复杂性中的理论——在事后评估中使用过程跟踪

Q2 Social Sciences
Kate Krueger, Molly Wright
{"title":"复杂性中的理论——在事后评估中使用过程跟踪","authors":"Kate Krueger, Molly Wright","doi":"10.1002/ev.20524","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evaluators who take a complexity‐aware approach must consider tradeoffs related to theoretical parsimony, falsifiability, and measurement validity. These tradeoffs may be particularly pronounced with ex‐post evaluation designs in which program theory development and monitoring frameworks are often completed before the evaluator is engaged. In this chapter, we argue that theory‐based evaluation (TBE) approaches can address unique ex‐post evaluation challenges that complexity‐aware evaluation (CAE) alone cannot, and that these two sets of approaches are complimentary. We will outline strategies that evaluators may use to conduct rigorous ex‐post evaluations of democracy, human rights, and governance (DRG) interventions that merge CAE's inductive approaches with a theory‐testing structure. It will illustrate these strategies with two case studies of ex‐post evaluation using process tracing (PT).","PeriodicalId":35250,"journal":{"name":"New Directions for Evaluation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Theory amidst complexity – using process tracing in ex‐post evaluations\",\"authors\":\"Kate Krueger, Molly Wright\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/ev.20524\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Evaluators who take a complexity‐aware approach must consider tradeoffs related to theoretical parsimony, falsifiability, and measurement validity. These tradeoffs may be particularly pronounced with ex‐post evaluation designs in which program theory development and monitoring frameworks are often completed before the evaluator is engaged. In this chapter, we argue that theory‐based evaluation (TBE) approaches can address unique ex‐post evaluation challenges that complexity‐aware evaluation (CAE) alone cannot, and that these two sets of approaches are complimentary. We will outline strategies that evaluators may use to conduct rigorous ex‐post evaluations of democracy, human rights, and governance (DRG) interventions that merge CAE's inductive approaches with a theory‐testing structure. It will illustrate these strategies with two case studies of ex‐post evaluation using process tracing (PT).\",\"PeriodicalId\":35250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"New Directions for Evaluation\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"New Directions for Evaluation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20524\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Directions for Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20524","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

采用复杂性感知方法的评估人员必须考虑与理论简约性、可证伪性和测量有效性相关的权衡。这些权衡在事后评估设计中可能特别明显,在这种设计中,项目理论开发和监控框架通常在评估人员参与之前完成。在本章中,我们认为基于理论的评估(TBE)方法可以解决复杂性感知评估(CAE)单独无法解决的独特事后评估挑战,这两组方法是互补的。我们将概述评估人员可用于对民主、人权和治理(DRG)干预措施进行严格事后评估的策略,这些干预措施将CAE的归纳方法与理论测试结构相结合。它将通过使用过程跟踪(PT)的两个事后评估案例研究来说明这些策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Theory amidst complexity – using process tracing in ex‐post evaluations
Evaluators who take a complexity‐aware approach must consider tradeoffs related to theoretical parsimony, falsifiability, and measurement validity. These tradeoffs may be particularly pronounced with ex‐post evaluation designs in which program theory development and monitoring frameworks are often completed before the evaluator is engaged. In this chapter, we argue that theory‐based evaluation (TBE) approaches can address unique ex‐post evaluation challenges that complexity‐aware evaluation (CAE) alone cannot, and that these two sets of approaches are complimentary. We will outline strategies that evaluators may use to conduct rigorous ex‐post evaluations of democracy, human rights, and governance (DRG) interventions that merge CAE's inductive approaches with a theory‐testing structure. It will illustrate these strategies with two case studies of ex‐post evaluation using process tracing (PT).
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
New Directions for Evaluation
New Directions for Evaluation Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
×
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