CHOOSING AN EVALUATION STRATEGY
Figure 11.2 addresses the challenge of competing demands. It is based on the notion of satisficing—pick the best of the least best alternatives, while doing no harm. The model proposes that there are combinations of rigor and scope.
The higher the rigor, the more formal and planned the evaluation. It can be argued that, in these cases, the results are valid and reliable. As for scope, the more whole the focus, the more the evaluation moves beyond examining the participants’ experience to the intervention’s impact on the entire system. These options provide the practitioner with four basic evaluation strategies:
• Crude: In this evaluation strategy, an informal and imprecise evaluation is conducted, most likely ...