Monitoring and Evaluations in Development

Monitoring and Evaluations in Development When management of certain programs establishes them, they need to make a follow up that ensures that there is compliance with the set standards and expectations of the project (Vaagaasar, 2009). Project management involves the process through which a project is established, implemented, monitored, evaluated, and any adjustments made to the system to attain its set goals and objectives (Livingston, 2008).Advertising We will write a custom report sample on Monitoring and Evaluations in Development specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Oxfam being an international federation of fifteen organizations working in 98 countries need to have a strong monitoring and evaluation team to handle its large volume of work and projects. Currently Oxfam has entered into a contact with Dak Nong Doet that seeks to improve the province’s education quality delivery, the project focuses on teachers, pupils, ministry of education and training, and teacher s. To ensure that the goals of the project have been attained, Oxfam needs to have an effective monitoring and evaluation program. This paper discusses the role that monitoring and evaluation plays in an organization and gives recommendations on the best approach that the organization can adopted for effective monitoring of Dak Nong Doet education project. The nature of Oxfam projects Oxfam is an international recognized NGO that establishes various programs targeting different needs within the society especially in rural development areas, poverty reduction programs, hungers and other such programs that needs fast and effective attention. There are different projects that the international organization manages and their nature and approach always vary with the intended outcome. Projects may take the form of civil society developments, ethnic minority issues address, and focus on girl and boy child, addiction programs, and women empowerments. One of the most renown program that Oxfa m has undertaken successfully is the education system where it aims at improving education for the less fortunate in communities; the main focus of these programs are the disadvantaged areas like third world countries, disaster stricken areas among other areas that need arises (Long and Plosser, 1983). In the past few years, the main focus that the company has had is to improve education in Tra, Vinh, Lao Cai and Dak Nong provinces where the main focus has been girl child programs; when dealing with the projects, the company has its main focus on the school, the child and the ministry as they are players in the segment for an effective implementation.Advertising Looking for report on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More In the same years, the organization has been advocating for the expansion of its programs or models through Ministry of Education and Training (Posond, 2008). The next coming years, th e organization is focusing on building effective governance in education in Vietnam where it will have the main focus on the teachers, school managers, pupils, and education representatives in all level of education (Marcus, 2010). Oxfam has signed a performance contract with Dak Nong Doet where it aims at promoting social accountability in the provinces education sector; with the project that has its own objectives, the organization need to have an effective Monitoring and Evaluation in Development programs. The Monitoring and Evaluation in Development needs to address all areas of the program failure to which it will mean that the projects will not take shape and objectives will not be attained (Walkenbach, 1997). Monitoring and Evaluation in Development Project management evaluation stage has the following roles to play in the entire project management: A project can be defined as a designated ally of tasks that aims at accomplishing a certain task within an organization; it has a period, expected expenditure, expected outcome, and a work framework or schedule; in every stage of the project, there are certain measures that needs to be considered to ensure that the project is running smoothly. Oxfam project evaluation should address all risky areas and ensure that correct measures have been taken to adhere to the set objectives and goals (Newbold,1998). In a nutshell Monitoring and Evaluation in Development has the following main objectives to attain alongside the projects main objectives:Advertising We will write a custom report sample on Monitoring and Evaluations in Development specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More to plan, organize and control activities: this is to ensure that the set level of operation is maintained in time, costs, and the expected delivery time Manage activities and organize resources (both human and physical) for the project. This ensures that the human capital that is involved in the pro jects fits their roles and they do not get higher or lower gains from the projects. The nature of Oxfam projects is that a person can get direct benefit from the project at the expense of the larger population; such moves should be controlled by Monitoring and Evaluation programs (Pons, 2008) putting all the logistics of a project into place so that there will be full attainment of project goals and objectives: the engagement that Oxfam has entered with Dak Nong Doet should be looked into to ensure that both parties to the program adhere to what they had promised each other; when such moves have been taken then the goals of the project will be attained effectively Ensuring that the project is accomplished in time with the available resources and if possible have some new strategies of completion of tasks that is better than the original plan. Dak Nong Doet and Oxfam project has some probable risks that the organization’s monitoring and evaluation programs should address befo re they limit the attainment of the entire project. The adoption and deployment of the Oxfam-Dak Nong Doet education system involves great risks, primarily due to the vast initial costs, high over-budget ratio, chances low success rate, failure to meet the project goals, and partial attainment of the initially set implementation. Furthermore, initiation costs are typically greater than a tailored integration plan but maintenance and modification costs of post-implementation are lower; Dak Nong Doet and Oxfam decided to have an approach that not only sees Dak Nong Doet students attain good education but one that ensures continuity and maintenance of the project. McComb, Kennedy, Green and Compton (2008) creates an evaluation framework regarding the main issues encountered in the rural development programs and the related costs and benefits; the study has emphasized the requirements of a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of; the writer also suggest that evaluation and monitoring should try to assess attempts of incorporating intangibles into conventional cost-benefit analysis. It is proposed that decision making should be based on scoring methods, cost/benefit analysis, risk analysis and ranking. However, some scholars argue that scoring and ranking techniques are straightforward but insufficient due to the project interdependence. Cost/benefit and risk analysis methods are insufficient either for the interrelated criteria (McComb, Kennedy, Green and Compton, 2008). The concept of Monitoring and Evaluation as should be adopted by Oxfam and Dak Nong Doet project The main aim that the monitoring and evaluation of the program focus on is the development of leaders and managers who can be relied upon to see the entire project come to pass effectively; the leaders should assume the role of planning and making responsive decisions that will see the program come to pass effectively, at any one point the programs should ensure that the programs reach majority of p opulation living in poverty and to sustain the change over a period of time. The Oxfam and Dak Nong Doet project monitoring and evaluation programs should consider the authenticity of policies, strategies and programs for both quantitative and qualitative change; this will facilitate the existence of equal resources distribution and ensuring that the target group get the benefits as had been anticipated.Advertising Looking for report on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The programs should embrace high levels of transparency, accountability and high performance as it can only be through such policies that it can succeed and the people targeted by various projects benefit. With an effective monitoring and evaluation standards, the organization will be assured that its funds address issues in the society and they remain sustainable as the company would have wanted them to be. Data collection methods for the evaluation When a project is running, there are checks and balances that should be implemented to offer red flags in the case the set objectives and pathways as has been laid are not adhered to. Project managers have the mandate of ensuring that there are effective internal controls that address any chances of risk; to collect data on the progress and the steps to make the following are effective method of monitoring and evaluation data collection; Use efficient test-run reports Before implementation and after implementation of a project, a Oxfam should be taking an appropriate research on what the world is going through and make relevant reports that can aid in the management of the project; it should be in touch with the occurrences in the project area and other areas of the economy. It is important to consider the following key report types: Single-page project report: this is a short report that offers a single but direct grasp of the project. It should be summarized to offer an overview of what the project if like and how it is expected to be; when there is an observable disparity between what is on paper and what can be observed on the ground Budgetary information: it provides room for an aggregate roll-up on budgetary status; the main issue is to ensure there are resources for every project Project dashboard: they have one-lie simplified reports on execution level and the progress of the project. Resource allocation view: a comparison of the current available resources and their chances of availability in the next 12 months Strategic alignment: reports that align the entire project with the role and goals of an organization. Flexible pivot table capabilities: it uses drag-and-drop pivot table-style analysis to offer management platform of answering certain questions pertaining the project as they arise. Conduct postmortems To manage effectively projects, managers need to have an ongoing budgetary and analyzing method; they should never assume that since the project has been well planned; then that is the end of the story, they should understand that there are changes that might affect the project negatively thus they need to be checked effectively. A constant review of the budget, periods and the final periodical results will assist project managers keep the project on its toes. There are some changes that are expected to be observed in a project as it develop, they include an improvement on the lives of the children and the general school environment. To have the data, the monitoring and eval uation team should undertake regular surveys on the area of implementation the surveys should look into the expected result after certain duration and compare the same with the on paper or the project blue print expectation, in the case there is some disparity they should be addressed effectively (Kumar, 2005). Recommendation for an effective Monitoring and Evaluation program for Oxfam and Dak Nong Doet project Oxfam and Dak Nong Doet project should adopt computer aiding monitoring and evaluation systems supported by qualitative and quantitative data from the field; the systems can be in-house developed or they can be sourced from commercial markets, in whichever the way that they have been attained, and then the system should be responsive to the needs of the projects. They need to have the capacity of interpolating of different issues and information then give the desired response to the managers for effective decision-making. The operators of computer aided project developments s hould have a good understanding of how the system works as well as understand the various logistics that are involved in the project at hand, it is by doing so that appropriate mechanism can be adopted (Shane, 2003). An effective computer aiding monitoring and evaluation is likely to address the following areas: Project evaluation process or methodology: give a framework of the pathway that the project should follow Cost and benefits measurement: evaluate the benefits and gains that every stage in the project is leading to a dif there is a stage that is not fully operation, the system should be strong enough to alert the managers (Wenzhe, Maoshan, Duffield, Young and Youmei, 2007). Progress reporting: the system should be able to check and report the progress of the system periodically and offer reports that can be used to improve the project, to be in a position to do this, the system should incorporate some checks and balances and have optimal performances levels. Communication o f key project data: in management of a project, data and information is of essence, there is need to have timely and relevant data at all times. This will offer the much-needed resource to manage the project effectively: an effective system should have the ability to offer the required data when needed and portray the data in an acceptable manner. Resource and capacity planning: resources are limited, they need to be effectively managed and put in optimal use, an effective system should have the capability of offering a resource allocation tracking system Cost and benefits tracking: as the project unfolds, there is an urgent need to have all the areas on track, the system should ensure that it looks into the development of a project and make improvements changes where needed (Gary, 2010) Computer aiding monitoring and evaluation assess the project as a whole and assist managers to have a better track of the project progress, they are of great benefit to management and they need to be of the right operation, failure to which a project will suffer. The main objective of an effective computer aiding monitoring and evaluation program is to put available resources into optimal use; resources are scarce so their management and utility is paramount in modern societies (Cleland and Ireland, 2006). Managers should understand that their main role id linking the laid down strategy with actual performance, they should understand that they should be the pioneers of development and operation in the firm (Wheelen and Hunger, 1998). When they fail to undertake effectively their duty, they should be assured they are leading their organization to failure. The first thing that program managers should embark on is internal analyzing of its potential, and ways that the potential can be put in proper use. With limited resources and having a variety of mutually exclusive projects to undertake, the managers should ensure they select that project that offers maximum returns to the ta rget population and cost the organizations involved relatively manageable costs (Andersen and Vaagaasar, 2009) To create synergy and keep a project running, program managers needs to develop management elements and factors that can be used to motivate the team players to work hand; they should be encouraged through being shown the success they have made so as they can feel motivated to develop the project further. A project is bound to be faced with a number of risks; there is need for management to establish the risks that are to be associated with the project and develop adequate mitigation measures. When managing a project, there is needed to have an honest management and team, this will facilitate the development of appropriate decisions making systems to the benefit of the company (Wynant, 1980). Communication is important monitoring and evaluation as well as in initialization, concluding and making final reports of project; computer aiding monitoring and evaluation keeps proje ct managers on track and reminds them on their role to communicate the progress of the project for evaluation purposes. There is need to develop and maintain effective communication method. Managers should be able to offer directions and receive feedbacks from the ground using an appropriate communication method (Anderson, 2010). Depending with the technology adopted and the nature of a project, communication can take different forms: they include online reports, word of mouth, and periodical letters. Project success can be measured in terms of the practicability of business relationships that is directly proportional to the quality of communication (Anbari, 2010). Conclusion Oxfam-Dak Nong Doet project aims to improving the provinces education system; the focus of the project is to school administrators, pupils, parents, ministry of education and training, and teachers. The project has its main risk such as chances of not attaining its set goals and objective if risks associated ar e not effectively managed. Monitoring and evaluation program address risks within a project and ensures that every stage adheres to the pathway as planned and outcomes are attained as required. For an effective monitoring and evaluation, Oxfam should adopt a computer aiding monitoring and evaluation program that assist to keep track the progress of the project; when such a program has been adopted then the project will be successful. References Anbari, F., 2010. The Chunnel Project. Washington: The George Washington University Anderson, B. , 2010. Project Leadership and The Art Of Managing Relationship. Project management, 64(3), p. 58. Andersen, E. S., and Vaagaasar, A., 2009. Project management improvement efforts-creating project management value by uniqueness or mainstream thinking? Project Management Journal, 40(1), pp. 19-27. Cleland, D., and Ireland, R., 2006. Project management: strategic design and implementation. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. Gary, L., 2010. Project management theory and practice .Baca Raton: Auerbach publishers. Kumar, P., 2005. Effective Use of Gantt chart for Managing Large Scale Projects Cost Engineering, 47(7), pp. 14-21. Livingston, J., 2008. Founders at work: stories of startups early days. Berkeley: Apress Long, J., Plosser, C. I.,1983. Real Business Cycles. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Marcus, G., 2010. Fundamental of agile project management: an overview. New York: Asme press. McComb, S., Kennedy, D., Green, S., and Compton, W., 2008. Project team effectiveness: the case for sufficient setup and top management involvement. Production Planning Control, 19(4), pp. 301-311. Newbold, R. C., 1998. Project Management in the Fast Lane; Applying the Theory of Constraints. New York: St. Lucie Publishers. Pons, D., 2008. Project management for new product development. Project Management Journal, 39(2), 82-97. Posond, D., 2008. Project management for new product development. Project Management Journal, 39(2), 82-97. S hane, S., 2003. A General Theory of Entrepreneurship: the Individual-Opportunity. Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing. Vaagaasar, A., 2009. Project management improvement efforts-creating project management value by uniqueness or mainstream thinking? Project Management Journal, 40(1), PP. 19-27. Walkenbach, J., 1997. Gantt charts in Excel. PC World, 15(12), p. 386. Wenzhe, T., Maoshan, Q., Duffield, C., Young, D., and Youmei, L., 2007. Risk Management in the Chinese Construction Industry. Journal of Construction Engineering Management, 133(12), pp.944-956. Wheelen, L., and Hunger, J.,1998. Strategic Management and Business Policy: Entering 21st Century Global Society. Massachusetts: Addison Wesley. Wynant, L., 1980. Essential elements of project financing. Harvard Business Review, 58(3), pp.165-173. Monitoring and Evaluations in Development For projects to be successful they need to be monitored and evaluated efficiently and effectively. Several techniques are applied during the whole process of project monitoring and evaluations development. The most common is the most significant change technique (MSC). The MSC technique â€Å"is a form of participatory monitoring and evaluation† (Davies Dart 2005, p.8).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Monitoring and Evaluations in Development specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More It is preferred as participatory because it involves different stakeholders who are involved in making decisive changes being recorded as well as analyzing the collected data (Ramalingam 2006, p.17; Dart Davies 2003, 157). It qualifies as a monitoring technique because it is applied along the program cycle through the provision of valuable management information. On the other hand, it is considered as an evaluating technique because it ab le to provide required â€Å"data on impact and the outcomes† (Davies Dart 2005, p.8; Serrat 2009, p.1) that is important in assessing a program performance. The MSC technique revolves around the gathering of vital changes that occur from the field and the significant stories (Mcdonald, Bammer Deane 2009, p.57) are selected by the field staff. Upon the capture of the stories, the stakeholders sit down, loudly read the stories and engage in in-depth discussions. The MSC was developed by Rick Davies in 1996 (Coy n.d, p.3; Lunch, 2007, p.28) as way of monitoring and evaluating participatory â€Å"rural development programme in Bangladesh† (Willetts Crawford 2007, p.367; Le Cornu, Peters, Foster 2003, p.3). It was seen as the alternative for the complex monitoring and evaluation techniques. Lastly, when the techniques have been successfully implemented the teams focus on the impact the program would have. The essay explores the challenges that face successful applicatio n of the most significant change technique. Like any other technique, the most significant change technique is faced by numerous challenges. One of the challenges that face successful application of the MSC is the ability to make the staff in a project to adequately and fully understand the MSC (Davies Dart 2005, p.55).Advertising Looking for essay on project management? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Although it seems like a simple technique, most of the people find it challenging as it uses a different approach of monitoring and evaluating a project. This is because it is carried across multi-lingual and cross-cultural contexts with the aim of collecting the most successful stories. In these contexts, it may be difficult to implement the MSC because of the communication barrier created. Because of its inclusivity procedure, the Most Significant Change technique does not discriminate people across ethic or language divide. The communication barrier created by this inclusivity and context makes it hard to decide on the basic indicators and domains to use. Other than communication, training the project staffs to acquire the necessary skills and knowledge could be very difficult (Davies Dart 2005, p.55). Training the participants to fully understand the participatory monitoring and evaluation, the trainers are faced with the challenge of deciding what skills to prescribe (Estrella 2000, p.218). This is because the different people used in capacity building are of different levels. For instance, there are those who already have the required skills and need to improve while others are new in the capacity building program and need to acquire the basic skills (Coninck 2008, 144). The choice becomes very difficult because the stakeholders should be at the same level skill wise for the MSC to be successful. The different levels of capacity mean that differing perspectives and capacities are brought on to the table. The implication of this is that at the community level, the stakeholders could be hindered by the powerbase. The stakeholders with much strength could use their influence to control the resources meant for all people. Participatory monitoring and evaluation would be compromised because only few people’s stories would be recorded. Another challenge faced during MSC application is capacity building. Capacity building entails the identification of the participants to be involved in a participatory project monitoring and evaluation. Capacity building consists of different participants who have different level of understanding, skills, and education. Therefore, it becomes challenging to fully accommodate all the people and train them on the same domain without conflict of interest. The need to build the capacities of the participants collectively (Estrella et al. 2000, p.218) could be very challenging making it difficult to successfully apply the participatory monito ring and application. Like development research, MSC requires the proper outlining of the motives (Akker n.d, p.1).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on Monitoring and Evaluations in Development specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Dominant shareholders may have negative influence on the implementation of a successful MSC. This is because their willingness to share their resources and power may be compromised. They may not be willing to share their resources and capacities with the other participants or shareholders which compromises the whole project monitoring and evaluation process. For examples, donors may only require the local people to participate at the initiation phases which make the locals participation somehow superficial (Estrella 2008, p.221). This may jeopardize the success of the MSC as more time would be required to negotiate the participants and reach a common operative ground. The fact that capacity buildi ng entails different participants as it is based on the wider range of people inclusion principle means that the participants and stakeholders involved share different expectations (Estrella 2008, p.219; Mikkelsen 2007, p.281). This translates that their access needs are totally different which makes it difficult to decide on which stakeholders to start up with. It also brings the challenge of choosing what concepts and skills to use and deciding the initiation point for the MSC implementation. However, it is argued that capacity building should be started with stakeholders who have been occasionally excluded from participatory monitoring and evaluation. This ensures that the needed skills and confidence are build. This may be difficult in choosing the people because as noted the people are from different cultural and lingual backgrounds making communication a barrier. The wider range of the people included in a capacity building means that the people have different visions. This ca n make it difficult in negotiating the shareholders to accommodate the prescribed vision. It may take a lot of time in deciding the most appropriate and accommodative ground. This would jeopardize the allocated timeframe making the whole process delayed thus increasing the possibilities of coming with a successful MSC.Advertising Looking for essay on project management? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More PME involve a lot of stakeholders participating (Mikkelsen 2007, p.283), however the challenge that faces the facilitator is to choose which shareholder to participate at what level because they all cannot participate at the same level. This may cause delay in choosing and allocating the different levels thus compromising the PME success. The inadequate availability and access to resources has been reported as major constraints in abilities building among the stakeholders involved in a PME (Estrella 2000, p.227). Based on this context, the resources do not necessarily mean funds but the material resources, information, and human capital. The inability to have trained and skilled project facilitators, sufficient materials, and adequate information on the locals and the Participatory Monitoring and Evaluation makes individual capacity and institution building in the MSE compromised. The costs incurred in the training and purchase of the required materials may significantly affect the budget allocated in the monitoring and the evaluation processes. Project facilitators are often faced with the challenge of ensuring that they are not faced with bias which may compromise the success of MSC. For instance, the inclusivity principle requires that all people be actively involved and their change stories collected with bias (Moore Offer n.d, p.117). However, the facilitators may be faced with the problem of choosing between the views of the most articulate participants and those of the others. The ability to make a choice from different collections challenges the facilitators as they try not to be biased and be accommodative to all participants regardless of the abilities. The selection process may also be biased if the facilitators do not facilitate the process across a wider range of spectrum. The challenge that is faced is coming with the most consistent and appropriate team to work with without bias in terms of gender or abilities. Given that MSC operates under the participatory context for validity reasons, it is often faced with the challenge of measuring the impact brought about by the participatory projects (Davies Dart 2005, p.68). The stakeholders are often faced with the challenge of choosing the most appropriate participatory ME to adopt instead of empowering the participants. It is utterly difficult to depend on the purposive sampling involved in MSC sampling. This is because the process involves the collection of the success stories rather than being inclusive. This makes it difficult to record the negative aspects of a particular project. In other instances, it is hard to decide on the appropriate stories from the different cultures â€Å"therefore there would be little value to the use of MSC in such an environment† (IOD PARC 2010). MSC is faced with entry of inaccurate data which is not time bound which may make it insignificant (Kotvojs n.d, p.6). In the most remote areas, it would be hard to successfully apply the MSC te chnique as the validity of the recorded information may be compromised. Since, the MSC technique depends heavily on the collected data, its success may be jeopardized if the collected and recorded information is lost. This would make it impossible to analyze the outcome and the impact of a particular program or project. The collected data requires a lot of time to make reviews (Scott Proescholdbell 2005, 29) and this may be hard for MSC. The concept of the applying the Most Significant Change technique is often not well conceptualized. For example, its application in 3 Australian funded project programs was faced with overcoming misunderstanding (Kotvojs n.d, p.3). It was perceived as an alternative of replacing the monitoring and evaluation process rather than playing a greater part in the broader monitoring and evaluation plan. Therefore, MCS is faced with misconceptions on the role it effectively and essentially plays in participatory ME. Field officers may be challenged in expl aining the importance of the technique and its application. This has the capacity of making its MSC unsuccessful because of the mixed opinions and reactions in regard to the questions asked (Outreach Evaluation Resource Center, 2009, p.1). The evaluation of the development projects involves a lot of heterogeneous activities that may be a challenge (Kumar Seth n.d, p.1). The people involved in project have diverse motives and views. Therefore, the use of the MSC may be compromised because the stakeholders’ motives are all different. For example, the MSC is based on storytelling technique (Groot, Toornstra Tarla 2001, p.1) in which the success stories are recorded. In conclusion, MSC technique which is participatory tool applied in the evaluation and monitoring of projects, is often faced with challenges that jeopardize its success. For instance, it is prone to bias as the tool depends on the selection of the most success stories from a list of many. Because of its wide range o f participants with different languages and cultural contexts, communication barrier is created. This hinders the relay of information to the participants. It also prohibits proper understanding between the stakeholders and the project facilitators. It is also faced with the challenge of disseminating the required skills and knowledge across to the participants. This is because of the different abilities and capabilities that shareholders have. For example, the different participants have different level of education, understanding and capacity. The officer is faced with the challenge of deciding on which group to start up with. Depending on the locality of the targeted group MSC may be hard to successfully apply because of inadequate resources and time. Some of the projects require more resources than others making its application jeopardized. The participants involved in a MCS technique all have different expectations and it may be hard to decide on what changes need to be recorde d. Other than different expectations, the stakeholders bring perspectives and capabilities which may be differing. For instance, one of the groups may be constraint while the other may be willing to benefit from the MSC technique application. These differences make it hard to fully apply the MSC. Time constraints the facilitation of a proper MSC technique. Reference List Akker, J. V. n.d, Principles and methods of development research [Online] Available at http://projects.edte.utwente.nl/smarternet/version2/cabinet/ico_design_principles.pdf Coninck, J.D. et al. 2008, Planning, monitoring and evaluation in development organizations: Sharing training and facilitation experiences, Thousand Oaks, California, Sage publications. Choy, S. n.d, Most significant change technique: a supplementary evaluation tool [Online] Available at http://avetra.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/30.00.pdf Dart, J. J. Davies R.J. 2003, A dialogical story-based evaluation tool: the most significant change t echnique, American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 24 no.2 pp.137-55 De Groot,.W. T, Toornstra, F. H. Tarla, F. N. 2001, Storytelling for Participatory Rural Appraisal [Online] Available at planotes.org/documents/plan_02309.PDF Davies, R. Dart, J. 2005, The ‘Most Significant Change (MSC) technique: A guide to its use [Online] Available at: http://mande.co.uk/docs/MSCGuide.pdf. Estrella, M. et al.2008, Learning from change: Issues and experiences in participatory and evaluation, Southampton, Intermediate Technology Publication Ltd. IOD PARC. 2010, Most Significant Change in practice [Online] Available at iodparc.com/resource/msc.html Kotvojs, F. n.d. MSC: Misconceptions, strengths and challenges [Online] Available at aes.asn.au/conferences/2009/Papers/Kotvojs,%20Fiona%20-%20MSC.pdf . Kumar, A Seth, M, n.d, â€Å"Stories of change for assessing programme impact: Most Significant Change (MSC) technique as a tool for monitoring and evaluation of development programmes† [Onli ne] Available at http://istr.conference-services.net/resources/588/1799/pdf/ISTR2010_0485.pdf Le Cornu, R., Peters, J. Foster, M. 2003, Exploring Perceptions of ‘Significant  Change’ in Reforming Schools [Online] Available at aare.edu.au/03pap/lec03358.pdf Lunch, C, 2007, The Most Significant Change: Using participatory video for monitoring  and evaluation[Online] Available at: http://insightshare.org/sites/default/files/The%20Most%20Significant%20Change%20using%20PV%20for%20ME.pdf . Mcdonald, D., Bammer, G., Deane, P. (2009).Research integration using dialogue methods, Acton, ANU E Press. Mikkelsen, B. 2007, Methods for Development Work and Research. New Delhi: Sage. Moore, A. Offer, L. n.d, Assessing changes in social capacity: experience with the ‘Most Significant Change’ technique, Extension Farming Systems Journal, vol. 5 No.1, pp.113-118. Outreach Evaluation Resource Center. 2009, Handout Five Qualitative Interviewing â€Å"Story† Metho ds  http://nnlm.gov/pnr/training/data_collection/DC_Handout5_story_tech.pdf Ramalingam, B. 2006. Tools for knowledge and learning: A Guide for development and  humanitarian organisations [Online] Available at odi.org.uk/resources/download/153.pdf Serrat, O. 2009, The Most significant change technique [Online] Available at adb.org/Documents/Information/Knowledge-Solutions/Most-Significant-Change.pdf . Scott, S. Proescholdbell, S. 2005. Structured Storytelling Method communityresearchworks.com/Toolbox/ParticipatoryEvaluation/NC_Storytelling_Method.pdf. Willetts, J. Crawford, P. 2007. The most significant lessons about the Most Significant Change technique, Development in Practice, Vol. 17, no. 3, pp.367-379

pseudonym - definition and examples in English

pseudonym - definition and examples in English Definition A pseudonym  (also called a pen name) is a fictitious name assumed by an individual to conceal his or her identity. Adjective: pseudonymous. Writers who use pseudonyms do so for a variety of reasons. For instance, J.K. Rowling, renowned author of the Harry Potter novels, published her first crime novel (The Cuckoos Calling, 2013) under the  pseudonym Robert Galbraith. It has been wonderful to  publish without hype or  expectation, Rowling said when her identify was revealed. American author Joyce Carol Oates (who has also published novels under the pseudonyms Rosamond Smith and Lauren Kelly) notes that theres something wonderfully liberating, even childlike, about a pen-name: a fictitious name given to the instrument with which you write, and not attached to you (The Faith of a Writer, 2003). See Examples and Observations below. Also see: AllonymName That -nymNicknameProper Name EtymologyFrom the Greek, false name   Examples and Observations Imprisoned for political offenses under Louis XV, Francois Marie Arouet changed his name to Voltaire in order to make a fresh start as a writer. The Rev. C. L. Dodgson used the pseudonym Lewis Carroll because he thought it beneath the dignity of a clergyman and a mathematician to write a book like Alice in Wonderland. Mary Ann Evans (George Eliot) and Lucile-Aurore Dupin (George Sand) used mens names because they felt women authors were discriminated against in the 19th century.(Fool-the-Squares. Time, December 15, 1967)Gender and PseudonymsPublishing under male and a-gendered  pseudonyms  was one way in which women writers made their work public, defied social convention, yet also became honorary men in their own day. The Brontà «Ã‚  sisters, George Eliot and even Louisa May Alcott published under pseudonyms. . . . [S]ubmitting work for publication under male or ambiguously gendered pseudonyms afforded  the anonymity necessary to have work judged by its literary merit, rather than on grounds of  gender  difference.(Lizbeth Goodman, with Kasia Boddy and Elaine Showalter, Prose Fiction, Form and Gender.  Literature and Gender, ed. by  Lizbeth Goodman. Routledge, 1996) Alan SmitheeAlan Smithee is probably the most famous pseudonym, invented by the Directors Guild for directors who are so unsatisfied with a studio or producers meddling with their film that they dont think it reflects their creative vision anymore. The first movie to use it was Death of a Gunfighter in 1969, and it has since been used dozens of times.(Gabriel Snyder, Whats in a Name? Slate, January 2, 2007)Pseudonyms of Stephen King and Ian RankinThe hyper-fecund Stephen King wrote as Richard Bachman . . . (until he killed Bachman off, citing cancer of the pseudo-nym as the cause of death). Ian Rankin found himself in a similar spot in the early 1990s, when he was bursting with ideas, but with a publisher wary of putting out more than one book a year. Along came Jack Harveynamed for Jack, Rankins first son, and Harvey, his wifes maiden name.(Jonathan Freedland, Whats in a Pseudonym? The Guardian, March 29, 2006)Pseudonyms and PersonaeA writer may sometimes assume a persona, not simpl y a different name, and publish a work under the guise of that persona. Washington Irving thus took on the character of a Dutch author named Diedrich Knickerbocker for his famous History of New York, while Jonathan Swift published Gullivers Travels as if he actually was Lemuel Gulliver, and described himself in the novels full title as first a Surgeon, and then a Captain of several Ships. The original edition even had a portrait of the fictional author, aged 58.(Adrian Room, Dictionary of Pseudonyms: 13,000 Assumed Names and Their Origins. McFarland, 2010) bell hooks, Pseudonym of American Author Gloria Jean WatkinsOne of the many reasons I chose to write using the pseudonym bell hooks, a family name (mother to Sarah Oldham, great-grandmother to me), was to construct a writer-identity that would challenge and subdue all impulses leading me away from speech into silence. I was a young girl buying bubble gum at the corner store when I first really heard the full name bell hooks. I had just talked back to a grown person. Even now I can recall the surprised look, the mocking tones that informed me I must be kin to bell hooksa sharp-tongued woman, a woman who spoke her mind, a woman who was not afraid to talk back. I claimed this legacy of defiance, of will, of courage, affirming my link to female ancestors who were bold and daring in their speech. Unlike my bold and daring mother and grandmother, who were not supportive of talking back, even though they were assertive and powerful in their speech, bell hooks as I discovered, claimed, and i nvented her was my ally, my support.(bell hooks, Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black. South End Press, 1989) Pronunciation: SOOD-eh-nim