Solent Home | SEA Home | About | Policies

Solent University Logo

Solent Electronic Archive
SEA HOMEPAGE Back to SEA homepage

SOLENT ELECTRONIC ARCHIVE

  • Home
  • About
  • Policies
  • Latest Additions
  • Search
  • Browse by Year
  • Browse by Subject
  • Browse by Faculty
  • Browse by Creator

USER MENU

Login

Building sport for development practitioners’ capacity for undertaking monitoring and evaluation – reflections on a training programme building capacity in realist evaluation

Harris, Kevin. Building sport for development practitioners’ capacity for undertaking monitoring and evaluation – reflections on a training programme building capacity in realist evaluation. international journal of sport policy and politics ,

[img] Microsoft Word
IJSPP BLIND COPY revisions JAN 18 VERSION3 post proofing.doc - Submitted Version

Download (235kB)

Abstract

At present, the quality and practice of Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) in Sport for Development (SfD) projects is under close scrutiny, mainly concerning the capacity that sport has to create social change. Critics have argued that a deeper understanding of ‘what works for whom and why’ is required when evaluating SfD projects. This article explores practitioner involvement in M&E, drawing upon a ‘realist participatory M&E training framework’ developed to train student sport development practitioners to make sense of how and why their SfD projects worked. The training framework was evaluated utilising a realist approach to understand what approaches to evaluation worked for those involved in the training framework. Specifically, 15 practitioners participated in the training framework encompassing 5 community focused SfD innovation projects delivered within the Coaching Innovation Programme at a south coast university in the United Kingdom. The realist evaluation incorporated Q-method factor analysis with realist interviews and reflective blogs. Findings on the value of realist evaluation for practitioners emerged. Practical and transformational evaluation characteristics unfolded and four groups of practitioners emerged, depicting how the training framework worked. These groups were ‘new and emerging evaluators’, ‘polished problem solvers’, ‘passive passengers’, and ‘proficient yet sceptical practitioners’. These were underpinned by holistic narratives in line with Q-method demonstrating shared viewpoints about the training framework. In conclusion, participatory approaches of M&E can work with practitioners and should be embedded to enable application of realist evaluation.

Item Type: Article
Subjects: SPORT AND TOURISM > Sport Studies
Faculties: Faculty of Business Sport & Enterprise > Business School
Depositing User: Kev Harris
Date Deposited: 04 Sep 2018 16:23
Last Modified: 04 Sep 2018 16:23
URI: https://ssudl.solent.ac.uk/id/eprint/3919

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item

Disclaimer | Privacy policy © Solent University

Main switchboard tel: 023 8201 3000