22 Mar At the heart of any evaluation is the evaluation design. It is now common consensus in policy evaluation that no amount of sophis
PLEASE READ THE ASSINGMENT!!!!
At the heart of any evaluation is the evaluation design. It is now common consensus in policy evaluation that no amount of sophisticated analysis can repair a poorly designed study. There is no such thing as a perfect evaluation design and there are always tradeoffs. One of the most important tradeoffs has to do with internal and external validity. This is true whether you are doing a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods evaluation.
For this Assignment, review this week’s Learning Resources and begin the process of developing your evaluation design by outlining its main features.
ASSIGNEMNT!!!!!!!!
2- to 3-page paper that addresses the following:
(THE POGRAM I CHOOSE IS NAMI- National Alliance on Mental Illness )
https://www.nami.org/home
- Explain how you would implement your evaluation design within an official policy evaluation. Be sure to include specific examples from the course readings, academic research and professional experience. Provide a rationale for your implementation choices, including examples and references.
- Explain how you would address validity threats, particularly internal validity (plausible rival hypothesis). Provide a rationale for these plans, including any expected outcomes, using examples and references
Resources:
Langbein, L. (2012). Public program evaluation: A statistical guide (2nd ed.). Armonk, NY: ME Sharpe.
Chapter 2, “Defensible Program Evaluations: Four Types of Validity” (pp. 26–50)
Chapter 3, “Internal Validity: The Logic of Internal Validity” (pp. 51–72)
McDavid, J. C., Huse, I., & Hawthorn, L. R. L. (2019). Program evaluation and performance measurement: An introduction to practice (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Chapter 3, “Research Designs for Program Evaluations” (pp. 97-155)
Optional Resources
Cook, T. D., Scriven, M., Coryn, C. L. S., & Evergreen, S. D. H. (2009). Contemporary thinking about causation in evaluation: A dialogue with Tom Cook and Michael Scriven. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(1), 105–117.
