home Page History

In question and answer format, this digest illustrates the variety of basic and theoretical issues in evaluation with which aspiring evaluators should be conversant in order to claim they know the knowledge base of their profession. Please note that none of these questions have a single correct answer and space limitations prevent providing the level of detailed discussion that each deserves. The questions vary considerably in difficulty and in how universally the issues involved would be recognized by most evaluators today. What follows, therefore, are outlines of the issues rather than correct "answers." For more extensive information on the topics discussed in these questions, please refer to the references found at the end of this digest, especially Shadish, Cook, and Leviton.

What are the four steps in the logic of evaluation?

Scriven published a variety of writings on the topic of the logical sequence of concepts that defines how people try to connect data to value judgments that the evaluand is good or bad, better or worse, passing or failing, or the like. Scriven outlined the four steps:

1.selecting criteria of merit, those things the evaluand must do to be judged good

2.setting standards of performance on those criteria, comparative or absolute levels that must be exceeded to warrant the appelation "good"

3.gathering data pertaining to the evaluand's performance on the criteria relative to the standards

4.integrating the results into a final value judgment.

To the extent that evaluation really is about determining value, some version of this logic ought to be universally applicable to the practice of evaluation.

Are qualitative evaluations valid?

More qualitative theorists than not seem to both use the word, subject to validity criticism, and endorse some version of its applicability. However, some qualitative theorists reject both the term and any cognates who seem to garner attention disproportionate to their representation in their own field. From outside the qualitative camps, the answer also seems to be more uniformly "yes." Nevertheless, the subtleties required for an intelligent discussion of this question are extensive with write my essay quick, of which the following few will illustrate but not exhaust. Even those who reject the concept of "validity" will acknowledge they are concerned in their work to "go to considerable pains not to get it all wrong". Further, within and across those methods qualitative theorists often disagree among themselves.

In addition, qualitative methods often aim to produce knowledge of a substantively different kind than other methods, so that particular validity criteria may be less pertinent to the interests of qualitative evaluations from https://essayprofy.net. Indeed, it would be wrong to assume all qualitative methods are alike. Different qualitative methods may have different aims that bring different validity criteria to bear. In the end, though, some version of validity as an effort to "go to considerable pains not to get it all wrong" probably underlies all methods used by all evaluators, quantitative and qualitative.

Useful Sources:




Last edited by Gregory Walters