| « | November 2025 | » | | 日 | 一 | 二 | 三 | 四 | 五 | 六 | | | | | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | | | | | | | |
|
公告 |
| 暂无公告... |
| Blog信息 |
|
blog名称:众生平等
日志总数:57
评论数量:27
留言数量:1
访问次数:225079
建立时间:2004年12月13日 |
| |
|
 user-friendly handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations
文章收藏
菩提 发表于 2004/12/17 10:59:15 |
|
Directorate for Education and Human Resources
500)this.width=500'>
Division of Research, Evaluation and CommunicationNational Science Foundation
User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations
The National Science Foundation (NSF) provides awards for research and education in the sciences and engineering. The awardee is wholly responsible for the conduct of such research and preparation of the results for publication. NSF, therefore, does not assume responsibility for the research findings or their interpretation.
NSF welcomes proposals from all qualified scientists and engineers and strongly encourages women, minorities, and persons with disabilities to compete fully in any of the research-related programs described here. In accordance with federal statutes, regulations, and NSF policies, no person on grounds of race, color, age, sex, national origin, or disability shall be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving financial assistance from NSF.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities (investigators and other staff, including student research assistants) to work on NSF projects. See the program announcement or contact the program coordinator at (703) 306-1636.
NSF has TDD (Telephonic Device for the Deaf) capability, which enables individuals with hearing impairment to communicate with NSF about programs, employment, or general information. To access NSF TDD dial (703) 306-0090; for the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS), 1-800-877-8339.
Acknowledgments
Appreciation is expressed to our external advisory panel Dr. Frances Lawrenz, Dr. Jennifer Greene, Dr. Mary Ann Millsap, and Steve Dietz for their comprehensive reviews of this document and their helpful suggestions. We also appreciate the direction provided by Dr. Conrad Katzenmeyer and Mr. James Dietz of the Division of Research, Evaluation and Communication.
User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations
Edited by
Joy FrechtlingLaure SharpWestat
August 1997
NSF Program OfficerConrad Katzenmeyer
Directorate for Education and Human Resources
500)this.width=500'>
Division of Research, Evaluation and Communication
This handbook was developed with support from the National Science Foundation RED 94-52965.
Table of Contents
Part I. Introduction to Mixed Method Evaluations
Introducing This Handbook(Laure Sharp and Joy Frechtling)
The Need for a Handbook on Designing and Conducting Mixed Method EvaluationsKey Concepts and Assumptions
Illustration: A Hypothetical Project(Laure Sharp)
Project TitleProject DescriptionProject Goals as Stated in the Grant Application to NSFOverview of the Evaluation Plan
Part II. Overview of Qualitative Methods and Analytic Techniques
Common Qualitative Methods(Colleen Mahoney)
ObservationsInterviewsFocus GroupsOther Qualitative Methods
Appendix A: Sample Observation InstrumentAppendix B: Sample Indepth Interview GuideAppendix C: Sample Focus Group Topic Guide
Analyzing Qualitative Data(Susan Berkowitz)
What Is Qualitative Analysis?Processes in Qualitative AnalysisSummary: Judging the Quality of Qualitative AnalysisPractical Advice in Conducting Qualitative Analyses
Part III. Designing and Reporting Mixed Method Evaluations
Overview of the Design Process for Mixed Method Evaluation(Laure Sharp and Joy Frechtling)
Developing Evaluation QuestionsSelecting Methods for Gathering the Data: The Case for Mixed Method DesignsOther Considerations in Designing Mixed Method Evaluations
Evaluation Design for the Hypothetical Project (Laure Sharp)
Step 1. Develop Evaluation Questions
Step 2. Determine Appropriate Data Sources and Data Collection Approaches to Obtain Answers to the Final Set of Evaluation Questions
Step 3. Reality Testing and Design Modifications: Staff Needs, Costs, Time Frame Within Which All Tasks (Data Collection, Data Analysis, and Reporting Writing) Must Be Completed
Reporting the Results of Mixed Method Evaluations(Gary Silverstein and Laure Sharp)
Ascertaining the Interests and Needs of the AudienceOrganizing and Consolidating the Final ReportFormulating Sound Conclusions and RecommendationsMaintaining ConfidentialityTips for Writing Good Evaluation Reports
Part IV. Supplementary Materials
Annotated Bibliography
Glossary
List of Exhibits
Common techniques
Example of a mixed method design
Advantages and disadvantages of observations
Types of information for which observations are a good source
Advantages and disadvantages of indepth interviews
Considerations in conducting indepth interviews and focus groups
Which to use: Focus groups or indepth interviews?
Advantages and disadvantages of document studies
Advantages and disadvantages of using key informants
Data matrix for Campus A: What was done to share knowledge
Participants’ views of information sharing at eight campuses
Matrix of cross-case analysis linking implementation and outcome factors
Goals, stakeholders, and evaluation questions for a formative evaluation
Goals, stakeholders, and evaluation questions for a summative evaluation
Evaluation questions, data sources, and data collection methods for a formative evaluation
Evaluation questions, data sources, and data collection methods for a summative evaluation
First data collection plan
Final data collection plan
Matrix of stakeholders
Example of an evaluation/methodology matrix
Back to Top | To Chapter 1
|
|
|