What’s in a definition? March 15, 2009
Posted by Paul Duignan in : Blog info, Communicating outcomes models, Outcomes systems architecture, Outcomes theory , trackbackI have not blogged for a number of weeks due to family illness and a bereavement. However, now I am back on deck and planning to increase the frequency of my blogs – shorter on some occassions and more often, but there will still be some substatial ones for those who want substance. If there are any issues you want me to blog on, or any questions you would like me to answer in future blogs, just post a comment to this posting.First up, I have now added to the Outcomes Theory Knowledge Base a set of definitions as they are used in outcomes theory. One reason the area of outcomes and evaluation suffers from major problems with language is because of the large number of disciplines which have an interest in outcomes and evaluation. They all come at the area with slightly different sets of terminology.In addition, often people who may not have a lot of experience in outcomes and evaluation are required to develop outcomes, monitoring and evaluation systems for particular programs. This all tends to result in lots of confusion as they work out how they want to set up their system and what they want to call the various elements within them. Anyway, check out the list of definitions here and if you have any comments, just put them up at the end of the Knol entry. Paul Duignan, PhD (www.OutcomesBlog.org)
Comments»
I just stumbled upon your site and I really like it – the definitions are great for me as a German native speaker. We have the same problem in German speaking countries – different terminologies for the same item.
Good that you like them Verena, if you have any comments on the actual definitions, post them at the bottom of the Knol article. If there are general points you want me to try and clarify post them here to this blog or on the Knol site.
Regards,
Paul