Search results

This article examines the application of discourse analysis in the empirical context of learning technology innovation. It outlines the various theoretical and methodological principles, as well as the technical procedures which have been followed in relation to the operationalization of an evaluation design using discourse analysis. The study itself is concerned with stakeholders' subjective and experiential knowledge structures which underlie a culture of technology innovation. The article examines how technology innovation is discursively constituted through the creation of shared meanings and images among stakeholders.

Transformed societal relationships in nations emerging from former Soviet influence present unique evaluation challenges. Altered links between governance and instruction create a climate in which the instruments for evaluation must differ not only in their scope but also in their intent. A central question in evaluating educational reform is how classroom, local school and community data can be made accessible to policy-makers who may not have the time, the training or the inclination to search through what has been traditionally regarded as ethnographic data. This article shares frameworks designed to: frame qualitative evaluation data in a manner that addresses both macro perspectives of communities and micro concerns of individuals; illuminate educational obstacles and conflicts surrounding the conditions and consequences of reformed social policies; portray the social, cultural and psychological concerns of participants in their acceptance or rejection of changed policies; and develop clarity in representing the transactional nature of evaluation.

The article first defines a set of policy measures that constitute the 'New Public Management' (NPM). Evidence is cited to support the contention that the NPM has been widely adopted, with local variations, in many Western states. The impacts of such large-scale reform are considerable. The article therefore explores the extent to which the NPM has been subject to serious and systematic evaluation. It is argued that there have been relatively few broad-scope evaluations and that the methodologies adopted for these have tended to leave some fundamental questions about the effectiveness of the NPM unanswered. Despite this, political enthusiasm for reforms of this type apparently continues to run at a high level. The article concludes with some modest suggestions for ways in which the evaluation of NPM-style reforms could be improved.

But what experience and history teach us is this, that nations and governments have never learned anything from history. (G. W. F. Hegel, 1837, cited in Feyerabend 1978) Contemporary literature on policy evaluation challenges the 'traditional', rational-objectivist model of policy evaluation. Instead, an argumentative- subjectivist approach is forwarded, conceiving of policy-making as an ongoing dialogue, in which both governmental and societal actors contest their views on policy issues by exchanging arguments. It is argued that, through constructive argumentation, policy actors, networks or advocacy coalitions may arrive at moral judgements on policy issues and, hopefully, at 'better' policies and ways of delivering those policies. The paradigm shift from the rational-objectivist model to the argumentative-subjectivist approach has implications for the way policy evaluation is studied as a means of institutionalized policy-oriented learning; the searching process of improving and perfecting public policy and its underlying normative assumptions through the detection and correction of perceived imperfections. Policy- oriented learning can be studied from a cybernetic control, a cognitive development and a social-constructivist perspective. Within policy-oriented argumentation and negotiation—the discursive processes that constitute the roots of policy-oriented learning—there may (still) be a need for methodologically sound assessments of the cost-effectiveness or 'quality' of policy measures. Accepting this premise, we advance an integrated learning strategy, in which the 'traditional', rational-objectivist role of evaluating institutions may well serve to complement more argumentative-oriented perspectives.

The European Union's Framework Programmes for research and technological development have been subject to a variety of evaluative activities over the past 10 years. These have included evaluations by panels, studies of impacts upon individual Member States, horizontal or issue-based evaluations and high-level reviews by, or on behalf of the principal stakeholders. This article reviews this experience, covering issues such as the interaction between peer review panels and supporting studies by evaluation specialists, the difficulties of establishing comparability across diverse national R&D systems, and the problems involved in addressing the Programmes' higher-level goals such as enhancing the competitiveness of European industry. The different perspectives taken by the main stakeholders, the Commission, the Member States and the European Parliament, are noted. In the light of recent proposals to develop the evaluation of the Framework Programme, conclusions are drawn on a series of topics. In particular, it is argued that the broader strategies of actors, and of the Union itself should be included within the scope of evaluations. In the final section recommendations are made on ways in which evaluation may be further institutionalized in order to increase the use made of it.

There is an emerging need for evaluators to assist with strategic decision making in organizations committed to ongoing learning and renewal. While some evaluators have developed rapid-response techniques to assist decision-makers fine tune their programs, new evaluation techniques are required to serve the needs of learning organizations which are committed to systems thinking as a way of improving their effectiveness. This article argues that evaluators can make major contributions to strategic decision- making by using procedures which clarify the nature of programs in their trial stage and outline the implications of implementing the program for the organization as a whole. A case study of the use of these procedures in an educational setting is outlined for the purposes of illustration.

This paper seeks to analyze how business cycle variations affect the distribution of income in Switzerland. The data used in the study are taken from the Swiss federal personal income tax statistics for 1951-1986. The results of our analysis show that productivity gains tend to improve the relative income share of the poor. It appears also that inflation acts like a progressive tax in Switzerland. Finally, our study emphasizes that macro economic downswings decrease income inequality in Switzerland, and this result can be explained by the very selective and restrictive Swiss immigration policy.

Insights gained from previous macroeconomic studies of the size distribution of U.S. incomes are incorporated into a richer model that considers the possibility of random walks and cointegration. The effects of macroeconomic, demographic, structural, and policy variables on quintile conditional mean incomes and Lorenz ordinates are estimated using more that four decades of data. The results are interpreted in terms of the powerful dominance method of evaluating entire income distributions. The model yields strong evidence of random walks and cointegration. Several findings from earlier studies are confirmed, and heretofore unrecognized influences on the size distribution of income are identified. Some surprising results emerge, especially as they relate to the effects of a more open economy on income inequality.

The question has been asked as to how changes in economic growth affect income distribution. Blinder and Esaki reframed the question to consider inflation and time trends in addition to aggregate income growth. The purpose of this paper is to widen the scope even more; specifically, the question is whether policy or business cycle measures explain most of the forecast error variance in the size distribution of income.

This paper examines the relationship between poverty and changes in productivity and other macroeconomic variables. It is not assumed that the relationship is unidirectional from productivity to poverty. Specifically, the hypothesis is that there may be bi-directional causality between poverty and changes in productivity. The empirical results suggest that feedback does exist between productivity and poverty. The clear public policy implication is that measures intended to affect productivity growth or poverty must be designed simultaneously.