Page:SELECTED ESSAYS of Dr. S. S. KALBAG.pdf/213

 ﻿________________

2. Technology for products and processes are not treated differently. 3. Economic parameters and alternatives are not studied sufficiently. 4. Field tests are done at the end of development not as part of development. 5. Poor or nil documentation. 6. Communication messages are not tested to see how the target group receives them. 7. Poor organisational support for follow- up. Evaluation of Technology is not for accepting or rejecting it but for helping it to develop and attain the objectives. If the objectives are worthy and the approach tried, does not work, we should try other approaches and test again by evaluation. 8. Most projects make too much investment even before basic concepts are tested. They do not grow with feedback, but plan everything on assumptions. Therefore, later changes become difficult and they get tied to one approach. If this is shown as ineffective by evaluation, the whole effect gets threatened. This is partly because funding agencies act very slowly and it is considered prudent to ask for the total funds at once rather than in phases. Recommendations: 1. All new products and processes must be properly and fully documented. Funding agencies can enforce this. 2. Field testing and evaluation as an aid to development must he carried out, preferably by a third party, but the originator of the technology must be fully involved. Funding agency has a vital role in coordinating this. 3. CAPART must set up a Market Research and Evaluation group. Help of professionals like ORG may be taken in forming this. This may be considered like a technical audit and information source. Rural Development Through Education System 200