Search results

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss theory-based evaluation of public–private partnership (PPP) projects/programmes and to develop an intervention logical framework. It aims to draw attention to the need to go beyond the measurement of project/programme results to address not only the question of whether or not the project/programme worked but also the how and why questions. The study follows an interpretative methodology. It analytically discloses the mechanics of theory-based evaluation in relation to a ‘PPP theory’ and describes a theory-based analytical framework that portrays an explicit path towards ultimate impacts so as to assess, in a more systematic and integrated way, the success or failure of a PPP. Theory-based evaluation is a promising evaluation approach that would fit into the complexities of PPP projects/programmes and would expand the available toolbox of evaluators. Proper use of theory-based evaluation in PPP interventions contributes to better policy formulation and project implementation, thus leading to improved socio-economic benefits derived from PPP projects and programmes. The main contribution of the study is that it develops a ‘PPP theory’ and a related logical intervention framework drawing on theory-based approaches. Although the framework is developed for a representative sector, transport, it can easily be applied to any other PPP intervention.

This chapter will focus on the use of evaluative research in higher education policy analysis. The approach will be illustrated by reference to higher education policy in Scottish higher education, with particular reference to the longitudinal evaluative research of support of teaching and learning (T&L) (the Quality Enhancement Framework or QEF). The chapter will discuss the features of the research process which are shaped by evaluation theory. We adopt a theoretical position on policy research which foregrounds the situated experience of policy as a core research focus. Policy is depicted as being underscored by an implicit theory of change which is used to structure and orientate the research focus. The design of the research is characterised by the involvement of potential users of the research output, with implications on the way in which findings are articulated, presented and ultimately used, along with aspects of the evaluative research design. The case study of the QEF will be contextualised, and the intersection between the design features and theoretical approaches, and the use and usability of research outputs, will be established.

The chapter will explore a collaborative theory of change approach that the authors used to evaluate three projects. The three projects worked with young people out of school in different ways to enable the young people to become agents of change in tackling the causes of alcohol misuse in their local Scottish communities. A theory of change approach provides a way of conceptualising programmes from inception, through to implementation and the evaluation of outcomes, in order to develop an understanding of how they work, for whom and in what circumstances. Using a collaborative model of this approach challenged prevailing notions of evaluation being the job of the evaluator and situated evaluation as a shared endeavour with the project staff. We outline the key attributes of such a collaborative model of theory of change and reflect on how this model can contribute to the evaluation of out-of-school activity.

A strong, useful theoretical foundation for performance assessment and prediction relies on four components: preliminary observation of a system, identification of key or dominating variables in the system, synthetic and vertical thinking, and successive refinement.

If institutions of higher education are to remain at the forefront of the knowledge-generating enterprise, the nature of graduate-level teaching must be critically examined. Exploring the manner in which discussion is facilitated in a seminar-like context offers one avenue for attaining this understanding. This study aims to shed light on the prevalence, purpose, and form of discussion facilitation practices that were observed in a small group setting within a social science academic program at a large Southern California university. An exploratory, embedded case study was conducted over approximately 24 weeks using ethnographic and conversation analytic methods. Data sources consisted of ethnographic field notes, audio recordings of meetings, transcripts from those recordings, and artifacts, including literature used during each session. Results suggest that facilitating small group discussions requires balancing focus on the selected text and participant engagement, a diverse set of facilitation practices, and use of different strategies (or micro-avenues) to arrive at the same end. Study findings emphasize the importance of intersubjectivity and form versus function of speech in an educational environment. What is said and how it is said both have great implications for shared learning and understanding. Adaptability of mixed qualitative methods in this study demonstrates the potential of ethnography and conversation analysis as complementary approaches for understanding the functional nature of talk and interaction. Thus, the criteria for rigorous qualitative research, the view that ethnography and conversation analysis do not mix, and the under-valuing of critical multiplism in research need to be re-examined.

There is a substantial literature evaluating the impact of aid at the macroeconomic level using cross-country regressions. However, despite econometric advances in recent years, there remain many flaws in this approach. Similar problems beset cross-country analysis of the impact of aid on poverty indicators. More reliable estimates of the poverty impact of aid come from project-level analyses from which can be built up a picture of aid impact at the country level. This paper presents the findings from three such studies carried out by the Independent Evaluation Group of the World Bank.

This chapter examines the nature and role of theory in criminal justice evaluation. A distinction between theories of and theories for evaluation is offered to clarify what is meant by ‘theory’ in the context of contemporary evaluation practice. Theories of evaluation provide a set of prescriptions and principles that can be used to guide the design, conduct and use of evaluation. Theories for evaluation include programme theory and the application of social science theory to understand how and why criminal justice interventions work to generate desired outcomes. The fundamental features of these three types of theory are discussed in detail, with a particular focus on demonstrating their combined value and utility for informing and improving the practice of criminal justice evaluation.