|
?:abstract
|
-
"This article discusses experiences of on-going evaluation within a project
funded by the EU Structural Funds. A question that is particularly illustrated
is how we, as on-going evaluators, have handled the dilemma between
closeness and involvement in the project in relation to distance and
a critical approach. This dilemma is standard within action- and interactive
research, and becomes particularly evident in a concrete reality within
a project. The problem is important to illustrate, especially considering the
fact that the on-going evaluation task is politically governed, that is, the
EU requires that the customary evaluation be replaced with an on-going
evaluation. Furthermore, on-going evaluation finds itself in a developmental
phase, where discussions are carried on about how to define the concept,
and also on how the role as an on-going evaluator should be worked
out. A possible outcome of this could be that the on-going evaluation becomes
far too uncritical, or critical, and with that cannot come up to expectations.
In this article the assumption is that the task of the on-going
evaluator is to follow the development in a project, vis-รก-vis established
goals, with the purpose of creating practice-relevant knowledge. We also
discuss the balancing that exists between being supportive of progress,
giving constructive criticism, and not being regarded as far too critical.
After having worked in an innovative development project for two years,
we have been strengthened in our understanding that the interactive research
approach, concept usage, theoretical connection and methodological
knowledge constitute imperative demands, in order to handle the
changes between closeness and distance." (author's abstract)
(xsd:string)
|
![[This page as RDF]](https://data.gesis.org/gesiskg/static/rdf-icon.gif){kind=icon}