Hello, Many interesting observations here, typically pointing towards the "lip service" problem of evaluation: "There, we've evaluated it..now, let's file it away under 'F' as in 'Forgetting'..."
True, some summative reports are simpy one-offs, and rarely cause any raised eyebrows. There's always room for improvement. I wonder if the group will also look at how evaluation loops are working, as summative evaluation (even "remedial evaluation") should be seen as part of an evaluation cycle. In my experience, usually, institutions who use evaluation actively (through in-house teams/external consultants or through combinations) are ones which practice the full cycle of audience research, i.e. baseline-front end-formative-summative and back. But there are also different aspects to evaluate, not all of them covering evaluation of learning. I also hope this evaluation-of-evaluations project will be promoted to the museum evaluation/audience research community, internationally, as it covers a very wide field (wherever interpretation activities are present). In my mind, there's no simple answer to this one...there's no shortcut to good evaluation! Best wishes, Paul Henningsson digital interpretation and evaluation ------------------------------------------------ musedia box 12139 se-402 42 gothenburg sweden tel . +46 (0)735-52 23 36 e-mail. <mailto:paul at musedia.net>paul at musedia.net www.musedia.net http://blogg.museiteknik.com ------------------------------------------------ At 08:09 2012-06-07 -0400, you wrote: >Hi everyone - I thought I'd bring over this interesting post from the MCG >listserv. > >Thoughts? > > >Sheila Carey (Chair, Metrics & Evaluation SIG) >Analyste des publics et des programmes | Audience and Program Analyst >R??seau canadien d'information sur le patrimoine (RCIP) | The Canadian >Heritage Information Network (CHIN) >Minist??re du Patrimoine canadien | Department of Canadian Heritage >Gatineau, Canada K1A 0M5 >sheila.carey at pch.gc.ca >T??l??phone | Telephone 819-934-5017 >T??l??copieur | Facsimile 819-994-9555 >T??l??imprimeur (sans frais) 1-888-997-3123 | Teletypewriter (toll-free) >1-888-997-3123 >Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada > > > > >-------------------- > > > > >Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 12:51:14 +0100 >From: Mia <mia.ridge at GMAIL.COM> >Subject: 'Why evaluation doesn't measure up' > >There's an interesting post called 'Why evaluation doesn't measure up' >on the Museums Association site >http://www.museumsassociation.org/museums-journal/comment/01062012-why-evaluation-doesnt-measure-up > >or http://bit.ly/L9FlQz where they say: > >"No one seems to have done the sums, but UK museums probably spend >millions on evaluation each year. Given that, it???s disappointing how >little impact evaluation appears to have, even within the institution >that commissioned it." > >and: > >"Summative evaluations are expected to achieve the impossible: to help >museums learn from failure, while proving the project met all its >objectives. Is it time to rethink how the sector approaches >evaluation?" > >I'm curious to know what others think. Are they right? Or are they >missing something? > >Cheers, Mia > >-------------------------------------------- >http://openobjects.org.uk/ >http://twitter.com/mia_out > >_______________________________________________ >You are currently subscribed to mcn-l, the listserv of the Museum Computer >Network (http://www.mcn.edu) > >To post to this list, send messages to: mcn-l at mcn.edu > >To unsubscribe or change mcn-l delivery options visit: >http://mcn.edu/mailman/listinfo/mcn-l > >The MCN-L archives can be found at: >http://toronto.mediatrope.com/pipermail/mcn-l/
