Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Program Evaluation in Social Work× | Concept Mapping× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Social Work | Social Work |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 2004 | 1989 |
| Grondlegger≠ | Evaluation-research tradition (Rossi, Lipsey, Freeman); social-work application by Royse, Thyer & Padgett | William M. K. Trochim |
| Type≠ | Systematic assessment of the need, design, implementation, and outcomes of a program | Mixed-method structured group conceptualization producing a visual cluster map |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). SAGE Publications. ISBN: 9780761908944 | Trochim, W. M. K. (1989). An introduction to concept mapping for planning and evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12(1), 1–16. DOI ↗ |
| Aliassen | Social Program Evaluation, Human Services Program Evaluation, Outcome and Process Evaluation, Evaluation Research (Social Work) | Group Concept Mapping, Structured Conceptualization, Trochim Concept Mapping, Concept Mapping for Planning and Evaluation |
| Verwant | 4 | 4 |
| Samenvatting≠ | Program evaluation in social work is the systematic application of social-science methods to judge a program's need, design, implementation, outcomes, and efficiency, in order to improve programs and inform decisions about them. Drawing on the evaluation-research tradition of Rossi, Lipsey, and Freeman and adapted for social work by Royse, Thyer, and Padgett, it spans a hierarchy of evaluation questions — from whether a program is needed and well-conceived to whether it is delivered as intended, produces the intended outcomes, and is worth its cost. | Concept mapping, in the structured sense developed by William Trochim, is a mixed-method process that lets a group develop a shared conceptual framework on a topic and represent it as a visual map. Participants generate statements about a focus question, sort them into thematic piles, and rate them; multidimensional scaling and cluster analysis then turn those sortings into a two-dimensional map of clustered ideas. Widely used in social-work and human-services planning and evaluation, it combines the openness of group brainstorming with the rigor of quantitative analysis to surface and structure stakeholder thinking. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|