Understanding Evaluation

Systematic determination of the quality or value of something (Scriven, 1991)

What can we evaluate? Projects, programs, or organizations Personnel or performance Policies or strategies Products or services Proposals, contract bids, or job application Almost everything in our daily life because

before you make decision, you do the evaluation first. Comparison is a kind of evaluation.

Definition of Evaluation

Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage

Evaluand That which is being evaluated (e.g.

Program, policy, project, product, service, organization, almost everything)

In personnel evaluation the term is evaluee

Terminology (Davison, Glossary)

S519

Evaluation is for Find areas for improvement Generate an assessment of overall quality

Answer the question of „Merit“ or „Worth“ (Scriven, 1991) Merit is the „intrinsic“ value of something =

„quality“ Worth is the value of something to an individual, an

organization, an institution – contextualized merit -- = „value“

Issues of Evaluation

S519

Accountability evaluation It is important to conduct an

independent evaluation i.e. Nobody on the evaluation team should

have a significant vested interest in whether the results are good or bad

Choosing the right group

S519

Step1: understanding the basic about evaluation (ch1)

Step2: defining the main purposes of the evaluation and the „big picture“ questions that need answers (ch2)

Step3: Identifying the evaluative criteria (ch3)

Step4: Organizing the list of criteria and choosing sources of evidence (collecting data) (ch4)

The steps involved (D-p4)

S519

Step5: analyzing data dealing with the causation/correlation issue

(which cause what, why), to avoid „subjectivity“ (ch5+6)

importance weighting: weight the results (ch7) Meric determination: how well your evaluand has done

on the criteria (good? Unacceptable?) (ch8) Synthesis methodology: systematic methods for

condensing evaluation findings (ch9)

Staticistical analysis: Salkind (2007)

The steps involved (D-p4)

S519

Step6: result Putting it all together: fitting the pieces

into the KEC framework (ch10) Step7: feedback

Meta-evaluation: how to figure out whether your evlauation is any good (ch11)

The steps involved (D-p4)

S519

The Key Evaluation Checklist (Davidson, 2005, p. 6-7)

I. Executive Summary

II. Preface III. Methodology

1. Background & Context

2. Descriptions& Definitions

3. Consumers

4. Resources

5. Values

6. Process Evaluation

7. OutcomeEvaluation

8 & 9. Comparative Cost-Effectiveness

10. Exportability

11. Overall Significance

12. Recommendations& Explanations

13. Responsibilities 14. Reporting& Follow-up

15. Meta-evaluation

S519

Identify the evaluand Background and context of evaluand

Why did this program or product come into existence in the first place?

Descriptions and definitions Describe the evaluand in enough detail so that virtually

anyone can understand what it is and what it does

How: collect background information, pay a firsthand visit or literature review

Step 1: Understand the basic of evaluation

S519

Some tips before you start Make sure that your evaluand is not

difficult to access (geolocation, inanimate objects)

Make your evaluand a clearly defined group (avoid abstract and complex system)

Avoid political ramification (assess your boss pet project, university administration)

To avoid your invovlement in the evaluand (to assess a class which you are teaching, etc.)

Are you ready for your first evaluation project?

S519

Metadata discussion group, Brown Bag discussion group, Twitter, SLIS website, Information Visulization Lab website, Media and Reserve Services in Wells Library, IU CAT, SoE website, Chemistry library website

How about something else related to real-world problems

For social good (http://dssg.io/projects/) Industry and Government talks at KDD214 (

http://www.kdd.org/kdd2014/) Maybe this will inspire you with a great project to

work on

Previous Projects

Utility To ensure that an evaluation will serve the practical

information needs of intended users Feasibility

To ensure that an evaluation will be realistic, prudent, diplomatic, and frugal

Propriety To ensure that an evaluation will be conducted

legally, ethically, and with due regard for the welfare of those involved in the evaluation, as well as those affected by its results (IRB: http://research.iu.edu/rschcomp/revlocation.html)

Accuracy To ensure that an evaluation will reveal and convey

technically adequate information about the features

Standards for Evaluation (Patton, 1997, p. 17)

http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/jc/ S519

Systematic inquiry Competence Integrity/honesty Respect for people Responsibilities for general and

public welfare

Guiding Principles for Evaluators (American Evaluation Association, 1995)

S519

Output: one or two page overview of the evaluand and findings What is your evaluand Background and context of your

evaluand Description of your evaluand

Try to be as detail as possible

Step1: Output report

S519

Who asked for this evaluation and why?

What are the main evaluation questions?

Who are the main audience?

Step2: Defining the Purpose of the Evaluation (D-Ch2)

S519

A. what is (are) the main purpose(s) of the evaluation?

To determine the overall quality or value of something (summative evaluation, absolute merit)

i.e. Decision making, funding allocation decision, benchmarking products, using a tool, etc.

To find areas for improvement (formative evaluation, relative merit)

To help a new „thing“ to start To improve the existing „thing“

Evaluation purposes

S519

Big picture questions: B. What is (are) the big picture

question(s) for which we need answers? Absolute merit

Do we want to invest this project? relative merit

How does this project compare with the other options?

Ranking

Big picture questions

S519

Your step2 output report should answer the following questions:

Define the evaluation purpose Do you need to demonstrate to someone (yourself) the

overall quality of something? Or Do you need to find a file for improvement? Or do you do both?

Once you answer above questions, figure out what are your big picture questions:

Is your evaluation related to the absolute merit of your evaluand?

Or the relative merit of your evaluand

Step2: Output report

S519