Comparar métodos
Examine os métodos selecionados lado a lado; as linhas que diferem ficam destacadas.
| Most Significant Change× | Participatory Evaluation× | |
|---|---|---|
| Área | Public Policy | Public Policy |
| Família | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Ano de origem≠ | 2005 | 1998 |
| Autor original≠ | Rick Davies & Jess Dart | J. Bradley Cousins & Elizabeth Whitmore |
| Tipo≠ | Participatory, story-based monitoring and evaluation technique | Collaborative, stakeholder-engaged evaluation approach |
| Fonte seminal≠ | Davies, R., & Dart, J. (2005). The 'Most Significant Change' (MSC) Technique: A Guide to Its Use. link ↗ | Cousins, J. B., & Whitmore, E. (1998). Framing participatory evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 1998(80), 5–23. DOI ↗ |
| Outros nomes≠ | MSC, MSC Technique, Story-Based Monitoring, Davies-Dart Most Significant Change | Collaborative Evaluation, Stakeholder-Based Evaluation, Practical Participatory Evaluation |
| Relacionados | 4 | 4 |
| Resumo≠ | The Most Significant Change (MSC) technique is a participatory, story-based approach to monitoring and evaluation developed by Rick Davies and refined with Jess Dart. It involves the systematic collection of stories of significant change from the field and the deliberative selection of the most significant of these by panels of stakeholders. There are no predefined indicators; instead, value judgements about what change matters most are made transparently by those involved, making MSC especially suited to capturing unexpected and qualitative outcomes in complex programs. | Participatory evaluation is a family of approaches in which stakeholders — program staff, beneficiaries, community members — are engaged as active partners in conducting the evaluation rather than as passive subjects of it. In their influential 1998 framing, J. Bradley Cousins and Elizabeth Whitmore distinguished two streams: practical participatory evaluation, oriented to improving program decisions and use, and transformative participatory evaluation, oriented to empowerment and social justice. What unites them is shared control of the inquiry, but they vary along dimensions of who participates, how much control they hold, and how deeply they are involved. |
| ScholarGateConjunto de dados ↗ |
|
|