Scribd
Upload
41 views2 pages

K - Lzif0F Joj:Yfkg LGB) (LZSF, @) %, SF) PK-BKMF $ % +U Dalgwt

This document contains an evaluation form for assessing overseas comparative study reports produced by participants of the Senior Executive Development Programme at the Nepal Administrative Staff College. The form evaluates the reports on six criteria: study design, presentation of information, analysis of information, study findings, recommendations, and learning application. Each criterion is scored on a scale of 1.5 to 4.0, with detailed descriptions provided of deficient, adequate, and high-quality responses. The total possible marks for the evaluation is 20.

Uploaded by

Uttam Acharya
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
41 views2 pages

K - Lzif0F Joj:Yfkg LGB) (LZSF, @) %, SF) PK-BKMF $ % +U Dalgwt

This document contains an evaluation form for assessing overseas comparative study reports produced by participants of the Senior Executive Development Programme at the Nepal Administrative Staff College. The form evaluates the reports on six criteria: study design, presentation of information, analysis of information, study findings, recommendations, and learning application. Each criterion is scored on a scale of 1.5 to 4.0, with detailed descriptions provided of deficient, adequate, and high-quality responses. The total possible marks for the evaluation is 20.

Uploaded by

Uttam Acharya
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

k|lzIf0f Joj:yfkg lgb]{lzsf, @)^%, sf] pkbkmf $=%=* ; +u ;DalGwt cg';"rL@*

Nepal Administrative Staff College


Jawalakhel, Lalitpur

Overseas Comparative Study Report Evaluation Form Title of the training: Senior Executive Development Programme Group of the participants: Class I Officers of the Government of Nepal Duration of the training: to Name of the group members: ... . ... . ... . Title of the report: Evaluation Criteria and Scale Full Marks: 20.00
1. Study Design: 1.5 1.75 2.0 2.25 2.5 3.0 3.25 3.5 3.75 4.0
Defective and poor design, no use of appropriate conceptual framework, objectives not clearly formulated and methodology. Quite appropriate adequate for investigation, use of appropriate conceptual framework, clear formation of objectives, appropriate methodology.

2. Presentation of Information: 1.5 1.75 2.0 2.25

2.5

3.0

3.25

3.5

3.75

4.0

In adequate and irrelevant for use of information, presentation poor, confusing and messy way, poor organization, vague reporting and messy language.

Highly relevant information, appropriately structured, clear, logical and systematic presentation, proper organization, compact reporting, accurate language.

3. Analysis of Information: 1.5 1.75 2.0

2.25

2.5

3.0

3.25

3.5

3.75

4.0

Shallow, unimaginative and random interpretations of information, unclear explanation.

Very logical, in-depth and relative interpretations of apparent and underlying facts, problems, issues and high quality explanted.

4. Study Findings: 1.5 1.75

2.0

2.25

2.5

3.0

3.25

3.5

3.75

4.0

Vague and inaccurate assessment of organizational situation, no derivation of basic essence and lessons.

Precise and accurate assessment of organizational situation, derivation of basic essence and lessons.

5. Recommendations: 0.10 0.20 0.25

0.50

0.75

1.0

1.25

1.5

1.75

2.0

Unrealistic and highly generalised course of action suggested, vague implementation plan.

Highly applicable, concrete suggestions for action, specific implementation plan suggested.

6. Learning Application: 0.10 0.20 0.25

0.50

0.75

1.0

1.25

1.5

1.75

2.0

No use of learning at NASC for analysis and suggestions, unrelated training theme.

High degree of use of learning at NASC for analysis and recommendations, highly related to training theme.

Total Marks: Evaluator's signature: Name: Date:

k[i7 (%

You might also like