Margins and line spacing: 1-in margins and 1.5 spacing
Please also include a single document header with your name, course, assignment title, and due date.
Evaluation of your work
As you read your assigned peer’s draft plan consider the following overall points in your feedback.
Is the overall goal of the proposed plan clear? Are the components clear?
What pieces of evidence presented are most and least effective in making the argument to fund the plan?
What remains unclear about the plan? Do you have suggestions on how to make it clearer?
A quality review means that you will:
Write several thoughtful, actionable comments addressing both positive and negative aspects of your peer’s proposal.
Give specific suggestions for next steps and how to revise.
Use purposeful questions and comments to get the writer to think about how to revise.
Prioritize the most important revisions the writer should make
Not focus solely on grammatical errors.
Once you have read the proposal, please prepare feedback for the webinar session by sending your peer review to your classmate and summarizing your feedback verbally (bulleted notes can help with this).
Before you even make your first comment, read the document all the way through.
Make sure you leave enough time for you to read through, respond, and for your peer to edit his/her document with your comments before any deadlines.
If you are provided with a feedback form to fill out and something is unclear, do not ignore the item but ask the instructor for clarification.
Point out the strengths as well as the weaknesses of the document.
Offer suggestions, not commands.
Editorial comments should be appropriate and constructive. There is no need to be rude. Be respectful and considerate of the writer’s feelings.
Be sure that your comments are clear and text-specific so that your peer will know what you are referring to (for example, terms such as “unclear” or “vague” are too general to be helpful).
As a reader, raise questions that cross your mind, points that may have not occurred to your peer author.
Try not to overwhelm your peer with too much commentary. Follow the feedback form and the issues you are supposed to address.
Be careful not to let your own opinions bias your review (for example, don’t suggest that your peer completely rewrite the paper just because you don’t agree with his/her point of view).
Reread your comments before passing them on to your peer. Make sure all your comments make sense and are easy to follow.
Avoid turning your peer’s paper into your paper.
Assignment 3: Overall Evaluation Plan
Assignment 3: Overall Evaluation Plan
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeFormatFollows length, margin, and font requirements for this assignment.
Includes in-text citations and a list of references.
Uses bullets, tables and other formatting to highlight for the reader the most important topics
3 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganizationIs well organized, with logical flow from beginning to end.
Has language to transition from section to section and paragraph to paragraph
3 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContentExplains how you are responding to feedback received from both faculty and the peer evaluation on your second assignment.
Includes all the required components: logic model, program description, implementation plan, process measures, outcome measures, a plan for data collection and analysis, outcome-evaluation design, and a discussion of threats to internal validity and generalizability (also called external validity).
Has an updated logic model that provides a comprehensive picture of the program’s theory and outcomes that flow logically from the planned processes.
Describes the program in sufficient detail to plan for its evaluation, but briefly enough to allow room for the other major components of the assignment.
Has a theory of change with a good evidence base.
Has an implementation plan that specifies who will do what, how, and when.
Has process measures that, taken together, provide a strong picture of whether the program has been implemented as intended.
Has outcome measures that provide a strong picture of whether the program is having its intended effect.
Has process and outcome measures that are SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and, time-bound).
Has a plan for data collection that is feasible, as well as an analysis plan appropriate for the data.
Has a plan for assessing whether the program is being delivered equitably.
Has an outcome-evaluation design.
Has a discussion of threats to internal validity and generalizability that is complete and appropriate.
Has a discussion of how you will assess whether the program reached its equity goals in its outcomes.
21 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWritingUses correct spelling and grammar.
Summarizes program details concisely.
Minimizes the use of jargon and unfamiliar acronyms.
Employs precise terminology appropriate for evaluation of public health programs.
3 pts
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|