Contribution Guidelines
We’re very excited to learn from you! If you work or study in the evaluation field, have hot tips, cool tricks, rad resources or lessons learned of interest to evaluators, and would like to contribute to aea365, please consider submitting a draft contribution. Posts should:
- Be written in first-person prose.
- Be short – approximately 250-400 words and absolutely no more than 450.
- Focus on topics that will be of interest to a range of evaluators, not just on the work that you are doing.
- Include a 2-3 sentence introduction to you and the general theme of your Tips, Trick, Resources, or Lessons Learned (e.g. I use a lot of logic models in my work, so I’ll be sharing a trick on helping stakeholders envision their program through logic modeling, as well as a website that helps me create interactive logic models).
- Include a description of the The Tip, Trick, Resource, or Lesson Learned and how it’s useful.
- Include an active weblink to the Tip, Trick, Resource or Lesson Learned (where appropriate).
To get a feel for the breadth and style of contributions, take a look at the archives via the archive link at the top of this page.
Send your draft post in an email for consideration to aea365@eval.org. Please note that we reserve the right to refuse submissions and to edit submissions for length and alignment with the style of aea365 – you’ll always have the opportunity to review and approve any edits.
3 Comments for Contribution Guidelines
David McDonald | January 13, 2010 at 6:40 pm
Author comment by Susan Kistler | January 13, 2010 at 7:35 pm
US slang – in a positive sense – short for radical.
I looked it up and found the following at http://onlineslangdictionary.com/definition+of/rad
Rad: “cool neat nice good ect. Origin: From the word radical.”
Rad: “Very good, excellent, great. Short form for the word radical.”
Perhaps too informal here?
David McDonald | January 14, 2010 at 7:27 pm
Thanks Susan. Since it is the American Eval Assoc, and most members are from the USA and would know the term, and contributors are briefed on what goes in which sections, I don’t see any need to change it. Not too informal or radical to me!
Though it is an odd use of the English language to define ‘radical’ as not meaning radical but something else entirely! Here in Australia something similar has happened with ‘awesome’, with the term being used colloquially to mean something like ‘excellent’.
Cheers – David
Hi, I’m finding these very interesting and appreciate the overnight Twitter alerts. One thing, though: what, pray, is meant by the term ‘Rad resource’? I know what a resource is but what is ‘rad’?
Thanks – David