Evaluation methods and evaluation research (5 cr)
Code: BG00DL13-3001
General information
- Enrollment
-
22.04.2024 - 04.09.2024
Registration for the implementation has ended.
- Timing
-
01.08.2024 - 31.12.2024
Implementation has ended.
- Number of ECTS credits allocated
- 5 cr
- Local portion
- 1 cr
- Virtual portion
- 4 cr
- Mode of delivery
- Blended learning
- Unit
- SeAMK Master School
- Campus
- SeAMK Seinäjoki, Kampustalo
- Teaching languages
- Finnish
- Degree programmes
- Master's Degree Programme in Development and Management of Social Work and Health Care
- Teachers
- Kaija Loppela
- Groups
-
YKEJO23Master's Degree in Social Services and Health Care, Development and Management
- Course
- BG00DL13
Evaluation scale
1-5
Objective
Students know and understand how to compare various evaluation approaches and how to apply appropriate methods of evaluation throughout the evaluation process and also in research and development activities.
Content
Evaluation research, different evaluation trends, e.g. process evaluation, evaluation of effects/effectiveness, participatory evaluation and realistic evaluation, ex ante and ex post evaluation and various evaluation methods and models. The use and utilization of evaluation research and other evaluation methods in the development of the working community.
Materials
Eräsaari, R ym. 1999. Arviointi ja asiantuntijuus. Helsinki: Gaudeamus.
Kalliola, S., Nakari, R. 2004. Yhteistoiminta ja kuntien työpaikkojen kehittäminen, Laatuverkoston arviontitutkimus.
Kivipelto, M. 2006. Sosiaalityön kriittinen arviointi. Sosiaalityön kriittisen arvioinnin perustelut, teoriat ja menetelmät (Critical evaluation of social work. Justifications, theories and methods for the critical evaluation of social work). Akateeminen väitöskirja, Tampereen Yliopisto.
Loppela, K. 2004. Ihiminen ja työ - keskustellen työkuntoon. Työyhteisön kehittäminen työkykyä ylläpitävän toiminnan viitekehyksessä. Akateeminen väitöskirja. Tampereen yliopisto.
Patton, M. 2012. Developmental evaluation: applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use.
Patton, M. 1996. Utilization-Focused Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
Patton, M.1990. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park: Sage.
Pawson, R. & Tilley, N. 1007. Realistic Evaluation. London: Sage.
Robson, C. , Lindqvist, T. 2001: Käytännön arvioinnin perusteet. Opas evaluaation tekijöille ja tilaajille.
Rossi, P.H. & Freeman, H.E. 1993. Evaluation. A systemic Approach 5. Newbury Park: Sage.
Seppälä-Järvelä, R. 2004. Prosessiarviointi kehittämisprojektissa. Stakes. Opas käytäntöihin
Seppänen-Järvelä; R. ym.(toim.) 2015. Yksilöllisesti räätälöity ja työhön kytketty: kelan työhönkuntoutuksen kehittämishankkeen arviointitutkimus
Virtanen, P. 2007. Arviointi: Arviointitiedon luonne, tuottaminen ja hyödyntäminen. Helsinki: Edita.
Teaching methods
Lectures, discussions, students own work and groupwork
Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)
The student knows and can describe evaluation research and various evaluation trends and evaluation methods and models.
.
Assessment criteria, good (3)
The student knows how to compare various evaluation approaches and methods and can also analyze how to use of them in research and development activities.
Assessment criteria, excellent (5)
Students know how to analyze, also critically, various evaluation approaches and methods. They can analyze, also critically, how to use of them in different research and development situations and activities. Student shows ability to implement evaluation research in practice.
Qualifications
No previous studies are required.