Worldview in Realist Evaluation
Abstract
Realist evaluation is structured around the key question of “What works, for whom and why” (Pawson and Tilley, 1997). Substantial development of metrics, mechanisms and programme theory have done much to create robust... [ view full abstract ]
Realist evaluation is structured around the key question of “What works, for whom and why” (Pawson and Tilley, 1997). Substantial development of metrics, mechanisms and programme theory have done much to create robust methods for understanding what works and why, yet the “whom” element has not yet developed into a distinctive methodological style. To some extent, this undermines what can be learned in the CMO approach,
This paper begins by considering the central but frequently overlooked idea that the worldview of a participant is the key is the key to understanding what mechanisms will fire in a particular context. Programmes seek to change minds (Pawson, 2013: p.34) and the success of a programme depends upon the range and stability of participants’ worldviews. It is clear from this definition that not only is worldview a primary component of “whom “and therefore critical in answering the “what” and “why” elements of the question, but also that a range of worldviews might be anticipated within any population of participants. “Whom” thus refers, in large part, to the specificity of worldviews within a population of participants.
The paper begins by briefly alluding to the philosophical background of worldview by drawing upon Steven Peppers depiction before reviewing some realist attempts to include worldview in an evaluation. Although Pawson appears to favour the idea of decision architecture, other realists have tried using role and demographic characteristics with limited success. More open, qualitative efforts have been partially successful, and at least one attempt has actually created the worldview it sought to study. Arguably, methods for studying “whom” and worldview doing have fallen behind those for considering programme theory and CMO.
The paper then offers operant subjectivity and its attendant Q sort method as means to formalise the “whom” component and thereby offer further insights into worldview, mechanism and context. Operant subjectivity (Stephenson 1977) refers to the functional, as opposed to logical, distinctions that constitute an individual subjective viewpoint. Q sort is a method for using factor analysis to collate and categorise similar individual viewpoints (or worldviews) into robust collective views by the ranking of statements drawn from programme theory, project objectives, literature review, folk knowledge and any other source. Thus a CMO can be modelled for each subgroup with a distinctive worldview.
The paper then offers examples of evaluation work carried out using Q methodology to define participants by worldview, demonstrating its potential and identifying further work that needs to be done.
Authors
-
steven henderson
(Southampton Solent University)
-
Brian Wink
(Southampton Solent University)
Topic Areas
Please select one of the following:: Realist evaluation , Please select a maximum of two themes from the following list:: Exploring 'Mechanisms' , Please select a maximum of two themes from the following list:: Theory in Realist Approach
Session
SO-4 » Realism in Action IV (11:30 - Tuesday, 4th October, Frobisher Room 4)
Presentation Files
The presenter has not uploaded any presentation files.