I have an article somewhere on the paradoxes of being a stakeholder and
evaluator at the same time but it has sunk to the bottom of one of th e
infinite piles of paper around me. When I come across it I'll post it others
are interested.
In our work over the past couple of decades evaluation of various kinds has
been a constant issue because the FORMS of evaluation ofter required are
incompatible with the nature of the work itself, e.g., creatig randomized
control groups so that effect sizes can be estimated.
Yes, clearly many non-academics run programs and do not evaluate them except
for how well they keep those who get salaries in a position to get salaries.
But we are talking here about evaluation with a chat perspective.
I believe that adequacy (speaking of my own efforts) at simultaneously
building and evaluating are never fully satisfactory and would be interested
in knowing the experiences of other xmca members.
mike
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 01 2003 - 01:00:09 PDT