Talk:RM analysis Bate
Exercise evaluation
Analysis vs. object of analysis
* ability to differentiate between the analysis (knowledge creating process of studying real-world phenomena) and the phenomena that the analysis looks into
←--1: . The main ideas in the evaluated assessments well identified. --Mikko Pohjola 09:49, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
⇤--2: . Some confusion between the analysis of different decision options and the decision options themselves. --Mikko Pohjola 09:49, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)
Score: 1/2
Analysis-use relationship
* ability to consider the possible meaning/value of the knowledge intended to be created by the planned analysis in different uses by different users
←--2: . The difference between different use/user perspectives somewhat identified. --Mikko Pohjola 09:49, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
⇤--3: . The evaluation seems to look into the analysis plans as "action plans" than as planned knowledge creating process (analyses). It remains unclear what would be the value of the planned analyses for different uses/users according to the evaluation. --Mikko Pohjola 09:49, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)
Score: 1/2
Usability of evaluation
* identification of major strengths as well as possible points of improvement * critical and constructive remarks to help develop the analysis (plan) further
←--4: . Some strong and weak points of the analysis somewhat identified. --Mikko Pohjola 09:49, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
⇤--5: . In some parts the evaluation report seems more like a brief summary of the decision/action options (intended to be) considered in the planned analyses. This gives only limited guidance for those who take the plan forward. --Mikko Pohjola 09:49, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)
Score: 2/4
Summarizing
* wrapping-up of the individual evaluations and tying them into the context described in the exercise description
←--6: . An overall evaluation exists, and it attempts to relate to the given context. --Mikko Pohjola 09:49, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: defence)
⇤--7: . The message to the ministry remains, however (much due to the weaknesses of the evaluation commented above), quite vague and not very well backed-up. --Mikko Pohjola 09:49, 25 May 2011 (EEST) (type: truth; paradigms: science: attack)
Score: 1/2
Bonus points
* e.g. value adding extra work done
Total Score: 5/10