[powerpoint Version - Slides] - Expert Evaluation (ee) Tool Within Governance Project
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View [powerpoint Version - Slides] - Expert Evaluation (ee) Tool Within Governance Project as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 390
- Pages: 6
Expert Evaluation (EE) Tool within Governance project
Dr. Ludger Deitmer, Dr. Wolfgang Wittig University of Bremen, ITB Germany
1
EE tool application in four expert workshops in Berlin, Copenhagen, Vienna and Zurich in November 2007 • Tool consists of a questionnaire in which seven main criteria are operationalised by roughly 30 sub-criteria • Respondents are asked to evaluate the sub-criteria on a scale from 1 (= criterion is not realised) to 10 (= fully realised) • In addition they are asked to assess the relevance of the main criteria for the adequate performance of the VET system by weighting them in per cent.. 2
7 main criteria: five on integration & two input and output 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Consistent legal framework Cooperation of the various bodies Innovation strategies Balance of relevant policy areas Allocation of strategic and operational functions 6. Outcome orientation 7. Input orientation 3
Guiding principles for EE tool in the expert workshops: • Participative: active national VET system experts: social partner, research and VET practise etc. • Discoursive: focus group discussion • Multiple perspectives: individual and collective assessment 4
Rationale of the evaluation concept • The method has to be understood as a “formative” or in other words “qualitative evaluation” process. • Those ones who are involved in Vet decision making play the most important role. • Experts with different backgrounds in national VET systems express individually and jointly what the actual governance situation in their VET system is. • The function of the moderator is to implement the self-evaluation process in a systematic way and to moderate the discussion in such a way that all persons get a voice and can express their wishes, needs and assessments. • Our experiences from former evaluation activities of this kind show that the opinions are becoming clearer during the process of their formulation and discussion. 5
Advantage/Challenges of focus group instrument • •
• • •
Adavantages A topic can be discussed indepth Common understanding and complaints get on the table: learning can be triggered A complex topic can be assessed quickly Effective way of getting a range of information Good on heterogenous groups
• • • •
Challenges Can be hard to analyse responses Some dominating partners can influence the result Composition of discussion group is important Diffcult to schedule 8 to 15 busy experts
6
Dr. Ludger Deitmer, Dr. Wolfgang Wittig University of Bremen, ITB Germany
1
EE tool application in four expert workshops in Berlin, Copenhagen, Vienna and Zurich in November 2007 • Tool consists of a questionnaire in which seven main criteria are operationalised by roughly 30 sub-criteria • Respondents are asked to evaluate the sub-criteria on a scale from 1 (= criterion is not realised) to 10 (= fully realised) • In addition they are asked to assess the relevance of the main criteria for the adequate performance of the VET system by weighting them in per cent.. 2
7 main criteria: five on integration & two input and output 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Consistent legal framework Cooperation of the various bodies Innovation strategies Balance of relevant policy areas Allocation of strategic and operational functions 6. Outcome orientation 7. Input orientation 3
Guiding principles for EE tool in the expert workshops: • Participative: active national VET system experts: social partner, research and VET practise etc. • Discoursive: focus group discussion • Multiple perspectives: individual and collective assessment 4
Rationale of the evaluation concept • The method has to be understood as a “formative” or in other words “qualitative evaluation” process. • Those ones who are involved in Vet decision making play the most important role. • Experts with different backgrounds in national VET systems express individually and jointly what the actual governance situation in their VET system is. • The function of the moderator is to implement the self-evaluation process in a systematic way and to moderate the discussion in such a way that all persons get a voice and can express their wishes, needs and assessments. • Our experiences from former evaluation activities of this kind show that the opinions are becoming clearer during the process of their formulation and discussion. 5
Advantage/Challenges of focus group instrument • •
• • •
Adavantages A topic can be discussed indepth Common understanding and complaints get on the table: learning can be triggered A complex topic can be assessed quickly Effective way of getting a range of information Good on heterogenous groups
• • • •
Challenges Can be hard to analyse responses Some dominating partners can influence the result Composition of discussion group is important Diffcult to schedule 8 to 15 busy experts
6
Related Documents
Project Slides
April 2020 4
Powerpoint Slides For
June 2020 4
Ict Evaluation Tool
May 2020 6
Internet Connectivity Evaluation Tool
June 2020 10
