Applying a Mixed Method Design to Evaluate Training Seminars Within an Early Childhood Education Project

Evaluation and Research in Education

Volumn 21, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 4-17

  Grammatikopoulos, Vasilis ^a   Zachopoulou, Evridiki ^b   Tsangaridou, Niki ^c   Liukkonen, Jarmo ^d   Pickup, Ian ^e  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THESSALY   (Greece)

^b ALEXANDER TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE OF THESSALONIKI   (Greece)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS   (Cyprus)

^d UNIVERSITY OF JYVÄSKYLÄ   (Finland)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ROEHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Mixed method evaluation; Preschool education; Training evaluation; Triangulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855930736     PISSN: 09500790     EISSN: 17477514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2167/eri417.0     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Caracelli, V., and Greene, J., 1997 Crafting mixed-method evaluation designs. In J., Greene and V., Caracelli Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms (pp. 19–32). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
2. Cronbach, L.J., 1982. Designing Evaluations of Educational and Social Programs, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3. Drago-Severson, E.E., 1994 What does ‘staff development’ develop? How the staff development literature conceives adult growth. Unpublished qualifying paper. Harvard University, Boston, MA.
4. Fitzpatrick, J.L., Sanders, J.R., and Worthen, B.R., 2004. Program Evaluation. Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines, Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
5. Fullan, M., 1990. “ Staff development, innovation, and institutional development ”. In Changing School Culture Through Staff Development, Edited by: Joyce, B., 3–25. Virginia VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
6. Giannakaki, M-R., 2005. Using mixed-methods to examine teachers’ attitudes to educational change: The case of the Skills for Life strategy for improving adult literacy and numeracy skills in England. Educational Research and Evaluation, 11 (4): 323–348.
7. Grammatikopoulos, V., Papacharisis, V., and Koustelios, A., 2004a. Construct validity of the self-assessment evaluation form for the Olympic education training program in Greece. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 99: 737–738.
8. Grammatikopoulos, V., Papacharisis, V., Koustelios, A., Tsigilis, N., and Theodorakis, Y., 2004b. Evaluation of the training program for Greek Olympic education. The International Journal of Educational Management, 18: 66–73.
9. Greene, J., and Caracelli, V., 1997 Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed-method evaluation. In J., Greene and V., Caracelli Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms (pp. 5–17). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10. Guskey, T.R., 2000. Evaluating Professional Development, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
11. Hill, T., and Westbrook, R., 1997. SWOT analysis: It's time for a product recall. Long Range Planning, 30 (1): 46–52.
12. Joyce, B., and Showers, B., 1995. Student Achievement through Staff Development: Fundamentals of School Renewal, New York, NY: Longman.
13. Killion, J., 2002. Assessing Impact: Evaluating Staff Development, Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.
14. Killion, P., 2006. Evaluating the impact of professional development in eight steps. The Evaluation Exchange, 11 (4): 5
15. Kotler, P., 2002. Marketing Management, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
16. Lee, J.H., and Walsh, D.J., 2004. Quality in early childhood programs: Reflections from program evaluation practices. American Journal of Evaluation, 25 (3): 351–373.
17. Lee, S.F., Lo, K.K., Leung, R.F., and Ko, A.S.O., 2000. Strategy formulation framework for vocational education: Integrating SWOT analysis, balanced scorecard, QFD methodology and MBNQA education criteria. Managerial Auditing Journal, 15 (8): 407–423.
18. Mason, J., 2006. Mixing methods in a qualitatively driven way. Qualitative Research, 6 (1): 9–25.
19. Moran-Ellis, J., Alexander, V.D., Cronin, A., Dickinson, M., Fielding, J., Sleney, J., and Thomas, H., 2006. Triangulation and integration: Processes, claims and implications. Qualitative Research, 6 (1): 45–59.
20. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future 1996 What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future. New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
21. Rallis, S.F., and Zajano, N.C., 1997. Keeping the faith until the outcomes are obvious. Phi Delta Kappan, 78: 706–709.
22. Richardson, V., and Placier, P., 2001. “ Teacher change ”. In Handbook of Research in Teaching, 4th edn, Edited by: Richardson, V., 905–947. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
23. Shadish W.R., 1993 Critical multiplism: A research strategy and its attendant tactics. In L., Sechrest Program Evaluation: A Pluralistic Enterprise (pp. 13–57). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24. Shotland, R.L., and Mark, M.M., 1987. Multiple Methods in Program Evaluation, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
25. Sparks, D., and Loucks-Horsley, S., 1989. Five models of staff development for teachers. Journal of Staff Development, 10 (4): 40–57.
26. Towns, D.P., and Serpell, Z., 2004 Successes and challenges in triangulating methodologies in evaluations of exemplary urban schools. In V.G., Thomas and F.I., Stevens Co-constructing a Contextually Responsive Evaluation Framework (pp. 49–62). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. Tsangaridou, N., Zachopoulou, E., Liukkonen, J., and Pickup, I., (2005) An innovation in early childhood physical education: The Early Steps project. Paper presented to the AIESEP 2005 World Congress, Lisbon.
28. Wilson, S., and Berne, J., (1999) Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in Education 24, 173–209.
29. Zimpher, N., and Howey, K., (1992) Policy and practice toward the improvement of teacher education. A report prepared for the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL).