How to Conduct a Metaevaluation?: A Metaevaluation Practice

IF 0.2 Q4 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Esra Kerimoğlu, Muazzez Nihal Öykü Ülker, Ş. Berk
{"title":"How to Conduct a Metaevaluation?: A Metaevaluation Practice","authors":"Esra Kerimoğlu, Muazzez Nihal Öykü Ülker, Ş. Berk","doi":"10.3138/cjpe.71619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A metaevaluation is a quality cross-check to examine the conduct of an evaluation and validate the results. Of the few metaevaluation studies, almost none have reported on the metaevaluation procedure through a practical example evaluation. This study reports on the strengths and weaknesses of a program evaluation study in terms of the four main standards: utility, feasibility, propriety, and accuracy. It includes a metaevaluation process that involves both quantitative and qualitative analysis of data from eight meta-evaluators. It was found that while the evaluation study had very good utility and accuracy standards, the feasibility and propriety standards were only fair.","PeriodicalId":43924,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.71619","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A metaevaluation is a quality cross-check to examine the conduct of an evaluation and validate the results. Of the few metaevaluation studies, almost none have reported on the metaevaluation procedure through a practical example evaluation. This study reports on the strengths and weaknesses of a program evaluation study in terms of the four main standards: utility, feasibility, propriety, and accuracy. It includes a metaevaluation process that involves both quantitative and qualitative analysis of data from eight meta-evaluators. It was found that while the evaluation study had very good utility and accuracy standards, the feasibility and propriety standards were only fair.
如何进行元评估?:元评估实践
元评估是一种质量交叉检查,用于检查评估的实施并验证结果。在为数不多的元评价研究中,几乎没有通过实例评价来报道元评价过程。本研究报告了项目评估研究的优点和缺点,主要依据四个标准:实用性、可行性、适当性和准确性。它包括一个元评估过程,包括对来自8个元评估者的数据进行定量和定性分析。发现评价研究具有很好的效用和准确性标准,而可行性和适当性标准仅为公平标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation
Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
32
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信