首页> 外文学位 >Impact of mixed method designs on knowledge gain, credibility, and utility of program evaluation findings.
【24h】

Impact of mixed method designs on knowledge gain, credibility, and utility of program evaluation findings.

机译:混合方法设计对知识获取,信誉和程序评估结果的实用性的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

This study attempted to understand the relationship between evaluation approach and the perceived knowledge gain, credibility, and utility of findings. Specifically, the researcher investigated whether or not quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method evaluations produced different kinds and amounts of knowledge gain, different levels of credibility, or suggested different types of use.;To investigate this question, the researcher selected a group of consumers of evaluations, presented them with three simulated evaluation case summaries, and interviewed them for their reactions. Participants included ten administrators from academic success and student service programs at Arizona State University. The evaluation case summaries were of a student counseling center, a summer transition program, and a supplemental instruction program. Each summary highlighted the evaluation's purposes, research questions, data collection methods, findings, conclusions, and recommendations.;The interview had two phases. During the initial phase, participants responded to questions about each of the summaries separately. For each summary, participants were asked questions regarding perceived knowledge gain, credibility, and utility. During the second phase, participants were asked to rank the summaries on the three dimensions.;Participants ranked the mixed-method summary the highest in knowledge gain because it portrayed the most comprehensive picture of program participants, processes, and outcomes. The mixed-method summary was ranked the highest in credibility because it allowed participants to experience the program through the eyes and voices of the students. Participants also ranked the mixed-method summary the highest in utility. They claimed it prepared them for such internal administrative responsibilities as strategic planning, high stakes decision-making, and programmatic improvement. Participants also anticipated they could take the summary to their superiors to report program outcomes and justify resource requests.;The study makes contributions to evaluation research by suggesting that evaluation approaches produce different kinds and amounts of knowledge gain, produce different levels of credibility, and suggest different kinds of use. These findings extend the current theoretical views regarding evaluation use. The study also makes contributions to evaluation practice in the training of evaluation professionals.
机译:这项研究试图理解评估方法与感知的知识获取,信誉和发现的效用之间的关系。具体而言,研究人员调查了定量,定性和混合方法评估是否产生了不同种类和数量的知识获取,不同程度的可信度或提出了不同的使用类型。为调查此问题,研究人员选择了一组评价的消费者,向他们提供了三个模拟的评价案例摘要,并采访了他们的反应。参加者包括来自亚利桑那州立大学的学术成就和学生服务计划的十位管理员。评估案例摘要包括学生咨询中心,暑期过渡计划和补充指导计划。每个摘要都强调了评估的目的,研究问题,数据收集方法,发现,结论和建议。访谈分为两个阶段。在初始阶段,参与者分别回答了有关每个摘要的问题。对于每个摘要,都向参与者询问有关感知知识获取,信誉和实用性的问题。在第二阶段中,要求参与者在三个维度上对摘要进行排名。参与者将混合方法摘要列为知识增益最高的地方,因为它描绘了计划参与者,过程和结果的最全面描述。混合方法摘要在信誉方面排名最高,因为它使参与者可以通过学生的眼睛和声音来体验该程序。与会人员还对混合方法摘要进行了最高实用性评估。他们声称,他们已为内部行政职责做好了准备,例如战略规划,重大风险决策和程序改进。参与者还期望他们可以将总结带给上级,以报告计划成​​果并证明资源需求的合理性。该研究通过建议评估方法产生不同种类和数量的知识获取,产生不同程度的可信度并提出建议,为评估研究做出了贡献不同的用途。这些发现扩展了当前有关评估使用的理论观点。该研究还为评估专业人员的培训中的评估实践做出了贡献。

著录项

  • 作者

    Potts, Shelly Ann Keimig.;

  • 作者单位

    Arizona State University.;

  • 授予单位 Arizona State University.;
  • 学科 Education Administration.;Education Higher.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1998
  • 页码 132 p.
  • 总页数 132
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号