The role of new information and communication technologies in equity-focused evaluation: Opportunities and challenges

Bamberger, Michael; Raftree, Linda; Olazabal, Veronica

doi:10.1177/1356389016638598

Cited by 11 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Extracting information from creative interrelation exchanges is difficult. Nevertheless, it may actually strengthen our evaluations through the adaption of methods that promote deeper understanding (Bamberger, Raftree, & Olazabal, 2016).…”

Section: Where To From Here?mentioning

confidence: 93%

What would we use and how would we use it? Can digital technology be used to both enhance and evaluate well-being outcomes with highly vulnerable and disadvantaged young people?

Vichta¹,

Gwinner²,

Collyer³

2018

Evaluation Journal of Australasia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An increasing number of technology apps for managing wellbeing and mental health are permeating young people’s use of digital spaces. There are a range of online wellbeing tools which have been developed to promote self-tracking and build young people’s wellbeing and mental health, for example, Optimism, My Mood Tracker and Strava. Tracking outcomes of support with highly transient young people is, more broadly, a particular challenge for youth workers, evaluators and social researchers. Using digital apps to promote as well as monitor wellbeing with tech-savvy young people is an enticing prospect for youth support services, particularly with young people whose engagement with support is sporadic and unpredictable during periods of homelessness or other crisis situations. The use of purpose-designed digital apps may have the potential to not only benefit young people’s mental health and wellbeing, but also enhance the consistency and quality of their connection with support services. In principle, putting wellbeing digital tools directly into the hands, and phones, of young people who are accessing support services seems to make good sense. A great number of online resources have, however, relatively limited uptake in highly vulnerable youth populations. The design starting point must therefore be, what would they use and how would they use it? How can digital apps help to promote stronger support engagement, be aligned with young people’s perspectives and priorities of wellbeing, and enable better outcomes evaluation? This article shares learnings from a consultation with more than 400 young youth service users to build better understanding of their relationships with digital technologies, what they would use and how they would use it to better connect with support as well as to promote and record changes in wellbeing over time. Exploring the young people’s perspectives on wellbeing, service delivery and use of digital technologies has broad implications for the integration of digital technology into both service delivery and evaluation of youth programmes. The findings suggest that digital platforms can play a role in evaluating youth wellbeing over time. The prerequisites, are however, that young people’s autonomy and individuality must be supported. We need to start from a place that facilitates agency and creativity, and focuses on capturing qualitative data that meet young people in their world – even when this is challenging for us.

show abstract

Section: Where To From Here?mentioning

confidence: 93%

What would we use and how would we use it? Can digital technology be used to both enhance and evaluate well-being outcomes with highly vulnerable and disadvantaged young people?

Vichta¹,

Gwinner²,

Collyer³

2018

Evaluation Journal of Australasia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, in order to avoid running into inefficient resource allocation, leveled-evaluation tools are required to monitor the performance of Egypt within SDG 1 and SDG 2 parameters for poverty alleviation. According to Bamberger et al (2016), three levels of evaluation are to be managed: level one: national policies, level two: policies involving broad based programs of public and private partnerships and level three: policies involving projects with limited components. According to Rania Al-Mashat, Minister of International Cooperation, bilateral cooperation and multilateral collaboration are required through global collectivism in order to overcome global crises such as COVID-19 and at the same time to create a platform of shared experiences and partnerships in the execution of projects (Ministry of International Cooperation 2020, August 30).…”

Section: Evaluation Methods For Sdg1 and Sdg2mentioning

confidence: 99%

Egypt Within the Sustainable Development Goals One and Two of the United Nations: Overview and Recommendations Thereof

Eissa

2020

RWE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this article is to (1) posit indicators to measure the performance of Egypt in achieving United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals one, to end poverty in all its forms and two, zero hunger, and (2) develop policy recommendations with regards to reducing poverty. Research methods include a systematic macro-process, general to narrow analysis, offering indicators and policy recommendations for governments to follow in achieving the sustainable development goals on poverty. The article is significant since it links between macroeconomics of poverty, an analysis of the quality and quantity of research conducted on the topic, the poor economics individual perspective, examples of pre and post-covid sustainable development goals one and two actual performance. Conclusions convey that poverty alleviation requires a combined public, private, and institutional collaboration to enhance the poor community capacity building, domestic resource mobilization techniques, efficient resource allocation and an awareness of the importance of implementing the sustainable development goals.

show abstract

“…• Behavioral complexity. Understanding the behavioral processes through which many complex programs achieve their outcomes requires the combination of QUANT methods such as socio-metric analysis, social network analysis, and attitude surveys with QUAL techniques such as participant observation, content analysis of audio and video recordings, focus groups, and in-depth interviews (Bamberger, Raftree, & Olazabal, 2016). The evaluation of complexity programs is another area where MMMR can make a major contribution.…”

Section: The Contribution Of Mmmr To the Evaluation Of Complex Develomentioning

confidence: 99%

New Challenges and Opportunities for Multi and Mixed Methods Research (MMMR) in the Evaluation of International Development Programs

Bamberger¹,

Consultant²

2018

IJMRA

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Independent Evaluation Consultant, OR, USAAlthough the term multi-method research has been around at least since the publication of Brewer and Hunter's (1989) Multimethod Research: A Synthesis of Styles, as yet, there is no consensus on how multi-method research should be defined and what is the distinction between multi-method and mixed methods (MM) approaches (see, however, the International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches website; it offers related operational definitions of these terms). Although multi-method approaches are widely applied by researchers in many disciplines, more attention has been focused on MM research, which has become increasingly popular over the past 20 years (sometimes referred to as the Third Research Paradigm) as evidenced by the publication of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research, three handbooks (i.e., Sage [with two editions] and Oxford University Press), and many books. One proposed way to distinguish between multi-method research and MM is that, whereas multi-method research usually involves the mixing, combining, or integration of techniques, approaches, concepts, language, and philosophies within a research tradition, in contrast, MM research usually involves the integration of techniques, approaches, and so forth across research traditions. Furthermore, MM usually involves a focus on integrating quantitative (QUANT) and qualitative (QUAL) methods. However, these distinctions are probably too limiting. Many evaluations involve combining both QUANT and QUAL approaches within a particular discipline (e.g., using sample surveys to develop a typology for selecting follow-up case studies or focus groups), whereas, on the other hand, multiple methods are frequently used in cross-disciplinary studies (Bevan, 2009).An important dimension that has received less attention concerns the need to understand the different ways that QUANT methods are used in different social science disciplines. For example, the econometric methods that are widely used in both macro-and microeconomics involve quite different assumptions than those underlying QUANT methods used in sociology, demography, ethnography, or public-sector research. For example, ABSTRACTThe purpose of this article is to review potential opportunities for the application of Multi and Mixed Methods Research (MMMR) in the evaluation of international development programs. MMMR is used to cover the mixing, combining, and integration of techniques, approaches, concepts, language, and philosophies within a particular social science discipline; and the mixing, combining, and integration across different social science disciplines. In this article, multimethod and mixed methods research approaches are not distinguished. Rather than focusing in depth on 1 or 2 potential applications, the article discusses 6 areas of development evaluation (i.e., integrating new information technologies, strengthening experimental and quasiexperimental designs, evaluating complexity and equity, evaluating gender equality and women's empowerment, and ide...

show abstract

The role of new information and communication technologies in equity-focused evaluation: Opportunities and challenges

Cited by 11 publications

References 9 publications

What would we use and how would we use it? Can digital technology be used to both enhance and evaluate well-being outcomes with highly vulnerable and disadvantaged young people?

What would we use and how would we use it? Can digital technology be used to both enhance and evaluate well-being outcomes with highly vulnerable and disadvantaged young people?

Egypt Within the Sustainable Development Goals One and Two of the United Nations: Overview and Recommendations Thereof

New Challenges and Opportunities for Multi and Mixed Methods Research (MMMR) in the Evaluation of International Development Programs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About