Bruk av kvalitative case-studier i evalueringer av barnevernsprogrammer

Geir Hyrve
{"title":"Bruk av kvalitative case-studier i evalueringer av barnevernsprogrammer","authors":"Geir Hyrve","doi":"10.7146/aul.292.206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This thesis, titled \"Use of qualitative case studies in evaluations of child welfare programs\", was submitted autumn 2018 for the PhD degree at the Danish Institute for Education and Education (DPU), Faculty of Arts, Aarhus University. The purpose of this dissertation is to conduct an analysis of previous evaluations, thereby developing insight and understanding of how minor case studies can contribute to the understanding and development of knowledge within the field of child welfare. After completing many evaluations in public sector, the purpose of this dissertation has been to analyze how these evaluations of programs have contributed to the development and renewal of a field of expertise. In order not to narrow the scope of the study, I have chosen to specifically explore programs in the field of childcare that I also previously have evaluated. This is the overall objective of the dissertation: What use do qualitative case studies have in the evaluation of child welfare programs? In order to refine and clarify the topic, I have come up with three research questions. • What knowledge can evaluations gathered through case studies generate about child welfare programs? • What empirical, political and social practices appear in case studies? • Can evaluations based on case studies help to develop services in the field of child welfare? The starting point of this dissertation is to find out more about the use of case studies in evaluations and the knowledge they emerge. An evaluation consists of empirical, political and social practices where the evaluator gathers and interprets data that are used in the interpretation and evaluations of a program. A relevant question is how case studies can be used to develop service provision in the child welfare field. To answer the research questions I analyzed two evaluations that used case design. In order to create a personal distance to the data material, I constructed an analytical model and used intervention theory in the retrospective analysis. First, the evaluations were analyzed individually, and then a cross-case analysis was conducted to understand the relationship between intervention, evaluations and user effects. The two programs evaluated were different, one having a \"top-down\" approach to social improvement within the child welfare field, while the other program had a bottom-up strategy for change and development. Common to the evaluations was that a program theory was used to systematically focus on some key points and provide a detailed description of what has been achieved, how it has happened, and why. It was important to gain knowledge of the process that led to user effects in the programs. The two examples of case studies showed that the type of interventions had impact on the evaluation. How change occurred affected the role of the evaluator, but also the actual evaluation process and development of knowledge. In case one, the evaluation consisted of a study of a decision-making method that “was traveling”, and was attempted translated into local practice, and the question was to what extent do ideas “work” in the local child welfare services? A form of best practice was implemented in a Norwegian context to improve practice, and the evaluation assignment was to determine if the change led to the prescribed results. Fidelity and application were at the heart of this evaluation, in addition to the view that knowledge is something that can be identified. In the second evaluation, there was a completely different and practical approach to a program in a residential childcare institution. The evaluation focused on practice with the purpose of making interpretative assessments of the value of human actions that took place in the institution, i.e. in a particular social, historical, and cultural context. In other words, knowledge was linked to social, historical, and cultural situations that occur when the users, the staff, the evaluators and the external stakeholders interact, what can be referred to as situational and co-learning. A case design provides the opportunity to understand why and how programs work, at both the micro and the meso level, but it is difficult to transfer this knowledge to the community level. Evaluations based on this case design offers opportunities to provide feedback that can be used both to understand what a program succeed with, and what not being achieved, something that can contribute on how to deal with interventions in the field of child welfare in a new and more constructive manner. Retrospective evaluations represent a source of understanding and learning from programs that have been implemented, and can also be used prospectively.","PeriodicalId":126978,"journal":{"name":"AU Library Scholarly Publishing Services","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AU Library Scholarly Publishing Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/aul.292.206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This thesis, titled "Use of qualitative case studies in evaluations of child welfare programs", was submitted autumn 2018 for the PhD degree at the Danish Institute for Education and Education (DPU), Faculty of Arts, Aarhus University. The purpose of this dissertation is to conduct an analysis of previous evaluations, thereby developing insight and understanding of how minor case studies can contribute to the understanding and development of knowledge within the field of child welfare. After completing many evaluations in public sector, the purpose of this dissertation has been to analyze how these evaluations of programs have contributed to the development and renewal of a field of expertise. In order not to narrow the scope of the study, I have chosen to specifically explore programs in the field of childcare that I also previously have evaluated. This is the overall objective of the dissertation: What use do qualitative case studies have in the evaluation of child welfare programs? In order to refine and clarify the topic, I have come up with three research questions. • What knowledge can evaluations gathered through case studies generate about child welfare programs? • What empirical, political and social practices appear in case studies? • Can evaluations based on case studies help to develop services in the field of child welfare? The starting point of this dissertation is to find out more about the use of case studies in evaluations and the knowledge they emerge. An evaluation consists of empirical, political and social practices where the evaluator gathers and interprets data that are used in the interpretation and evaluations of a program. A relevant question is how case studies can be used to develop service provision in the child welfare field. To answer the research questions I analyzed two evaluations that used case design. In order to create a personal distance to the data material, I constructed an analytical model and used intervention theory in the retrospective analysis. First, the evaluations were analyzed individually, and then a cross-case analysis was conducted to understand the relationship between intervention, evaluations and user effects. The two programs evaluated were different, one having a "top-down" approach to social improvement within the child welfare field, while the other program had a bottom-up strategy for change and development. Common to the evaluations was that a program theory was used to systematically focus on some key points and provide a detailed description of what has been achieved, how it has happened, and why. It was important to gain knowledge of the process that led to user effects in the programs. The two examples of case studies showed that the type of interventions had impact on the evaluation. How change occurred affected the role of the evaluator, but also the actual evaluation process and development of knowledge. In case one, the evaluation consisted of a study of a decision-making method that “was traveling”, and was attempted translated into local practice, and the question was to what extent do ideas “work” in the local child welfare services? A form of best practice was implemented in a Norwegian context to improve practice, and the evaluation assignment was to determine if the change led to the prescribed results. Fidelity and application were at the heart of this evaluation, in addition to the view that knowledge is something that can be identified. In the second evaluation, there was a completely different and practical approach to a program in a residential childcare institution. The evaluation focused on practice with the purpose of making interpretative assessments of the value of human actions that took place in the institution, i.e. in a particular social, historical, and cultural context. In other words, knowledge was linked to social, historical, and cultural situations that occur when the users, the staff, the evaluators and the external stakeholders interact, what can be referred to as situational and co-learning. A case design provides the opportunity to understand why and how programs work, at both the micro and the meso level, but it is difficult to transfer this knowledge to the community level. Evaluations based on this case design offers opportunities to provide feedback that can be used both to understand what a program succeed with, and what not being achieved, something that can contribute on how to deal with interventions in the field of child welfare in a new and more constructive manner. Retrospective evaluations represent a source of understanding and learning from programs that have been implemented, and can also be used prospectively.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
这篇题为“在儿童福利项目评估中使用定性案例研究”的论文于2018年秋季提交给丹麦奥胡斯大学文学院教育与教育研究所(DPU)的博士学位。本论文的目的是对以往的评估进行分析,从而深入了解和理解小案例研究如何有助于理解和发展儿童福利领域的知识。在完成了许多公共部门的评估之后,本文的目的是分析这些项目的评估如何促进一个专业领域的发展和更新。为了不缩小研究范围,我选择专门探讨我之前也评估过的儿童保育领域的项目。这是本文的总体目标:定性案例研究在评估儿童福利计划中有什么用?为了细化和澄清这个主题,我提出了三个研究问题。•通过案例研究收集的评估可以产生关于儿童福利计划的哪些知识?•案例研究中出现了哪些经验、政治和社会实践?•基于个案研究的评估是否有助于发展儿童福利领域的服务?本文的出发点是发现更多的案例研究在评估中的应用和他们所产生的知识。评估由经验、政治和社会实践组成,评估者收集和解释用于项目解释和评估的数据。一个相关的问题是如何利用个案研究来发展儿童福利领域的服务提供。为了回答研究问题,我分析了两个使用案例设计的评估。为了与数据材料建立个人距离,我构建了一个分析模型,并在回顾性分析中使用了干预理论。首先,对评价进行单独分析,然后进行跨案例分析,以了解干预、评价和用户效果之间的关系。被评估的两个项目是不同的,一个项目在儿童福利领域采用“自上而下”的方法来改善社会,而另一个项目采用自下而上的策略来改变和发展。评估的共同之处在于,计划理论被用于系统地关注一些关键点,并提供对已经实现的内容、如何发生的以及为什么实现的详细描述。了解导致程序中用户效果的过程是很重要的。这两个案例研究的例子表明,干预措施的类型对评价有影响。变化如何发生影响了评价者的角色,也影响了实际评价过程和知识的发展。在第一种情况下,评价包括对一种“正在旅行”的决策方法的研究,并试图将其转化为当地实践,问题是思想在当地儿童福利服务中“起作用”的程度如何?在挪威的环境中实施了一种形式的最佳实践,以改进实践,评估任务是确定变更是否导致规定的结果。除了知识是可以被识别的观点之外,忠诚和应用是这一评价的核心。在第二次评估中,有一个完全不同的和实用的方法在一个寄宿儿童保育机构的项目。评估侧重于实践,目的是对机构中发生的人类行为的价值进行解释性评估,即在特定的社会、历史和文化背景下。换句话说,当用户、员工、评估者和外部利益相关者相互作用时,知识与社会、历史和文化情境相关联,这可以被称为情境和共同学习。案例设计提供了在微观和中观层面上理解项目运作的原因和方式的机会,但很难将这些知识转移到社区层面。基于此案例设计的评估提供了提供反馈的机会,这些反馈可以用来了解一个项目成功的地方,以及没有达到的地方,这些反馈可以帮助我们以一种新的、更具建设性的方式处理儿童福利领域的干预措施。回顾性评价是对已经实施的项目的理解和学习的来源,也可以前瞻性地使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Creating Supply Chain Resilience Through Scenario Planning: How a Digital Twin Can Be Used To Enhance Supply Chain Resilience Through Scenario Planning Implementation and applications of harvest fleet route planning Deltagelse i kulturhuse og andre borgerinvolverende kulturinstitutioner ”Vokalhelvedet”: hvor svær er dansk udtale, og hvordan undervises der i udtale for andetsprogstalere? Podcastlytteren som hverdagskurator
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1