关于发展援助委员会评估标准方法相关性的分析讨论

Sada Hussain Shah
{"title":"关于发展援助委员会评估标准方法相关性的分析讨论","authors":"Sada Hussain Shah","doi":"10.46827/ejsss.v9i3.1599","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Monitoring and evaluation are modern approaches used to study project logic and these help in solving project problems. Taking a few muscles and bones from social research these studies are growing in the fields. Monitoring and evaluation studies take key methods and tools from social research, particularly operational research. Therefore, these are deemed identical to social research but monitoring and evaluation are not social research. These are deserted children of social research who are growing independently in the fields based on needs. This discussion paper doesn’t explore the history of evaluation but explains the conceptual trajectory of evaluation starting from its mandate to the practice. Development or humanitarian sector is not running based on the theory of demand and supply. The development sector is based on the logic of need and fulfillment. Therefore, evaluation in the development sector is also grounded in need. While explaining the conceptual roots and practices of evaluation in the development sector. Commonly used OECD/DAC evaluation criteria are taken for discussion. Hence the evaluation is an abductive approach of study that focuses on project logic and helps in solving project problems or measuring project results. Therefore, an abductive approach to examination is used in this paper. Coming with the deductive approach, the review starts with theory and ends at practice, and following the inductive approach review starts with practice to help generalizing concepts. Both approaches have limitations when applied to examine evaluation practices and mandate. Because the practices and mandate are already existing in the vacuum of evaluation. Therefore, this specific analysis is an attempt to cognize the linkages between existing evaluation theory and practice. Vivid cognition in building trajectory between evaluation ideology and practice. Leads to recognize the scope of evaluation that ultimately contributes to sophisticated evaluation practices. The journey of this analysis embarks with fundamental questions, why the OECD/DAC criteria are being used for evaluations in the development sector, and considered useful? What are the logical links among evaluation mandate, evaluation approach, evaluation frame “OECD/DAC criteria”, and evaluation methods?  Article visualizations:","PeriodicalId":309514,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Sciences Studies","volume":"69 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"AN ANALYTICAL DISCUSSION ON METHODOLOGICAL RELEVANCE OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE’S EVALUATION CRITERIA\",\"authors\":\"Sada Hussain Shah\",\"doi\":\"10.46827/ejsss.v9i3.1599\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Monitoring and evaluation are modern approaches used to study project logic and these help in solving project problems. Taking a few muscles and bones from social research these studies are growing in the fields. Monitoring and evaluation studies take key methods and tools from social research, particularly operational research. Therefore, these are deemed identical to social research but monitoring and evaluation are not social research. These are deserted children of social research who are growing independently in the fields based on needs. This discussion paper doesn’t explore the history of evaluation but explains the conceptual trajectory of evaluation starting from its mandate to the practice. Development or humanitarian sector is not running based on the theory of demand and supply. The development sector is based on the logic of need and fulfillment. Therefore, evaluation in the development sector is also grounded in need. While explaining the conceptual roots and practices of evaluation in the development sector. Commonly used OECD/DAC evaluation criteria are taken for discussion. Hence the evaluation is an abductive approach of study that focuses on project logic and helps in solving project problems or measuring project results. Therefore, an abductive approach to examination is used in this paper. Coming with the deductive approach, the review starts with theory and ends at practice, and following the inductive approach review starts with practice to help generalizing concepts. Both approaches have limitations when applied to examine evaluation practices and mandate. Because the practices and mandate are already existing in the vacuum of evaluation. Therefore, this specific analysis is an attempt to cognize the linkages between existing evaluation theory and practice. Vivid cognition in building trajectory between evaluation ideology and practice. Leads to recognize the scope of evaluation that ultimately contributes to sophisticated evaluation practices. The journey of this analysis embarks with fundamental questions, why the OECD/DAC criteria are being used for evaluations in the development sector, and considered useful? What are the logical links among evaluation mandate, evaluation approach, evaluation frame “OECD/DAC criteria”, and evaluation methods?  Article visualizations:\",\"PeriodicalId\":309514,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Social Sciences Studies\",\"volume\":\"69 6\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Social Sciences Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46827/ejsss.v9i3.1599\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Sciences Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46827/ejsss.v9i3.1599","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

监测和评估是研究项目逻辑的现代方法,有助于解决项目问题。这些研究从社会研究中抽取了一些筋骨,在各领域中不断发展壮大。监测和评估研究采用了社会研究,特别是业务研究的主要方法和工具。因此,这些研究被认为与社会研究相同,但监测和评估并不是社会研究。它们是社会研究的弃儿,根据需要在各领域独立发展。本讨论文件并不探讨评价的历史,但解释了评价从任务到实践的概念轨迹。无论是发展部门还是人道主义部门,都不是以供需理论为基础的。发展部门是以需求和满足的逻辑为基础的。因此,发展部门的评估也是以需求为基础的。在解释发展部门评估的概念根源和实践的同时。经合发组织/发援委常用的评价标准被用于讨论。因此,评估是一种归纳式的研究方法,侧重于项目逻辑,有助于解决项目问题或衡量项目成果。因此,本文采用了归纳法进行研究。采用演绎法时,审查始于理论,终于实践,而采用归纳法时,审查始于实践,有助于概括概念。这两种方法在审查评估实践和任务时都有局限性。因为这些实践和任务已经存在于评价的真空中。因此,这种具体分析是对现有评价理论与实践之间联系的一种认知尝试。生动认知评价思想与实践之间的构建轨迹。引导人们认识到评价的范围,最终促成成熟的评价实践。本分析的出发点是一些基本问题:为什么经合组织/发援会的标准被用于发展部门的评 价,并被认为是有用的?评价任务、评价方法、评价框架 "经合组织/发援会标准 "和评价方法之间有哪些逻辑联系? 文章可视化:
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
AN ANALYTICAL DISCUSSION ON METHODOLOGICAL RELEVANCE OF DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE’S EVALUATION CRITERIA
Monitoring and evaluation are modern approaches used to study project logic and these help in solving project problems. Taking a few muscles and bones from social research these studies are growing in the fields. Monitoring and evaluation studies take key methods and tools from social research, particularly operational research. Therefore, these are deemed identical to social research but monitoring and evaluation are not social research. These are deserted children of social research who are growing independently in the fields based on needs. This discussion paper doesn’t explore the history of evaluation but explains the conceptual trajectory of evaluation starting from its mandate to the practice. Development or humanitarian sector is not running based on the theory of demand and supply. The development sector is based on the logic of need and fulfillment. Therefore, evaluation in the development sector is also grounded in need. While explaining the conceptual roots and practices of evaluation in the development sector. Commonly used OECD/DAC evaluation criteria are taken for discussion. Hence the evaluation is an abductive approach of study that focuses on project logic and helps in solving project problems or measuring project results. Therefore, an abductive approach to examination is used in this paper. Coming with the deductive approach, the review starts with theory and ends at practice, and following the inductive approach review starts with practice to help generalizing concepts. Both approaches have limitations when applied to examine evaluation practices and mandate. Because the practices and mandate are already existing in the vacuum of evaluation. Therefore, this specific analysis is an attempt to cognize the linkages between existing evaluation theory and practice. Vivid cognition in building trajectory between evaluation ideology and practice. Leads to recognize the scope of evaluation that ultimately contributes to sophisticated evaluation practices. The journey of this analysis embarks with fundamental questions, why the OECD/DAC criteria are being used for evaluations in the development sector, and considered useful? What are the logical links among evaluation mandate, evaluation approach, evaluation frame “OECD/DAC criteria”, and evaluation methods?  Article visualizations:
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信