Compară metode
Examinează metodele selectate una lângă alta; rândurile care diferă sunt evidențiate.
| Evaluarea participativă a programelor× | Evaluarea Programelor× | |
|---|---|---|
| Domeniu | Metode de teren | Metode de teren |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Anul apariției≠ | 1992 (formal articulation); roots in participatory action research of the 1970s–1980s | 1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971) |
| Autorul original≠ | J. Bradley Cousins & Lorna Earl (formalization); Michael Q. Patton (utilization-focused lineage) | Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi |
| Tip≠ | Applied evaluation approach | Applied evaluation methodology |
| Sursa seminală≠ | Cousins, J. B., & Earl, L. M. (1992). The case for participatory evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(4), 397–418. DOI ↗ | Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944 |
| Denumiri alternative | participatory evaluation, collaborative evaluation, PE, stakeholder-involved evaluation | evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation |
| Înrudite | 3 | 3 |
| Rezumat≠ | Participatory program evaluation is an applied evaluation approach in which program stakeholders — staff, participants, funders, or community members — are actively involved as co-evaluators rather than passive subjects. By engaging those closest to the program in designing questions, collecting data, and interpreting findings, the approach aims to increase both the quality of the evaluation and the likelihood that findings will be understood, owned, and acted upon. | 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. |
| ScholarGateSet de date ↗ |
|
|