program evaluation
DESCRIPTION
Program Evaluation. Program evaluation Methodological techniques of the social sciences social policy public welfare administration. Evaluation Formative – help form the program Ongoing assessment to improve implementation Outcome – after the fact. Needs Assessment. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Program Evaluation
![Page 2: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Program evaluation
Methodological techniques of the social sciences
social policy
public welfare administration.
![Page 3: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Evaluation
Formative – help form the program
Ongoing assessment to improve implementation
Outcome – after the fact
![Page 4: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Needs Assessment
Program Theory Assessment
Process Evaluation
Outcome Evaluation
Efficiency Assessment
![Page 5: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Needs assessment
Who needs the program?
How great is the need?
What might work to meet the need?
What resources are available?
![Page 6: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
“Evaluability” assessment
Is an evaluation feasible?
How stakeholders can shape its usefulness.
![Page 7: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Structured Conceptualization
Define the program or technology.
Define the target population.
Define possible outcomes
![Page 8: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Process Evaluation
Investigates the process of delivery and alternatives.
Summative – summarize the effects
![Page 9: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Implementation evaluation
Monitors the fidelity of delivery
![Page 10: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Outcome Evaluations
Demonstrable effects on defined targets.
![Page 11: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Impact evaluation
Net effects intended and unintended on program as a whole
![Page 12: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Cost-effectiveness / Cost benefit.
Examines efficiency by standardizing outcomes in dollar costs and values.
![Page 13: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Secondary analysis
Examine existing data to address new questions or use different methods.
![Page 14: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Meta analysis
Integrates outcome with other studies to get summary judgment.
![Page 15: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Meta-analysis
Analysis of analyses
Summarize a body of work
Replication is good but can lead to inconsistent results
![Page 16: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Useful for
1)clarifying inconsistencies
2) program evaluation
3) review work
4) broadly framed questions
![Page 17: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
replications treatment control diff
Exp 1 22 19 3
Exp 2 20 18 2
Exp 3 23 17 6
Exp 4 15 16 -1
![Page 18: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
• Sampling
• Error in measurement
• Systematic error
• 3 in 4 studies show..
• Or Mean difference = 2.5
• (average out experimental errors….)
![Page 19: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
replications treatment control diff
Exp 1 (n=10)
22 19 3
Exp 2
(n = 10)
20 18 2
Exp 3
(n= 15)
23 17 6
Exp 4
(n = 1000)
15 16 -1
![Page 20: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
replications treatment control diff
Exp 1 22 19 3 p<0.05
Exp 2 20 18 2 p<0.05
Exp 3 23 17 6 p<0.05
Exp 4 15 16 -1 p<0.001
![Page 21: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
• Pooled data 35 people in 1000 show….
• Can overpower data
• Statistics based on large N tend to be more reliable – but only if the study is valid
• Meta-analysis tends to decrease random and systematic errors
![Page 22: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
• What if studies are not replications but variations on a theme…
• Exp 1 uses a scale from 1-5• Exp 2 uses scale from 1-100
treatment control difference
Exp 1 500 400 100
Exp 2 24 22 2
Average difference =51 ???
![Page 23: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
• Average difference =51???????????
treatment control difference Effect size d
Exp 1 500 400 100 0.5
Exp 2 24 22 2 0.67
Average d = 0.58
![Page 24: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
What is summarized?
1) count studies for and againstdoes not give magnitude and has low power
2) combine significance levels
3) combine effect sizes(effect gives the magnitude of the relationship between 2 variables)
Advantage -a) increase sample size and powerb) increase internal validity-
soundness of conclusions about relationshipc) increase external validity –
generalizability to other places people etcd) shows effect even if small if it is consistent
![Page 25: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
• Synthesis is a better estimate of effect size
• If effect is real and consistent it will be detected
• BUT Limited by the original studies
![Page 26: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Steps in meta-analysis
1)Formulate the question
2) Collect previous studies
3) Evaluate and code
4) Analyze and interpret
5) Presentation
![Page 27: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Data Sources
Study Selection
Data Abstraction
Statistical Analysis
![Page 28: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Data Sources
1. Computer searches
2. Cross-referencing
3. Hand-searching
4. Expert(s) to review list
![Page 29: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Study Selection
1. Study designs2. Subjects3. Publication types4. Languages5. Interventions6. Time Frame
![Page 30: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
• Need to establish criteria for inclusion
• Eg if reading program for schools then maybe it is only effective for younger children . …
• Determine cut-off of age acceptable.
• Or separate analyses for two groups
• Or use it as a moderating factor
![Page 31: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Data Abstraction
1. Number of items coded2. Inter-coder bias3. Items coded
![Page 32: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Coding…
Are all studies the same?
One has N=10 another has N= 1000….
Different DV scales 1-5 vs 500 point scale
How flawed is ok??? Do we include a study if we think it has a confound?
Publication bias…
![Page 33: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Statistical Analysis
1. Choice of metric
2. Choice of model/ heterogeneity
3. Publication bias
4. Study quality
5. Moderator analysis
![Page 34: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Choice of Metric Original Standardized mean difference
(Mean/Standard Deviation)
Choice of Model/ Heterogeneity Fixed Effects – current group of studies
explained Random Effects – assumes that this is
a random group from all possible
![Page 35: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Publication Bias Graphical methods Quantitative methods
Study Qualitya. Difficult to assessb. Interpret with cautionc. Numerous scales and checklists
available
![Page 36: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Moderator Analysisa. Categorical Analysisb. Regression Analysis
Allows for explanation of effects
![Page 37: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
• Meta analysis compared to review
• Objective or subjective???
![Page 38: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
The Contingent Smile: A Meta-Analysis of Sex Differences in Smiling
M LaFranceM A. HechtE Levy Paluck
Psychological Bulletin.2003, Vol. 129, No. 2, 305–334
![Page 39: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Based on 20 published studies, the effect size (d) she reported was a moderate 0.63. In a follow-up report, J. A. Hall and Halberstadt (1986) added seven new cases and reported a somewhat lower weighted effect size of 0.42.
![Page 40: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
We included in our meta-analysis unpublished studies such as conference papers and theses, as well as previously unanalyzed data that were not includedin their prior meta-analysis.
Second, we explored the influence of several moderators derived from work in other areas of sex difference research
![Page 41: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
The third goal for the present meta-analysis was to conduct amore fine-grained analysis of several moderators previously consideredby J. A. Hall and Halberstadt (1986)
![Page 42: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Method
• Retrieval of Studies• We searched the empirical literature for studies
that documented a quantitative relationship between sex and smiling, even if that relationship was not the central one of the investigation.
• Along with published articles, unpublished materials such as conference papers, theses, dissertations, and other unpublished papers were included. This was done to counter the publication bias toward positive results
![Page 43: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
![Page 44: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
![Page 45: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
![Page 46: Program Evaluation](https://reader036.vdocument.in/reader036/viewer/2022062500/568151e7550346895dc020f2/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)