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。
| Summative Evaluation× | 反事实影响评估 (CIE)× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域≠ | Public Policy | 因果推断 |
| 方法族≠ | Process / pipeline | Regression model |
| 起源年份≠ | 1967 | 1970s–2000s |
| 提出者≠ | Michael Scriven | Heckman, Imbens, Rubin, and the program evaluation literature |
| 类型≠ | Judgement-oriented evaluation function | Causal inference / program evaluation |
| 开创性文献≠ | Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler, R. M. Gagné, & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of Curriculum Evaluation (pp. 39–83). Chicago: Rand McNally. ISBN: 9780528616600 | Heckman, J. J., & Vytlacil, E. J. (2007). Econometric evaluation of social programs, Part I: Causal models, structural models and econometric policy evaluation. Handbook of Econometrics, 6B, 4779-4874. DOI ↗ |
| 别名≠ | Outcome Judgement Evaluation, Accountability Evaluation | CIE, counterfactual evaluation, counterfactual policy evaluation, impact evaluation |
| 相关≠ | 4 | 5 |
| 摘要≠ | Summative evaluation is evaluation conducted to render an overall judgement of a program, policy or product — its merit, worth, effectiveness or impact — typically after it has been implemented or has matured. Named by Michael Scriven in his 1967 essay 'The Methodology of Evaluation' as the counterpart to formative evaluation, its purpose is to inform consequential decisions: whether to continue, expand, replicate, defund or certify an intervention. It addresses the bottom-line question 'did it work, and was it worth it?' for audiences such as funders, policymakers and the public. | Counterfactual Impact Evaluation is a family of causal methods that estimates the effect of an intervention by comparing what actually happened to participants with what would have happened had the intervention not taken place. Formalised in the Rubin Causal Model and extended by Heckman, Imbens and others, CIE underlies most modern program and policy evaluation practice. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|