D COMEDIAS DE MAGIA.

Scriven (1991) describes evaluation as a new discipline but an ancient practice (Scriven, 1991). It is probably the most common form of reasoning used by people and all humans are nascent evaluators (Mathison, 2005). In terms of the evolution of the human race, evaluation is possibly the most important activity that has allowed us to evolve, develop, and survive in an ever-changing environment. Each time we attempt something new – a farming method, a manufacturing process, a medical treatment, a social change programme, a policy, or a new information system – it is important to consider its value (Davidson, 2004). Shadish and Luellen (2005) claim that Chapter One in the Book of Daniel in the Bible’s Old Testament describes a quasi- experiment evaluation that sought to establish the effects of a Hebrew versus a Babylonian diet on health (Scriven, 1991).

It was not until the late 20th Century however, that the concept of evaluation became popularised. According to Guba and Lincoln (1989), the first published educational research that could be associated with the ‘field’ of evaluation is Rice’s (1987) ‘The Futility of the Spelling Grind’ research study. Stufflebeam et al. (2000) believed the rise of scientific management during the 1920s in order to improve efficiency and productivity witnessed a subsequent increase in use of evaluations in an effort to control the labour process. Tyler’s 1942 study on curriculum improvement however, provided the most significant example of evaluation as an emerging distinct mode of inquiry (Guba and Lincoln, 1989). There appears consensus amongst the evaluation literature that Tylers research was the starting point of programme evaluation as we perceive it today (Kenny, 2007).

Evaluation as a mode of inquiry within social sciences has gradually gained acceptance as a legitimate ‘research design’ process (Sarantakos, 1998). It has largely been categorised as ‘applied research’, which focuses upon programme, policy issues and problem solving as opposed to basic research that aims to make a substantive, original contribution to knowledge (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2004; and Kenny, 2007). The literature portrays the

emergence of evaluation as a mode of specific inquiry to be located in the 1960s. The development of an array of social programmes and extensive financial investments as a consequence of the ‘great society’ strategy pursued in the USA aimed at dismantling poverty warranted increased accountability. Subsequently, many of these programmes received allocated funding for evaluations (Cracknell, 2000; Shadish and Luellen, 2005; Guba and Lincoln, 1989, Patton, 1997 and Pawson and Tilley, 2001).

On the development aid front, it was not until the late 1970s that evaluation became an integral component for the Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development (OECD) programmes. Development aid budgets and activities were increasing, which generated a need for more systematic audits and accountability. Financial audits evolved into performance audits that in turn evolved into impact and learning focused evaluations (World Bank, no date). On the professional front, methods and theories were as diverse as the professions themselves. In the majority of cases sociologists and psychologists conducted experimental evaluations, educators focused on testing during evaluations, anthropologists used qualitative methods while those from management used management information systems (Shadish and Luellen, 2005).

During the 1970s and 1980s humanitarian organisations were largely exempt from serious evaluation or critical analysis (Crisp, 2000). However, as discussed in Chapter 2, the ability to deliver aid in increasingly complex environments; the greater absorption of public and private funding by humanitarian organisations; and increasing ability of the international media to document such emergencies placed growing pressure on the humanitarian system to deliver results and demonstrate accountability. This pressure erupted in 1994 during the Rwandan crisis, which saw the largest humanitarian effort at that time fail to respond adequately or timely both before and during the genocide (Sphere Project, 2006). In order to examine the failings of the humanitarian response an evaluation team was established – the Joint Evaluation of Emergency Assistance to Rwanda (JEEAR). With 52 researchers and a cost of over a million dollars, a five-volume evaluation

report was produced. Whilst the Rwanda evaluation was somewhat unique in scale, its approach presented a new standard of good practice in evaluating humanitarian assistance (Crisp, 2000). Evaluations of humanitarian efforts have since become common practice and have attracted unprecedented levels of donor funding and agency commitment, as well as public and political interest.

The Active Learning Network of Accountability and Performance (ALNAP) was established in the mid-1990s as a result of the growing number of humanitarian evaluations and a need to demonstrate accountability. ALNAP maintains the most comprehensive evaluations database with over 1,100 evaluation reports, lessons studies, synthesis reports and good practice studies (ALNAP, 2013). This database however, does not illustrate the extent of growth in humanitarian evaluations as it is by no means exhaustive and relies on member and non-member organisations submitting their evaluation reports.

Evaluation has experienced phenomenal growth in recent years and is amongst the fastest growing disciplines in the world (Cracknell, 2000). The growth of evaluation is manifest in the increasing number of evaluation societies, journals, conferences, workshops, training sessions and number of evaluations themselves (Guba and Lincoln, 1982; Cracknell, 2000; O'Keefe et al., 2002). The Americas, Africa, Asia and Europe all now have their own evaluation societies and evaluation societies are continuing to grow and emerge in various countries throughout the world such as the UK, Germany, France, Afghanistan, Australia, Malaysia, Nigeria and South Africa (OECD/DAC, 2011). The growth in evaluations confirms their increasing importance to informing policy and programming.

Evaluation as applied research has long been accepted by scholars including Weiss (1972), Clarke (1999), Shaw (1999), Cracknell (2000) and Patton (2002). The use of the terms ‘research’, ‘applied inquiry’, ‘systematic collection of information’ and ‘assessment’ denotes that evaluation is a type of applied research that centres upon practical challenges and issues faced by

societies and how these could be addressed (Patton, 2002; Clarke, 1999).

Evaluation determines the merit, worth, or value of things. The evaluation process identifies relevant values or standards that apply to what is being evaluated; performs empirical investigation using techniques from the social sciences; and then integrates conclusions with the standards into an overall evaluation or set of evaluations (Scriven, 1991).

Social science research, by contrast, does not aim for or achieve evaluative conclusions. It is restricted to empirical (rather than evaluative) research, and bases its conclusions only on factual results – that is, observed, measured, or calculated data. Social science research does not establish standards or values and then integrate them with factual results to reach evaluative conclusions (Scriven, 2004). Fournier (2005) asserts conclusions made in evaluations encompass both an empirical aspect (that something is the case) and a normative aspect (judgement about the value of something). It is this value feature that distinguishes evaluation from other types of enquiry such as basic research, clinical epidemiology or investigative journalism (ibid).