Validating an evaluation checklist using a mixed method design
When used in evaluation, checklists provide guidance for the collection of relevant evidence used to determine the merit, worth, or significance of an evaluand. The inherently systematic process found in the use of a checklist makes it highly relevant and useful for evaluative purposes. As such, the value of checklists for evaluation purposes is generally accepted. However, the methods for validating evaluation checklists are less commonly presented and lack specificity with respect to study designs and outcomes. This article addresses this deficit by presenting a case example of a mixed methods validation study applied to an evaluation checklist. The validation approach presented herein is relatively quick and was demonstrated to be feasible on a limited budget all the while providing a reasonable level of validation for the checklist. Following a brief overview of the checklist, the two-part validation study is presented followed by a discussion of the limitations of the methodology.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Robert E. Quinn & John Rohrbaugh, 1983. "A Spatial Model of Effectiveness Criteria: Towards a Competing Values Approach to Organizational Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(3), pages 363-377, March.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:3:p:215-222. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Shamier, Wendy)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.