80 likes | 195 Views
A Review of the O rissa M ulti Lingual Programme (MLE) Evaluation Proposal (5 pages). John Owen ( Dr ). Introduction. Notes limitations of the evaluation’s time frame, cites a lack of information for evaluating the plan, infers the design is very ambitious
E N D
A Review of the Orissa Multi Lingual Programme (MLE) Evaluation Proposal(5 pages) John Owen (Dr)
Introduction • Notes limitations of the evaluation’s time frame, cites a lack of information for evaluating the plan, infers the design is very ambitious • Provides an overview of the metaevaluation report’s 4 sections, including a brief discussion of evaluation standards and suggestions plus caveats relating to lack of immersion in the local conditions
Nature of the Intervention • Describes and critiques the evaluation plan’s program description • Advises the evaluator to develop a time-ordered, causal logic model • Suggests ways to assess quality of the program’s strategies
Purposes and Audiences • Suggests further work in engaging stakeholders to define evaluation questions
Evaluation Design • Asks for more specific definition of program objectives • Advises search for unintended outcomes • Characterizes and compliments the sampling plan • Cautions that quality control will be a key issue • Characterizes and critiques data collection plan • Commend use of case studies and makes a few suggestions
Dissemination • Criticizes plan for lack of attention to dissemination and promotion of use of findings
Standards of Practice • Notes existence of Joint Committee Standards • Advises evaluators to pay special attention to ethical considerations
And that’s all there was • For the Orissa Multi Lingual Programme Evaluation Proposal • It is assumed that Owens provided similar reports for the other three evaluation plans that were to be reviewed • Should this five page report be considered as an acceptable metaevaluation report?