Mapping the territory: Issues in evaluating large-scale learning technology initiatives

Educational Technology and Society

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 31-42

  Anderson, Charles ^a   Day, Kate ^a   Haywood, Jeff ^a   Land, Ray ^a   Macleod, Hamish ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Evaluation practice; Higher education; ICT

Indexed keywords

EID: 3042579896     PISSN: 11763647     EISSN: 14364522     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (22)

1. th European Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, 24-28 August, Göteborg, Sweden.
2. Bryman, A. (1988). Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London: Unwin Hyman.
3. Clarke, A. & Dawson, R. (1999). Evaluation Research: an introduction to principles, methods and practice, London: Sage.
4. Cook, T. D. & Reichardt, C. S. (1979). Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research, London: Sage.
5. Cronbach, L. J. (1982). Designing Evaluations of Educational and Social Programs, London: Jossey-Bass.
6. Gage, N. (1989). The paradigm wars and their aftermath. Education Researcher, 18, 4-10.
7. Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1983). Effective Evaluation, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8. Haywood, J., Anderson, C., Coyle, H., Day, K., Haywood, D. & Macleod, H. (2000). Learning Technology in Scottish Higher Education - a survey of the views of senior managers, academic staff and 'experts'. ALT-J, 8 (2), 5-17.
9. House, E. R. (1993). Professional Evaluation: Social Impact and Political Consequences, Newbury Park: Sage.
10. Patton, M. Q. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation, London: Sage.
11. Patton, M. Q. (1988). Paradigms and pragmatism. In Fetterman, D. M. (Ed.) Qualitative Approaches to Evaluation in Education: The Silent Scientific Revolution. New York: Praeger, 116-137.
12. nd Ed., Newbury Park: Sage.
13. th Ed., London: Sage.
14. Scriven, M. (1983). Evaluation Ideologies. In Madaus, G. F., Scriven, M., Stufflebeam, D. L. (Eds.) Evaluation Models: Viewpoints in Educational and Human Services Evaluation, Lancaster: Kluwer-Nijhoff, 229-260.
15. Shadish, W. R, Cook, T. D & Leviton, L. C. (1990). Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice, London: Sage.
16. Shadish, W. R. & Epstein, L. (1987). Practice of program evaluation practice among members of the Evaluation Research Society and Evaluation Network Evaluation Review, 11, 555-90.
17. Shaw, I. F. (1999). Qualitative Evaluation, London: Sage.
18. Silverman, D. (1997). The logics of qualitative research. In Miller, G. and Dingwall, R. (Eds.) Context and Method in Qualitative Research, London: Sage, 12-25.
19. Stufflebeam, D. L. & Shinkfield, A. J. (1984). Systematic Evaluation, Lancaster: Kluwer-Nijhoff.
20. Trend, M. G. (1978). On the Reconciliation of Qualitative and Quantitative Analyses: A Case Study. Human Organization, 37, 345-54.
21. Reprinted in Cook, T. D. & Reichardt, C. S. (Eds.) (1979) Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research, London: Sage, 68-86.
22. Yin, R. (1989). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Revised Ed., London: Sage.