I guess you intend to classify the responses afterward to discover underexplored dimensions of evaluations. Anticipating that I will just offer a lot of dimensions and examples thereof:
Evaluation of an attribute the subject can or can not influence (weight vs. height)
Kind of the evaluated attribute(s) - Physical (weight), technical (gear ratio), cognitive (IQ, mental imagery), mental (stress), medical (ICD classification), social (number of friends), mathematical (prime), …
Abstractness of the evaluated attribute(s)
low: e.g. directly observable physical attributes like height;
high: requiring expert interpretation and judgment e.g. beauty of a proof
Evaluation with the knowledge of the subject or without—test in school vs. secret observation
Degree of Goodhardting possible or actually occurring on the evaluation
Entangledness of the evaluation with the subject and evaluator
No relation between both—two random strangers, one assesses the other and moves on
Evaluator acts in a complex system, subject does not—RCT study of a new drug in mice
Both act in a shared complex system—employee evaluation by superior
Evaluation that is voluntary or not—medical check vs. appraisal on the job
Evaluation that is legal or not—secret observation of work performance is often illegal
Evaluation by the subject itself, another entity, or both together
Purpose of the evaluation—for decision making (which candidate to choose), information gathering (observing competitors or own strengths), or quality assurance (good meet expectations)
Evaluation for the purpose of the subject, the evaluator, another party, or a combination—exams in school often serve all of these
Objectiveness of the evaluation or the underlying criteria
Degree of standardization or “acceptedness” of the criteria—SAT vs. ad-hoc questionnaire
Single (entry exams), repeated (test in school), or continuous evaluation (many technical monitoring systems)
Size of evaluated population—single, few, statistically relevant sample size, or all
Length of the evaluation
Effort needed for the evaluation
You can treat this submission as an evaluation of evaluations ;-)
I guess you intend to classify the responses afterward to discover underexplored dimensions of evaluations. Anticipating that I will just offer a lot of dimensions and examples thereof:
Evaluation of an attribute the subject can or can not influence (weight vs. height)
Kind of the evaluated attribute(s) - Physical (weight), technical (gear ratio), cognitive (IQ, mental imagery), mental (stress), medical (ICD classification), social (number of friends), mathematical (prime), …
Abstractness of the evaluated attribute(s)
low: e.g. directly observable physical attributes like height;
high: requiring expert interpretation and judgment e.g. beauty of a proof
Evaluation with the knowledge of the subject or without—test in school vs. secret observation
Degree of Goodhardting possible or actually occurring on the evaluation
Entangledness of the evaluation with the subject and evaluator
No relation between both—two random strangers, one assesses the other and moves on
Evaluator acts in a complex system, subject does not—RCT study of a new drug in mice
Both act in a shared complex system—employee evaluation by superior
Evaluation that is voluntary or not—medical check vs. appraisal on the job
Evaluation that is legal or not—secret observation of work performance is often illegal
Evaluation by the subject itself, another entity, or both together
Purpose of the evaluation—for decision making (which candidate to choose), information gathering (observing competitors or own strengths), or quality assurance (good meet expectations)
Evaluation for the purpose of the subject, the evaluator, another party, or a combination—exams in school often serve all of these
Objectiveness of the evaluation or the underlying criteria
Degree of standardization or “acceptedness” of the criteria—SAT vs. ad-hoc questionnaire
Single (entry exams), repeated (test in school), or continuous evaluation (many technical monitoring systems)
Size of evaluated population—single, few, statistically relevant sample size, or all
Length of the evaluation
Effort needed for the evaluation
You can treat this submission as an evaluation of evaluations ;-)
EDIT: spell checking