On the Principles of Comparative Evaluation

Evaluation

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 359-371

  Vartiainen, Pirkko ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VAASA   (Finland)

Author keywords

analytical comparison; comparative evaluation; illustrative comparison; methodological principles

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646571626     PISSN: 13563890     EISSN: 14617153     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/135638902401462484     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Almond, G. A. and G. B. Powell, eds (1992) `Introduction', in Comparative Politics Today: A World View, 5th edn. New York: Harper Collins.
2. Anderson, M.J. and R.N. Shaw (1999) `A Comparative Evaluation of Qualitative Data Analytic Techniques in Identifying Volunteer Motivation in Tourism', Tourism Management20(1): 99-106.
3. Argyris, C. (1962) Interpersonal Competence and Organizational Effectiveness. Homewood, IL: Richard D. Irwin.
4. Balthasar, A. and S. Rieder (2000) `Learning from Evaluations. Effects of the Evaluation of the Swiss Energy 2000 Programme', Evaluation6(3): 245-60.
5. Bonnell, V.E. (1980) `The Uses of Theory, Concepts and Comparison in Historical Sociology', Comparative Studies in Society and History22(2): 156-73.
6. Cheetham, J., E.J. Mullen, H. Soydan and K. Tengvald (1998) `Evaluation as a Tool in the Development of Social Work Discourse. National Diversity or Shared Preoccupations? Reflections from a Conference', Evaluation4(1): 9-24.
7. Coe, C. (1999) `Local Government Benchmarking: Lessons from Two Major Multi-government Efforts', Public Administration Review59(2): 110-5.
8. Cohen, D.K. and J.P. Spillane (1994) `National Education Indicators and Traditions of Accountability', in Making Education Count: Developing and Using International Indicators, pp. 323-37. Paris: OECD.
9. Creemers, B.P.M. and D. Reynolds (1996) `Issues and Implications of International Effectiveness Research', International Journal of Educational Research25(3): 257-65.
10. Etzioni-Halevy, E. (1990) `Comparing Semi-corruption among Parliamentarians in Britain and in Australia', in E. yen (ed.) Comparative Methodology: Theory and Practice in International Social Research, pp. 113-33. London: Sage.
11. Kanter, R. and D. Summers (1994) `Doing Well While Doing Good: Dilemmas of Performance Measurement in Nonprofit Organizations and the Need for Multiple-constituency Approach', in D. McKevitt and A. Lawton (eds) Public Sector Management: Theory, Critique and Practice, pp. 220-36. London: Sage.
12. Laukkanen, R. (1997) `Vertailevan tutkimuksen mahdollisuuksia koulutusjärjestelmän arvioinnissa' [Possibilities of Comparative Research in Evaluation of Educational Systems], Hallinnon tutkimus16(1): 15-26.
13. Manns, C.L. and J.G. March (1978) `Financial Adversity, Internal Competition and Curriculum Change in a University', Administrative Science Quarterly23(4): 541-52.
14. Mayer, L.C. (1989) Redefining Comparative Politics: Promise versus Performance. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15. Meyer, M.W. and L.G. Zucker (1989) Permanently Failing Organizations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16. Pennings, J.M. and P.S. Goodman (1979) `Toward a Workable Framework', in J. M. Pennings and P. S. Goodman (eds) New Perspectives on Organizational Effectiveness, pp. 146-84. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
17. Peters, B.G. (1998) Comparative Politics: Theory and Method. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
18. Przeworski, A. (1987) `Methods of Cross-national Research, 1970-1983: An Overview', in M. Dierkes, H. N. Weiler and A. B. Antal (eds) Comparative Policy Research: Learning from Experience. Aldershot: Gower.
19. Ragin, C. (1987) The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
20. Roberts, G.K. (1985) `The Explanation of Politics: Comparison, Strategy and Theory', in P. G. Lewis, D. C. Potter and F. G. Castles (eds) The Practice of Comparative Politics, pp. 285-304. Avon: Longman/Open University Press.
21. Salminen, A. (1998) Hallintotiede: Organisaatioiden hallinnolliset perusteet [Administrative Science: The Administrative Grounds of Organisations]. Helsinki: Valtion Painatuskeskus.
22. Salminen, A. and S. Lehtinen (1982) `Hallintotiede ja vertaileva tutkimus' [Administrative Science and Comparative Study]. Proceedings of the University of Vaasa. Research Papers, No. 86.
23. Sartori, G. (1991) `Comparing and Miscomparing', The Journal of Theoretical Politics3(3): 243-57.
24. Shadish, W.R., T.D. Cook and L.C. Leviton (1991) Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
25. Vartiainen, P. (1994) `Palveluorganisaatioiden tuloksellisuusarviointi, teoriat ja käytäntö. Päivähoitoon, erityisesti päiväkoteihin kohdistuva monitahoarviointi' [Efficiency Evaluation in Service Organisations, Theory and Practice. Multiple Constituency Evaluation of Children's Day-care Centres], Acta Wasaensia40, Hallintotiede2.
26. Vartiainen, P. (1997) `Kokemuksia terveydenhuollon laadun arvioinnista SERVQUALmenetelmällä' [Assessing Quality in Health Care with SERVQUAL Method]. Suomen Lääkärilehti52(16): 1989-95.
27. Vartiainen, P. (1998) `Local Economic Development Policy in Finland: Key Actors View to Implementation', in K. T. Liou (ed.) Handbook of Economic Development, pp. 401-25. New York: Marcel Dekker.
28. Weiss, C.H. (1972) Evaluation Research: Methods for Assessing Program Effectiveness. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
29. Weiss, C.H. (1995) `Nothing as Practical as a Good Theory: Exploring Theory-based Evaluation for Comprehensive Community Initiatives', in J. P. Conell, A. C. Kubisch, L. B. Schorr and C. H. Weiss (eds) New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Concepts, Methods and Contexts. Washington, DC: The Aspen Institute.
30. Weiss, C.H. (1999) `The Interface between Evaluation and Public Policy', Evaluation5(4): 468-86.