Learning, Systems Concepts and Values in Evaluation: Proposal for an Exploratory Framework to Improve Coherence

The three core systems concepts – interrelationships, perspectives and boundaries – can be used for framing an impact evaluation (see Williams, this IDS Bulletin). But their use also has implications for the type of learning that an impact evaluation is likely to generate. Moreover, they can help to make the value base of evaluations more explicit. This article first outlines a typology for learning and elaborates on the implications for evaluation and the use of systems concepts. Then a similar typology for values is presented, together with their likely correspondence with learning types. These three aspects are usually dealt with separately in evaluation assignments, although they should be viewed together, as they mutually influence each other or can be seen as complementary. To this end a conceptual framework is proposed which permits to explore and reflect on the connections between the three systems concepts with learning and values.

[1]  Patricia J. Rogers,et al.  Using Programme Theory to Evaluate Complicated and Complex Aspects of Interventions , 2008 .

[2]  Marjorie A. Lyles,et al.  Organizational Learning , 2007 .

[3]  Gregory Bateson,et al.  The Logical Categories of Learning and Communication , 2005 .

[4]  Martin Reynolds,et al.  Systems thinking, learning and values in evaluation , 2013 .

[5]  Jennifer Greene,et al.  EVALUATION, DEMOCRACY, AND SOCIAL CHANGE , 2006 .

[6]  Pat Ricia,et al.  Using Programme Theory to Evaluate Complicated and Complex Aspects of Interventions , 2008 .

[7]  Elliot Stern,et al.  DFID Working Paper 38. Broadening the range of designs and methods for impact evaluations. , 2012 .

[8]  Bob Wood Systems Concepts in Action: A Practitioner's Toolkit, B. Williams, R. Hummelbrunner. Stanford University Press (2010), ISBN: 978-0804770620 , 2011, Int. J. Inf. Manag..

[9]  M. N. Saunders,et al.  The origins and conceptualizations of ‘triple-loop’ learning: A critical review , 2012 .

[10]  F. Reamer Ethics and Values , 2013 .

[11]  Gustavo Stubrich The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization , 1993 .

[12]  Murray L. Wax Ethics and Values in Applied Social Research , 1989 .

[13]  Allan J. Kimmel Ethics and values in applied social research , 1989 .

[14]  Anne S. Miner,et al.  Ugly Duckling No More: Pasts and Futures of Organizational Learning Research , 1996 .

[15]  Ernest R. House,et al.  Deliberative democratic evaluation , 2000 .

[16]  Massimo Marraffa,et al.  Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice , 1998 .

[17]  Bob Williams,et al.  Wicked solutions: a systems approach to complex problems: a workbook , 2016 .

[18]  Donald A. Schön,et al.  Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method, and Practice , 1995 .

[19]  Angela Everitt,et al.  Developing Critical Evaluation , 1996 .

[20]  Jeffrey B. Arthur,et al.  Gainsharing and Organizational Learning: An Analysis of Employee Suggestions Over Time , 2001 .

[21]  Robert L. Flood,et al.  Contours of diversity management and triple loop learning , 1996 .

[22]  P. Senge The fifth discipline : the art and practice of the learning organization/ Peter M. Senge , 1991 .