1 / 7

Evaluation: Timetable & Approach

Evaluation: Timetable & Approach. October 2001: Internal project evaluation (Virtual project meeting) November 2001: Evaluation report (+ project progress report) Approach: Guiding questions: derived from the proposal (chapter 3.8)

lance-kent
Download Presentation

Evaluation: Timetable & Approach

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Evaluation:Timetable & Approach • October 2001: • Internal project evaluation (Virtual project meeting) • November 2001: • Evaluation report (+ project progress report) • Approach: • Guiding questions: derived from the proposal (chapter 3.8) • Assumption: Most „answers“ can be derived from the preliminary report (August 2001) • Additional „continuous improvement process“ (?): • Internal „survey“ with regard to some criteria • 7/01, 12/01, 5/02

  2. „Effectiveness“ (1)Coverage of the foci of interest • ITA/FORTH: technology & business focus • is the technology AND business focus adequately covered by • the questionnaire? • the case study design? • the selection of case study candidates? • (the address pool for the broad survey?)

  3. „Effectiveness“ (2)Coverage of the 3 main target areas: employment, vocational training, education • are the three target areas adequately covered by • the address pool? • the feedback rate / sample structure • the case study candidates? • is the questionnaire design appropriate for all the three target areas? • is the case study design appropriate for all the three target areas?

  4. Effectiveness“ (3)Identification of good-practice examples according to „widely accepted indicators“ (validity) • does the questionnaire focus on inclusive design? • e.g., consideration of relevant target groups, user involvement, standards... • is the process of selecting case study candidates guided by the focus on inclusive design? • does the case study design focus on inclusive design ?

  5. „Efficiency“ (1)Management • are precise workplans with milestones • created? • monitored? • changed/updated if necessary?

  6. „Efficiency“ (2)Communication • regular project meetings? • provision of a web site with information on the project progress with a ‘participants-only’ area? • usage of electronic communication? • usage of telephone communication?

  7. Further criteria / issues • „Quality“ of the survey (development) • sources (conferences, fairs, databases, mailing lists,...) • pre-tests • participants‘ comments • feedback rate • Additional/accompanying scientific activities (?) • conferences • related publications

More Related