ABCD-Training-of-Trainers-Tools-July-2013
ABCD-Training-of-Trainers-Tools-July-2013
ABCD-Training-of-Trainers-Tools-July-2013
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
2.15. Monitoring and Evaluation: The Most Significant Change<br />
(Adapted from Dart, J. & Davies, R. (2003). A dialogical, story-based evaluation tool: the most significant<br />
change technique. American Journal <strong>of</strong> Evaluation 24(2), 137-155.)<br />
Session Title<br />
Session Objectives<br />
Duration <strong>of</strong> Session<br />
Resources<br />
Evaluation <strong>of</strong> community activity<br />
Learn one technique for doing evaluation with a community<br />
60 minutes<br />
Flipchart<br />
Markers<br />
<strong>Training</strong> Materials<br />
Example <strong>of</strong> “Most Significant Change”<br />
Introduction<br />
This technique was developed because conventional approaches to evaluation were found to be<br />
inadequate with complex, participatory development programs. Conventional approaches tend to pay<br />
close attention to planned and predicted change, <strong>of</strong>ten using quantitative indicators. In this way, the<br />
design <strong>of</strong> monitoring and evaluation is shaped by what is supposed to happen. While this may be<br />
important for accountability purposes, as well as for learning, it may only provide a partial picture <strong>of</strong><br />
what has actually happened.<br />
A monitoring and evaluation approach that takes a retrospective look at what has happened and the<br />
significance <strong>of</strong> what has happened is a useful complement to approaches that simply track what was<br />
supposed to happen. It allows for uncertainty. It assumes that change evolves, a result <strong>of</strong> the interaction<br />
<strong>of</strong> many different factors, only some <strong>of</strong> which may be planned. Most importantly, it requires all<br />
stakeholders to think about why a certain change is significant. This is where real evaluation takes place.<br />
In this way, decisions that are made about how to move forward are informed by a sense <strong>of</strong> purpose<br />
rather than a bureaucratic requirement.<br />
Instead <strong>of</strong> using quantitative indicators that have been decided on at the beginning <strong>of</strong> the program, the<br />
MSC technique involves the regular collection and participatory interpretation <strong>of</strong> “stories” about<br />
change. In this way, communities can:<br />
• describe what they consider to be the most important changes they have experienced since they<br />
started working on a particular community initiative<br />
• explain why they think these changes are significant (or why they are <strong>of</strong> value)<br />
• explain how those changes came about (including who was active in bringing about this change<br />
• make decisions about how to continue with more activities that will be <strong>of</strong> value to this community<br />
120
Change language