One of the hallmarks of genuine evaluation is thoughtful analysis and sound evaluative reasoning that the audience can follow.
Some of our readers are not only evaluators, but also teachers or students of evaluation. We thought you might enjoy this little classic that’s done the rounds on the Internet. We found this version on
Read the whole post –> The Friday Funny: Is hell endothermic or exothermic?
A salutary reminder that just because things are measured precisely (such as money) doesn’t mean that the measurements are valid or useful. As reported by Louise Story, Landon Thomas Jr and Nelson D. Schwartz, in the New York Times on 13 Feb 2010 :
As in the American subprime crisis and the implosion of
Read the whole post –> What you measure and how you measure it – the Greek financial example
The second-funniest joke in the world, according to Richard Wiseman’s LaughLab, was the joke submitted by Geoff Anandappa of Blackpool, which is clearly about the importance of focusing key messages in evaluation summaries. Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson were going camping. They pitched their tent under the stars and went to sleep. Sometime in the middle of the night Holmes woke Watson up and said: “Watson, look up at the stars, and tell me what you see.” …
Read the whole post –> Friday funny – drawing conclusions
What does it take to get a ‘good’ evaluation? What’s suggested here are five core evaluation components that commissioners of evaluation might focus on to improve the likelihood of getting a good evaluation.
Read the whole post –> Don’t drop the ball: Five key messages for getting to a ‘good’ evaluation
We might remember ‘regression to the mean‘ from those lists of threats to validity (in terms of causal analysis). But when is it actually likely to be a problem for genuine evaluation? In a recent post by Rebecca Goldin on the stats.org blog, “Why any ol’ diet will work (if your BMI is high
Read the whole post –> Does regression to the mean explain successful diet programs?