Thesis (MPhil (Sociology and Social Anthropology))--University of Stellenbosch, 2010. / The contemporary evaluation literature advocates for and recommends a pluralistic approach to
programme evaluation, with some writers contending that the use of multiple and/or mixed
methods for the practice is inevitable. The rationale for such an approach encompasses
aspects of both the ‘technical’ and the ‘political’ requirements of evaluation practice. A review of
evaluation research literature underscores the important role of mixed methods research
towards realizing richer evaluation findings, and addressing the pragmatic, democratic and
political facets of the evaluation practice. However, it is observed that there is a dearth of
literature that focuses on how the use of a mixed methods evaluation approach facilitates the
realization of richer conclusions or inferences about programme merit/worth. Thus, the
overarching aim of the thesis is to establish how the perception and implementation of mixed
methods research among evaluation practitioners influences the nature of inferences they
make.
This thesis aims at identifying patterns and relationships within and between conceptions and
practices of mixed methods evaluation through a descriptive process. The selection of cases is
therefore purposive and includes fourteen published evaluation articles on
projects/programmes. An analytical framework is developed on the basis of a literature review
on mixed methods research and background literature on evaluation research. This framework
guides the qualitative content analysis of each case study and the cross-case analysis across
the fourteen studies to identify common patterns.
The findings reveal two prominent perspectives of mixed methods evaluation prevailing among
evaluation practitioners. The first (labeled a ‘strong’ conception) has the intention of and places
emphasis on the integration of the qualitative and quantitative components, with the primary
objective of obtaining richer evaluation inferences. In this conception, the use of the methods
and the data/inferences thereof are synthesized to achieve this goal. This conception is
congruent with mixed methods purposes of: - ‘complementarity’ and ‘triangulation’ and is
responsive to the ‘technical’ needs of evaluation. The second perspective (labeled a ‘weak’
conception) is silent about the integration of the respective methods or data/findings/inferences,
qualifying the use of multiple methods and data in a single study as sufficing for a mixed
methods approach. It resonates with justifications of mixed methods research that address
issues of: - comprehensiveness, multiple view points, inclusiveness and democracy and seems
more tailored to the ‘political’ needs of evaluation. The findings also reveal that the resulting
multiple inferences from this ‘weak’ conception can weaken each other when contradicting or
inaccurate qualitative and quantitative findings result, especially when the complimentary
function of either method is not planned a priori.
Therefore within the context of realizing richer and more valid evaluation findings/inferences, it
is recommended that the purposes and qualification as mixed methods research of the second
perspective be re-considered. It is apparent that in embracing the ‘political’ needs of evaluation
practice, this conception seems to eschew the ‘technical’ requirements initially intended for a
mixed methods approach. This has implications particularly for the mixed methods purpose of
‘expansion’ and rationales of pluralism, inclusiveness and democracy, which are seemingly
popular within programme evaluation practice.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:sun/oai:scholar.sun.ac.za:10019.1/5349 |
| Date | 12 1900 |
| Creators | Kyeyune, Apolo Peter |
| Contributors | Mouton J., University of Stellenbosch. Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences. Dept. of Sociology and Social Anthropology. |
| Publisher | Stellenbosch : University of Stellenbosch |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | 150 p. |
| Rights | University of Stellenbosch |
Page generated in 0.0105 seconds