Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 3,805 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 761 - Next  Jump:
2018 - Comparative and International Education Society Conference Words: 588 words || 
Info
1. Beggs, Christine. "Are two data points worth two million dollars? Re-examining our approach to building evidence in education" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Comparative and International Education Society Conference, Hilton Mexico City Reforma Hotel, Mexico City, Mexico, <Not Available>. 2019-10-20 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1354435_index.html>
Publication Type: Panel Paper
Abstract: This presentation puts forward an argument for more inclusive and transparent treatment of evidence and a call for greater contexualization of evaluations by integrating systems-thinking methods into evaluation design and interpretation. Specific recommendations based on new analyses will be presented to address these challenges.

Rigorous evaluations of education programs in developing countries have grown exponentially over the past decade. Much of this growth can be attributed to efforts by organizations such as the Center for Global Development who convened the Evaluation Gap Working Group to address the lack of rigorous evidence in the health and education sectors. The 2006 publication stemming from this initiative, "When Will We Ever Learn: Improving Lives through Impact Evaluation", put forward a strong call to action and a roadmap for increasing the number of high-quality impact evaluations to drive better programming and policy decisions. The emergence of organizations such as the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (JPAL), the International Initiative for Impact Evaluations (3ie) and the World Bank’s Strategic Impact Evaluation Fund (SIEF), gave life to this movement, making a significant expansion of impact evaluations in developing countries possible. Bi-lateral funders including the United Kingdom’s Department for International Development (DFID) and the United States’ Agency for International Development (USAID) began to expand their commitment to and funding for evaluations of their programs. Private foundations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation played a critical role through both their thought leadership and financial support. Fast forward to the present day, and we have a steady supply of well-designed and well-executed independent impact evaluations of education programs in developing countries.

A natural by-product of this increase in impact evaluations has been the need to synthesize these disparate evaluations that are measuring different outcomes, in different ways, across different contexts, into something meaningful and actionable - all while maintaining transparency, addressing issues of comparability and acknowledging limitations with respect to external validity. Welcome onto the scene an expanding set of systematic reviews; guided by protocols put forward by initiatives such as the Campbell and Cochrane Collaborations and thought-leaders including Patrick McEwan, Dave Evans, Rachel Glennerster, Paul Glewwe and Micheal Kremer. These systematic reviews are close cousins of the impact evaluation in terms of rigor and transparency and significant effort has been made to translate the findings into program and policy recommendations.

While these developments certainly signal advances in evidence building for the education sector, challenges remain. Study selection biases (geographic, publication, etc.), insufficiently detailed categorization of interventions, scarcity of evaluations that build more nuanced evidence through treatment arms, disparate measurements and methods, and striking the right balance when assessing the generalizability of findings top the list of recognized vulnerabilities in systematic reviews. We are also leaving a lot of important information and learning on the cutting floor. Taking stock for example that roughly 90% of the evaluations funded by USAID are not impact evaluations due to suitability of program designs for impact evaluations, contextual challenges, resource constraints, timing factors and other drivers; and recognizing that there is considerable investment by a range of development organizations, both northern and southern, in “internal evaluations” - we need to find a way to be more inclusive of these evaluations while maintaining sufficient transparency in methods and threats to internal and external validity.

This presentation will present specific strategies for: improving inclusivity in systematic reviews without compromising transparency and rigor; and more effective contexualization of evaluation findings by integrating systems-thinking methods, specifically causal-loop diagramming, into evaluation design and interpretation.

2012 - RSA Annual Meeting Words: 149 words || 
Info
2. Brown, Cedric. "One Scribe, Two Recusant Miscellanies, Two Provincial Locations: The Case of Hand B" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the RSA Annual Meeting, Grand Hyatt, Washington, DC,, <Not Available>. 2019-10-20 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p524359_index.html>
Publication Type: Panel Paper
Abstract: The distribution of textual materials into provincial miscellanies needs investigation, with recusant texts as a special case. This paper looks again at the case of “Hand B” in Constance Aston-Fowler’s miscellany (HM 904), which is also the chief hand of Bodleian Eng.poet.b.5. The first, from the 1630s, comes from Staffordshire; the second, from the 1650s, was used on yeoman farms in Wootten Wawen, Warwickshire. The first is a personal collection in a landed family, collecting poetry contributed by family and friends; the second is of devotional material made for community use. The commonly held assumption that Hand B is the work of Gertrude Aston Thimelby can be shown to be wrong, with many other influential assumptions about hands in HM 904, and what emerges is a fascinating story of priestly influence and Jesuit sources across three decades in the middle of the seventeenth century.

2012 - LRA 62nd Annual Conference Pages: unavailable || Words: 2261 words || 
Info
3. Consalvo, Annamary. and Maloch, Beth. "Talk to me: Two teachers, two students, and their writing conversations across a school year" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the LRA 62nd Annual Conference, Sheraton San Diego Hotel & Marina, San Diego, CA, Nov 28, 2012 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-10-20 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p578382_index.html>
Publication Type: Roundtable
Review Method: Peer Reviewed

2015 - Pacific Sociological Association Annual Meeting Pages: unavailable || Words: unavailable || 
Info
4. Rocha, Rosalba. "A Tale of Two Cities: A Statistical Comparison of Mexicans in Two Border Metropolitan Areas" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Pacific Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Hyatt Regency Long Beach, Long Beach, CA, Apr 01, 2015 Online <PDF>. 2019-10-20 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p980927_index.html>
Publication Type: Undergraduate Roundtable Presentation
Review Method: Peer Reviewed

2016 - American Sociological Association Annual Meeting Pages: unavailable || Words: unavailable || 
Info
5. Kuyucu, Tuna. "Two Crises, Two Trajectories: Impact of Economic Crises on Urban Governance in Turkey" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Washington State Convention Center, Seattle, WA, Aug 17, 2016 Online <PDF>. 2019-10-20 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p1122267_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Major economic crises are the most important drivers of policy shift in the governance of cities and their economies. But the existing literature on urban governance does not sufficiently explore the causal links between crises and urban governance shifts. The relatively small number of works on the topic are mostly descriptive single-case studies focusing on how the Great Recession that began in 2007 impacts urban regimes in advanced capitalist contexts. This is unfortunate given the frequency and intensity of economic crises experienced all around the globe in the neoliberal period, which makes it possible to construct comparative studies with the potential to advance our theoretical frames about how crises impact on urban dynamics. The purpose of this study is to explain why two major economic shocks experienced in Turkey in 2001 and 2008 led to very different policy outcomes in urban governance as well as the regulation of urban land and housing markets. While the former crisis was followed by wide-ranging decentralizing reforms in public administration, the latter crisis gave way to unprecedented centralization in urban governance as well as economic policy-making. That the same political party had been in power during the implementation of most of these reforms makes the question more interesting. The answer, I argue, lies mostly in ‘external factors’ –i.e. the state of the global economy (growth between 2001-07, recession after 2007) and prospects of Turkey’s EU membership (positive until 2008, negative after 2008). These external factors directly shaped the impact of crises on urban governance.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 761 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy