非洲非殖民化和本土化评价实践:非洲制造评价方法主流化路线图

Q2 Social Sciences African Evaluation Journal Pub Date : 2022-08-22 DOI:10.4102/aej.v10i1.620
Ayabulela Dlakavu, Jabulani Mathebula, S. Mkhize
{"title":"非洲非殖民化和本土化评价实践:非洲制造评价方法主流化路线图","authors":"Ayabulela Dlakavu, Jabulani Mathebula, S. Mkhize","doi":"10.4102/aej.v10i1.620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"when it is evaluated, by whom, and with what methodologies’ (Chilisa et al. 2016). This can be referred Background: Decolonisation is a concept that has taken on multiple layers since the end of colonisation and the onset of independence in the Global South. More than ever before, decolonialism, decoloniality and indigenisation have moved to the centre of intellectual inquiry across the broad spectrum of human activity: knowledge production, education, academic disciplines, professions, political life and economic organisation. The evaluation profession and fraternity has also been grappling with the idea of decolonising and indigenising its ontological, epistemological and methodological foundations, which are essentially rooted in the Global North development theory, practice and knowledge systems. Objectives: This article endeavours to provide recommendations on how to make the Made in Africa Evaluation (MAE) paradigm practical (applicable) for evaluators in Africa, based on decolonisation and indigenisation methodological prescriptions. Method: The study is qualitative by design, employing document analysis and the authors’ observation on development and evaluation practice in Africa and globally. Results: The emergent practice of evaluation is only experiencing decolonial scrutiny in the 21st century. In the African context, the MAE paradigm appears to be the continent’s decolonisation and indigenisation project for the evaluation fraternity. Conclusion: Building an Afrocentric, decolonised and indigenous MAE paradigm and approach requires a coordinated effort on building scholarship on the topic of MAE approaches and methodologies. Once there is sufficient documentation of the MAE approach, it should become easier to advance Afrocentric evaluation as mainstream discourse alongside the more established and neoliberal development and evaluation discourse.","PeriodicalId":37531,"journal":{"name":"African Evaluation Journal","volume":"78 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decolonising and indigenising evaluation practice in Africa: Roadmap for mainstreaming the Made in Africa Evaluation approach\",\"authors\":\"Ayabulela Dlakavu, Jabulani Mathebula, S. Mkhize\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/aej.v10i1.620\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"when it is evaluated, by whom, and with what methodologies’ (Chilisa et al. 2016). This can be referred Background: Decolonisation is a concept that has taken on multiple layers since the end of colonisation and the onset of independence in the Global South. More than ever before, decolonialism, decoloniality and indigenisation have moved to the centre of intellectual inquiry across the broad spectrum of human activity: knowledge production, education, academic disciplines, professions, political life and economic organisation. The evaluation profession and fraternity has also been grappling with the idea of decolonising and indigenising its ontological, epistemological and methodological foundations, which are essentially rooted in the Global North development theory, practice and knowledge systems. Objectives: This article endeavours to provide recommendations on how to make the Made in Africa Evaluation (MAE) paradigm practical (applicable) for evaluators in Africa, based on decolonisation and indigenisation methodological prescriptions. Method: The study is qualitative by design, employing document analysis and the authors’ observation on development and evaluation practice in Africa and globally. Results: The emergent practice of evaluation is only experiencing decolonial scrutiny in the 21st century. In the African context, the MAE paradigm appears to be the continent’s decolonisation and indigenisation project for the evaluation fraternity. Conclusion: Building an Afrocentric, decolonised and indigenous MAE paradigm and approach requires a coordinated effort on building scholarship on the topic of MAE approaches and methodologies. Once there is sufficient documentation of the MAE approach, it should become easier to advance Afrocentric evaluation as mainstream discourse alongside the more established and neoliberal development and evaluation discourse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37531,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Evaluation Journal\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Evaluation Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v10i1.620\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Evaluation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v10i1.620","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

什么时候评估,由谁评估,用什么方法评估”(Chilisa et al. 2016)。背景:自殖民结束和全球南方国家开始独立以来,非殖民化是一个具有多层面的概念。与以往任何时候相比,非殖民主义、非殖民化和本土化已经在人类活动的广泛领域(知识生产、教育、学术学科、专业、政治生活和经济组织)中成为知识探索的中心。评价专业和博爱也一直在努力解决其本体论、认识论和方法论基础非殖民化和本土化的想法,这些基础基本上植根于全球北方发展理论、实践和知识体系。目的:本文试图在非殖民化和本土化方法论处方的基础上,就如何使非洲制造评估(MAE)范式对非洲的评估人员实用(适用)提供建议。方法:本研究采用定性设计,采用文献分析和作者对非洲和全球发展和评价实践的观察。结果:评价的新兴实践在21世纪才经历了非殖民化的审视。在非洲的情况下,MAE模式似乎是非洲大陆评价兄弟会的非殖民化和本土化项目。结论:建立一个以非洲为中心、非殖民化和土著化的MAE范式和方法,需要协调一致地努力建立关于MAE方法和方法主题的学术研究。一旦有足够的文献证明MAE方法,将非洲中心主义评价作为主流话语与更成熟的新自由主义发展和评价话语一起推进就会变得更容易。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Decolonising and indigenising evaluation practice in Africa: Roadmap for mainstreaming the Made in Africa Evaluation approach
when it is evaluated, by whom, and with what methodologies’ (Chilisa et al. 2016). This can be referred Background: Decolonisation is a concept that has taken on multiple layers since the end of colonisation and the onset of independence in the Global South. More than ever before, decolonialism, decoloniality and indigenisation have moved to the centre of intellectual inquiry across the broad spectrum of human activity: knowledge production, education, academic disciplines, professions, political life and economic organisation. The evaluation profession and fraternity has also been grappling with the idea of decolonising and indigenising its ontological, epistemological and methodological foundations, which are essentially rooted in the Global North development theory, practice and knowledge systems. Objectives: This article endeavours to provide recommendations on how to make the Made in Africa Evaluation (MAE) paradigm practical (applicable) for evaluators in Africa, based on decolonisation and indigenisation methodological prescriptions. Method: The study is qualitative by design, employing document analysis and the authors’ observation on development and evaluation practice in Africa and globally. Results: The emergent practice of evaluation is only experiencing decolonial scrutiny in the 21st century. In the African context, the MAE paradigm appears to be the continent’s decolonisation and indigenisation project for the evaluation fraternity. Conclusion: Building an Afrocentric, decolonised and indigenous MAE paradigm and approach requires a coordinated effort on building scholarship on the topic of MAE approaches and methodologies. Once there is sufficient documentation of the MAE approach, it should become easier to advance Afrocentric evaluation as mainstream discourse alongside the more established and neoliberal development and evaluation discourse.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
African Evaluation Journal
African Evaluation Journal Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles merit on any subject related to evaluation, and provide targeted information of professional interest to members of AfrEA and its national associations. Aims of the African Evaluation Journal (AEJ): -AEJ aims to be a high-quality, peer-reviewed journal that builds evaluation-related knowledge and practice in support of effective developmental policies on the African continent. -AEJ aims to provide a communication platform for scholars and practitioners of evaluation to share and debate ideas about evaluation theory and practice in Africa. -AEJ aims to promote cross-fertilisation of ideas and methodologies between countries and between evaluation scholars and practitioners in the developed and developing world. -AEJ aims to promote evaluation scholarship and authorship, and a culture of peer-review in the African evaluation community.
期刊最新文献
Erratum: Review of Goldman and Pabari’s book through the lens of the work of Sulley Gariba Table of Contents Vol 11, No 1 (2023) Improving citizen-based monitoring in South Africa: A social media model A results-based monitoring and evaluation system for the Namibian Child Support Grant programme Lessons learned from an occupational therapy programme needs assessment
×
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