Cancelled SUMMER 22: Systematic Approaches to Evaluation: Theory and Practice

Course content

The purpose of this course is to enable the participants to design and carryout five of the most common approaches to the evaluation of programs and policies: (1) needs assessment; (2) evaluation of program theory and design; (3) evaluation of program process and implementation; (4) measuring and monitoring program outcomes; and (5) impact evaluation.  For each of 

the five approaches, the course participants will learn the benefits of the approach, the appropriate methods, and the complexities associated with it.

Prior to delving into the five approaches, key concepts needed for designing and carrying out evaluations will be introduced and discussed, including social betterment, evaluation influence, stakeholder involvement, and intellectual property rights. 

The participants. 


Summerschool 2022

Learning outcome


The participants will learn the theoretical constructs that underlie evaluation and the activities involved in undertaking each approach to evaluation.


Participants will develop the skills required to ascertain the approach to evaluation most likely to be influential within the program context; how to plan an evaluation; and the basic methodological skills needed to conduct an evaluation and communicate its findings.  In additon, participants will gain skills for developing and applying appropriate criteria for making judgments about the program.


Participants will acquire basic competencies needed to plan and conduct an evaluation of programs and policies in governmental and non-governmetal settings..

Most classes will include a lecture section and a discussion section in which students respond to questions posed by the instructor and other students. The students will be exposed to evaluations conducted in Denmark, in USA and by the European Union to begin to understand the contextual differences in the questions asked and the approaches to evaluation most likely to be chosen.

Preliminary literature:


Peter Rossi, Mark Lipsey and Gary Henry: Evaluation. A Systematic Approach. 8th edition. Sage.


Stephen S Lim, Lalit Dandona, Joseph A Hoisington, Spencer L James, Margaret C Hogan, & Emmanuela Gakidou (2010) “India’s Janani Suraksha Yojana, a conditional cash transfer programme to increase births in health facilities: an impact evaluation.” Lancet 375: 2009–23.


Van Der Wees, P.J., Zaslavsky, A.M. & Ayanian, J.Z. (2013) ”Improvements in Health Status after Massachusetts Health Care Reform” The Milbank Quarterly, Vol. 91, No. 4, 2013 (pp. 663–689).


Andersen, Simon Calmar, Humlum, Maria Knoth, & Nandrup, Anne Brink (2016) ”Increasing instruction time in school does increase learning” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences  113:27, 7481–7484.


Henry, Gary T. & Harbatkin, Erica (2020) “The Next Generation of State Reforms to Improve their Lowest Performing Schools: An Evaluation of North Carolina’s School Transformation Intervention” Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 13(4), 702-730.


Henry, Gary T., Pham, Lam, Kho, Adam, & Zimmer, Ron (2020) “Peeking into the Black Box of School Turnaround: A Formal Test of Mediators and Suppressors” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 42:2, 232-256.


Arrieta, A., Woods, J.R., Qiao, N., & Jay, S.J. (2014). Cost-benefit analysis of home blood pressure monitoring in hypertension diagnosis and treatment: An insurer perspective. Hypertension, 64(4), 891-896.


Blamey, A. A., Macmillan, F., Fitzsimons, C. F., Shaw, R., & Mutrie, N. (2013). Using programme theory to strengthen research protocol and intervention design within an RCT of a walking intervention. Evaluation, 19(1), 5-23.


Chow, M. Y., Li, M., & Quine, S. (2010). Client satisfaction and unmet needs assessment. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health, 24(2), 406-414.


Dahler-Larsen, P. (2017). Theory-based evaluation meets ambiguity. American Journal of Evaluation, 39(1), 6-23.


European Commission, Directorate-General for Regional Policy. (2014). Guidance document on monitoring and evaluation.


Harris, R., Van Dyke, E. R., Ton, T.G.N., Nass, C. A., & Buchwald, D. (2016). Assessing needs for cancer education and support in American Indian and Alaska Native communities in the northwestern United States. Health Promotion Practice, 17(6), 891-898.

Methodological skills equivalent to successful completion of the methodology courses at the bachelor program in political science.

Continuous feedback during the course of the semester
Feedback by final exam (In addition to the grade)
7,5 ECTS
Type of assessment
To follow
Marking scale
7-point grading scale
Censorship form
No external censorship
Criteria for exam assessment

Criteria for exam assesment

  • Grade 12 is given for an outstanding performance: the student lives up to the course's goal description in an independent and convincing manner with no or few and minor shortcomings
  • Grade 7 is given for a good performance: the student is confidently able to live up to the goal description, albeit with several shortcomings
  • Grade 02 is given for an adequate performance: the minimum acceptable performance in which the student is only able to live up to the goal description in an insecure and incomplete manner

Single subject courses (day)

  • Category
  • Hours
  • Class Instruction
  • 28
  • English
  • 28


Course number
7,5 ECTS
Programme level
Full Degree Master
Spring And Summer
Department of Political Science, Study Council
Contracting department
  • Department of Political Science
Contracting faculty
  • Faculty of Social Sciences
Course Coordinator
  • Peter Dahler-Larsen   (3-786c7448716e7b36737d366c73)
Saved on the 11-01-2022

Are you BA- or KA-student?

Are you bachelor- or kandidat-student, then find the course in the course catalog for students:

Courseinformation of students