Descriptive model of evaluation is a framework used to describe and understand the various

components, processes, and dimensions involved in evaluation activities. Unlike prescriptive

models that offer specific guidelines or steps to follow, descriptive models provide a conceptual
overview of evaluation practices without necessarily prescribing a singular methodology.
key features and components of a descriptive model of evaluation:
1. Contextual Understanding: Evaluation begins with understanding the context in which
the program or intervention operates. This includes identifying the stakeholders,
understanding the goals and objectives of the program, and recognizing the broader
socio-political, economic, and cultural factors that may influence the evaluation process.
An example of a descriptive evaluation could be the assessment of a community-based health
education program aimed at promoting healthy eating habits among children in a particular
neighborhood. Here's how the descriptive evaluation might unfold:
 The evaluators would begin by understanding the socio-economic context of the
community, including factors such as access to healthy food options, cultural dietary
practices, and existing health education initiatives.
2. Clarification of Purpose: Clearly defining the purpose and scope of the evaluation is
essential. This involves identifying the questions the evaluation seeks to answer,
determining the intended use of the evaluation findings, and establishing criteria for
success.
 The purpose of the evaluation would be clearly defined, such as assessing the
effectiveness of the health education program in increasing children's knowledge of
nutrition, influencing their food choices, and improving overall health outcomes.
3. Selection of Evaluation Criteria: Identifying the criteria against which the program will
be evaluated is a crucial step. These criteria should be relevant, measurable, and aligned
with the goals and objectives of the program.
 Evaluation criteria might include changes in children's knowledge about nutrition,
changes in dietary habits, increased consumption of fruits and vegetables, and any
observable changes in health indicators such as body mass index (BMI) or energy levels.
4. Data Collection Methods: Descriptive models acknowledge the variety of methods
available for collecting evaluation data, including qualitative and quantitative approaches.
Common data collection methods include surveys, interviews, focus groups,
observations, document analysis, and existing data review.
 Various data collection methods could be employed, such as pre- and post-program
surveys to assess changes in knowledge and attitudes, dietary diaries or food frequency
questionnaires to track dietary habits, observations of meal times or grocery shopping
behaviors, and interviews with program participants, parents, and program facilitators to
gather qualitative insights.
5. Data Analysis and Interpretation: Once data is collected, it needs to be analyzed and
interpreted to draw meaningful conclusions about the program's effectiveness, efficiency,
relevance, and sustainability. Data analysis may involve statistical techniques, qualitative
coding and thematic analysis, and triangulation of multiple data sources.
  Data collected from surveys, observations, and interviews would be analyzed using
appropriate quantitative and qualitative analysis techniques. For example, pre- and post-
test scores on nutrition knowledge assessments could be compared using statistical
analysis, while thematic analysis could be used to identify common themes and patterns
in qualitative data.
6. Reporting and Utilization of Findings: Descriptive models emphasize the importance of
clear and transparent reporting of evaluation findings. Reports should be tailored to the
needs of different stakeholders and should include recommendations for program
improvement based on the evaluation findings.
 The evaluation findings would be summarized in a report that outlines the program's
strengths, weaknesses, and areas for improvement. Recommendations for program
refinement or expansion may be included based on the evaluation findings. The report
would be shared with program stakeholders, including community members, program
funders, and health authorities, to inform decision-making and program planning.
7. Iterative Process: Evaluation is often an iterative process, meaning that it involves
ongoing reflection, adaptation, and refinement based on new insights and changing
circumstances. Descriptive models recognize that evaluations may need to be revisited
periodically to assess long-term impacts and address emerging issues.
 The evaluation process may inform ongoing program adaptations and improvements
based on feedback from participants and stakeholders. Periodic evaluations may be
conducted to track changes over time and assess the long-term impact of the program on
children's health outcomes.
8. Ethical Considerations: Ethical considerations are integral to the evaluation process. This
includes ensuring the confidentiality and anonymity of participants, obtaining informed
consent, minimizing potential harm, and promoting transparency and accountability.
 Throughout the evaluation process, ethical considerations such as informed consent,
participant confidentiality, and respect for cultural norms would be upheld to ensure the
well-being and rights of program participants and stakeholders.
In summary, a descriptive model of evaluation provides a conceptual framework for
understanding the key components and processes involved in evaluation activities, while
allowing flexibility in the selection of methods and approaches based on the specific context and
needs of the evaluation.
Patton's qualitative evaluation model, developed by Michael Quinn Patton, is a comprehensive
framework for conducting qualitative evaluations. This model is widely used in various fields
such as social sciences, education, public health, and program evaluation. Patton's model
emphasizes the importance of understanding the context, perspectives, and experiences of
individuals involved in a program or intervention.
The key components of Patton's qualitative evaluation model include:
Context Evaluation: Understanding the broader context in which the program operates, including
socio-cultural, political, economic, and environmental factors. Context evaluation helps
evaluators understand how these factors influence program implementation and outcomes.
Input Evaluation: Examining the resources, inputs, and activities involved in the program. This
includes understanding the program's design, resources, staffing, and infrastructure.
Process Evaluation: Focusing on how the program is implemented and delivered. Process
evaluation involves assessing the quality of program delivery, adherence to protocols, participant
engagement, and any challenges encountered during implementation.
Output Evaluation: Assessing the immediate outputs and outcomes of the program. This may
include changes in knowledge, attitudes, behavior, or practices among program participants.
Outcome Evaluation: Examining the broader outcomes and impacts of the program. Outcome
evaluation involves assessing the program's effectiveness in achieving its intended goals and
objectives, as well as any unintended consequences.
Impact Evaluation: Assessing the long-term impacts and sustainability of the program. Impact
evaluation involves examining the lasting effects of the program on individuals, communities,
systems, and environments.
Patton's qualitative evaluation model emphasizes the use of qualitative methods such as
interviews, focus groups, observations, document analysis, and case studies to gather rich, in-
depth data. It also highlights the importance of participatory approaches, stakeholder
engagement, and cultural sensitivity in the evaluation process.
Overall, Patton's qualitative evaluation model provides a systematic framework for conducting
rigorous and comprehensive evaluations of programs and interventions, with a focus on
understanding the complexities and nuances of real-world settings.
The Stake Responsive Evaluation Model, developed by Robert Stake, is a framework for
conducting evaluations that emphasizes responsiveness to the unique needs, values, and contexts
of stakeholders involved in a program or intervention. Stake is a prominent figure in the field of
evaluation and has contributed significantly to the development of qualitative and responsive
evaluation approaches.
Key features of the Stake Responsive Evaluation Model include:
Qualitative Emphasis: The model emphasizes the use of qualitative methods such as interviews,
observations, focus groups, and document analysis to gather rich, in-depth data about the
program or intervention being evaluated.
Stakeholder Engagement: Stakeholders are actively involved in the evaluation process from the
outset. Their perspectives, priorities, and concerns are considered throughout the evaluation,
ensuring that the evaluation is relevant and meaningful to those affected by the program.
Contextual Understanding: The evaluation seeks to understand the broader context in which the
program operates, including social, cultural, political, and environmental factors that may
influence program outcomes and implementation.
Flexibility and Adaptability: The Stake Responsive Evaluation Model is flexible and adaptable to
the specific needs and circumstances of each evaluation. It allows for adjustments in evaluation
design, methods, and focus based on emerging insights and changing stakeholder priorities.
Emphasis on Multiple Perspectives: The model recognizes the importance of considering
multiple perspectives and voices in the evaluation process. It seeks to capture the diverse
experiences, viewpoints, and interpretations of stakeholders involved in or affected by the
program.
Focus on Use and Utility: Stakeholders are actively engaged in the interpretation and utilization
of evaluation findings. The evaluation process is oriented towards producing actionable insights
and recommendations that can inform decision-making, program improvement, and policy
development.
Holistic Approach: The Stake Responsive Evaluation Model takes a holistic approach to
evaluation, considering both intended and unintended outcomes of the program, as well as its
broader impacts on individuals, communities, and systems.
Overall, the Stake Responsive Evaluation Model emphasizes collaboration, responsiveness, and
contextual understanding in the evaluation process. It is particularly well-suited for complex
programs and interventions operating in diverse and dynamic environments were traditional, top-
down evaluation approaches may be less effective.
References
Patton, M. Q. (2003). Qualitative evaluation checklist. Retrieved from
Stake, R. E. (1990). Responsive evaluation. In H. J. Walberg & G. D. Haertel (Eds.), The
International encyclopedia of educational evaluation (pp. 75-77). Pergamon Press.