Program Evaluation and Archives: An Essay on a Research Agenda

The author begins with comments on the importance and position of program evaluation (PE), mostly in the context of European archives. These observations, based on personal experience and on a preliminary literature review, show a definitive need for PE, despite its weak position in the managerial activities of archives. Next, the author highlights some special aspects of the evaluation of archival programs. Finally, the author draws conclusions from his general remarks and from his reading of the articles included in this thematic issue ofArchival Science. He outlines some tendencies and shifts in the definition and purposes of evaluation and a short research agenda, containing the most important issues for further development of PE in archives.     

Olympische Spiele als mediale Vermögensgegenstände

On the basis of the media coverage of the Olympic Games and the underlying strategic positioning, it is shown how important it is to illuminate this topic from an interdisciplinary perspective. Special emphasis is placed on the coupling of resource-based theory and network theories and illustrates particularly well the new interplay between management, organizational communication and mass communication. In the past decade the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has been transformed in ever increasing dimensions into a media corporation. The Olympic values and principles, innovations and creation potentials are the focal points of this strategy as tangible assets of the media.     

Feedback after good trials enhances learning

Recent studies (Chiviacowsky & Wulf, 2002, 2005) have shown that learners prefer to receive feedback after they believe they had a "good" rather than "poor" trial. The present study followed up on this finding and examined whether learning would benefit if individuals received feedback after good relative to poor trials. Participants practiced a task that required them to throw beanbags at a target with their nondominant arm. Vision was prevented during and after the throws. All participants received knowledge of results (KR) on three trials in each 6-trial block. While one group (KR good) received KR for the three most effective trials in each block, another (KR poor) received feedback for the three least effective trials in each block. There were no group differences in practice. However the KR good group showed learning advantages on a delayed retention test (without KR). These results demonstrated that learning is facilitated if feedback is provided after good rather than poor trials. The findings are interpreted as evidence for a motivational function of feedback.