S. B. Nielsen, Sebastian Lemire, Isabelle Bourgeois, Leslie A. Fierro
{"title":"掌握评估能力:评估能力工具绘图的结果","authors":"S. B. Nielsen, Sebastian Lemire, Isabelle Bourgeois, Leslie A. Fierro","doi":"10.3138/cjpe-2024-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article surveys the literature on organizational evaluation capacity (EC) instruments. Over the past 25 years, articles have been published in four waves covering the development of organizational evaluation capacity models, surveys of the evaluation capacity and practice landscape, the development of EC instruments, and their replication and adaptation. Altogether, the authors identified 20 studies applying 16 EC instruments. Several studies applied variants of the same instrument. We found instruments of three types: checklists, rubrics, and questionnaires. The instruments vary in terms of type, purpose, scoring, dimensions, number of items, and validation processes. In general, the validation studies demonstrated acceptable face, content, construct validity, and internal consistency. Only two studies tested for predictive validity. No studies covered concurrent validity and test–retest, or inter-rater reliability.","PeriodicalId":504262,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation","volume":"19 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Capturing Evaluation Capacity: Findings from a Mapping of Evaluation Capacity Instruments\",\"authors\":\"S. B. Nielsen, Sebastian Lemire, Isabelle Bourgeois, Leslie A. Fierro\",\"doi\":\"10.3138/cjpe-2024-0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article surveys the literature on organizational evaluation capacity (EC) instruments. Over the past 25 years, articles have been published in four waves covering the development of organizational evaluation capacity models, surveys of the evaluation capacity and practice landscape, the development of EC instruments, and their replication and adaptation. Altogether, the authors identified 20 studies applying 16 EC instruments. Several studies applied variants of the same instrument. We found instruments of three types: checklists, rubrics, and questionnaires. The instruments vary in terms of type, purpose, scoring, dimensions, number of items, and validation processes. In general, the validation studies demonstrated acceptable face, content, construct validity, and internal consistency. Only two studies tested for predictive validity. No studies covered concurrent validity and test–retest, or inter-rater reliability.\",\"PeriodicalId\":504262,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"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-2024-0001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe-2024-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Capturing Evaluation Capacity: Findings from a Mapping of Evaluation Capacity Instruments
This article surveys the literature on organizational evaluation capacity (EC) instruments. Over the past 25 years, articles have been published in four waves covering the development of organizational evaluation capacity models, surveys of the evaluation capacity and practice landscape, the development of EC instruments, and their replication and adaptation. Altogether, the authors identified 20 studies applying 16 EC instruments. Several studies applied variants of the same instrument. We found instruments of three types: checklists, rubrics, and questionnaires. The instruments vary in terms of type, purpose, scoring, dimensions, number of items, and validation processes. In general, the validation studies demonstrated acceptable face, content, construct validity, and internal consistency. Only two studies tested for predictive validity. No studies covered concurrent validity and test–retest, or inter-rater reliability.