MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378223319 · doi:10.1002/ev.20539

Meeting the challenges of educating internal evaluators

2023· article· en· W4378223319 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Directions for Evaluation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicEvaluation and Performance Assessment
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFront linePublic relationsGeopoliticsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicProgram evaluationPolitical scienceBusinessMedicinePublic administration

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The COVID‐19 pandemic and its related health, social, economic and geopolitical shocks have greatly increased the demand for internal evaluation as a way of helping organizations, especially those in the public sector, adapt to ongoing challenges and new realities. To help meet the demand, this chapter discusses the recent trend to educate managers, front‐line supervisors and other organization professionals to be nonspecialist internal evaluators—individuals who are not evaluation specialists. Three experienced internal evaluators and educators share real‐world examples of their successful strategies for educating nonspecialist internal evaluators. They conclude with a discussion of lessons learned and suggestions for the road ahead.

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.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.389
GPT teacher head0.566
Teacher spread0.177 · 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