My name is Mika Yamashita, a program chair of the Mixed Methods Evaluation Topical Interest Group (TIG). The Mixed Methods Evaluation TIG was founded in 2010 to be a space for members to “examine the use of mixed methods evaluation through reflective analysis of philosophy, theory and methodology that is developing in the field of mixed methods” (Petition submitted to AEA in 2010). Evaluation 2012 will be our third year to sponsor sessions.
Mixed Methods Evaluation TIG members who presented at past conferences contributed this week’s posts. A majority of presentations focused on findings from mixed methods evaluations, analysis of data collection and analysis methods, and strategies used in evaluation teams. So, posts for this week will cover these topics. On Monday, Tayo Fabusuyi and Tori Hill will highlight the framework used for the evaluation of a minority leadership program. On Tuesday, Leanne Kallemeyn and her colleagues at Loyola University will share lessons learned from and tips for conducting integrated analysis. On Wednesday, Kristy Moster and Jan Matulis will walk us through how their evaluation team members worked to analyze data from multiple sources. On Thursday, Hongling Sun will share lessons learned from conducting a mixed methods evaluation. Finally, on Friday, Terri Anderson will share her evaluation team’s experience using the National Institute of Health’s guide, Best Practices for Mixed Methods Research in the Health Sciences to understand an unexpected evaluation result
Rad Resources: Listed are resources I found helpful for learning about Mixed Methods Evaluation.
Hot Tips:
- If you are new to mixed methods evaluation, and if you do not have time to read many articles, Jennifer Greene, Valerie Caracelli and Wendy Graham’s seminal work: Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs written in 1989 will go a long way to help you to think about how to design mixed methods evaluations.
- NIH and NSF created handbooks written with assistance from well-known methodologists in the field (e.g. Frechtling, Sharp, Cresswell, Klassen, Plano-Clark, and Smith). They are great introductions to mixed methods evaluation. Both handbooks are also on-line.
- NIH’s Best Practices for Mixed Methods Research in the Health Sciences.
- NSF’s User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations.
- The Journal of Mixed Methods Research is another great place to see issues discussed among mixed methods researchers.
- InterAction is developing a series of guidance notes on impact evaluation, including one focused mixed methods. Check this webpage for the forthcoming guidance note and related webinars on the use of mixed methods in impact evaluation.
The American Evaluation Association is celebrating Mixed Method Evaluation TIG Week. The contributions all week come from MME members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org. aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluator.