Evaluating Development in Higher Education

Evaluating Development in Higher Education

A Guide for Steering Committees, Contractors and Project Staff

Department of Employment Further and Higher Education Branch

July 1994

Extract from pages 7 and 8

Part 2

The second part of this Guide is designed mainly for those involved in the detailed operation of projects, and those preparing evaluation strategies and reports, although it may also he of interest to members of Steering Groups and institutional managers.

1 Purposes of Evaluation

Although evaluation approaches will vary according to the project and its particular objectives, there are at least four key issues which should always be addressed. They are listed below, with illustrative examples of the kinds of question which readers, Steering Group members, the Department and others might wish to see answered:
assessing contract compliance and value for money;

was the agreed work carried out in broad terms?

how far were the specific objectives achieved?

were the resources used effectively to achieve the broad aims?

could an alternative approach been more effective?

contributing formatively to development;

what have we learned from work so far?

in view of this should we modify objectives or approaches?

who needs to know immediately what we have found?

informing future agenda building and gathering intelligence.

what new issues has the work identified for future research or development?

what are we learning about the environment in which the work is taking place, and what does this imply for future work?

how should this be reported, and to whom?

informing the review of development and evaluation methodology

what have we learned about techniques and methods of development work?

what have we learned about approaches to evaluation?

2 Principles

To achieve this, every project must have an evaluation strategy, agreed by the Steering Group, and embodying the following principles:
formative

evaluation should seek to inform ongoing work wherever possible
regular

evaluation should be carried out regularly, to maximise opportunities for longitudinal study.
inclusive

evaluation should seek to involve all the partners in the project and, as far is possible, be carried out jointly
open

evaluation reports should he made widely available unless there is a specific reason to do otherwise
economical

evaluation should maximise the use of material already gathered for other purposes, and avoid creating additional processes for collecting evidence
integrated

since evaluation of the individual project will feed into the, broader evaluation of the Department's work, individual projects must address the Department's "Project Lever questions, as well as local ones.

methodologically sound

evaluation must seek to he reliable, valid, consistent and objective; to discriminate fairly on the basis of explicit criteria; and to be carried out in a way which is regarded as fair and acceptable, to all parties.