7 Conventional evaluation
Evaluations often take place at the end of the project or programme (ex post) and result in bulky reports. Thus, they are not of use during the project’s implementation and cannot inform decision-making at this stage. The methods used are often standardised, static ones, unfit for purpose in situations of unpredictability and uncertainty.
‘Conventional evaluation’ has been a term used throughout this week to refer to mainstream evaluation practices developed and refined over many years.
The way forward is to draw on this deep reservoir of knowledge and experience to keep what works and change what doesn’t. In generalising and writing about overall trends and processes, the very individual and small-scale gets lost, in this case, the lives and experiences of those gathering the data and doing the fieldwork in order to carry out evaluations.
Another aspect that hasn’t featured in this week so far but is critical to consider is that much of conventional evaluation practice has evolved within a European–North American context. This bias may not reflect the input and needs of areas outside these regions, some of which are recognising the need to create their own evaluation networks and communities. An example is the South African Monitoring and Evaluation Association (SAMEA) launched in 2005, which:
strives to cultivate a vibrant community that will support, guide and strengthen the development of monitoring and evaluation (M&E) as an important discipline, profession and instrument for empowerment and accountability in South Africa.
Next week, which is your final week, you will consider alternative evaluation methods, particularly arts based and participatory tools.