Are quantitative or qualitative methods better for undertaking impact evaluations? What about true experiments? Is contribution analysis the new 'state of the art' in impact evaluation or should I just do a survey and use statistical methods to create comparison groups?
Determining one's plan for an impact evaluation occurs within the constraints of a specific context. Since method choices must always be context specific, debates in the professional literature about impact methods can at best only provide partial guidance to evaluation practitioners. The way to break out of this methods impasse is by focusing on the evidentiary requirements for assessing casual impacts.
We're thrilled to be able to join the Australasian Evaluation Society at their 2017 International Conference in Canberra. We'll have a booth set up in the conference exhibition area and we'd love you to come say hello and join in the fun as we use our time at the AES to work with our members, website users, and the wider evaluation community to co-create and share knowledge about evaluation.
We're delighted to be able to share the news that the Australasian Evaluation Society (AES) has extended the deadline for the Emerging Indigenous Evaluators Support Grants for the AES17 International Evaluation Conference and workshops in Canberra.
Applications are now due on July 11, 2017.
All too often conferences fail to make good use of the experience and knowledge of people attending, with most time spent presenting prepared material that could be better delivered other ways, and not enough time spent on discussions and active learning. With closing dates for two evaluation conferences fast approaching (the Australasian Evaluation Society and the American Evaluation Association), could you propose something more useful, that would demonstrate how much we know and care about communicating and using information?