Читать книгу An Introduction to Evaluation - Chris Fox - Страница 72

According to Rogers et al. (2000: 7–8):

[A]t its simplest, a program theory shows a single intermediate outcome by which the program achieves its ultimate outcome … More complex program theories show a series of intermediate outcomes, sometimes in multiple strands that combine to cause the ultimate outcomes. (Rogers et al. 2000: 7–8)

In turn, Wholey states that programme theory identifies ‘program resources, program activities, and intended program outcomes, and specifies a chain of causal assumptions linking program resources, activities, intermediate outcomes, and ultimate goals’(1987: 78).

Programme theory therefore emerged from a need to better understand programmes’ rationale and, more importantly, the chain of causality that led to its outcome(s). The assumption here is that there is a logic that leads to the achievement(s) and that understanding this logic is paramount to understanding the success and failure of a programme.

There is, nevertheless, a rigidity to programme theory that does not account for the role all actors/stakeholders also play in shaping the success or failure of a programme (Rogers et al. 2000) and to an extent downplays the influence of context. Instead it posits the programme as having its own inner logic undisturbed by any other external factors. Yet, and as Virtanen and Uusikylä put it, ‘traditional cause-and-effect logic disregards the fact that programme effects are always brought about by real actors rather than constructed ideal actors’ (2002: 9). The inward logic of programme theory misses the complexity of the multiple exogenous influences that the theory of change tries to capture by formulating the theory – not of the programme but of the desired change or changes.

First articulated as an evaluation tool, the TOC developed into an approach to programme planning and a tool for evaluation. Planning-wise, the TOC consists of stating the desired (long-term) change based on a number of assumptions that hypothesise, project or calculate how change can be enabled. More specifically it requires thinking through:

 the context for the initiative, including the social, political and environmental conditions, the current state of the problem the project is seeking to influence, and other actors able to influence change

 the long-term change that the initiative seeks to support and for whose ultimate benefit

 the process/sequence of change anticipated to lead to the desired long-term outcome

 assumptions about how these changes might happen, as a check on whether the activities and outputs are appropriate for influencing change in the desired direction in this context (Vogel 2012: 4)

The assumptions therefore determine the strategies (activities) that can be used to achieve the change(s) and set out the pathway(s) that will need to be followed in order for that change to be achieved. Assumptions are indeed crucial:

The central idea in theory of change thinking is making assumptions explicit. Assumptions act as ‘rules of thumb’ that influence our choices, as individuals and organisations. Assumptions reflect deeply held values, norms and ideological perspectives. These inform the design and implementation of programmes. Making assumptions explicit, especially seemingly obvious ones, allows them to be checked, debated and enriched to strengthen programmes. (Vogel 2012: 4)

Finally, the TOC is fundamentally participatory in its process of development, including a variety of stakeholders and therefore perceptions. The process of developing a TOC ‘should be based on a variety of forms of rigorous evidence, including local knowledge and experience, past programming material and social science theory … Designated as an iterative process, ToC is intended to be an evolving tool, and a set of theories relevant to a specific setting, that is articulated, tested, and improved over time’ (Stein and Valters 2012: 13).