IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v259y2017i2p626-641.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A utilisation focussed and viable systems approach for evaluating technology supported learning

Author

Listed:
  • Hart, Diane
  • Paucar-Caceres, Alberto

Abstract

The paper uses a higher education case study to illustrate a participative theory of change approach to evaluating technology supported learning. The approach is informed by the Viable Systems Model (VSM) and utilisation-focussed evaluation and, falls within the tradition of facilitated modelling approaches to operational research. We argue that this approach worked well in engaging primary evaluation users in a process of collaborative action research to improving an educational development initiative and that the approach helped generate information relevant to answering its primary users’ questions, to inform their specific decisions and actions relevant to their quality enhancement responsibilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Hart, Diane & Paucar-Caceres, Alberto, 2017. "A utilisation focussed and viable systems approach for evaluating technology supported learning," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 259(2), pages 626-641.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:259:y:2017:i:2:p:626-641
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2016.10.056
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221716309067
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.10.056?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Leighton Vaughan Williams, 2007. "Introduction to the First Issue from the Editor," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 1(1), pages 1-1, February.
    2. Ali Azadeh & Kosar Darivandi & Ehsan Fathi, 2012. "Diagnosing, Simulating and Improving Business Process Using Cybernetic Laws and the Viable System Model: The Case of a Purchasing Process," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 66-86, January.
    3. ., 2007. "Introduction and overview," Chapters, in: International Economic Law and the Digital Divide, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Espinosa, Angela & Walker, J., 2013. "Complexity management in practice: A Viable System Model intervention in an Irish eco-community," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 225(1), pages 118-129.
    5. Murray Saunders & Bernadette Charlier & Joël Bonamy, 2005. "Using evaluation to create "provisional stabilities": bridging innovation in Higher Education change process," Post-Print halshs-00155131, HAL.
    6. Carol H. Weiss, 1997. "How Can Theory-Based Evaluation Make Greater Headway?," Evaluation Review, , vol. 21(4), pages 501-524, August.
    7. Preece, Gary & Shaw, Duncan & Hayashi, Haruo, 2013. "Using the Viable System Model (VSM) to structure information processing complexity in disaster response," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 224(1), pages 209-218.
    8. Espinosa, Angela & Reficco, Ezequiel & Martínez, Andrea & Guzmán, David, 2015. "A methodology for supporting strategy implementation based on the VSM: A case study in a Latin-American multi-national," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 202-212.
    9. Franco, L. Alberto & Montibeller, Gilberto, 2010. "Facilitated modelling in operational research," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 205(3), pages 489-500, September.
    10. Julian, David A. & Jones, Ann & Deyo, Diana, 1995. "Open systems evaluation and the logic model: Program planning and evaluation tools," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 333-341.
    11. Ian Thynne & Burns, 2007. "Editorial Introduction," Asia Pacific Journal of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 1-2, June.
    12. Preece, Gary & Shaw, Duncan & Hayashi, Haruo, 2015. "Application of the Viable System Model to analyse communications structures: A case study of disaster response in Japan," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 243(1), pages 312-322.
    13. Ackermann, Fran, 2012. "Problem structuring methods ‘in the Dock’: Arguing the case for Soft OR," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 219(3), pages 652-658.
    14. Espinosa, A. & Harnden, R. & Walker, J., 2008. "A complexity approach to sustainability - Stafford Beer revisited," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(2), pages 636-651, June.
    15. Ulrich, Werner, 1987. "Critical heuristics of social systems design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 276-283, September.
    16. J Brocklesby, 2012. "Using the Viable Systems Model to examine multi-agency arrangements for combatting transnational organised crime," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 63(3), pages 418-430, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zeinab Rezaee & Adel Azar & Abbas Moghbel Ba Erz & Mahmoud Dehghan Nayeri, 2019. "Application of Viable System Model in Diagnosis of Organizational Structure," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 273-295, June.
    2. Juliana Mariano Alves & Waldecy Rodrigues & Fernán Enrique Vergara & Fred Newton Souza & Leonardo Augusto Amaral Terra, 2021. "From the black box to the fish farming development policy project: A diagnosis from the viable system model," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(4), pages 459-472, August.
    3. Sahar Saeed Rezk & Shahinaz Gamal, 2020. "An Organizational Cybernetics Framework for Designing a Viable Higher Education System," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(6), pages 703-724, December.
    4. Julio César Puche-Regaliza & Alfredo Jiménez & Pablo Arranz-Val, 2020. "Diagnosis of Software Projects Based on the Viable System Model," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 215-236, April.
    5. Daniel Ebakoleaneh Ufua, 2020. "Exploring the Effectiveness of Boundary Critique in an Intervention: a Case in the Niger Delta Region, Nigeria," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 485-499, October.
    6. Lowe, David & Espinosa, Angela & Yearworth, Mike, 2020. "Constitutive rules for guiding the use of the viable system model: Reflections on practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1014-1035.
    7. Diane Hart, 2021. "Conceptualizing the systemic evaluation of dashboards in quality enhancement processes in higher education," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 817-832, November.
    8. Luis Arturo Pinzon‐Salcedo & María Alejandra Torres‐Cuello, 2022. "Systems thinking concepts within a collaborative programme evaluation methodology: The Hermes Programme evaluation," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(4), pages 708-722, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lowe, David & Espinosa, Angela & Yearworth, Mike, 2020. "Constitutive rules for guiding the use of the viable system model: Reflections on practice," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(3), pages 1014-1035.
    2. Elena Tavella & L. Alberto Franco, 2015. "Dynamics of Group Knowledge Production in Facilitated Modelling Workshops: An Exploratory Study," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 451-475, May.
    3. David Lowe & Louise Martingale & Mike Yearworth, 2016. "Guiding interventions in a multi-organisational context: combining the Viable System Model and Hierarchical Process Modelling for use as a Problem Structuring Method," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 67(12), pages 1481-1495, December.
    4. Diane Hart, 2021. "Conceptualizing the systemic evaluation of dashboards in quality enhancement processes in higher education," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 817-832, November.
    5. Sydelko, Pamela & Espinosa, Angela & Midgley, Gerald, 2024. "Designing interagency responses to wicked problems: A viable system model board game," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 312(2), pages 746-764.
    6. Amin Vahidi & Alireza Aliahmad & Ebrahim Teimouri, 2019. "Evolution of Management Cybernetics and Viable System Model," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 297-314, June.
    7. Tavella, Elena & Papadopoulos, Thanos, 2017. "Applying OR to problem situations within community organisations: A case in a Danish non-profit, member-driven food cooperative," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 258(2), pages 726-742.
    8. Maren Berge Vik & Hanne Finnestrand & Robert L. Flood, 2022. "Systemic Problem Structuring in a Complex Hospital Environment using Viable System Diagnosis – Keeping the Blood Flowing," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 203-226, April.
    9. Smith, Chris M. & Shaw, Duncan, 2019. "The characteristics of problem structuring methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 403-416.
    10. Harwood, Stephen A., 2019. "A question of interpretation: The Viable System Model (VSM)," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(3), pages 1198-1201.
    11. Fattoum, Ayham & Chari, Simos & Shaw, Duncan, 2024. "Configuring systems to be viable in a crisis: The role of intuitive decision-making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 317(1), pages 205-218.
    12. Julio César Puche-Regaliza & Alfredo Jiménez & Pablo Arranz-Val, 2020. "Diagnosis of Software Projects Based on the Viable System Model," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 215-236, April.
    13. Espinosa, Angela & Walker, J., 2013. "Complexity management in practice: A Viable System Model intervention in an Irish eco-community," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 225(1), pages 118-129.
    14. Espinosa, A. & Duque, C., 2018. "Complexity management and multi-scale governance: A case study in an Amazonian indigenous association," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 268(3), pages 1006-1020.
    15. Andrea C. Martinez‐Lozada & Angela Espinosa, 2022. "Corporate viability and sustainability: A case study in a Mexican corporation," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(1), pages 143-158, January.
    16. Espinosa, Angela & Reficco, Ezequiel & Martínez, Andrea & Guzmán, David, 2015. "A methodology for supporting strategy implementation based on the VSM: A case study in a Latin-American multi-national," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 240(1), pages 202-212.
    17. Amin Vahidi & Alireza Aliahmadi, 2019. "Describing the Necessity of Multi-Methodological Approach for Viable System Model: Case Study of Viable System Model and System Dynamics Multi-Methodology," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 13-37, February.
    18. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    19. van Antwerpen, Coen & Curtis, Neville J., 2016. "A data collection and presentation methodology for decision support: A case study of hand-held mine detection devices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(1), pages 237-251.
    20. Lami, Isabella M. & Tavella, Elena, 2019. "On the usefulness of soft OR models in decision making: A comparison of Problem Structuring Methods supported and self-organized workshops," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(3), pages 1020-1036.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:259:y:2017:i:2:p:626-641. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.