Syndicate content

Add new comment

Hi Raul, Thanks for your comments. One of the of the great difficulties in impact evaluations of ICT use in education is that there are just so many variables at hand. How do you disentangle the "ICT" input from all of the rest? Randomization is one way to attempt to do this -- but it can be quite difficult (and costly) to do well. Given this complexity and expense, is this worth doing? I do agree that some of us -- perhaps -- put disproportionate rhetorical stress on impact evaluation. For me at least, this is because I see so little impetus to critically examine what we are doing in this area. Randomization may indeed be the 'gold standard' (although some people dispute this), but even adopting a 'bronze standard' would help us move forward quite a bit. Some groups see a commitment to funding rigorous impact evaluations as a useful tool to compel critical examinations of process/implementation issues. (Please note that I am using the word 'critical' here not in any pejorative sense -- I am talking about looking at things with a dispassionate, scientific eye, not a negative one.) Whatever the case, more transparency about intentions, process *and* impact -- and less marketing -- would certainly help all of us as we help make investment decisions related to ICT use in education. The 'Lessons Learned' series that UNESCO-Bangkok put out a few years ago was a useful attempt to synthesize findings from some of the on-going formative evaluation work that went on in Southeast Asia. http://www.unescobkk.org/education/ict/online-resources/e-library/ Let's hope we see more of this type of work as well! -Mike