方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 数字项目评估× | 项目评估× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 田野方法 | 田野方法 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 2000s–2010s (formalized alongside proliferation of digital programs and online data) | 1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971) |
| 提出者≠ | Evolving practice; rooted in Rossi, Lipsey & Freeman's evaluation tradition; extended by digital methods scholars in the 2000s–2010s | Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi |
| 类型 | Applied evaluation methodology | Applied evaluation methodology |
| 开创性文献≠ | George, S., & Leidner, D. (2020). Digital Evaluation: Leveraging Digital Data and Methods for Program Assessment. Routledge. link ↗ | Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944 |
| 别名 | technology-enhanced evaluation, digital evaluation, e-evaluation, online program evaluation | evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation |
| 相关≠ | 5 | 3 |
| 摘要≠ | Digital program evaluation applies the systematic logic of program evaluation to programs that operate fully or partly in digital environments, using digital tools and data — web analytics, online surveys, platform logs, social media metrics, and digital trace data — to assess program reach, implementation fidelity, and outcomes. It retains the core evaluative commitment to rendering a defensible judgment about program merit and worth while exploiting the speed, scale, and granularity that digital data sources offer. Applications span online education, digital public health campaigns, e-government services, and technology-mediated social programs. | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|