Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Procedures for the use of the humble checklist, although no one would deny their utility in evaluation and elsewhere, are usually thought to fall somewhat below the entry level of what we call a methodology, let alone a theory. However, many checklists used in evaluation incorporate a quite complex theory, which we are well advised to uncover—and the process of validating an evaluative checklist is a task calling for considerable sophistication. It is interesting that although this theory is less ambitious than the kind that we normally call program theory, it is often all the theory we need for an evaluation. This entry covers some of the basic features of checklists and their application in evaluation, but it does not claim to exhaust their logic or methodology.

BASIC CONCEPTS

A checklist is defined here as a list of factors, properties, aspects, components, criteria, tasks, or dimensions, the presence or amount of which are to be separately considered in the performance of a certain task. There are many different types of checklist, although all have at least one nondefinitional function in common—that of being a mnemonic device. This function alone makes them useful in evaluation, as the nature of evaluation calls for a systematic approach to determining the merit, worth, and so on, of what are often complex entities. Hence, a list of the many components or dimensions of performance of such entities is frequently valuable.

Checklists are of various kinds: At the bottom of the checklist pecking order is the eponymous laundry list, which is almost entirely a mnemonic device and nonetheless useful for that. Notice that the order in which one calls on the items in a laundry list does not affect the validity of the list: We can start by entering on the list whatever items are at the top of the laundry pile. However, the entry of entities into the right place on the list is crucial to avoid the equivalent of key-boarding errors in empirical data entry. Also, the grouping of items as the list is being constructed is often quite important: For example, shirts with colors that may bleed need to be kept separate from white shirts. Note that a real laundry list is not an evaluative list, but plenty of “laundry lists” are used in evaluation, and one of these is discussed later.

Next is the sequential checklist, where the order does matter. The first kind of these is what we might call the strongly sequential kind, wherein the sequencing (of some or all checkpoints) must be followed to get valid results. One example of this is the preflight checklist, whose use is compulsory, not merely recommended, for the flight crews on aircraft carrying hundreds of thousands of passengers a day. It is sequential because, for example, the accuracy of the reading of instrument A depends on whether or not the setting on instrument A has been zeroed, so one must do the setting before the reading. The use of the preflight checklist is evaluative because it is designed to provide support for the evaluative conclusion that the plane is in good enough condition to fly safely. Many sequential checklists, however, are not intrinsically evaluative, although they might nevertheless be used in the course of an evaluation. Flowcharts often imply one or more sequential checklists, but they are often a better way to represent inference chains that involve extensive conditionals (i.e., “if-then” statements), as well as sequences.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading