• Title, Summary, Keyword: Evaluation indicators

Search Result 1,077, Processing Time 0.046 seconds

A Study on Developing Evaluation Indicators of University Libraries in Digital Environment (디지털 환경에서 대학도서관 평가지표 개발에 관한 연구)

  • 곽병희
    • Proceedings of the Korean Society for Information Management Conference
    • /
    • /
    • pp.23-65
    • /
    • 2002
  • This study is to consider varying factors of internal/external informational and operational environments in libraries, and develop a new evaluation indicators for university libraries in digital environments. In order to do this research, the previous works have been investigated, and the Delphi study and our own analysis have been performed. The main research results are as follows. First, the results through the Delphi method that was to adopted to verify evaluation items and indicators determined by the literature review show that the repressed values for each evaluation category is greater than 3.00. overall average is 4.02. and standard deviation is ranged from 0.40 to 0.62 for each category. This means that the evaluation indicators are valid. Second, the factor analysis was performed to verify the construct validity of evaluation indicators. As a result. the cumulative variance of evaluation indicators consisting of 11 dimensions per factor is 72.733%. In turn, this result shows that the validity of these indicators is very reliable. Third, t-test and one way ANOVA are performed within significance probability 0.05 in order to verify differences in each librarians point of views for the degree of importance in evaluation indicators. The results show that these evaluation indicators are verified to be appropriate since there is no significant difference. Based on the Delphi study and our own analysis. we developed a new evaluation indicators that consists of 7 evaluation categories, 35 evaluation items, and 92 evaluation indicators.

  • PDF

A Study on Developing the Performance Evaluation Indicators of Defense R&D Test Development Projects (국방연구개발 시험개발사업 성과평가지표 개발에 관한 연구)

  • Lee, Hyung-Jun;Kim, Woo-Je;Kim, Chan-Soo
    • IE interfaces
    • /
    • v.23 no.1
    • /
    • pp.78-88
    • /
    • 2010
  • In this paper we develop a model for the performance evaluation of defense R&D test development projects based on analytic hierarchy process. First, evaluation indicators are collected through the related literature survey and a delphi inquiry method. Second, stepwise multiple linear regression is used for developing a hierarchical structure for analytic hierarchy process in the evaluation model, which can make the selected evaluation indicators of the hierarchical structure independent. Also we verify the effectiveness of proposed indicators of the performance evaluation by comparing with the existing evaluation indicators. The developed indicators for the performance evaluation is more reasonable and practical than the previous indicators on defense R&D test development projects.

A Study on Developing Evaluation Indicators of University Libraries (디지털 환경에서 대학도서관 평가지표 개발에 관한 연구)

  • 곽병희;이두영
    • Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
    • /
    • v.19 no.4
    • /
    • pp.258-296
    • /
    • 2002
  • This study is to consider varying factors of jnternal/external informational and operational environments in libraries, and develop a new evaluation indicators for university libraries in digital environments. The main research results are as follows. First, the results through the Delphi method that was to adopted to verify evaluation items and indicators determined by the literature review show that the repressed values for each evaluation category is greater than 3.00, overall average is 4.02, and standard deviation is ranged from 0.40 to 0.62 for each category. This means that the evaluation indicators are valid. Second, the factor analysis was performed to verify .the construct validity of evaluation indicators. As a result, the cumulative variance of evaluation indicators consisting of 11 dimensions per factor is 72.733%. In turn, this result shows that the validity of these indicators is very reliable. Third, t-test and one-way ANOVA are performed within significance probability 0.05 in order to verify differences in each librarians point of views for the degree of importance in evaluation indicators. Based on the Delphi study and our own analysis, we developed a new evaluation indicators that consists of 7 evaluation categories, 35 evaluation items, and 92 evaluation indicators.

A Study on the Development of Evaluation Indicators for the Proposals of National Defense Core-Technology R&D Projects (국방핵심기술 연구개발의 제안서 평가를 위한 평가지표 개발에 관한 연구)

  • Kim, Chan-Soo;Cho, Kyu-Kab
    • IE interfaces
    • /
    • v.21 no.1
    • /
    • pp.96-108
    • /
    • 2008
  • This paper proposes the systematic design approach for developing the evaluation indicators that evaluate the candidate proposals in the national defense core-technology R&D projects. To improve the validity and fairness of the evaluation indicators, the existing evaluation process in a military and a public sector are surveyed and also the existing evaluation system of the core-technology R&D programs for the national defense is analysed and discussed. A new system for the evaluation indicators is designed by using the axiomatic design, factor analysis and the analytic hierarchy process. It is expected that the proposed evaluation indicators contribute to enhance the fairness and the reliability of the evaluation process for the proposal of the national defense core-technology R&D projects.

Comparative Analysis on the Evaluation Indicators of Academic Libraries (국내외 대학도서관 평가지표의 비교분석)

  • 윤희윤
    • Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
    • /
    • v.18 no.3
    • /
    • pp.239-264
    • /
    • 2001
  • The aim of this study is to compare and analyse the evaluation or performance indicators for academic libraries suggested at domestic and foreign. For the study, evaluation indicators of the various evaluation models(IFLA, ISO, ALA/ACRL, LA, HEFCE, CERLIM, JUAA, UNICOOP. KLA) was analysized. Evaluation or performance indicators should shed light on inputs and outputs of resource, levels of demand and satisfaction, the library effectiveness, and operating efficiency. There is a great deal of work going on at present, but as yet there is no greed set of indicators that can be across all academic libraries. Therefore, new evaluation indicators for physical and electronic libraries should be developed.

  • PDF

Development of the Evaluation Model for the Quantitative Analysis of Local Agenda 21 (지방의제 21의 정량적 분석을 위한 평가모델의 개발)

  • Woo, Hyung-Taek
    • Journal of Environmental Science International
    • /
    • v.15 no.12
    • /
    • pp.1205-1220
    • /
    • 2006
  • This study was conducted to develop the evaluation model which can analyse local agenda 21 comprehensively and systematically from the making process to the designed contents. The evaluation model was devised through the theoretical review of local agenda 21 and designing the evaluation system composed of evaluation domains, related indicators and scales. The evaluation system was carefully constructed based on planning theories and the discussion and agreement of specialists regarding local agenda 21. This model has three evaluation domains of process, content, and evaluation of implementation with different weighting values. Each domain contains large indicators, medium indicators and small indicators. Each indicator has different weighting value according to its importance. Basically, each small indicator was scored by 3 or 5 point scale. This evaluation system can not only analyse local agenda 21 quantitatively, but also find out good points, problems, and limits of various phases of planning and implementing local agenda 21.

A Research on the Development of Evaluation Indicators for Academic Libraries (대학도서관 평가 지표의 개발에 관한 연구)

  • Kwack, Dong-Chul;Yoon, Cheong-Ok
    • Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
    • /
    • v.45 no.2
    • /
    • pp.309-324
    • /
    • 2011
  • The purpose of this study is to develop evaluation indicators for academic libraries in Korea. The evaluation model developed in this research consists of three elements:(1) Confirmation of evaluation methods, procedures and criteria,(2) Development of qualitative and quantitative evaluation indicators, and(3) Assessment of the applicability and feasibility of those indicators. Evaluation indicators were developed to measure a basic state, a common use of library resources, specialized services, and user satisfaction for academic libraries. To test the feasibility and applicability of those evaluation indicators, a pilot assessment of academic libraries was conducted in 2010.

A Study on the Development of Environmental Indicators and the Evaluation of Environmental Amenity (쾌적환경평가 및 지표개발에 관한 연구 - 경기도를 중심으로 -)

  • 성현찬;이영준
    • Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
    • /
    • v.24 no.4
    • /
    • pp.23-38
    • /
    • 1997
  • In this Study, indicators for the evaluation of environmental amenity were determined through the investigation of the resident's consciousness in all thirty one cities and counties of Kyonggi. Also, environmental amenity that the resident feel in terms of recognition level was evaluated and based on the determined environmental indicators, environmental amenity for the physical environmental situation was evaluated. By analyzing the results, basic data for the planning of the future environmental management were prepared. The results of this study can be summarized as follows First, the developed indicators for the evaluation of environmental amenity consist of four intermediate evaluation items and fifteen individual evaluation items, and fifty four evaluation standards in total . Two to five evaluation standards were determined for the respective individual evaluation items. Second, using the developed indicators, the evaluation of environmental amenity were implemented based on both resident's consciousness and statistical data. Third, by analyzing the difference between two evaluation results, future research plan was proposed.

  • PDF

Development of the Evaluation Indicators of Positive Nursing Organizational Culture in a Clinical Setting (임상현장에서의 긍정적인 간호조직문화 평가지표 개발)

  • Yom, Young Hee;Noh, Sang Mi;Kim, Kyung Hee;Ji, Soon Ju;Kim, Hyun Jung
    • Journal of Korean Clinical Nursing Research
    • /
    • v.19 no.2
    • /
    • pp.233-244
    • /
    • 2013
  • Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop the evaluation indicators of positive nursing organizational culture in a clinical setting. Methods: The evaluation indicators of positive nursing organizational culture were developed from a literature review and a focus group interview. The content validity testing was done using a clinical expert panel. The content utility testing was done using a survey questionnaire. Results: The evaluation indicators of positive nursing organizational culture consists of 88 indicators representing the eight domains with the 24 categories. The average scores in evaluation indicators of positive nursing culture included the importance (3.29 points in average), the potential for further utilization (3.14 points in average) and the current state of extension agency (2.80 points in average). Conclusion: The developed evaluation indicators can be applied to measure the nursing organizational culture, which would be the basic data to manage human resources effectively in a clinical setting.

Development of Program Evaluation Indicator : Community Health Center's Health Promotion Program (보건소 건강증진사업 평가지표 개발)

  • 송현종;진기남
    • Health Policy and Management
    • /
    • v.13 no.4
    • /
    • pp.1-27
    • /
    • 2003
  • The purpose of this study was to develop the evaluation indicator for the health promotion programs of the Community Health Centers and to test its validity. The modified logic model was used as the evaluation model based on the literature reviews. Using this model, four dimensions, eleven sub­dimensions, and forty­one individual indicators were developed. These evaluation indicators are superior in reflecting the distinctiveness of the community health promotion programs, and also flexible enough to accommodate diverse programs. These indicators also emphasize the role of process evaluation, and the diversity of outcomes. To test content validity, survey method of experts in the community health promotion field was conducted. Eleven in three expert groups(professionals, practitioners in Community Health Centers, and policy makers) generally agreed with the validity of evaluation indicators. To examine criteria and construct validity, these indicators were used to evaluate the health promotion programs conducted by the 18 Key Community Health Centers. The data came from the interview surveys of the main health promotion practitioner and 30 visitors from each center. The ranks of these eighteen Community Health Centers were computed from these data. There was no significant difference in ranking either by these indicators or by the existing indicators, which was developed by Technical Support and Evaluation Team for criteria validity. There was no statistically significant difference in ranking between input, process and outcome dimensions. Based on these study results, evaluation indicators developed in this study are valid to evaluate Community Health Center's health promotion program. It can be used both by the Community Health Center for internal evaluation, and by the stakeholders for external evaluation.