2011

Return to search form  

Contact emails are provided for one-to-one contact only and may not be used for mass emailing or group solicitations.

Session Title: Evaluators as Partners in Technology Program Design
Multipaper Session 313 to be held in Conference Room 14 on Thursday, Nov 3, 11:40 AM to 12:25 PM
Sponsored by the Research, Technology, and Development Evaluation TIG
Chair(s):
Mary Beth Hughes,  Science and Technology Policy Institute, m.hughes@gmail.com
The Logical Framework Approach to Drafting Proposals for Government Technology Programs: The Case of Taiwan
Presenter(s):
Ling-Chu Lee, Science & Technology Policy Research and Information Center, lingchulee@yahoo.com.tw
Shan Shan Li, Science & Technology Policy Research and Information Center, ssli@stpi.narl.org.tw
Abstract: In the knowledge economy, new technology development requires a demand-driven, innovation-oriented model. The Taiwanese government uses integrated technology development programs as a policy tool in response to major social and economic issues. However, the government is increasingly demanding budget accountability, and so the assessment of program benefits is a vital issue. The 2010 Survey of Government Strategy for Technology Development found that about 53.7% of respondents believed there were problems with the objectives, indicators or planning of technology development programs. In order to improve the practice of program design in Taiwan, this study introduces a logical framework approach which incorporates planning tools commonly used in Taiwan. There are three advantages to the planning process. 1. It is simple and uses existing tools, making adoption easy. 2. It includes strategy design and performance indicator design. 3. It replaces a technology-oriented approach with a problem-oriented approach.
The Role of Evaluation within Nanoscale Science and Engineering Education Research: Differential Use, Application and Benefits of Evaluation
Presenter(s):
Jennifer Nielsen, Manhattan Strategy Group, jnielsen@manhattanstrategy.com
Andrew Herrmann, Manhattan Strategy Group, aherrmann@manhattanstrategy.com
Amara Okoroafor, Manhattan Strategy Group, aokoroafor@manhattanstrategy.com
Taimur Amjad, Manhattan Strategy Group, tamjad@manhattanstrategy.com
Shezad Habib, Manhattan Strategy Group, shabib@manhattanstrategy.com
Abstract: Directorates and Divisions within the National Science Foundation (NSF) co-funded several research projects to enhance Nanoscale Science and Engineering (NSE) Education through the development of educational resources for grades 7-12, and the general public. As the field of NSE is rapidly advancing and difficult to understand, these projects required collaboration between researchers and educators. The role of evaluation within one Division's research projects varied tremendously. Within the projects, four of ten included an evaluator as project senior personnel working 160+ hours on the project. These four projects, plus two others, listed an evaluator as an organizational partner. Analysis of proposals, reviews, and reports revealed both differential use/inclusion of the evaluation perspective, and differential application of the evaluation perspective within the projects. This paper will explore the differential benefits, both tangible and perceived, that were associated with the varying role of the evaluation perspective in these efforts.

 Return to Evaluation 2011

Add to Custom Program