Evaluation Strategy

Literature on the evaluation of educational development projects provides considerable advice concerning the scale, approach, style and nature of evaluation. The scale of our evaluation will be relatively modest, with a concentration on formative evaluation by our advisory and evaluation panel, comprising UK and international experts on assessment and evaluation, all of whom are keen to participate in this ground-breaking project. Student-researchers will also have opportunities to suggest improvements to processes and outcomes. Our approach will be iterative and dynamic, with regular reviews by our panel who will contribute principally virtually through Elluminate conferencing software but who will also advise on site when visiting Leeds Met, since all are already Visiting Professors, external consultants or involved in existing projects. In terms of style, we will follow Saunders (a) who advises that evaluations “should feel relaxed” and Baume (2007) that they should be “as far as possible collaborative.” The nature of our evaluation will involve adopting the ‘RUFDATA’ approach favoured by Saunders (b). This centres on the evaluation’s: Reasons and purposes; Uses; Focus; Data and evidence; Audience; Timing; Agency, as indicated below. Additionally, the strategy will itself be monitored and adapted as the project progresses.

Reasons and purposes

Enhancing project-planning and management; improving data-gathering methods; ensuring accountability.


Improving understanding of M-level assessments; compiling practice digest; reviewing the value of case studies; informing future projects.


Achievement of aims; ensuring effectiveness of journalism students as researchers; ensuring the quality of outputs.

Data and evidence

Mainly qualitative: student-participant and project team questionnaires; focus groups; interviews.


M-level programme providers; PGCHE and other M-level students; HE Academy: international HE scholars.


Periodic: 6- monthly, following pilot stage and with overview at the project conclusion.


Project team re student-researchers; advisory and evaluation panel as critical friends and external evaluators.