Сравнение на методи
Прегледайте избраните методи един до друг; редовете с разлики са откроени.
| Програмна оценка, базирана на теренни условия× | Оценка на програми× | |
|---|---|---|
| Област | Полеви методи | Полеви методи |
| Семейство | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Година на възникване≠ | 1970s–1980s (field methods integration with evaluation practice) | 1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971) |
| Създател≠ | Michael Q. Patton; Peter H. Rossi and Howard E. Freeman | Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi |
| Тип≠ | Applied evaluation research | Applied evaluation methodology |
| Основополагащ източник≠ | Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage Publications. ISBN: 978-0761908944 | Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944 |
| Други названия | naturalistic program evaluation, field evaluation, on-site program evaluation, field-based evaluation | evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation |
| Свързани≠ | 6 | 3 |
| Резюме≠ | Field-based program evaluation is an applied research method that assesses the implementation, outcomes, and value of a program by collecting data directly in the natural setting where the program operates. Rather than relying solely on administrative records or remote surveys, evaluators embed themselves in the field — observing activities, interviewing stakeholders on-site, and reviewing context-specific documents — to produce evidence-grounded judgments about program merit and worth. | Program evaluation is a systematic, empirically grounded process of collecting and analyzing information about a program to determine its merit, worth, or significance. Applied across education, public health, social services, and policy, it addresses questions such as whether a program is reaching its target population, whether it is being implemented as designed, and whether it is producing the intended outcomes. It draws on both quantitative and qualitative methods and serves accountability, improvement, or knowledge-generation purposes. |
| ScholarGateНабор от данни ↗ |
|
|