MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4353055711 · doi:10.3138/cjpe.75429

Enduring Themes in John Mayne’s Work: Implications for Evaluation Practice

2023· article· en· W4353055711 on OpenAlexaffvenue
J. Bradley McDavid

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Program Evaluation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSophisticationChecklistWork (physics)ElaborationAccountabilityField (mathematics)Causality (physics)SociologyPsychologyEngineering ethicsPolitical scienceSocial scienceEngineeringCognitive psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on three enduring themes in John Mayne’s work. They are causality; balancing learning and accountability as meta-objectives for evaluations; and program complexity. These themes are all central in his development and elaboration of contribution analysis. Although his work was aimed at practitioners, over time, the sophistication of his approach to evaluation raises challenges for practitioners, particularly given the structure of the evaluation field. The paper concludes with a suggestion to make contribution analysis more accessible, taking advantage of the work done by contributors to the Checklist Project at the University of Western Michigan.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.045
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0450.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.585
GPT teacher head0.610
Teacher spread0.025 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Program EvaluationSame topicEvaluation and Performance AssessmentFrench-language works237,207