Mixed-methods evaluation in complex programmes: The national reading plan in Portugal

Evaluation and Program Planning

Volumn 39, Issue , 2013, Pages 1-9

  Da Costa, António Firmino ^a   Pegado, Elsa ^a   Ávila, Patrícia ^a   Coelho, Ana Rita ^a  

^a INSTITUTO UNIVERSITÁRIO DE LISBOA ISCTE IUL   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Literacy policy; Mixed methods; Programme evaluation; Reading promotion

Indexed keywords

EDUCATION; EDUCATION POLICY; INTEGRATED APPROACH; LITERACY; METHODOLOGY; MODELING;

PORTUGAL;

EID: 84874707610     PISSN: 01497189     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.02.001     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Costa A.F., Pegado E., ávila P. Avaliação do Plano Nacional de Leitura. Lisbon: GEPE - Ministério da Educação 2008.
2. Costa A.F., Pegado E., ávila P., Coelho A.R. Avaliação do programa Rede de Bibliotecas Escolares. Lisbon: RBE - Ministério da Educação 2010.
3. Costa A.F., Pegado E., ávila P., Coelho A.R. Avaliação do Plano Nacional de Leitura: os primeiros cinco anos. Lisbon: GEPE - Ministério da Educação 2011.
4. Bean R., Draper J., Turner G., Zigmond N. Reading First in Pennsylvania: Achievement findings after five years. Journal of Literacy Research 2010, 42(1):5-26. 10.1080/10862960903583244.
5. Berry T.R., Spence J.C., Plotnikoff R.C., Bauman A., McCargar L., Witcher C., et al. A mixed methods evaluation of televised health promotion advertisements targeted at older adults. Evaluation and Program Planning 2009, 32:278-288.
6. Bryman A. Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done?. Qualitative Research 2006, 6:97-113. 10.1177/1468794106058877.
7. Bryman A. Mixed methods research: Combining quantitative and qualitative research. Social research methods 2012, 627-652. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 4th ed. A. Bryman (Ed.).
8. Carlisle J.F., Cortina K.S., Zeng J. Reading achievement in Reading First Schools in Michigan. Journal of Literacy Research 2010, 42(1):49-70. 10.1080/10862960903583236.
9. Cassany D. Prácticas letradas contemporâneas 2008, Ríos de Tinta, México.
10. Celik H., Abma T.A., Klinge I., Widdershoven G.A.M. Process evaluation of a diversity training program: The value of a mixed method strategy. Evaluation and Program Planning 2011, 35:54-65.
11. Chen H.T. Theory-driven evaluations 1990, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
12. Chen H.T. A theory-driven evaluation perspective on mixed-methods research. Research in the Schools 2006, 13(1):75-83.
13. Creswell J.W., Clark V.L.P. Designing and conducting mixed methods research 2006, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
14. Davies P. Is evidence-based government possible?. Paper presented at the 4th annual campbell collaboration colloquium 2004.
15. Dole J.A., Hosp J.L., Nelson K.L., Hosp M.K. Second opinions on the reading first initiative: The view from Utah. Journal of Literacy Research 2010, 42(1):27-48. 10.1080/10862960903583277.
16. Foorman B.R., Petscher Y., Lefsky E.B., Toste J.R. Reading First in Florida: Five years of improvement. Journal of Literacy Research 2010, 42(1):71-93. 10.1080/10862960903583202.
17. Gamse, B. C., Jacob, R. T., Horst, M., Boulay, B., & Unlu, F. (2008). Reading first impact study final report. Washington, DC: US Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pdf/20094038.pdf.
18. Giannakaki M.S. 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 2005, 11(4):323-348. 10.1080/13803610500110687.
19. Grammatikopoulos V., Zachopoulou E., Tsangaridou N., Liukkonen J., Pickup I. Applying a mixed method design to evaluate training seminars within an early childhood education project. Evaluation & Research in Education 2008, 21(1):4-17. 10.2167/eri417.0.
20. Greene J.C., Benjamin L., Goodyear L. The merits of mixing methods in evaluation. Evaluation 2001, 7(1):25-44. 10.1177/13563890122209504.
21. Greene J.C., Caracelli V.J., Graham W.F. Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 1989, 11(3):255-274. 10.2307/1163620.
22. Hindin A., Paratore J.R. Supporting young children's literacy learning through home-school partnerships: The effectiveness of a home repeated-reading intervention. Journal of Literacy Research 2007, 39(3):307-333. 10.1080/10862960701613102.
23. Hopkins D., Youngman M., Harris A., Wordsworth J. Evaluation of the initial effects and implementation of success for all in England. Journal of Research in Reading 1999, 22(3):257-270. 10.1111/1467-9817.00089.
24. Kelly-Vance L., Schreck D. The impact of a collaborative family/school reading programme on student reading rate. Journal of Research in Reading 2002, 25(1):43-53. 10.1111/1467-9817.00157.
25. Kraaykamp G. Literary socialization and reading preferences: Effects of parents, the library, and the school. Poetics 2003, 31:235-257. 10.1016/S0304-422X(03)00033-40.
26. Lages M.F., Liz C., António J.H.C., Correia T.S. Os estudantes e a leitura 2007, GEPE - Ministério da Educação, Lisbon.
27. Luo M., Dappen L. Mixed-methods design for an objective-based evaluation of a magnet school assistance project. Evaluation and Program Planning 2005, 28:109-118.
28. The Oxford handbook of public policy 2006, Oxford University Press, Oxford. M. Moran, M. Rein, R.E. Goodin (Eds.).
29. OECD Education at a glance 2000-2011, OECD, Paris.
30. OECD Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000 2001, OECD, Paris.
31. OECD Learning for tomorrow's world: First results from PISA 2003 2004, OECD, Paris.
32. OECD PISA 2006, science competencies for tomorrow's world 2007, OECD, Paris.
33. OECD PISA 2009 results: What students know and can do. Student performance in reading, mathematics and science 2010, Vol. I. OECD, Paris.
34. OECD PISA 2009 results: Learning trends. Changes in student performance since 2000 2010, Vol. V. OECD, Paris.
35. OECD, Statistics Canada Literacy in the information age: Final report of the international adult literacy survey 2000, OECD, Paris.
36. Olsen W. Triangulation in social research: Qualitative and quantitative methods can really be mixed. Developments in sociology 2004, 103-121. Causeway Press, Ormskirk. M. Holborn (Ed.).
37. Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: In search of a method. Evaluation 2002, 8(2):157-181. 10.1177/1358902002008002512.
38. Premier League, Football Foundation, National Literacy Trust & Arts Council England. (2010). Premier league reading stars: Annual review 2010. Retrieved from http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/.
39. Protheroe J., Bower P., Chew-Graham C. The use of mixed methodology in evaluating complex interventions: Identifying patient factors that moderate the effects of a decision aid. Family Practice 2007, 24:594-600.
40. Rihoux B., Ragin C.C. Configurational comparative methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and related techniques 2009, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
41. Rvachew S., Savage R. Preschool foundations of early reading acquisition. Paediatrics and Child Health 2006, 11(9):589-593.
42. Santos M.L.L, Neves J.S., Lima M.J., Carvalho M. A leitura em Portugal 2007, GEPE - Ministério da Educação, Lisbon.
43. Saunders J. The School Libraries Network in Portugal. School Libraries in View 2006, 22. Retrieved from. http://www.cilip.org.uk/get-involved/special-interest-groups/school/publications/journal/sliv-22/pages/sliv22e.aspx.
44. Siraj-Blatchford I., Sammons P., Taggart B., Sylva K., Melhuish E. Educational research and evidence-based policy: The mixed-method approach of the EPPE project. Evaluation & Research in Education 2006, 19(2):63-82.
45. Small M.L. How to conduct a mixed methods study: Recent trends in a rapidly growing literature. Annual Review of Sociology 2011, 37:57-86. 10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102657.
46. Stern E. Evaluation research methods 2005, 4 Vols. Sage, London.
47. Stufflebeam D.L. Evaluation models. New Directions for Evaluation 2001, 89:7-98. 10.1002/ev.3.
48. Teddlie C., Tashakkori A. Major issues and controversies in the use of mixed methods in the social and behavioral sciences. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research 2003, 3-50. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. A. Tashakkori, C. Teddlie (Eds.).
49. Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research 2010, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. 2nd ed. A. Tashakkori, C. Teddlie (Eds.).
50. Townsend L., Floersch J., Findling R.L. The conceptual adequacy of the drug attitude inventory for measuring youth attitudes toward psychotropic medications: A mixed methods evaluation. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 2010, 4(1):32-55. 10.1177/1558689809352469.