Upload
debra-morrison
View
218
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
S519: Evaluation of Information Systems
Evaluation Report Template
The steps involved (D-p4)
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)
Step5: analyzing data dealing with the causation 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)
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 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
Step 1: Understand the basic of evaluation
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
Step1: Output report
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
Step2: Defining the Purpose of the Evaluation (D-Ch2)
Who asked for this evaluation and why? What are the main evaluation questions? Who are the main audience?
Aboslute merit or relative merit
Step2: Output report
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
Step3: Defining evaluative criteria
To build a criterion list, consider the following procedures: A needs assessment Logic model of linking the evaluand to the needs An assesment of other relevant values, such as
process, outcomes, and cost A strategy to organize your criterion checklist
Make sure that you go into the evaluation with a well-thought-out plan so that you know what you need to know, where to get that information, and how you are going to put it together when you write up your report.
Needs assessment
Understand the true needs of your evaluation end users (consumers or impactees)
Who are your end users? They are the person or entity who buys or users a product or
service, enroll in a training program,etc. Upstream stakeholder (i.e. People on upper level of the structure –
manager, designer) Immediate recipients (i.e. People who directly consume your product or
service – consumer, trainee) Downstream consumers (i.e. People who indirectly involved in your
evaluation)
Understanding needs Needs vs. Wants
Difference and why A need is something without which unsatisfactory functioning occurs.
Different kind of needs Context dependence Conscious needs vs. Unconsious needs
Needs we know and needs we do not know Met needs vs. Unmet needs
Building a factory (increase job, but create pollution) Performance needs vs. Instrumental needs
„need to do“ something for satisfactory functioning (actual problems) vs. Proposed solutions
Access email vs. Lightweight laptop Most of the case, performance needs is considered, but not the instrumental
needs
Needs assessment method
Two phases: Identifying and documenting performance needs Investigating the underlying causes of
performance needs
Training program
Improved skillsImproved
performance
Step3: output report
Needs assessment Identify consumers or impactees (e.g. Table3.2) Identify different needs (e.g. Table3.3)
Logic model (e.g. Exhibit3.6 and Exhibit3.7) An assessment of other relavent values with
the consideration of process, outcome and cost (e.g. Table3.4)
Organizing your criteria see step4 output report
Step4: Organizing criteria and indentifying sources of evidence
When organizing your criteria, always keep the followings in mind: Process
How good are the evaluand‘s content and implementation Outcomes
How good are the impacts on immediate recipients and other impactees
Comparative Cost-Effectives How costly is it? Excessive, quite high, acceptable or reasonable
Exportability How can we extend this to other settings?
The process evaluation checkpoint
Process evaluation Content
What the evaluand consists of, i.e., basic components or design) Implementation
How well or efficiently the evaluand was implemented or delivered to the consumers who needed it
Other features Any other features that make the program good or bad which are not
covered by the first two and are not outcomes or cost-related criteria
category Subcategories and criteria Source of evdience
Content evaluation
Implementation evlauation
Others (if necessary)
The outcome evaluation checkpoint
What is outcome Things that happen as a result of the program Outcomes can affect anyone listed as consumers
How to do Based on logic model in step3 (e.g. Exhibit3.6 and Exhibit3.7) Organize them into subcategories See Table4.3 (D-p60)
category Subcategories and criteria Source of evdience
Knowledge, skill and attitude gain
Application of knowledge, skill and attitudes
The comparative cost-effectiveness checkpoint
Any evaluation has to take cost into account What are costs?
Money Time Effort Space Opportunity costs
The exportability checkpoint
What elements of the evaluand (i.e., innovative design or approach) might make it potentially valuable or a significant contribution or advance in another setting
Step4: Output report
Checkpoints for Process (e.g. Table4.1, 4.2) Outcomes (e.g., Table4.3) Comparative Cost-Effectives (e.g., cost cube
table) Exportability
Short summary of potential areas for exportability
Mid-term report
Step 1- Step 4
Step5: Analysing data
5.1 Inferencing causation 5.2 Determining importance 5.3 Merit determination 5.4 Synthesis
5.1 Certainty about causation (D-ch5)
Each decision-making context requires a different level of certainty
Quantitative or qualitative analysis All-quantitative or all-qualitative
Sample choosing Sample size
Mix of them
More in statistical analysis
Inferrencing causation: 8 strategies 1. Ask observers 2. Check whether the content of the evaluand matches the outcome 3. Look for other telltale patterns that suggest one cause or another 4. Check whether the timing of outcomes makes sense 5. Check whether the „dose“ is related logically to the „response“. 6. Make comparisons with a „control“ or „comparison“ group 7. Control statistically for extraneous variables 8. Identify and check the underlying causal mechanism(s)
5.2 Determining importance (D-ch7)
5.2 Importance determiniation is the process of assigning labels to dimensions or components to indicate their importance.
Different evaluations Dimensional evaluation Component evaluation Holistic evaluation
Determining importance: 6 strategies
1. having stakeholders or consumers „vote“ on importance
2. Drawing on the knowledge of selected stakeholders 3. Using evidence from the literature 4. Using specialist judgment 5. Using evidence from the needs and values
assessments 6. Using program theory and evidence of causal linkages
5.3 Merit determination
It is the process of setting „standards“ (definitions of what performance should constitute „satisfactory“, „good“, etc.) and applying those standards to descriptive data to draw explicitly evaluative conclusions about performance on a particular dimension or component.
Decscriptive facts about
performance
Quality or value
determinatoin guide
Evaluative conclusions
Rubric
Rubric is a tool that provides an evaluative description of what performance or quality „looks like“.
It has two levels: Grading rubric is used to determin absolute
quality or value (e.g., Table8.2) Ranking rubric is used to determin relative quality
or value
5.4 Synthesis methodology
Synthesis is the process of combining a set of ratings or performances on several components or dimensions into an overall rating.
Quantitative synthesis Using numerical weights
Qualitative synthesis Using qualitative labels
Qualitative (nonnumerical) weighting example 2
Dimension by dimension Layer by layer
Sub-dimnention1
Sub-dimnention2
Sub-dimnention3
Sub-dimnention4
Dimnention1
Dimnention2
Overall rating
Step 6: Result
Putting it all together: fitting the pieces into the KEC framework (ch10)
Now we are ready to write our evaluation report.
Step 7: Feedback (optional)
Meta-evaluation: how to figure out whether your evlauation is any good (ch11)
Related links
KEC http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/kec.htm http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/kec_feb07.pdf
Questionnaire examples http://www.go2itech.org/HTML/TT06/toolkit/evaluation/forms.html http://enhancinged.wgbh.org/formats/person/evaluate.html http://www.dioceseofspokane.org/policies/HR/Appendix%20II/
SampleForms.htm http://njaes.rutgers.edu/evaluation/