Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization - Assignment Example

Planning and Evaluation Name Course Name and Code Instructor’s Name Date Introduction This evaluation assignment entails an evaluation is the sector of disability in China using two forms namely the proactive and interactive forms. Judith & John (1999) has reviewed five categories that that evaluative enquiry can be classified into impact, monitoring, proactive, clarificative and interactive forms. It should be noted that evaluation covers a wide range of activities. There are a lot of issues that are going on as far as disability is concerned even in the learning institutions is concerned, one of the major concerns being discrimination of the disabled (Michaels &Duncan, 2010). The two forms will be sued in evaluation of the actions taken in relation to disability issue of discrimination in prioritization of their needs (Mark, 1999). China is one of the main countries with so many disabled people in its huge population hence need for prioritization of their needs for the purposes of equality. Overview of the first form The first form of choice is the proactive which is the form A. This is whereby the evaluation takes place way before the designing of the programs (Mark, 1999). This enables the programmers to get enough evidence to be able to make decisions concerning the type of program necessary for the situation at hand (Michaels &Duncan, 2010). The main aim of this evaluation is provide empirical inputs on how best the program can be developed in the advanced stage of planning (John, 1999). This kind of evaluation accord the evaluator the mandate of advisory to give evidence on the issues that entail development of policies , the format of the needed program, the way an organization can be changed to improve its effectiveness and efficacy (Judith & John, 1999). It provides the leaders with timely advice necessary for making decisions that will affect the future as well as survival of a particular organization. The evaluator is involved in determining the following issues with reference to disability (Armstrong, 2009): The need for the program to be developed What details are available about the problem needed to be addresses The best recognized practice in that area The attempts early done to solve the problem What the conventional wisdom and relevant research reveals about the problem What is already known about the problem that program will address What can be retrieved from external sources to support the program or policy in existence This form is bests for the topic chosen because of its two consistence approached namely (Michaels &Duncan, 2010) A. Analysis or assessment of the needs: it entails development of the program using a variety of analytical methods like interviews and documentation together with the stakeholder and other program staff. Their main aim is to come up with a map for the program (Glynis & Lynne, 1995). The processes used for the development of the program are called program logic development. B. Accreditation. This is the process that entails determining the worth of the guidelines of the programs for the purpose of determining whether the organization can deliver that program by the specified period of time (Judith & John, 1999). It deals with the designs of the program rather than the process of implementation. This is mainly applied to programs that are funded by the public for the purpose of giving the public confidence that the programs are being delivered (Mark, 1999). Overview of the second form The second form is the interactive evaluation which is the form C. it provides information that concerns implementation or delivery of a particular program (Mark, 1999). It can also be concerned with the issues of incremental implementation or documentation of some innovation or even establishment of whatever is happening to enable the staff understand better why and how a program works in a certain way (Judith & John, 1999). It is the duty of the evaluator to provide the findings as well as facilitate decision making (Michaels &Duncan, 2010). It is very useful and applicable in the programs that are evolving and are easily changing. The main aim of the evaluator is to provide information that is useful in improving that program (David, 2005). This is applicable when mostly the evaluator is an insider hence facilitating change. The finding is mainly directed to managers that are in the level of the middle as well as the implementers responsible for the process of delivering the program at the local level (Judith & John, 1999). This is fit for the situation because the evaluator in concerned with What the program is aimed at achieving How the serving is ongoing Whether the delivery is working If there is a consistence with the plan of the program The changes that can be made to make the program more effective and efficient The changes that can be made in the organization to make more efficient and effective. It is also very appropriate because of the approaches that are involved in its implementation namely (Michaels &Duncan, 2010); A. Responsive evaluation: it involves much of illumination and documentation of the program delivery. It takes into account the stakeholders and the audiences requirements especially the program providers. B. Action research: it entails the determination of the difference made by the innovatory approaches. C. Quality review: This is also institutional kind of study. which entails the provision of guideline by the evaluator for the purpose of control (Judith & John, 1999) Developmental evaluation: this entails the process of working very closely with providers of the programs for the purpose of continuous process of improvement (Michaels &Duncan, 2010). This will apply in this kind of sector because there is great need for innovation (Mark, 1999) D. Empowerment evaluation: this entails assistance given to the participant and program providers for the purpose of evaluating their own programs which is a way of giving the participants control over their life (Mark, 1999). In this case the disabled and the program implementers are empowered. Analysis The sector is disability entails several issues. The issue of discriminations is very important. This is whereby in China the disabled are being discriminated in the process of employment opportunities (Judith & John, 1999). China is a super power country and a giant as far as the issue of industrialization I concerned. This means that most of the available jobs are in the industries where the disabled are deemed not a fit to work (Michaels &Duncan, 2010). There is also the aspect of gender equality within the disabled whereby the females are even further discriminated on the basis of strength. In addition the issue of disability is very dominant in schools whereby most o the schools are not willing to admit a student because they are disabled in one way or another (Judith & John, 1999). The problem analysis The above diagram shows the problems that need to be solved by a program and projects. There are cases whereby a program and projects in the program can not function well unless under a cover of a certain policy (Judith & John, 1999). In this case the policy about the discrimination against the disabled will be applicable The chart above show the problem that needs to be solved, the policy to be put in place , the programs to be used and the projects to be implemented for solving the problem. for the success of the program as well as the projects, evaluation is very important. This means that some issues must be critically looked into which are as follows (Michaels &Duncan, 2010). A. Time factor: the time that is allocated for the project to be put in place must be evaluated. This is to ensure that all the goals and objects targeted by the project are time bound B. Empowerment of the program implementers and the participants: This is whereby the managers o organizations or the companies that are taking part in employing the disabled are motivated by the government either by financing some of the projects that the disabled people are being absorbed in (Judith & John, 1999). also the learning institutions that are admitting the disabled students are motivated by donating learning materials as well as financing the process of learning. The participants who in this case are the disabled can be empowered by ensuring at work place they are given a higher salary than the other employees to encourage the rest to join the working force, The students that are disabled can also be empowered by receiving scholarships to join the schools as well as by ensuring they are comfortable in schools. C. Standard indicators: every evaluation process must have some indicator to check the compliance as well as the level of success or efficiency delivered by the program or the projects in question (Judith & John, 1999). This case, the indicator can be the number of disabled students joining school as well as the number of disabled people applying for the jobs and getting absorbed. Also their performance in the work place and school can be checked against the normal students and people to give a comparison D. Consistency of the plans: both in the work places and the schools, the evaluation must be able to determine in the assessment the level of consistency in the process of implementation. E. The changes that can be made: the evaluator must be in a position to determine the changes or additions that can be added to make the programs and projects more successful. This means that incase one of the projects are not fruitful, and then suggestions must be provided by the evaluations or the assessment done on the program and projects. Reference Amstrong, M. (2009). Amstrong’s handbook of human resource management practice. London: Kogan Page Publishers. David, M. (2005). Empowerment evaluation principles in practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Glynis, M & Lynne M. (1995). Basic evaluation methods: analyzing performance, practice and procedure. California: Cengage Learning. John, M. (1999). Program evaluation: forms and approaches. London: Thomson. Judith, W. & John, C. (1999). A handbook of techniques for formative evaluation: mapping the student’s learning experience. New York: John Wiley & sons. Mark E. (1999). Organizational learning and the learning organization. London: Kogan Page Publishers. Michaels, A. & Duncan, B. (2010). Evidence based reward management: creating measuring. business impact from your pay and reward practices. California: Cengage Learning EMEA. Read More