|
دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی + خرید ترجمه فارسی
|
|
| عنوان فارسی مقاله: | فرایندی برای تعیین شاخص های اثر محسوس برای پروژه های آبخیز |
| عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: | A Process for Determining Appropriate Impact Indicators for Watershed Projects |
| مشخصات مقاله انگلیسی (PDF) | |
| تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی | 7 صفحه با فرمت pdf |
| رشته های مرتبط با این مقاله | منابع طبیعی، عمران، محیط زیست و کشاورزی |
| گرایش های مرتبط با این مقاله | مهندسی آب و فاضلاب، حقوق و اقتصاد محیط زیست، سیستم اطلاعات جغرافیایی(GIS)، مرتع و آبخیزداری، سازه های آبی و مدیریت منابع اب |
| دانشگاه تهیه کننده | گروه هماهنگ کننده کیفیت آب، دانشگاه ویسکانسین، مدیسون |
| نشریه | Owpubauthor |
| مشخصات و وضعیت ترجمه مقاله (Word) | |
| تعداد صفحات ترجمه مقاله | 9 صفحه با فرمت ورد، به صورت تایپ شده و با فونت 14 – B Nazanin |
| ترجمه اشکال | ترجمه توضیحات زیر اشکال انجام شده و اشکال و نمودارها به صورت عکس در فایل ترجمه درج شده است. عبارات روی اشکال ترجمه نشده است. |
فهرست مطالب:
چکیده
مقدمه
رویکرد
بحث
تاکید ارایه
مروری بر نتایج
اهمیت برای مطالعات اینده
بخشی از ترجمه:
در پاییز ۲۰۰۲ یک فرایند فعل و انفعالی با یک گروه بحث کوچک از هماهنگ کنندگان الودگی غیر نقطه ای از Illinois, Michigan, Ohio, Indiana and Minesota گرد هم امدند.. این جلسه در ۲۳ تا ۲۴ اکتبر انجام شد و یک سری مباحث در میان دست اندرکاران به صورت اینترنتی به منظور به اشتراک گذاشتن ایده ها در خصوص ئایه و اساس ارزیابی و تهیه ی گزارش پروژه انجام شد.
به عنوان یک نقطه ی شروع برای تبادل ایده ها در تهیه ی گزارش جلسه ی اکتبر مبتنی بر استفاده از مدل منطقی برای عملکرد برنامه به عنوان غالب کاری جهت شناسایی دامنه ی بالقوه ی برنامه و اثرات پروژه بود. طی ۷ ماه بعدی ایده های ایجاد شده توسط این گروه مورد بحث قرار گرفت و مجموعه ای از برنامه های اولیه و اثرات پروژه ایجاد شدند که می توان ان ها را طی زمان پایش کرد و شبکه ی منطقه ای موجود در پروژه ی بخش ۳۱۹ ارزیابی شد .مجددا این مقاله گزارشاتی در خصوص شاخص های رایج در پروژه ی ۳۱۹ ارایه می دهد و می تواند در تقویت بحث مفید باشد. اطلاعات داده های ارایه شده در این جا مقدماتی بوده و به صورت یک برنامه ی اموزشی در سال ۲۰۰۳ اصلاح شدند.
برای یررسی مباحث مربوط به وضعیت فعلی و ان چه که ارزیابی می شود مدل منطقی برای ارزیابی منطقی استفاده شد . این مدل منطقی در تعدادی از رشته ها برای شناسایی ۳سطح اثر برنامه استفاده شدند:!ورودی.۲)خروجی ۳)برایند.
بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی:
Introduction Increased pressures from politicians and agency personnel through program reviews and audits, as well as the federal enactment of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) in 1993, are examples of the ever-expanding focus on program results and impacts. As the demand for accountability in natural resources programming increases, so too will the need for thoughtful, well-planned program evaluations (Davenport, 2002). Evaluation is a critical dimension of any watershed project. It is most often used in summative or conclusive ways to identify what was accomplished by a project after a specified period of time. But, evaluation can also be a formative element in program planning and implementation, to ensure that projects within those programs are meeting short- and long-term goals. Building evaluation skills and developing the confidence to use those skills is critical for watershed-based staff if they are to answer questions about the effectiveness and efficiency of their programs. While it may not be necessary for educators to become evaluation experts, they do need a fundamental understanding of methods and ethical standards if they are to make evaluation part of overall program design. Evaluation is the systematic collection of information about the activities, characteristics, and outcomes of programs, personnel, and products, in order to reduce uncertainties, improve effectiveness, and make decisions with regard to what those programs or products are doing and affecting (Patton, 1982). While evaluation includes a look at program impacts, it is different from impact reporting, which focuses on 409 specific program results that may only be important to program stakeholders (Patton, 1997; Bickman, 1985; and Cronbach, 1982) Evaluation measures a variety of outcome data against the program’s intent (Bennett and Rockwell, 1995). Approach To improve how evaluation is used in watershed projects, six land grant universities in the Great Lakes region (i.e., Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin) are working with state and regional coordinators from nonpoint source pollution projects (Section 319). This multi-state effort, which includes participation by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region V office, has been initiated to identify consistent and reliable impact indicators and evaluation processes. A series of small group discussions and interactive training sessions on evaluation is currently being offered to state-level 319 coordinators. Those meetings and interactions will encourage cross-state problem solving and lead to the development of common success indicators for watershed projects. Discussion Typically, evaluation is not addressed until late in, or even at the end of, a project. This reactive evaluation is often merely a hunt for positive impacts, and has limited value in either describing the success of a program or in planning future efforts. A more planned, formative evaluation that is integrated into the project from the very beginning can track changes over time. Formative evaluation (Scriven, 1967) examines issues such as audience needs, current knowledge gaps, prevalent behaviors, and information preferences. Because they are assessed prior to a project’s start, these issues can be used to influence the design and implementation of the outreach efforts (King & Rollins, 1999; Lanyon, 1994; Mattocks & Steele, 1994). One barrier associated with formative evaluation approaches is deciding what to measure. Water quality projects are by nature directed at protecting or improving physical water quality. Biophysical changes to the water are normally the measure of success (Davenport, 2002). While the ultimate goal of water quality projects may be to protect or enhance water quality, there are other impacts to assess, such as increased knowledge, improved skills or the adoption of improved management practices (Rogers, 1995). Research has shown certain management practices to be beneficial to water quality and farm profits, and the promotion of these practices by project staff is at the heart of most water quality outreach efforts. Therefore, both long-term indicators (i.e., physical changes to water quality) and more immediate impacts (i.e., changes in farm management and behavior) were assessed in this study to determine the level and type of evaluation support needed by and from state water quality coordinators. In prior internal assessments of evaluation processes (Shepard, 2002) used by water quality program staff, only three (10 percent) of the states actually conducted a formative assessment strategy for their project. This involved documenting pre-project needs and audience characteristics specifically for USDA Water Quality program efforts pertaining to the Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service (CSREES) Water Quality Initiative of the 1990s. When individual project coordinators were asked what information they intended to use to determine program impact, they mentioned a range of indicators, from biophysical environmental (e.g., sediment loading, biotic indexes, etc.) to behavioral (e.g., awareness, knowledge or adoption of practices). When a range of potential indicators was assessed for intended use, it was shown that many states intend to rely on such indicators without any true baseline from which change can be adequately assessed (Figure 1).
|
دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی + خرید ترجمه فارسی
|
|
| عنوان فارسی مقاله: | فرایندی برای تعیین شاخص های اثر محسوس برای پروژه های آبخیز |
| عنوان انگلیسی مقاله: | A Process for Determining Appropriate Impact Indicators for Watershed Projects |
