Understanding Theory Usage in Reports: Critical Considerations - Free Report Example

Supporting theory can be used in this report, and the critical issues to consider include having a better understanding of the theory to be used. Additionally, the theory should remain relevant to the matter under study and the way that it will be used to inform research. A theory can be utilized to support the study being done by trying to find a relationship between various components. There are instances in which more than one theory can be used by they must confer value when compared to the utilization of a single theory.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

When using the supporting theory, it is essential to consider their assumptions and discourse to avoid the clash of concepts. In this analysis, the focus is on the way that the evaluation plan would help in making an analysis of the merits and demerits of the random sampling process when utilized to cover a whole population in an entity (Mastenbroek et al., 2016). There will be a determination of whether students require IEP. When applying supporting theory to this research topic, the theory discourse should be considered.

The impact of the standard form of measurement is that the outcome is easily comparable to past studies on the same topic. However, when alternative strategies are utilized, it becomes challenging to compare the current results to the previous studies for the forms of measurement used are not the same. Therefore, there is a high chance that mistakes will be made, which will lead to the formation of the wrong conclusions when relying on the output of the alternative measurement forms. For example, the evaluation technique used in this study is the planned evaluation approach, and if this is the program used in previous studies, it will be easier to compare the current results with what other researchers got.

The reasons why there will be a meta-evaluation of the evaluation project is to ensure that there is an aggregation of findings and there is structured external feedback on the quality of reports by relying on the evaluation standards of accuracy, fairness, and feasibility. The meta-evaluation program will also seek to improve the processes and information offered by the various parties involved in this study. Additionally, the procedure will also be applied in the documentation of the reoccurring recommendations and evaluation findings. The evaluation of quality controls is essential for it helps to raise credibility and help to manage the business of an evaluator.

The evaluation function should be audited. Some of the procedures followed when undertaking the meta-evaluation process include the summative process. It is undertaken when there is a need to have a recapitulation of the entire evaluation process. A formative process makes changes to the evaluation study, which happens at the implementation stage. When this procedure is used, it becomes possible to improve the implementation and evaluation design.

The roles that should be taken by those conducting the meta-evaluation should include determining whether the results of the evaluation process are accurate and of the desired quality levels. Additionally, they should also determine the quality of the overall evaluation process quality. They should adopt the capacity development strategy that will be used in the evaluation process, helping to improve the quality of the overall process. They have a study to update the support materials and take responsibility for the coordination of the quality assurance of the procedures being used in the evaluation process.

Another role that should be adopted by those involved in the meta-evaluation includes the establishment of mechanisms and processes that will be geared toward the generation of strategic findings. The consolidation of processes can be realized through a reduction in the number of evaluations being done and centralizing them to a level minimum. The evaluation program is wide, and a lot of activities are involved when undertaking this evaluation process (Samson & Solabarrieta, 2018). Data will be collected, analysed, and the details obtained will be reviewed for conclusions to be raised.

When undertaking the meta-evaluation process, it is essential to have an element that is the central focus, which will help in analyzing the matter under consideration. There is a need to implement new policies that will help make the evaluation process effective and ensure that the latest changes in the meta-evaluation processes are adopted. When assuming these roles, they will manage to understand the previous performance of the evaluation (Gallant & Luthy, 2020).

Additionally, it will manage to handle the issues likely to arise at the time of data collection and when communicating with the personnel involved in the study process. There is a possibility that if data is not collected in the right way, the evaluation process will not be effective, and it will lead to the formation of wrong conclusions. At the same time, the data is obtained from respondents, and if the right tools for communication are not adopted, there is a possibility that the meta-evaluation will not derive the desired objectives.

Conclusion

In conclusion, supporting theory can be used in this evaluation though it is essential to ensure that there is a relationship between the theory and matters under consideration. More than one theory can be used though it is critical to ensure that all measures are taken to avoid confusion that can be raised by the assumptions of each theory utilized. The form of measurement used should be consistent, for this will help in making a comparison. The standard procedures are the best to use, for they will enable any reader of the evaluation mechanism to have a platform upon which they can compare the current outcome with the results obtained by other researchers on the same topic.

References

Gallant, D. J., & Luthy, N. (2020). Mixed Methods Research in Designing an Instrument for Consumer-Oriented Evaluation. Journal of Multidisciplinary Evaluation, 16(34), 21-43. https://doi.org/10.1108/BFJ-08-2018-0526

Mastenbroek, E., van Voorst, S., & Meuwese, A. (2016). Closing the regulatory cycle? A meta-evaluation of ex-post legislative evaluations by the European Commission. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(9), 1329-1348. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2015.1076874

Samson, B., & Solabarrieta, J. (2018). Improving the evaluation of students: a meta-evaluation study on cce from the perspective of students evaluation standards. MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends and Practices, 8(2). http://www.mierjs.in/ojs/index.php/mjestp/article/view/183