Evaluating ICT for Education in Africa - Royal Holloway, University of ...

evaluation of ICT and development programmes (Parkinson and Ramirez2006), and the evaluation of education and development programmes(Glewwe and Kremer 2005). Despite such guides, much debate remainsregarding the most appropriate methodology for evaluation of education andtechnology, with the need for a greater degree of thoroughness, quality andclarity widely acknowledged (Farrington 2003) with a current climatedominated by somewhat „fragmented and uncoordinated approaches‟(Roblyer 2005 p.1). This situation led Trucano (2005 p.3) to conclude thatthere remains „an absence of widely accepted standard methodologies andindicators to assess impact of ICTs in education‟ with this being particularlyapparent in regard to the lack of research concerning impact on learningoutcomes within ICT for education (Wagner et al. 2005, World Bank IEG2006, Tolani-Brown et al. 2009).Having recognised the need for monitoring and evaluation of ICT foreducation programmes to embrace more holistic processes, it was useful toengage with generic monitoring and evaluation literature, and draw onsystems-based thinking in designing the approach to the case studies(Morgan 2004, Watson 2006, Cabrera 2006). This provides a flexibleframework (Taylor and Soal 2004) within which concepts can evolve until aninternally consistent conclusion is approached. Equally valuable in thisregard was engaging with empowerment evaluation (Fetterman 1996), anapproach that has gained cross-sectoral credibility structured aroundprinciples of improvement, inclusion, community ownership, democraticparticipation, social justice and accountability (Fetterman and Wandersman2004). Such emphases represent significant progression from conventionaland solely outputs-based approaches and were valuable in shaping my ownsystems-based approach to monitoring and evaluation. Alongside this it wasbeneficial to gain practical grounding through studying the development ofthree related methodological approaches called „Outcome Mapping‟, „ActionAid Accountability, Learning and Planning System‟ (ALPS), and „MostSignificant Change‟ (MSC).75