The need for theory evaluation in global citizenship programmes: The case of the GCSA programme

Sarah Goodier, Carren Field and Suki Goodman

Evaluation and Program Planning, 2018, vol. 66, issue C, 7-19

Abstract: Many education programmes lack a documented programme theory. This is a problem for programme planners and evaluators as the ability to measure programme success is grounded in the plausibility of the programme’s underlying causal logic. Where the programme theory has not been documented, conducting a theory evaluation offers a foundational evaluation step as it gives an indication of whether the theory behind a programme is sound. This paper presents a case of a theory evaluation of a Global Citizenship programme at a top-ranking university in South Africa, subsequently called the GCSA Programme. This evaluation highlights the need for documented programme theory in global citizenship-type programmes for future programme development. An articulated programme theory produced for the GCSA Programme, analysed against the available social science literature, indicated it is comparable to other such programmes in terms of its overarching framework. What the research found is that most other global citizenship programmes do not have an articulated programme theory. These programmes also do not explicitly link their specific activities to their intended outcomes, making demonstrating impact impossible. In conclusion, we argue that taking a theory-based approach can strengthen and enable outcome evaluations in global citizenship programmes.

Keywords: Theory evaluation; Global citizenship programme; Programme theory; Programme design (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718916303470
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:epplan:v:66:y:2018:i:c:p:7-19

DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.08.011

Access Statistics for this article

Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell

More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().