Evaluation meaning of the word

This article is about characterizing and appraising something of interest. For other uses, see Evaluation (disambiguation).

Evaluation is a
systematic determination and assessment of a subject’s merit, worth and significance, using criteria governed by a set of standards. It can assist an organization, program, design, project or any other intervention or initiative to assess any aim, realisable concept/proposal, or any alternative, to help in decision-making; or to ascertain the degree of achievement or value in regard to the aim and objectives and results of any such action that has been completed.^[1] The primary purpose of evaluation, in addition to gaining insight into prior or existing initiatives, is to enable reflection and assist in the identification of future change.^[2] Evaluation is often used to characterize and appraise subjects of interest in a wide range of human enterprises, including the arts, criminal justice, foundations, non-profit organizations, government, health care, and other human services. It is long term and done at the end of a period of time.

Definition[edit]

Evaluation is the structured interpretation and giving of meaning to predicted or actual impacts of proposals or results. It looks at original objectives, and at what is either predicted or what was accomplished and how it was accomplished. So evaluation can be formative, that is taking place during the development of a concept or proposal, project or organization, with the intention of improving the value or effectiveness of the proposal, project, or organisation. It can also be summative, drawing lessons from a completed action or project or an organisation at a later point in time or circumstance.^[3]

Evaluation is inherently a theoretically informed approach (whether explicitly or not), and consequently any particular definition of evaluation would have been tailored to its context – the theory, needs, purpose, and methodology of the evaluation process itself. Having said this, evaluation has been defined as:

• A systematic, rigorous, and meticulous application of scientific methods to assess the design, implementation, improvement, or outcomes of a program. It is a resource-intensive process, frequently requiring resources, such as, evaluate expertise, labor, time, and a sizable budget^[4]
• «The critical assessment, in as objective a manner as possible, of the degree to which a service or its component parts fulfills stated goals» (St Leger and Wordsworth-Bell).^{[5][failed verification]} The focus of this definition is on attaining objective knowledge, and scientifically or quantitatively measuring predetermined and external concepts.
• «A study designed to assist some audience to assess an object’s merit and worth» (Stufflebeam).^{[5][failed verification]} In this definition the focus is on facts as well as value laden judgments of the programs outcomes and worth.

Purpose[edit]

The main purpose of a program evaluation can be to «determine the quality of a program by formulating a judgment» Marthe Hurteau, Sylvain Houle, Stéphanie Mongiat (2009).^[6] An alternative view is that «projects, evaluators, and other stakeholders (including funders) will all have potentially different ideas about how best to evaluate a project since each may have a different definition of ‘merit’. The core of the problem is thus about defining what is of value.»^[5]
From this perspective, evaluation «is a contested term», as «evaluators» use the term evaluation to describe an assessment, or investigation of a program whilst others simply understand evaluation as being synonymous with applied research.

There are two function considering to the evaluation purpose Formative Evaluations provide the information on the improving a product or a process Summative Evaluations provide information of short-term effectiveness or long-term impact to deciding the adoption of a product or process.^[7]

Not all evaluations serve the same purpose some evaluations serve a monitoring function rather than focusing solely on measurable program outcomes or evaluation findings and a full list of types of evaluations would be difficult to compile.^[5] This is because evaluation is not part of a unified theoretical framework,^[8] drawing on a number of disciplines, which include management and organisational theory, policy analysis, education, sociology, social anthropology, and social change.^[9]

Discussion[edit]

However, the strict adherence to a set of methodological assumptions may make the field of evaluation more acceptable to a mainstream audience but this adherence will work towards preventing evaluators from developing new strategies for dealing with the myriad problems that programs face.^[9] It is claimed that only a minority of evaluation reports are used by the evaluand (client) (Datta, 2006).^[6] One justification of this is that «when evaluation findings are challenged or utilization has failed, it was because stakeholders and clients found the inferences weak or the warrants unconvincing» (Fournier and Smith, 1993).^[6] Some reasons for this situation may be the failure of the evaluator to establish a set of shared aims with the evaluand, or creating overly ambitious aims, as well as failing to compromise and incorporate the cultural differences of individuals and programs within the evaluation aims and process.^[5] None of these problems are due to a lack of a definition of evaluation but are rather due to evaluators attempting to impose predisposed notions and definitions of evaluations on clients. The central reason for the poor utilization of evaluations is arguably^{[by whom?]} due to the lack of tailoring of evaluations to suit the needs of the client, due to a predefined idea (or definition) of what an evaluation is rather than what the client needs are (House, 1980).^[6] The development of a standard methodology for evaluation will require arriving at applicable ways of asking and stating the results of questions about ethics such as agent-principal, privacy, stakeholder definition, limited liability; and could-the-money-be-spent-more-wisely issues.

Standards[edit]

Depending on the topic of interest, there are professional groups that review the quality and rigor of evaluation processes.

Evaluating programs and projects, regarding their value and impact within the context they are implemented, can be ethically challenging. Evaluators may encounter complex, culturally specific systems resistant to external evaluation. Furthermore, the project organization or other stakeholders may be invested in a particular evaluation outcome. Finally, evaluators themselves may encounter «conflict of interest (COI)» issues, or experience interference or pressure to present findings that support a particular assessment.

General professional codes of conduct, as determined by the employing organization, usually cover three broad aspects of behavioral standards, and include inter-collegial relations (such as respect for diversity and privacy), operational issues (due competence, documentation accuracy and appropriate use of resources), and conflicts of interest (nepotism, accepting gifts and other kinds of favoritism).^[10] However, specific guidelines particular to the evaluator’s role that can be utilized in the management of unique ethical challenges are required. The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation has developed standards for program, personnel, and student evaluation. The Joint Committee standards are broken into four sections: Utility, Feasibility, Propriety, and Accuracy. Various European institutions have also prepared their own standards, more or less related to those produced by the Joint Committee. They provide guidelines about basing value judgments on systematic inquiry, evaluator competence and integrity, respect for people, and regard for the general and public welfare.^[11]

The American Evaluation Association has created a set of Guiding Principles for evaluators.^[12] The order of these principles does not imply priority among them; priority will vary by situation and evaluator role. The principles run as follows:

• Systematic Inquiry: evaluators conduct systematic, data-based inquiries about whatever is being evaluated. This requires quality data collection, including a defensible choice of indicators, which lends credibility to findings.^[13] Findings are credible when they are demonstrably evidence-based, reliable and valid. This also pertains to the choice of methodology employed, such that it is consistent with the aims of the evaluation and provides dependable data. Furthermore, utility of findings is critical such that the information obtained by evaluation is comprehensive and timely, and thus serves to provide maximal benefit and use to stakeholders.^[10]
• Competence: evaluators provide competent performance to stakeholders. This requires that evaluation teams comprise an appropriate combination of competencies, such that varied and appropriate expertise is available for the evaluation process, and that evaluators work within their scope of capability.^[10]
• Integrity/Honesty: evaluators ensure the honesty and integrity of the entire evaluation process. A key element of this principle is freedom from bias in evaluation and this is underscored by three principles: impartiality, independence, and transparency.

Independence is attained through ensuring independence of judgment is upheld such that evaluation
conclusions are not influenced or pressured by another party, and avoidance of conflict of
interest, such that the evaluator does not have a stake in a particular conclusion. Conflict of
interest is at issue particularly where funding of evaluations is provided by particular bodies
with a stake in conclusions of the evaluation, and this is seen as potentially compromising the
independence of the evaluator. Whilst it is acknowledged that evaluators may be familiar with
agencies or projects that they are required to evaluate, independence requires that they not have
been involved in the planning or implementation of the project. A declaration of interest should
be made where any benefits or association with project are stated. Independence of judgment is
required to be maintained against any pressures brought to bear on evaluators, for example, by
project funders wishing to modify evaluations such that the project appears more effective than

findings can verify.^[10]

Impartiality pertains to findings being a fair and thorough assessment of strengths and
weaknesses of a project or program. This requires taking due input from all stakeholders involved
and findings presented without bias and with a transparent, proportionate, and persuasive link
between findings and recommendations. Thus evaluators are required to delimit their findings to
evidence. A mechanism to ensure impartiality is external and internal review. Such review is
required of significant (determined in terms of cost or sensitivity) evaluations. The review is
based on quality of work and the degree to which a demonstrable link is provided between findings

and recommendations.^[10]

Transparency requires that stakeholders are aware of the reason for the evaluation, the criteria
by which evaluation occurs and the purposes to which the findings will be applied. Access to the
evaluation document should be facilitated through findings being easily readable, with clear
explanations of evaluation methodologies, approaches, sources of information, and costs

incurred.^[10]

• Respect for People: Evaluators respect the security, dignity and self-worth of the respondents, program participants, clients, and other stakeholders with whom they interact.This is particularly pertinent with regards to those who will be impacted upon by the evaluation findings.^[13] Protection of people includes ensuring informed consent from those involved in the evaluation, upholding confidentiality, and ensuring that the identity of those who may provide sensitive information towards the program evaluation is protected.^[14] Evaluators are ethically required to respect the customs and beliefs of those who are impacted upon by the evaluation or program activities. Examples of how such respect is demonstrated is through respecting local customs e.g. dress codes, respecting peoples privacy, and minimizing demands on others’ time.^[10] Where stakeholders wish to place objections to evaluation findings, such a process should be facilitated through the local office of the evaluation organization, and procedures for lodging complaints or queries should be accessible and clear.
• Responsibilities for General and Public Welfare: Evaluators articulate and take into account the diversity of interests and values that may be related to the general and public welfare. Access to evaluation documents by the wider public should be facilitated such that discussion and feedback is enabled.^[10]

Furthermore, the international organizations such as the I.M.F. and the World Bank have independent evaluation functions. The various funds, programmes, and agencies of the United Nations has a mix of independent, semi-independent and self-evaluation functions, which have organized themselves as a system-wide UN Evaluation Group (UNEG),^[13] that works together to strengthen the function, and to establish UN norms and standards for evaluation. There is also an evaluation group within the OECD-DAC, which endeavors to improve development evaluation standards.^[15] The independent evaluation units of the major multinational development banks (MDBs) have also created the Evaluation Cooperation Group^[16] to strengthen the use of evaluation for greater MDB effectiveness and accountability, share lessons from MDB evaluations, and promote evaluation harmonization and collaboration.

Perspectives[edit]

The word «evaluation» has various connotations for different people, raising issues related to this process that include; what type of evaluation should be conducted; why there should be an evaluation process and how the evaluation is integrated into a program, for the purpose of gaining greater knowledge and awareness? There are also various factors inherent in the evaluation process, for example; to critically examine influences within a program that involve the gathering and analyzing of relative information about a program.

Michael Quinn Patton motivated the concept that the evaluation procedure should be directed towards:

• Activities
• Characteristics
• Outcomes
• The making of judgments on a program
• Improving its effectiveness,
• Informed programming decisions

Founded on another perspective of evaluation by Thomson and Hoffman in 2003, it is possible for a situation to be encountered, in which the process could not be considered advisable; for instance, in the event of a program being unpredictable, or unsound. This would include it lacking a consistent routine; or the concerned parties unable to reach an agreement regarding the purpose of the program. In addition, an influencer, or manager, refusing to incorporate relevant, important central issues within the evaluation

Approaches[edit]

There exist several conceptually distinct ways of thinking about, designing, and conducting evaluation efforts. Many of the evaluation approaches in use today make truly unique contributions to solving important problems, while others refine existing approaches in some way.

Classification of approaches[edit]

Two classifications of evaluation approaches by House^[17] and Stufflebeam and Webster^[18] can be combined into a manageable number of approaches in terms of their unique and important underlying principles.^{[clarification needed]}

House considers all major evaluation approaches to be based on a common ideology entitled liberal democracy. Important principles of this ideology include freedom of choice, the uniqueness of the individual and empirical inquiry grounded in objectivity. He also contends that they are all based on subjectivist ethics, in which ethical conduct is based on the subjective or intuitive experience of an individual or group. One form of subjectivist ethics is utilitarian, in which «the good» is determined by what maximizes a single, explicit interpretation of happiness for society as a whole. Another form of subjectivist ethics is intuitionist/pluralist, in which no single interpretation of «the good» is assumed and such interpretations need not be explicitly stated nor justified.

These ethical positions have corresponding epistemologies—philosophies for obtaining knowledge. The objectivist epistemology is associated with the utilitarian ethic; in general, it is used to acquire knowledge that can be externally verified (intersubjective agreement) through publicly exposed methods and data. The subjectivist epistemology is associated with the intuitionist/pluralist ethic and is used to acquire new knowledge based on existing personal knowledge, as well as experiences that are (explicit) or are not (tacit) available for public inspection. House then divides each epistemological approach into two main political perspectives. Firstly, approaches can take an elite perspective, focusing on the interests of managers and professionals; or they also can take a mass perspective, focusing on consumers and participatory approaches.

Stufflebeam and Webster place approaches into one of three groups, according to their orientation toward the role of values and ethical consideration. The political orientation promotes a positive or negative view of an object regardless of what its value actually is and might be—they call this pseudo-evaluation. The questions orientation includes approaches that might or might not provide answers specifically related to the value of an object—they call this quasi-evaluation. The values orientation includes approaches primarily intended to determine the value of an object—they call this true evaluation.

When the above concepts are considered simultaneously, fifteen evaluation approaches can be identified in terms of epistemology, major perspective (from House), and orientation.^[18] Two pseudo-evaluation approaches, politically controlled and public relations studies, are represented. They are based on an objectivist epistemology from an elite perspective. Six quasi-evaluation approaches use an objectivist epistemology. Five of them—experimental research, management information systems, testing programs, objectives-based studies, and content analysis—take an elite perspective. Accountability takes a mass perspective. Seven true evaluation approaches are included. Two approaches, decision-oriented and policy studies, are based on an objectivist epistemology from an elite perspective. Consumer-oriented studies are based on an objectivist epistemology from a mass perspective. Two approaches—accreditation/certification and connoisseur studies—are based on a subjectivist epistemology from an elite perspective. Finally, adversary and client-centered studies are based on a subjectivist epistemology from a mass perspective.

Summary of approaches[edit]

The following table is used to summarize each approach in terms of four attributes—organizer, purpose, strengths, and weaknesses. The organizer represents the main considerations or cues practitioners use to organize a study. The purpose represents the desired outcome for a study at a very general level. Strengths and weaknesses represent other attributes that should be considered when deciding whether to use the approach for a particular study. The following narrative highlights differences between approaches grouped together.

Summary of approaches for conducting evaluations
Approach	Attribute
Organizer	Purpose	Key strengths	Key weaknesses
Politically controlled	Threats	Get, keep or increase influence, power or money.	Secure evidence advantageous to the client in a conflict.	Violates the principle of full & frank disclosure.
Public relations	Propaganda needs	Create positive public image.	Secure evidence most likely to bolster public support.	Violates the principles of balanced reporting, justified conclusions, & objectivity.
Experimental research	Causal relationships	Determine causal relationships between variables.	Strongest paradigm for determining causal relationships.	Requires controlled setting, limits range of evidence, focuses primarily on results.
Management information systems	Scientific efficiency	Continuously supply evidence needed to fund, direct, & control programs.	Gives managers detailed evidence about complex programs.	Human service variables are rarely amenable to the narrow, quantitative definitions needed.
Testing programs	Individual differences	Compare test scores of individuals & groups to selected norms.	Produces valid & reliable evidence in many performance areas. Very familiar to public.	Data usually only on testee performance, overemphasizes test-taking skills, can be poor sample of what is taught or expected.
Objectives-based	Objectives	Relates outcomes to objectives.	Common sense appeal, widely used, uses behavioral objectives & testing technologies.	Leads to terminal evidence often too narrow to provide basis for judging the value of a program.
Content analysis	Content of a communication	Describe & draw conclusion about a communication.	Allows for unobtrusive analysis of large volumes of unstructured, symbolic materials.	Sample may be unrepresentative yet overwhelming in volume. Analysis design often overly simplistic for question.
Accountability	Performance expectations	Provide constituents with an accurate accounting of results.	Popular with constituents. Aimed at improving quality of products and services.	Creates unrest between practitioners & consumers. Politics often forces premature studies.
Decision-oriented	Decisions	Provide a knowledge & value base for making & defending decisions.	Encourages use of evaluation to plan & implement needed programs. Helps justify decisions about plans & actions.	Necessary collaboration between evaluator & decision-maker provides opportunity to bias results.
Policy studies	Broad issues	Identify and assess potential costs & benefits of competing policies.	Provide general direction for broadly focused actions.	Often corrupted or subverted by politically motivated actions of participants.
Consumer-oriented	Generalized needs & values, effects	Judge the relative merits of alternative goods & services.	Independent appraisal to protect practitioners & consumers from shoddy products & services. High public credibility.	Might not help practitioners do a better job. Requires credible & competent evaluators.
Accreditation / certification	Standards & guidelines	Determine if institutions, programs, & personnel should be approved to perform specified functions.	Helps public make informed decisions about quality of organizations & qualifications of personnel.	Standards & guidelines typically emphasize intrinsic criteria to the exclusion of outcome measures.
Connoisseur	Critical guideposts	Critically describe, appraise, & illuminate an object.	Exploits highly developed expertise on subject of interest. Can inspire others to more insightful efforts.	Dependent on small number of experts, making evaluation susceptible to subjectivity, bias, and corruption.
Adversary Evaluation	«Hot» issues	Present the pro & cons of an issue.	Ensures balances presentations of represented perspectives.	Can discourage cooperation, heighten animosities.
Client-centered	Specific concerns & issues	Foster understanding of activities & how they are valued in a given setting & from a variety of perspectives.	Practitioners are helped to conduct their own evaluation.	Low external credibility, susceptible to bias in favor of participants.
Note. Adapted and condensed primarily from House (1978) and Stufflebeam & Webster (1980).[18]

Pseudo-evaluation[edit]

Politically controlled and public relations studies are based on an objectivist epistemology from an elite perspective.^{[clarification needed]} Although both of these approaches seek to misrepresent value interpretations about an object, they function differently from each other. Information obtained through politically controlled studies is released or withheld to meet the special interests of the holder, whereas public relations information creates a positive image of an object regardless of the actual situation. Despite the application of both studies in real scenarios, neither of these approaches is acceptable evaluation practice.

Objectivist, elite, quasi-evaluation[edit]

As a group, these five approaches represent a highly respected collection of disciplined inquiry approaches. They are considered quasi-evaluation approaches because particular studies legitimately can focus only on questions of knowledge without addressing any questions of value. Such studies are, by definition, not evaluations. These approaches can produce characterizations without producing appraisals, although specific studies can produce both. Each of these approaches serves its intended purpose well. They are discussed roughly in order of the extent to which they approach the objectivist ideal.

• Experimental research is the best approach for determining causal relationships between variables. The potential problem with using this as an evaluation approach is that its highly controlled and stylized methodology may not be sufficiently responsive to the dynamically changing needs of most human service programs.
• Management information systems (MISs) can give detailed information about the dynamic operations of complex programs. However, this information is restricted to readily quantifiable data usually available at regular intervals.
• Testing programs are familiar to just about anyone who has attended school, served in the military, or worked for a large company. These programs are good at comparing individuals or groups to selected norms in a number of subject areas or to a set of standards of performance. However, they only focus on testee performance and they might not adequately sample what is taught or expected.
• Objectives-based approaches relate outcomes to prespecified objectives, allowing judgments to be made about their level of attainment. Unfortunately, the objectives are often not proven to be important or they focus on outcomes too narrow to provide the basis for determining the value of an object.
• Content analysis is a quasi-evaluation approach because content analysis judgments need not be based on value statements. Instead, they can be based on knowledge. Such content analyses are not evaluations. On the other hand, when content analysis judgments are based on values, such studies are evaluations.

Objectivist, mass, quasi-evaluation[edit]

• Accountability is popular with constituents because it is intended to provide an accurate accounting of results that can improve the quality of products and services. However, this approach quickly can turn practitioners and consumers into adversaries when implemented in a heavy-handed fashion.

Objectivist, elite, true evaluation[edit]

• Decision-oriented studies are designed to provide a knowledge base for making and defending decisions. This approach usually requires the close collaboration between an evaluator and decision-maker, allowing it to be susceptible to corruption and bias.
• Policy studies provide general guidance and direction on broad issues by identifying and assessing potential costs and benefits of competing policies. The drawback is these studies can be corrupted or subverted by the politically motivated actions of the participants.

Objectivist, mass, true evaluation[edit]

• Consumer-oriented studies are used to judge the relative merits of goods and services based on generalized needs and values, along with a comprehensive range of effects. However, this approach does not necessarily help practitioners improve their work, and it requires a very good and credible evaluator to do it well.

Subjectivist, elite, true evaluation[edit]

• Accreditation / certification programs are based on self-study and peer review of organizations, programs, and personnel. They draw on the insights, experience, and expertise of qualified individuals who use established guidelines to determine if the applicant should be approved to perform specified functions. However, unless performance-based standards are used, attributes of applicants and the processes they perform often are overemphasized in relation to measures of outcomes or effects.
• Connoisseur studies use the highly refined skills of individuals intimately familiar with the subject of the evaluation to critically characterize and appraise it. This approach can help others see programs in a new light, but it is difficult to find a qualified and unbiased connoisseur.

Subject, mass, true evaluation[edit]

• The adversary approach focuses on drawing out the pros and cons of controversial issues through quasi-legal proceedings. This helps ensure a balanced presentation of different perspectives on the issues, but it is also likely to discourage later cooperation and heighten animosities between contesting parties if «winners» and «losers» emerge.

Client-centered[edit]

• Client-centered studies address specific concerns and issues of practitioners and other clients of the study in a particular setting. These studies help people understand the activities and values involved from a variety of perspectives. However, this responsive approach can lead to low external credibility and a favorable bias toward those who participated in the study.

Methods and techniques[edit]

Evaluation is methodologically diverse. Methods may be qualitative or quantitative, and include case studies, survey research, statistical analysis, model building, and many more such as:

See also[edit]

• Monitoring and Evaluation is a process used by governments, international organizations and NGOs to assess ongoing or past activities
• Assessment is the process of gathering and analyzing specific information as part of an evaluation
• Competency evaluation is a means for teachers to determine the ability of their students in other ways besides the standardized test
• Educational evaluation is evaluation that is conducted specifically in an educational setting
• Immanent evaluation, opposed by Gilles Deleuze to value judgment
• Performance evaluation is a term from the field of language testing. It stands in contrast to competence evaluation
• Program evaluation is essentially a set of philosophies and techniques to determine if a program ‘works’
• Donald Kirkpatrick’s Evaluation Model for training evaluation
• Rating
• Efficiently updatable neural network A neural network based evaluation function
• Metric fixation

References[edit]

External links[edit]

• Links to Assessment and Evaluation Resources — List of links to resources on several topics
• Glossaries
• Evaluation Portal Link Collection Evaluation link collection with information about evaluation journals, dissemination, projects, societies, how-to texts, books, and much more
• Free Resources for Methods in Evaluation and Social Research
• Introduction to and Discussions on Monitoring & Evaluation of Development Programs & Projects
• Basic Guide to Program Evaluation, Gene Shackman
• BetterEvaluation — A website and resource library with freely available information about how to conduct, manage, and use evaluation well.

оценка, определение качества, определение количества

существительное ↓

Словосочетания

evaluate a training program as effective — оценить учебную программу как эффективную  
an impartial evaluation of the job applicant’s qualifications that does not consider age, gender, or race — беспристрастная оценка квалификации претендентов на должность, без учёта их возраста, пола или расовой принадлежности  
campaign evaluation — оценка результатов эффективности кампании  
to make an evaluation — оценивать  
critical evaluation — критическая оценка  
fair / objective evaluation — объективная оценка  
evaluation policies and procedures — основные принципы и порядок проведения аттестации  
evaluation software — ознакомительное программное обеспечение  
evaluation database — оценочная база данных (напр., в системах распознавания речи)  
project evaluation — оценка выполнения проекта  
cost-effectiveness evaluation — оценка эффективности затрат  
bid evaluation — оценка предложений  

Примеры с переводом

Возможные однокоренные слова

1	0   0 Relationships Related Term:  valuation value Distinguish From:  appraisal n. ~ The process of assessing the value of records, especially as regards their destruction. Notes:  Evaluation is typicall [..]

2	0   0 Evaluation Three types of evaluation have been identified for the 2014-20 programming period: before (ex ante), during (ongoing), and after (ex post). Cohesion policy is evaluated on a partnership basis. Member [..]

3	0   0 Evaluation The systematic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed project, programme or policy, its design, implementation and results. The aim is to determine the relevance and fulfilment of object [..]

4	0   0 Evaluation The patient assessment that may include gathering of information through interview, observation, examination, and use of specific tests that allows a dentist to diagnose existing conditions. Please re [..]

5	0   0 Evaluation 1755, «action of appraising or valuing,» from French évaluation, noun of action from évaluer «to find the value of,» from é- «out» (see ex-) + valuer (see value (n.)). [..]

6	0   0 Evaluation Refer to «See Also» column to the right.

7	0   0 Evaluation The study of a patient to determine the cause and effect of an illness, the study of a set of facts to determine what the facts mean, or the study of a program to determine its effectiveness.

8	0   0 Evaluation The work involved in gaining a knowledge of the size, shape, position and value of coal.

9	0   0 Evaluation A thorough appraisal or determination of the value of information, resources, or options. [D02721]

10	0   0 Evaluation Evaluation is the systematic consideration of the value, quality, importance or worth of something or someone.  Procurement processes often require judgements to be made, for example deciding whether [..]

11	0   0 Evaluation Technical evaluation focuses on the tenderer’s compliance with the requirements of the specification.  When acquiring complex categories, the evaluation may separate technical dimensions of the bid [..]

12	0   0 Evaluation The systematic and structured evaluation of suppliers’ offers.  The outcome of tender evaluation is the selection of the successful offers.  However the processes through which the offers are eval [..]

13	0   0 Evaluation An assessment of an intervention (for example, a treatment, service, project, or programme) to see whether it achieves its aims.

14	0   0 Evaluation act of ascertaining or fixing the value or worth of an appraisal of the value of something; "he set a high valuation on friendship" measure: evaluate or estimate the nature, [..]

15

0   0 Evaluation  1. Assessment of an information technology (IT) product or system against defined security-related functional and assurance criteria, performed by a combination of testing and analytic techniques.   2.   The detailed examination of a system or a product to search for vulnerabilities and to determine the extent to which the required or claimed [..]

16	0   0 Evaluation 1. The examination and overall appraisal of something to determine its value. 2. Determining somethings success. 3. Interpretation of test results.

17	0   0 Evaluation evaluation (pop)

18	0   0 Evaluation Process of assessing work completed by an individual, group, or institution with the aim of determining whether the individual, group, or institution has meet predetermined standards.

19	0   0 Evaluation Assessment against a standard. Evaluations can assess both the process (of establishing a programme to deliver an outcome) and outcomes (ultimate objectives)

20	0   0 Evaluation Evaluation is the process of assessment or appraisal to determine whether a design meets the criteria, or meets the design brief.

21	0   0 Evaluation Any systematic method for gathering information about the impact and effectiveness of a learning offering. Results of the measurements can be used to improve the offering, determine whether the learni [..]

22	0   0 Evaluation See Assessment

23

0   0 Evaluation Periodical assessment of a project’s efficiency, effectiveness, impact, sustainability and suitability within the framework of pre-determined objectives. Evaluation is an independent examination of a project’s history, objectives, results, activities and utilized means in order to gain lessons to help make future decisions.

24	0   0 Evaluation According to 15 USCS § 2681 (4), [Title 15. Commerce and Trade; Chapter 53. Toxic Substances Control; Lead Exposure Reduction] the term evaluation means “risk assessment, inspection, or risk assess [..]

25	0   0 Evaluation Systematic inquiry to inform decision making and improve programs. Systematic implies that the evaluation is a thoughtful process of asking critical questions, collecting appropriate information, and then analyzing and interpreting the information for a specific use and purpose.

26	0   0 Evaluation a structured conversation between facilitators and participants to enable participants to analyse and appraise what they have learned from an experiential and participatory activity. In the process, p [..]

27	0   0 Evaluation In the Australian higher education context, the term evaluation is generally used to refer to the assessment of quality, of student satisfaction, and of the process of review of curriculum, content, a [..]

28	0   0 Evaluation (n) act of ascertaining or fixing the value or worth of(n) an appraisal of the value of something

29	0   0 Evaluation A review of a student’s non-AU post-secondary studies to determine if any credit can be transferred towards the AU program.

30	0   0 Evaluation To judge or determine the worth or quality of.  Evaluation has a logic and should be carefully distinguished from mere subjective preference. The elements of its logic may be put in the form of quest [..]

31

0   0 Evaluation An assessment of the accomplishment or worth of an activity or countermeasure.  Evaluations are predominantly of two types, (1) administrative evaluation which measures the actual activities, tasks, dollars against those planned; (2) impact evaluation which measures an activity against a specific goal, e.g., a reduction of fatalities, injuries.

32	0   0 Evaluation The process of deciding the severity of a condition after an indication has been interpreted. Evaluation determines if the test object should be rejected, repaired or accepted. See indication and inte [..]

33	0   0 Evaluation As part of the Transportation Planning Process, evaluation is the process of systematically assessing the costs and benefits of competing alternatives. In addition to such a priori applications, evalu [..]

34	0   0 Evaluation Amazon Machine Learning: The process of measuring the predictive performance of a machine learning (ML) model.Also a machine learning object that stores the details and result of an ML model evaluatio [..]

35	0   0 Evaluation a process for measuring and judging the quality of performance of an institution, a program, a process, or individuals, e.g., instructors, administrators. While assessment of student learning and eval [..]

36	0   0 Evaluation A means to measure, compare, and judge the quality of student work, schools, or a specific educational program. CRESST

37

0   0 Evaluation Evaluation of teaching and academic studies in a subject or department and the related degree programmes comprises all those activities which aim at assessing quality and fitness for purpose and of purpose.  Strengths and weaknesses of education and training can be identified by stocktaking, analysis and proposals formulated to ensure the sustaina [..]

38	0   0 Evaluation The process or results of an assessment or appraisal in relation to stated objectives, standards, or criteria; in vocational education and training, may be applied to organisations, programs, policies, courses, etc.

39	0   0 Evaluation A formal process of assessing how successful an activity, program or plan has been.

40	0   0 Evaluation focused on making a judgment or determination concerning the quality of a performance, work product or use of skills against a set of standards. Evaluations are designed for and intended to document the level of achievement that has been attained.

41	0   0 Evaluation to examine, judge, and analyze the data collected through the assessment process.

42	0   0 Evaluation represents a judgment or determination of value (e.g., effective or ineffective, or below, at, or above grade level) is placed on some performance.

43

0   0 Evaluation Process of collecting and analyzing data on various aspects of a program, usually for the purpose of program planning and goal setting, securing funding, improving processes and outcomes, and allocating resources. Includes formative (collecting and analyzing data to focus on “what’s working and what needs to be improved”) and summative (co [..]

44	0   0 Evaluation systematic determination of merit, worth, and significance of something or someone using criteria against a set of standards. Evaluation is often used to characterize and appraise subjects of interest [..]

45	0   0 Evaluation A process that “applies judgment to data that are gathered and interpreted through assessment” (Palomba & Banta, 1999, p. 4). The terms assessment and evaluation are often used in tandem to re [..]

46

0   0 Evaluation The process of collecting information about a student’s learning needs through a series of individual tests, observations, and talks with the student, the family, and others. Also, the process of obtaining detailed information about an infant or toddler’s developmental levels and needs for services. May also be called Assessment.

47

0   0 Evaluation An evaluation is the determination of the child’s abilities and disabilities. This includes observations of the child, medical information, information provided by the parents, and testing by specialists. Testing may include health, vision, intelligence, hearing, communication and motor assessments.

48	0   0 Evaluation Determination of the degree of a physical, mental, or emotional handicap. The Diagnosis is applied to legal qualification for benefits and Income under Disability Insurance and to eligibility for Soci [..]

49	0   0 Evaluation Any process by which toxicity, Metabolism, Absorption, elimination, preferred route of administration, safe dosage range, etc., for a drug or group of Drugs is determined through clinical assessment i [..]

50	0   0 Evaluation Formal Programs for assessing Drug Prescription against some standard. Drug Utilization Review may consider clinical appropriateness, cost effectiveness, and, in some cases, outcomes. Review is usuall [..]

51	0   0 Evaluation The integration of epidemiologic, sociological, economic, and other analytic Sciences in the study of Health Services. Health Services Research is usually concerned with relationships between need, de [..]

52	0   0 Evaluation Research carried out by Nurses that uses interviews, Data Collection, Observation, surveys, etc., to evaluate Nursing, Health, clinical, and Nursing Education Programs and Curricula, and which also de [..]

53	0   0 Evaluation Preclinical testing of Drugs in experimental Animals or In Vitro for their biological and toxic effects and potential clinical applications.

54	0   0 Evaluation Studies designed to assess the efficacy of Programs. They may include the evaluation of cost-effectiveness, the extent to which objectives are met, or impact.

55	0   0 Evaluation Assessment of physiological capacities in relation to job requirements. It is usually done by measuring certain physiological (e.g., circulatory and respiratory) variables during a gradually increasin [..]

56	0   0 Evaluation A process that focuses on the worth and value of what we’re doing. It seeks answers to questions such as «What is the impact?” «How good is this?” «Is it good enough?”

57	0   0 Evaluation An assessment of an individual’s abilities (i.e., speech and language, motoric, cognitive, etc.) in order to determine their strengths and weaknesses, and to see whether or not deficits are signi [..]

58	0   0 Evaluation Procedures used by qualified personnel to determine whether a child has a disability and the nature and extent of the special education and related services that the child needs.

59	0   0 Evaluation and Outcome.

60	0   0 Evaluation The systematic and objective assessment of an on-going or completed project, program or policy, its design, implementation and results. There are two types of evaluation of significant importance to t [..]

61

0   0 Evaluation Evaluation means the systematic collection and analysis of psychological, behavioral and social information; the process by which information is gathered, analyzed and documented. In this document the term “sex offense-specific evaluation” is used to describe the evaluation provided for sex offenders under the jurisdiction of the criminal justi [..]

62	0   0 Evaluation One or more processes for interpreting the data and evidence accumulated through assessment processes. Evaluation determines the extent to which student learning outcomes are being attained. Evaluatio [..]

63	0   0 Evaluation Evaluation is one of the 6 key concepts of computational thinking and is concerned with making judgements, in an objective and systematic way whenever possible.

64	0   0 Evaluation An assessment may be used to evaluate, or to determine whether a child may have learning disabilities or ADHD, may be called an evaluation and would probably take into consideration developmental hist [..]

65	0   0 Evaluation The process performed by the restorer to establish recommended corrective actions based on information and evidence collected during the inspection process and conclusions from the preliminary determi [..]

66	0   0 Evaluation A process that attempts to determine as systematically and objectively as possible the relevance, effectiveness, and impact of activities in the light of their objectives.

67	0   0 Evaluation Efforts aimed at determining as systematically and objectively as possible the effectiveness and impact of health-related (and other) activities in relation to objectives, taking into account the resources that have been used.

68

0   0 Evaluation The process of making a value judgment or an assessment of merit concerning one or more variables of interest that have been measured and analyzed. For example, grading is an instance of evaluation. (Consider the following verbal analogy: Measurement is to testing as evaluation is to grading.)

69	0   0 Evaluation The systematic assessment of the operation and/or outcomes of a program or policy, compared to explicit or implicit standards, in order to contribute to the improvement of the program or policy. [10 [..]

70	0   0 Evaluation A systematic and objective assessment of the design, implementation and outcome of an on-going or completed intervention. The two main purposes of evaluation are i) to improve future aid policy and in [..]

71	0   0 Evaluation Any systematic method for gathering information about the impact and effectiveness of a learning offering. Results of the measurements can be used to improve the offering, determine whether the learni [..]

72

0   0 Evaluation The evaluation of bibliographic records sent for batch processing involves an extensive analysis of the data. This evaluation is necessary because a custom computer set up is created to process the records. Batch Services staff identify problems with the records as well as problems with the file structure. All of this analysis is done to obtain the [..]

73	0   0 Evaluation the systematic investigation of the value and impact of an intervention or program Evidence-based

74	0   0 Evaluation A process to determine progress towards a goal. In public health, evaluation is a systematic means by which the value of programs, initiatives, or interventions can be determined.

75	0   0 Evaluation A relatively structured, analytical effort undertaken selectively to answer specific management questions regarding USAID funded assistance programs or activities (USAID Automated Directives System — [..]

76	0   0 Evaluation Evaluation of the project happens during ( in itinere evaluation, mid-term evaluation) and/or after its implementation (final evaluation). It aims at obtaining a general and impartial judgement on project’s achievements (scope and quality of outputs and results) and impact.

77	0   0 Evaluation A review of the results of a grant, with the emphasis upon whether the grant achieved its desired objective.

78	0   0 Evaluation An evaluation is an activity by a coach to evaluate a student-athlete’s academic or athletic ability. This would include visiting the student-athlete’s high school or watch the student-athlete in competition or practice.

79	0   0 Evaluation A coach’s review of a student’s athletic or academic ability. A coach typically evaluates a student either at his or her high school or during a showcase, practice, competition, club practice, or [..]

80	0   0 Evaluation A periodic assessment of progress toward achieving long-term objectives and goals. Monitoring and evaluation are the third phase in the management cycle.

81	0   0 Evaluation An assessment, such as an annual personnel performance review used as the basis for a salary increase or bonus, or a summary of a particular situation. (mathematics) A completion of a mathematical [..]

82	0   0 Evaluation A process by which a strategy, issue, or relationship is studied and assessed in-depth. (IDRC, Outcome Mapping) http://web.idrc.ca/en/ev-28407-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html

83	0   0 Evaluation Gathering and analysing information at particular stages in delivering specific work (like a project or service) to assess how well it is meeting its objectives.

84	0   0 Evaluation may be considered as clinical, educational or service.

85	0   0 Evaluation

Dictionary.university is a dictionary written by people like you and me.
Please help and add a word. All sort of words are welcome!

Add meaning

In addition to the monthly written evaluation, at the end of each year the PROJIMO team has an ‘evaluation dinner’. ❋ Unknown (1999)

He may sound alarmist, but his evaluation is actually rather balanced. ❋ Unknown (2009)

This kind of evaluation is of course time-consuming, and Carleton has the advantage of being a small school (1,800 students) with a low student-teacher ratio. ❋ Unknown (2005)

You think showing that my evaluation is not demonstrably perfect kills my position. ❋ Unknown (2009)

An important research study exemplifying both accountability and transformation purposes of evaluation is the Student ❋ Unknown (2009)

The evaluation is part of what the White House is calling the Strategic Implementation Plan to keep on top of Afghanistan, according to one of the officials. ❋ Unknown (2009)

We reject all your «passkey» piffle, point to the bankruptcy of your «moral value,» and contend that the presence of even the most basic skills of ethical evaluation is vastly preferable to your line of crap. ❋ Hal Duncan (2009)

The main aim of this evaluation is to set out the context for this framework and to lead to a series of recommendations that will underpin it. ❋ Unknown (2009)

As for test scores, I think they must play a role in evaluation because we need something that is close to objective in the mix. ❋ Unknown (2010)

Instead of standardized test results, the core evaluation is a periodic comprehensive review covering the range of attributes parents and communities want for their schools. ❋ Valerie Strauss (2010)

Part of the evaluation is based on the fact that the Medicare “doc fix”, which would add $371 billion to the pricetag, was removed from the Senate bill. ❋ Unknown (2010)

Their findings weren’t the final word on whether David Tarloff can stand trial; at least one other evaluation is planned, and ultimately a judge will rule on the issue. ❋ AP (2010)

Teacher evaluation is emerging as the central flash point in education policy debates. ❋ Jay Mathews (2010)

Teacher evaluation is controversial because it combines two elements new to education professionals and the public – quantifiable measurement of performance, and stakes like firing or public exposure. ❋ Jay Mathews (2010)

My evaluation is based on relevance, whether the study is likely to be of value to the literature, whether the study is appropriate in design, and whether the conclusions are valid internally and externally. ❋ Unknown (2009)

we are going [to do] an evaluation of your [mood] [today]. ❋ Sexisgreat7 (2020)

A woman evaluates a [gemstone] to [determine] it’s [value]. ❋ Lexi12 (2017)

Melissa: «[oh my gawd] Stephanie is ugly»
[Clarissa]: «oh my gawd are you dissin’ [my bestie]?»
Melissa: «oh my gawd no i’m just evaluating»
Clarissa: «oh my gawd did you evaluate my bestie?» ❋ Sushi Mcbetterthanyou (2018)

Karen: I’m so sick of [my cum] evaluator giving my cum a 3 out of 10!
[Sharen]: dw babe ill still [slurp it]
Karen: sex?
Sharen: only if you want herpes? ❋ William Donelly (2021)

Drew: What’s up Joe?
Joe: I just got kicked out of school because I never [go to class] and my marks suck, [I’m flat] broke [because I can’t] keep a job, and my girlfriend just dumped me… fuck.
Drew: You need to re-evaluate. ❋ Edsy (2008)

I [downloaded] an unlimited evaluation of [Maya] from [alt].binaries.mac.applications. Works great! ❋ Bkdouble (2006)

Guy 1: You didn’t spend the night at her place?
Guy 2: No, I [froze] on [the intercourse] [evaluation], so she kicked me out. ❋ Resident Alian (2009)

I ordered a new [sex toy] from [eBay] & they’re already [bugging] me to rate it. I haveb’t even GOT it yet! Talk about premature evaluation! ❋ Cyberpope67,BC,Canada (2015)

Damn she’s hot, but I wish I would of known about Tammy [Sue’s] [step-brother] Earl before I married her. Will they ever find a cure for [premature evaluation]? ❋ Mishpuka (2010)

«Damn all [those kids] have such post-evaluative syndrome. They just compared each character in [Trainspotting] to one of their close and [personal] acquaintances.» ❋ Icehead (2006)