Good Evaluation Measures: More Than Their Psychometric Properties

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In this commentary, we examine Braverman's insights into the trade-offs between feasibility and rigor in evaluation measures and reject his assessment of the trade-off as a zero-sum game. We, argue that feasibility and policy salience are, like reliability and validity, intrinsic to the definition of a good measure. To reduce the tension between feasibility and measurement rigor, we argue that evaluators should make greater use of existing data, identify ways in which improved measurement will result in improved program management, and "thickly" invest measurement resources in areas where questions are most important and evaluation is most needed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)115-119
Number of pages5
JournalAmerican Journal of Evaluation
Volume34
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2013

Fingerprint

Psychometrics
psychometrics
evaluation
Reproducibility of Results
management
resources
Evaluation
Trade-offs

Keywords

  • administrative data
  • evaluation
  • management
  • measurement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business and International Management
  • Strategy and Management
  • Social Psychology
  • Education
  • Health(social science)
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Good Evaluation Measures : More Than Their Psychometric Properties. / Weitzman, Beth C.; Silver, Diana.

In: American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 34, No. 1, 03.2013, p. 115-119.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ca0a0f414c3a43b9abd73c30933ca040,
title = "Good Evaluation Measures: More Than Their Psychometric Properties",
abstract = "In this commentary, we examine Braverman's insights into the trade-offs between feasibility and rigor in evaluation measures and reject his assessment of the trade-off as a zero-sum game. We, argue that feasibility and policy salience are, like reliability and validity, intrinsic to the definition of a good measure. To reduce the tension between feasibility and measurement rigor, we argue that evaluators should make greater use of existing data, identify ways in which improved measurement will result in improved program management, and {"}thickly{"} invest measurement resources in areas where questions are most important and evaluation is most needed.",
keywords = "administrative data, evaluation, management, measurement",
author = "Weitzman, {Beth C.} and Diana Silver",
year = "2013",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1177/1098214012461628",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "34",
pages = "115--119",
journal = "American Journal of Evaluation",
issn = "1098-2140",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Good Evaluation Measures

T2 - More Than Their Psychometric Properties

AU - Weitzman, Beth C.

AU - Silver, Diana

PY - 2013/3

Y1 - 2013/3

N2 - In this commentary, we examine Braverman's insights into the trade-offs between feasibility and rigor in evaluation measures and reject his assessment of the trade-off as a zero-sum game. We, argue that feasibility and policy salience are, like reliability and validity, intrinsic to the definition of a good measure. To reduce the tension between feasibility and measurement rigor, we argue that evaluators should make greater use of existing data, identify ways in which improved measurement will result in improved program management, and "thickly" invest measurement resources in areas where questions are most important and evaluation is most needed.

AB - In this commentary, we examine Braverman's insights into the trade-offs between feasibility and rigor in evaluation measures and reject his assessment of the trade-off as a zero-sum game. We, argue that feasibility and policy salience are, like reliability and validity, intrinsic to the definition of a good measure. To reduce the tension between feasibility and measurement rigor, we argue that evaluators should make greater use of existing data, identify ways in which improved measurement will result in improved program management, and "thickly" invest measurement resources in areas where questions are most important and evaluation is most needed.

KW - administrative data

KW - evaluation

KW - management

KW - measurement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84873465623&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84873465623&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1098214012461628

DO - 10.1177/1098214012461628

M3 - Article

VL - 34

SP - 115

EP - 119

JO - American Journal of Evaluation

JF - American Journal of Evaluation

SN - 1098-2140

IS - 1

ER -