ABSTRACT
Researchers examined student learning outcomes in two program evaluation courses, taught by the same instructors: a first-year PhD-level course taught using theory and a second-year master's-level course taught blending theory and application by executing an evaluation. Embedding this work in Ghere, King, Stevahn, and Minnema (2006) Essential Competencies for Program Evaluators Self-Assessment (ECPE), researchers investigated student perceptions of their evaluator competencies, scored end-of-course proposals, and interviewed program leaders to understand differences between the two teaching methods, as well as the extent to which the applied evaluation component of the master's-level course may have impacted differential, practice-based outcomes. Researchers analyzed program leader interviews and student data derived via survey, and a six-person team analyzed students' end-of-course proposals. Findings showed master's-level students independently rated all applied components of their course significantly higher than their and their PhD counterparts' rating of the theoretical components, which partially aligned with results of students' final, end-of-course proposals. Program leaders agreed that the applied course yielded strong evaluative findings, given what they perceived as a successful integration of theory and practice.
