Assessment Protocol Peter van Rosmalen Assessment Protocol The main criteria are: Quality and Productivity (WP2-8) –Scientific (articles, book chapters,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WORK PLAN WP1. OBJECTIVE To define criteria for assessing teachers training practices that facilitate the use of ICT to promote an effective learning.
Advertisements

TENCompetence Management Issues: WP1 Eric Kluijfhout.
Enabling Access to Sound Archives through Integration, Enrichment and Retrieval WP1. Project Management.
WP6: Delivery and evaluation of learning environment and training programme Dublin, June /05/13.
Succesful implementation of a multi- modal pressure ulcer prevention program in nursing homes Eva, Nuria, Luk, Theo, Cecile, Niina, Vivi, Antoinette.
WP5 – Knowledge Resource Sharing and Management Kick-off Meeting – Valkenburg 8-9 December 2005 Dr. Giancarlo Bo Giunti Interactive Labs S.r.l.
Project Risks and Feasibility Assessment Advanced Systems Analysis and Design.
WP4 Assessment of the CAP reform on farmers’ economic performance Alfons Oude Lansink Business Economics, Wageningen University.
Research Impact Alexandra Byrnes, Research Publication Officer Rio
1 AQA ICT AS Level © Nelson Thornes ICT Systems.
By Anthony W. Hill & Course Technology 1 User Support Management Beisse.
Providing Access to Your Data: Tracking Data Usage Robert R. Downs, PhD NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) Center for International.
 ELECTRI Council Meeting  Information Technology Assessment for Line Electrical Contractors Vanessa Valentin, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of.
1 WERT: WP 5 RG EVANS ASSOCIATES November 2010 Aim To pilot and evaluate the content and context of the course material with target groups To help women.
1 Analysing the contributions of fellowships to industrial development November 2010 Johannes Dobinger, UNIDO Evaluation Group.
Introduction Complex and large SW. SW crises Expensive HW. Custom SW. Batch execution Structured programming Product SW.
UNESCO-CEPES 10 September 2002 Kauko Hämäläinen, Kirsi Mustonen and Karl Holm Standards, Criteria and Indicators in Programme Accreditation and Evaluation.
WP 3: Scenarios and management objectives Simo Sarkki & Timo P. Karjalainen GOHERR: Kick-off April.
HIC Meeting July 30, NWS Climate Services Division and NWS Hydrologists in the Field Summer Hydrologist-in-Charge Meeting July 30, 2008 Ahsha Tribble,
Annual survey of CARNet member institutions Barbara Kolarek.
KP Lab Meeting January 25, 2008 Budapest 1 MapIt trials in Hungary.
ESSnet on the use of administrative and accounts data in business statistics Development of Quality Indicators (WP6) John-Mark Frost (ONS, UK), Humberto.
Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research EAER Federal Office for Agriculture FOAG WP5 Impact assessment and evaluation of ERA-NET.
EHEA meeting Dublin 30th-31st January Evaluating teaching and learning 1/ Introduction In the U-Multirank report, one distingnishes between : a)Focused.
VT’s University Libraries Assessing Technology-based Projects for Faculty Evaluations Some Survey Results and comparisons with ARL Academic Libraries.
Copyright 2010, The World Bank Group. All Rights Reserved. Principles, criteria and methods Part 2 Quality management Produced in Collaboration between.
WEEK INTRODUCTION CSC426 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING.
If we build a partnership will they come? Integrating Needs Assessment, Process Evaluation, and Impact Evaluation Ronald Jester and Robert Wilson, University.
Impact assessment and evaluation of ERA-NET effectiveness Juliana Zweifel, Bert Beck, Katrien Broekaert, Iver Thysen, Agris Nikitenko, Markus Loetscher.
PERCEPTION AND EXPECTATION OF THE USERS OF BHARATHIDASAN UNIVERSITY LIBRARY: A STUDY GUIDEC.RANGANATHAN ASSITANT PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF LIBRARY THIYAGU.C.
Developing and evaluating web- based multimedia learning objects: a case study Peter Chalk LTRI & CCTM Learning Technology Exhibition 22/3/05 London Metropolitan.
Monitoring Know the importance of monitoring in humanitarian response Be aware of different elements of monitoring Identify challenges and tips for effective.
School ICT Policy. ICT success indicators Focus on ICT Policy Why should a school have an ICT policy?  Guidelines for action  Influences daily practice.
Unit 8: Implementation, Part II Seminar Wednesday pm ET.
Providing access to your data: Determining your audience Robert R. Downs, PhD NASA Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) Center for International.
WP1 Justification & Guideline Development Keith Horner.
ESENS WP3: Task 3.1 Preparation phase: M1-M6 EE(2) +DE(1), GR(1), IT(2), LU(4), NL(2), TR(2), OpenPEPOL(1) Task leader: Jaak Tepandi;
The business process models and quality issues at the Hungarian Central Statistical Office (HCSO) Mr. Csaba Ábry, HCSO, Methodological Department Geneva,
Review of EIPA Resource Centre by PWC For Irish Presidency April 2004.
The reading is 7.38 mm. The reading is 7.72 mm.
Technical Writing Services
DEVRY CIS 321 Week 7 Milestone 5 and Milestone 6 Check this A+ tutorial guideline at
Project planning The systems life cycle.
Design Process.
Quantifying the value of our libraries. Are our systems ready?
What is your FICO IQ Quiz? Link to article attached.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم.
Systems Design, Implementation, and Operation
شاخصهای عملکردی بیمارستان
School ICT Policy.
Professor _ 1 Associated Professor 2 Assistant Professor 6 8
Software Development Process
Personal Software Process Software Estimation
2nd Quality Assurance Committee meeting 2nd Steering Committee meeting at the University of Sarajevo, 6 – 7 November 2017 University of Tirana in
مدل زنجیره ای در برنامه های سلامت
فرق بین خوب وعالی فقط اندکی تلاش بیشتر است
Evaluation of Library Procedures and Services
Turn to page 26. Read the Conclusion
Student Research Grant 2018
Effect combined IMPACT on achieving outcomes Organizational OUTPUTS
Evaluating Logarithms
Exponential and Logarithmic Forms
Интерпретация және зерттеу нәтижесін өңдеу
Assessment of Service Outcomes
Peer assessment.
Testing and peer review
 Is a machine that is able to take information (input), do some work on (process), and to make new information (output) COMPUTER.
Use-Case Points for Estimating Software Size
University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences – Vienna
Presentation transcript:

Assessment Protocol Peter van Rosmalen

Assessment Protocol The main criteria are: Quality and Productivity (WP2-8) –Scientific (articles, book chapters, PhD Thesis) –Technology (software, specifications, models, documentation) Impact (WP9-10) – Indicators (surveys, questionnaires and counters) e.g.: Number of software installations User satisfaction Web references

Assessment Protocol The output is based on: Available MM (input) Type of staff (professor, post-doc, PhD, ICT, ICT junior) Effective time (estimated 70% with exception of first half year) Type (and amount) of output Example: Output Year1 = (mm/12) * %-Y1 * (Effective-T x Norm-Output) * Y1-reduction (mm/12) *.65 * (.7 * 3) *.5 Note: Norm-Output for a Professor

Assessment Protocol (WP)

Assessment Protocol (Partner)