Participation and timeliness are the watchwords for the PHEA-ETI Evaluation. The ETI is as much about learning as doing. As well as producing tangible improvements in every institution, it will also advance our understanding of how educational technology can be harnessed for better teaching and learning in higher education. Effective evaluation is central to that understanding. The big question is: How do we ensure evaluation is effective?
Too many evaluations produce findings and recommendations that fail to resonate with project partners. Too many end up gathering dust on shelves. We mean to avoid these pitfalls in the ETI. We want evaluation that is relevant, timely and above all, useful.
Experience suggests that two factors in particular are likely to promote relevant, timely and useful evaluation.
- Evaluation should be participatory. Project partners should be involved in shaping the evaluation process, capturing the information and interpreting it.
- There should be strong emphasis on formative evaluation. Monitoring and evaluation should provide regular feedback on progress within the life of the inteervention – in time to make improvements.
These are the cornerstones of the ETI’s approach to evaluation. We have engaged an external evaluator, Dr Patrick Spaven (see bio box on this page).
Patrick began his visits to the participating institutions in August 2009 in Ghana and Nigeria. He then headed for East Africa in October 2009, and Mozambique in February 2010. During his visits, Patrick discussed how the participating instutional could get involved in the evaluation of both the individual projects and the ETI as a whole. Review the documents below for more information:
- Document: Evaluation Plan
- Presentation: Monitoring and Evaluation in the PHEA ETI
- Document: Institution-level Monitoring and Evaluation
Patrick is responsible for producing annual formative evaluation reports, and a summative evaluation at the end of the programme in 2012. These reports rely heavily on the monitoring and evaluation that the participating institutions conduct. Patrick’s role is therefore to a large extent that of a coordinator and facilitator. In this way he will also help to develop the institutions capacity in evaluation.
