1. Application of Logic Modeling Processes to Explore Theory of Change from Diverse Cultural Perspectives
Ricardo Millett, Sharon Dodson, & Cynthia Phillips
American Evaluation Association
November 4, 2000

2. Whose Logic Model …and for Whom?
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

3. Logic Models Are Subjective
“Since the measuring device has been constructed by the observer..we have to remember that what we observe is not nature itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning” Heisenberg
“We see things not as they are, but as we are….” Anais Nin
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

4. Common Issues Encountered
“too linear…”
“too limited…”
“…constraining”
“doesn’t capture complexity…”
“…nuances are lost”
“too graphic…”
“needs more specific details…”
“…connections are not clear enough…”
“not evaluable…”
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

5. American Evaluation Association
Reflection Activity 1
What are some of the distinguishing characteristics of each model?
Strengths, limitations?
Utility?
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

6. American Evaluation Association
Model 1
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

7. American Evaluation Association
Model 2
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

8. American Evaluation Association
Model 3
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

9. American Evaluation Association
Model 4
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

10. Ways of Showing—Logic Models
Causal
(Attribution)
Non-Causal
(Contribution)
Linear
(Synchrony)
MODEL 1
theory testing
MODEL 2
idea mapping
Non-linear (Asynchrony)
MODEL 3
MODEL 4
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

11. Epistemic Style (Draze, 2000)
Metaphoric
Eclectic
Rational
Theory of Action
Change Agent
Facilitator
Educator
Attitude Toward Data
Intuitive,
sense making,
ambiguous
Pattern depends on situation and context
Logical, precise, analytic
Evaluation Focus
Process
Process and outcomes
Outcomes
Theory and Practice
Theory generating
Theory mapping
Theory testing
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

12. Ways of Knowing--Epistemology
Causal
(Attribution)
Non-Causal
(Contribution)
Linear
(Synchrony)
MODEL 1
MODEL 2
Non-linear (Asynchrony)
MODEL 3
MODEL 4
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association

13. Conclusion--Locus for Growth
November 4, 2000
Conclusion--Locus for Growth
If the audiences of evaluation were more consistently understood and the range of assumptions respected would interpretation and use of logic models change?
The key is to be conscious of our theories in use and be aware of how they are influencing our observations of the world.
November 4, 2000
American Evaluation Association
Millett, Dodson, & Phillips--American Evaluation Association