Explore BrainMass

Developmental and Transformation Participation Evaluation

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

1. During the planning stage of an evaluation, it is essential that all key stakeholders be identified. Involving them at an early stage reducing anxieties and keeps them engaged. Setting boundaries is a fundamental step in gaining a clear sense of what an evaluation is all about.
Question: Why is it important to understand the context of the object being evaluated?

2. What are the strengths and weakness of the following two participatory approaches to evaluation; Development Participatory Evaluation and Transformative Participatory Evaluation.

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 17, 2018, 12:24 pm ad1c9bdddf

Solution Preview

Step 1
It is important to understand the context of the object being evaluated. The context gives directions as to what should be evaluated and the importance that should be assigned to each dimension of evaluation. Specifically the context helps select criteria for evaluation and also helps assign weights to these criteria. In practice it is important to understand the context of the object being evaluated through participation. For example, if an employee is to be evaluated, understanding the context means that the supervisor who is evaluating sits with the employee before the evaluation ...

Solution Summary

This solution explains. participatory evaluation The sources used are also included in the solution.

Similar Posting

Evaluators Might Need Motivation Too!

Performance has often been viewed as a multiplicative function of ability and motivation. Of course, from the quality movement and attribution theory, system factors must also be recognized as important determinants of performance. Focusing on a person, however, leads to emphasizing ability and motivation as causes of performance. The simple multiplicative model can be applied to how well evaluators perform the task of evaluating, not just how well workers perform their tasks or roles or enact the desired values.

Looked at as a joint function of ability and motivation, it can be seen that techniques used for developing common evaluation standards focus on the ability to evaluate accurately. However, techniques such as FOR (Frame-Of-Reference) training do not directly address the motivation of people to evaluate accurately and with common standards.

1. To what extent do you think evaluators may not be motivated to do a good "job" of evaluation? Are there reasons why an evaluator may be motivated to NOT make evaluations accurately? Describe

2. What could be done to increase the motivation of evaluators to rate accurately?

3. Are there system factors that may operate as barriers to evaluating accurately? How could these be reduced or eliminated?

View Full Posting Details