IPT 661 Notes: 5-11-2010

Evaluation Planning and Questions

accurate (ethical) representation of findings

example of school district that failed to use fed funds appropriately, yet gleaned part of the eval that /was/ positive.

Darin suggests there may be whistleblower protection by the fed funding provider

Questions to Ask the Client

objective of the evaluation?

what do you hope to get out of this evaluation? what do you hope to do with the results?

objective of the software?

how is it suppsed to work?

software features:

logs and analytics

versioning

(don’t have to go to IRB to collect data because we won’t publish it), however should warn client. We should always try to get IRB, because you never know when you’ll get something interesting.

“No eval should be conducted without a detailed description of the program being evaluated.” e.g. “team teaching” but we don’t know if it’s team teaching

“[understand] why the program is supposed to achieve its desired impacts”

1. meet

2. describe program

3. share with description of program

3 ways to gather info

review documentation

talk to stakeholders

observe object/program

evaluand may change as you go, e.g. formativeness of feedback

(Rob = point of contact, projet mgr?)

Describe Timez Attack in a Logic Model
, user interface

This entry was posted in IPT 661 - Evaluation, PhD Coursework and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Anti-Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

Subscribe without commenting