MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366384503 · doi:10.3138/cjpe.0025.012

Management Challenges in M&E: Thoughts from South Africa

2011· article· en· W4366384503 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Indran A. Naidoo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLand Rights and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeSet (abstract data type)PoliticsKey (lock)Government (linguistics)Political scienceUnit (ring theory)Public relationsEnvironmental resource managementSociologyEconomic growthProcess managementBusinessPsychologyComputer scienceEconomicsMathematics educationComputer securityLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: This impressionistic narrative focuses on experiences in setting up South Africa’s first government monitoring and evaluation (M&E) unit. The high political expectations for the program required that M&E provide a progress overview and diagnosis of the ambitious land reform program. Key contextual factors that influence success and that may pose challenges are considered in this account, which shows both how strategies had to be changed to address varied demands and the mixed results these produced. Based on the practical experiences, a set of suggestions are provided to emerging evaluators as they sharpen their evaluation acumen.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.272
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.017 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Program EvaluationSame topicLand Rights and ReformsFrench-language works237,207