Evaluation Approach
&
Program Theory
Metacognition, Change & Program Evaluation
According to Chen, programs could be looked at through a system view when approaching an evaluation design methodology. As indicated in Figure 1.1, taken from Practical Program Evaluation, the system view looks at the environment, input, transformation of the input, output which is then evaluated through feedback. (Chen, 4)
|
![Picture](/uploads/1/0/3/2/103258266/published/867838203.jpg?1519310052)
Essentially when looking at program evaluations, I feel that as an evaluator you need to step back and look at programs from a metacognitive approach. You need to look at the thinking behind the thinking involved in devising the program. As indicated in the above metacognitive cycle, this requires deep reflection and to look at different components from varying angles.
In addition to the this, Knoster, Villa & Thousand provide a breakdown of looking at how change could be managed. Through the reflective approach of the metacognitive cycle, we would be able to see where potential 'confusion, anxiety, resistance, frustration, or 'false starts'' are in a program - as indicated by Knoster Villa & Thousand. Chen's system view of a program is lacking in this sense. It lacks the detail to really look deeper in how to approach your evaluation.
Since 'Mindfulness' was a concept which was initially received with 'resistance' and 'confusions', it would be wise to look at the following:
In addition to the this, Knoster, Villa & Thousand provide a breakdown of looking at how change could be managed. Through the reflective approach of the metacognitive cycle, we would be able to see where potential 'confusion, anxiety, resistance, frustration, or 'false starts'' are in a program - as indicated by Knoster Villa & Thousand. Chen's system view of a program is lacking in this sense. It lacks the detail to really look deeper in how to approach your evaluation.
Since 'Mindfulness' was a concept which was initially received with 'resistance' and 'confusions', it would be wise to look at the following:
- How is the program 'vision' communicated? and
- Are there 'resources' to support the concept?
Questions to consider during this evaluation...
- How can the certain models be used in the evaluation process to develop a deeper understanding in how effective this program was implemented?
- Could the the initial stages of program implementations reform the approach of taking the program further?
- Through evaluation can factors of whether enough communication with all stakeholders in the process to have an effective implementation of the project be assessed?
eVALUATION aPPROACH & Rationale
The best suited evaluation approach for this program would be process, impact and outcome approach. With a process evaluation approach, the program could be evaluated with 'how' the program is implemented, is it going well and are the activities taking place as they should. As a result of this the evaluation could look at where the improvements need to take place in order to have the desired 'impact'. In return this would further influence the 'impact' of the program.
This would best suit the evaluation design for this program because it involves the social emotional characteristics of the participants. As result this requires evaluators to be holistic in their approach and really look at the thinking behind the thinking of how participants respond. I always believe that to really understand where people's actions are coming from - it is important to look at where those actions are coming from that justify the behaviour.
With the help of using the metacognition cycle and Knoster, Villa and Thousand's model - it would develop and support Chen's 'System View' of a program. By combing the two models together, it would encourage a holistic approach. The holistic approach finds it imperative to include contextual or 'transformation' information when assessing the merits of a program. (Chen, 9)
Sources:
Chen, Huey-Tsyh. Practical Program Evaluation: Assessing and Improving Planning, Implementation, and Effectiveness. London: SAGE, 2005. Print.
Knoster, Villa, and Thousand. Managing Complex Change. Digital image. Sylvia Duckworth, n.d. Web. 23 Jan. 2017. <http://www.ride.ri.gov/Portals/0/Uploads/Images/Virtual-Learning/ManagingComplexChange-SM.jpg>.
This would best suit the evaluation design for this program because it involves the social emotional characteristics of the participants. As result this requires evaluators to be holistic in their approach and really look at the thinking behind the thinking of how participants respond. I always believe that to really understand where people's actions are coming from - it is important to look at where those actions are coming from that justify the behaviour.
With the help of using the metacognition cycle and Knoster, Villa and Thousand's model - it would develop and support Chen's 'System View' of a program. By combing the two models together, it would encourage a holistic approach. The holistic approach finds it imperative to include contextual or 'transformation' information when assessing the merits of a program. (Chen, 9)
Sources:
Chen, Huey-Tsyh. Practical Program Evaluation: Assessing and Improving Planning, Implementation, and Effectiveness. London: SAGE, 2005. Print.
Knoster, Villa, and Thousand. Managing Complex Change. Digital image. Sylvia Duckworth, n.d. Web. 23 Jan. 2017. <http://www.ride.ri.gov/Portals/0/Uploads/Images/Virtual-Learning/ManagingComplexChange-SM.jpg>.
Program THeory for Change & Action
![Picture](/uploads/1/0/3/2/103258266/learning_orig.jpeg)
With the aid of the evaluation approach, it is important to couple this with the theory which would facilitate a means to learn from the 'theory and practice'.