Within the context of program evaluation, different schools of thought or paradigms affect how evaluators do evaluation. In this post, we will look specifically at the postpositivist paradigm.
Postpositivism
The postpositivist paradigm grew out of the positivist paradigm. Both paradigms believe in using the scientific method to uncover laws of human behavior. There is also a focus on experiments whether they are true or quasi with the use of surveys and or observation. However, postpositivism will also take a mixed method (combining quantitative with qualitative) approach when it makes sense.
The main differences between positivism and postpositivism are the level of certainty and their contrasting positions on metaphysics. Positivists focus on absolute certainty of results while postpositivists are more focused on the probability of certainty. In addition, Positivists believe in one objective reality that is independent of the distant observer while postpositivists tend to have a more nuanced view of reality.
The typical academic research article follows the positivist/postpositivist paradigm. Such an article will contain a problem, purpose, hypotheses, methods, results, and conclusion. This structure is not unique to postpositivism, but it is important to note how ubiquitous this format is. The example above is primarily for quantitative research, but qualitative and mixed methods follow this format more loosely.
Within evaluation, postpositivism has influenced theory-based evaluation and program theory. Theory-based evaluation is focused on theories or ideas about what makes a great program, which are realized in the traits and tools used in the program.
Program theory is a closely related idea focused on the elements needed for achieving results and showing how these elements relate to each other. The natural outgrowth of this is the logic model which identifies what is needed (inputs) for the program, what will be done with these resources (output), and what is the impact of the use of these resources among stakeholders (outcomes). The logic model is the bedrock of program evaluation in many contexts such as within the government.
The reason for the success of the logic model is how incredibly structured and clear it is. Anybody can understand the results even if they may not be useful. In addition, the logic model was developed earlier than other approaches to program evaluation and it may be popular because it’s one of the first approaches most students learn in graduate school.
The emphasis on theory with postpositivism can often be at the expense of what is taking place in the actual world. While the use of theory is critical for grounding a study scientifically this can be alienating to the stakeholders who are tasked with using the results of a postpositivist program evaluation. As such, other schools of thought have looked to address this.
Conclusion
Postpositivism is one of many ways to view program evaluation. The steps are highly clear and sequential, and generally, everybody knows what to do. However, the appearance of clarity does not imply that it exists. Other paradigms have challenged the usefulness of the results of a program evaluation inspired by postpositivism.