Case study 1
In this context, the evaluation method is often created to address particular evaluation questions or challenges. These initiatives are often based on community change with ambitious goals that trigger difficult planning strategies for specific goals. According to Patton, the evaluation theorist planned a specific task for designing and managing which can provide information about the practices and doctrines prevalent in the field in general. In this case, the theory of change is important for evaluating success for a variety of reasons. The program should be based on sound theory. By developing a change theory based on good theory, managers can be more confident that the program provides appropriate activities for the desired outcome. For example, a contribution analysis method has been developed to address the question of the likelihood of reaching this conclusion that it is difficult to show a direct intervention relationship in situations where contributions have resulted in interventions. Leads. Through this approach, the exact relationship between activity and long-term goal achievement is better understood. This led to more advanced planning, including a detailed understanding of how the activity would change. This leads to better evaluation, as it can identify the results of the program as well as measure progress to achieve long-term goals (Archibald et al. 2018).
Evaluators try to understand the authenticity of the program through conversations with program executives. In order to engage the user for the primary purpose, the evaluator must identify the partners who have the most direct and identifiable part of the evaluation and results, in other words, "for personal reasons." Each stage of the evaluation process involves the accused user. The main goal of evaluator is to improve the program supported by the psychology of use. If the accused user assumes that they have the process and results, they will be able to use the evaluation. Its use does not occur naturally; Thus, the way users use accused users should be strengthened at each stage of the evaluation (Douthwaite and Hoffecker, 2017).
This approach to change focuses on the root causes of these theories and programs. Patton identifies that the system contains such programs, including outputs, inputs, effects, and results. In this case, the partners have different perspectives but in the end the goal is for the welfare of the community for him to visit, so that the final response can be taken. No pressure related to this approach is required and is best served by the valuable community so that feedback is acceptable. Patton suggest that evaluators should begin working with stakeholders to consider objectives and assumptions in programs. Logical models can be used to describe the relationship between activity and outcome. Patton offers many suggestions for modeling program theory, such as action models (e.g., systematic plans for managing staff, settings for allocating resources) and modifying models (i.e., some descriptive assumptions about underlying functions and outcomes). Evaluators should consider the use of this method when working with program implementers to provide the information needed to improve a constructive program (Allen et al. 2017).
Case study 2
Many practitioners plan evaluations about the method. However, I would say that a more holistic approach begins with the theory before the approach. In this case, theory of change is appropriate for detailed illustration and description of why and how the anticipated change is likely to occur in a specific event. A particular focus is on mapping or “achieving” what is being described as a “lost means” of what a change program or initiative (activity or intervention) is doing and how it can achieve the desired goal. First identify the desired long-term goal and then use it again to identify all the conditions (results) in the target so that it can happen and (how it relates to each other). These are all mapped to the results framework. To determine the theoretical basis, the evaluator must first understand the purpose of the evaluation and then develop an evaluation question to inform the method. Often, evaluators focus on the technical details of the evaluation rather than the general purpose. The theoretical focus at the beginning of the project ensures that the process (e.g. stakeholder involvement, methods, data collection, analysis, reporting) is purposeful, intentional, and more beneficial to the client. Through this approach, the exact relationship between activity and long-term goal achievement is better understood. It led to more advanced planning, including a detailed understanding of how the activity would change (Douthwaite and Hoffecker, 2017).
In the context of case studies, evaluators should use a systematic approach to data collection, analysis, and use to response on the questions about programs, projects, and policies, mainly those related to efficiency and effectiveness. The stakeholder often wants to know if the program funds, applies, selects, accepts, or debates its objectives. First program evaluation attentions on this explanation, significant deliberations often include the cost of each participant in the program, how to improve the program, whether the program is successful, whether there are better substitutions, if any unintended consequences occur and the program includes beneficial evaluators answer this question. Therefore, evaluator helps to give but the best way to answer a question is that the evaluation can be a joint project between the stakeholder and evaluator (Rogers et al., 2019).
In this case, it is clear that eHealth is the most effective opt-out. This evaluation is important to ensure that there are risks associated with this approach that can be identified and managed. How to manage the risk of choosing. The based method can be used here but you want to include a strict methodical method. As a result, evaluators hire partners for various events and act as “critical friends” or “mentors” when conducting the evaluation process. Moreover, empowerment evaluation pursues to increase the likelihood of program success by providing skills and tools for reviewers for self-evaluation and key evaluation of the organization. Weiss outlines three key steps to manage empowerment evaluations, such as create and refine missions, prioritize program activities, and plan for upcoming priorities (Paufler et al. 2020).
Case study 3
In this case, the approach involves the development of change theories for interventions that show how specific interventions can be used and the assumptions behind these theories. They raise questions about what the intervention does (i.e. make a difference for the desired result). Change theory is usually developed based on stakeholder feedback and some data sources. An example of a change evaluation theory found in Patton (2008) provides an example of evaluation using contribution analysis. Patton (2008) makes three possible proposals for inclusion of stakeholder values: (a) practical (such as increasing access to use), (b) purposeful (i.e., considering all interests), and (c) emancipatory (e.g. empower stakeholder). With this approach, the program gains an understanding of the context, requirements, and basic values as well as develops evaluation designs and methods. This needs to be done with answers to more relevant questions with a broader and deeper and more structured rather than a brief evaluation. The process of considering complex and critical alternatives to court boundaries and involvement, to address how individuals / groups deal with related evaluations (Apgar et al. 2017).
Evaluators try to understand the authenticity of the program through conversations with program executives. Evaluators can create different mini-theories that relate the context of different programs to different processes that can lead to different results. For example, a physician of science and evidence that could prove that focusing on the educational components of this program stops smoking which causes the negative effects of maternity midwives in the fetus, which will be most effective in women who have no children. However, younger women may be less concerned about health threats, but are more likely to respond to interventions designed to attract self-reflection. At this stage, the evaluator searches for the results related to this minor theory. The evaluator takes an active part in creating qualitative and quantitative program images. These initiatives include the evaluation of an extent to which various fundamental psychological mechanisms and motivation to a specific person by a particular service (Rice and Barth, 2016).
In this case, the evidence is unreliable in this evaluation because it does not recommend the correct policy - the evaluation states that the HPV vaccine is effective for all women, but only with men who have sex with other men, so the method will not work. Australia provides this vaccine to both boys and girls because of its social value. NZ is the only vaccine for girls because it is expensive for all boys. Canada is trying to implement a policy based on evidence from British Columbia. The theorist tried to identify the 11-year-old boy as "at risk" for being vaccinated. A realistic evaluation is then made for a relevant assumption where the results are made by a method that can be used but not all parties because some disagree. The process of external evaluation can also cause confusion in some disputes among stakeholders. Thus, the pragmatic approach tends to be more research-oriented, focusing on underlying intervention theories and situations that support behavioral assumptions and interventions in the workplace. Focus is the most promising context-process-results configuration, which shows what can be intervened in a population and can be found as a link to a small change theory or overall change theory in any situation. All children, regardless of gender or sexual identity, should be provided with an arm to receive the HPV vaccine in the territories and provinces of Canada (Janzen et al. 2016).
Allen, W., Cruz, J. and Warburton, B., 2017. How decision support systems can benefit from a theory of change approach. Environmental management, 59(6), pp.956-965.
Apgar, J.M., Allen, W., Albert, J., Douthwaite, B., Paz Ybarnegaray, R. and Lunda, J., 2017. Getting beneath the surface in program planning, monitoring and evaluation: Learning from use of participatory action research and theory of change in the CGIAR Research Program on Aquatic Agricultural Systems. Action Research, 15(1), pp.15-34.
Archibald, T., Neubauer, L.C. and Brookfield, S.D., 2018. The Critically Reflective Evaluator: Adult Education's Contributions to Evaluation for Social Justice. New Directions for Evaluation, 2018(158), pp.109-123.
Douthwaite, B. and Hoffecker, E., 2017. Towards a complexity-aware theory of change for participatory research programs working within agricultural innovation systems. Agricultural Systems, 155, pp.88-102.
Janzen, R., Ochocka, J. and Stobbe, A., 2016. Towards a theory of change for community-based research projects. Engaged Scholar Journal: Community-Engaged Research, Teaching, and Learning, 2(2), pp.44-64.
Paufler, N.A., King, K.M. and Zhu, P., 2020. Delivering on the promise of support for growth? Evaluator perceptions of a new state teacher evaluation system. Journal of Educational Supervision, 3(2), p.32.
Rice, L. and Barth, J.M., 2016. Hiring decisions: The effect of evaluator gender and gender stereotype characteristics on the evaluation of job applicants. Gender Issues, 33(1), pp.1-21.
Rogers, A.F., Kelly, L.M. and McCoy, A., 2019. Pathways to becoming an internal evaluator: Perspectives from the Australian non-government sector. Evaluation and program planning, 74, pp.102-109.
Remember, at the center of any academic work, lies clarity and evidence. Should you need further assistance, do look up to our Education Assignment Help
Proofreading and Editing$9.00Per Page
Consultation with Expert$35.00Per Hour
Live Session 1-on-1$40.00Per 30 min.
Doing your Assignment with our resources is simple, take Expert assistance to ensure HD Grades. Here you Go....
Min Wordcount should be 2000 Min deadline should be 3 days Min Order Cost will be USD 10 User Type is All Users Coupon can use Multiple