Wouldn’t it make sense to have a grounded theory approach i.e. allow for the collection of programme data to generate a theory rather than construct theories in advance especially if you have no prior understanding of the programme you are evaluating.

 

Yes. If you are lost, you can certainly track potential program theories either through a literature search related to the program, or through interviews with stakeholders. But keep in mind that the analytical process for RE theory development is 'retroduction', not grounded theory. That means that although you can collect and analyse data to search for programme theories, you need not limit yourself to themes emerging from that data. You also involve your imagination, open-ended (critical and creative) thinking and incorporate your hunches about why a programme is implemented and working (or not) as well. Afterall, there is no garuantee that your interviewees will explicate the programme theory (may they will, maybe they won't). So as a realist evaluator, you take stock of what people are saying about the programme and incorporate that into your own ideas about why it is working (or for whom, under what circumstances etc.).  Once you've got a grasp of your own ideas about the program, you can use that to tailor your data collection tools to harness data that will further inform your theories (and bring in contextual factors). Does that make sense?

 

 

Justin

 

                       

CRICOS Provider Number: 00114A

This email and any attachments may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please inform the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message.

 

Please think of our environment and only print this e-mail if necessary