Abstract
This chapter addresses how the studies reviewed in this manuscript are generally problematic for two reasons that go beyond their specific findings. The first problem is the econometric nature of the studies, while the second is the political-financial-intellectual complex from which these studies were borne and back into which they went as they furthered the interests of that complex. In addition to discussing these issues, this chapter focuses on how the combination of these issues contributes to relations of dependence between international researchers with expertise in these methods and their counterparts in low- and middle-income countries. In response to this situation, alternative methodological approaches are advocated. A number of suggestions are also made for addressing the political-economic challenges that confront knowledge production in the field of global education policy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For more on the history of EDUCO and the politics of its emergence see, in addition to Chap. 4 in this volume, Edwards (2018, forthcoming) and Edwards and Ávalos (2015).
- 2.
At the global level, one indicator of the timeliness of the suggestion to increase the research capacity of southern knowledge agents is the fact that it was proposed by actors involved in the process of setting the post-2015 goals (Quint & Lucas, 2014).
References
Ball, S. (2012). Global education, inc.: New policy networks and the neo-liberal imaginary. New York: Routledge.
Bennett, A., & Elman, C. (2006). Qualitative research: Recent developments in case study methods. Annual Review of Political Science, 9, 455–476.
Broad, R. (2006). Research, knowledge, and the art of “paradigm maintenance”: The World Bank’s development economics Vice-Presidency (DEC). Review of International Political Economy, 13(3), 387–419.
Chan, J. (2007). Between efficiency, capability, and recognition: Competing epistemes in global governance reforms. Comparative Education, 43(3), 359–376.
Dumas, M., & Anderson, G. (2014). Qualitative research as policy knowledge: Framing policy problems and transforming education from the ground up. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 22(11), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.v22n11.2014.
Edwards, D. B., Jr. (forthcoming). Accountability through community-based management? Implications from the local level implementation in El Salvador of a globally-popular model. In K. A. Heidemann & R. A. Clothey (Eds.), Another way: Decentralization, democratization, and the global politics of community-based schooling. Rotterdam: Sense.
Edwards, D. B., Jr. (2018). The trajectory of global education policy: Community-based management in El Salvador and the global reform agenda. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Edwards, D. B., Jr., & Ávalos, E. (2015). Santa Marta y el programa EDUCO: Una experiencia de resistencia, adaptación e inversión de la lógica neoliberal. [Santa Marta and the EDUCO Program: An experience of resistance, adaptation and inversion of neoliberal reform logic.] San Salvador, El Salvador: Universidad Centroamericana.
Edwards, D., Jr., & Klees, S. (2015). Unpacking “participation” in development and education governance: A framework of perspectives and practices. Prospects, 45(4), 483–499.
Erickson, F., & Gutierrez, K. (2002). Culture, rigor, and science in educational research. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 21–24. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X031008021.
Gillies, J. (Ed.) (2010). Education system reform and aid effectiveness: The power of persistence. Washington, DC: USAID/Equip 2. Retrieved from http://www.equip123.net/docs/E2-Power_of_Persistence.pdf
Goldie, D., Linick, M., Jabbar, H., & Lubienski, C. (2014). Using bibliometric and social media analyses to explore the “echo chamber” hypothesis. Educational Policy, 28(2), 281–305.
Klees, S., & Edwards, D. B., Jr. (2014). Knowledge production and technologies of governance. In T. Fenwick, E. Mangez, & J. Ozga (Eds.), World yearbook of education 2014: Governing knowledge: Comparison, knowledge-based technologies and expertise in the regulation of education (pp. 31–43). New York: Routledge.
Kvernbekk, T. (2013). Evidence-based practice: On the function of evidence in practical reasoning. Studier i Pedagogisk Filosofi, 2(2), 19–33.
La Londe, P., Brewer, T., & Lubienski, C. (2015). Teach for America and teach for all: Creating and intermediary organization network for global education reform. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 23(7), 1–25. http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/1829.
Leamer, E. (1983). Let’s take the con out of econometrics. American Economic Review, 73(1), 31–41.
Lieblich, A., Tuval-Mashiach, R., & Zilber, T. (1998). Narrative research: Reading, analysis and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Lubienski, C., Brewer, T., & La Londer, P. (2016). Orchestrating policy ideas: Philanthropies and think tanks in the US education policy advocacy networks. Australian Educational Researcher, 43(1), 55–73.
Moen, T. (2006). Reflections on the narrative research approach. International Journal of Qualitative Methodology, 5(4), Article 5. Retrieved from https://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/5_4/HTML/moen.htm
Pawson, R. (2006). Evidence-based policy: A realist perspective. London: Sage.
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
Quint, R., & Lucas, S. (2014). The power and potential of southern think tanks for the post-2015 agenda. Post2015.org : What comes after the MDGs? Retrieved from http://post2015.org/2014/11/05/the-power-and-potential-of-southern-think-tanks-for-the-post-2015-agenda/
Samoff, J. (1991). The façade of precision in education data and statistics: A troubling example from Tanzania. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 29(4), 669–689.
Samoff, J. (1993). The reconstruction of schooling in Africa. Comparative Education Review, 37(2), 181–222.
Samoff, J. (1996). Chaos and certainty in development. World Development, 24(4), 611–633.
Schroeder, L., Sjoquist, D., & Stephan, P. (1986). Understanding regression analysis. London: SAGE.
Spring, J. (2015). Economization of education: Human capital, global corporations, skills-based schooling. New York: Routledge.
Upshur, C. (1995). What is participatory evaluation (PE)? What are its roots?, The Evaluation Exchange, 1(3/4). Retrieved from http://www.hfrp.org/evaluation/the-evaluation-exchange/issue-archive/participatory-evaluation/what-is-participatory-evaluation-pe-what-are-its-roots
Vavrus, F., & Bartlett, L. (2006). Comparatively knowing: Making a case for the vertical case study. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 8(2), 95–103. Retrieved from http://devweb.tc.columbia.edu/i/a/document/25697_8_2_Vavrus_Bartlett.pdf
Verger, A. (2012). Framing and selling global education policy: The promotion of PPPs in education in low-income countries. Journal of Education Policy, 27(1), 109–130.
Verschuren, P. (2001). Holism versus reductionism in modern social science research. Quality & Quantity, 35, 389–405. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012242620544.
Weiss, C. (1995). The four “I’s” of school reform: How interests, ideology, information, and institution affect teachers and principals. Harvard Education Review, 65(4), 571–592.
Whitehead, T. (2002). Introduction to ethnographic assessment and evaluation systems. Ethnographic Assessment & Evaluation Systems Working Paper #2. Departments of Anthropology, University of Maryland. Retrieved from http://www.cusag.umd.edu/documents/WorkingPapers/IntroEAES.pdf
World Bank. (2011). Participatory methods. Retrieved from http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTPOVERTY/EXTISPMA/0,,contentMDK:20190347~menuPK:412148~pagePK:148956~piPK:216618~theSitePK:384329,00.html
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Edwards, D.B. (2018). Impact Evaluations: Persistent Limitations, Alternative Approaches, Possible Responses. In: Global Education Policy, Impact Evaluations, and Alternatives. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75142-9_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75142-9_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-75141-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-75142-9
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)