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/