobre S. ( 2001) Construction et conflits de légitimité professionnelle: qualification et compétence des conservateurs de musée . Sociologie du travail43: 91-109.
42.
Owen JM ( 2006) Program Evaluation: Forms and Approaches (3rd edn). New-York: Guilford.
43.
Parsons W. ( 2001) Modernising policy-making for the twenty first century: the professional model. Public Policy and Administration16(3): 93-110.
44.
Patton MQ ( 1990) The challenge of being a profession. Evaluation Practice11(1): 45-51.
45.
Preston A., Cooper DJ, Scarbrough DP, and Chilton RC ( 1995) Changes in the code of ethics of the U.S. accounting profession, 1917 and 1988: the continual quest for legitimation. Accounting , Organizations and Society20(6): 507-46.
46.
Quinn BA ( 2003) Building a profession: a sociological analysis of the intern development program. Journal of Architectural Education56(4): 41-9.
47.
Reynaud J-D ( 2001) Le management par les compétences: un essai d’analyse . Sociologie du travail43: 7-31.
48.
Rossi PH, Lipsey MW, and Freeman HE ( 2004) Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE .
49.
Rouge J.-C (2004) The origin and development of the African evaluation guidelines. New Directions for Evaluation104: 55-66.
50.
Shaw G. ( 2005) German lawyers and globalisation: changing professional identity. German Life and Letters58(2): 211-25.
51.
Sheinfeld SN ( 1978) The evaluation profession in pursuit of value. Evaluation and Program Planning1(2): 113-15.
52.
Smith MF ( 1999) Should AEA begin a process for restricting membership in the profession of evaluation? American Journal of Evaluation20(3): 521-31.
53.
Sqep (2007) Normes professionnelles pour les évaluateurs: Position de la Société québécoise d’évaluation de programmes. Québec : SQEP.
54.
Sullivan WM ( 1995) Work and integrity. The crisis and Promise of Professionalism in America. New York: Harper Business .
55.
Sullivan WM ( 2004) Can professionalism still be a viable ethic? The Good Society13(1): 15-20.
56.
Weiss-Gal I. and Welbourne P. ( 2008) The professionalisation of social work: a cross-national exploration. International Journal of Social Welfare17(4): 281-90.
57.
Widmer T. ( 2004) The development and status of evaluation standards in western Europe. New Directions for Evaluation104: 31-42.
58.
Wolf A., Turner D., and Toms K. ( 2008) Ethical perspectives in program evaluation. In Mertens DM and Ginsberg PE (eds) The Handbook of Social Research Ethics . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, 170-83.
59.
Worthen BR ( 1994) Is evaluation a mature profession that warrants the preparation of evaluation professionals? New Directions for Evaluation62: 3-15.
60.
Worthen BR ( 1999) Critical challenges confronting certification of evaluators . American Journal of Evaluation20(3): 533-55.
