What Does a Transformative Lens Bring to Credible Evidence in Mixed Methods Evaluations?

New Directions for Evaluation

Volumn 2013, Issue 138, 2013, Pages 27-35

  Mertens, Donna M ^a  

^a GALLAUDET UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878932998     PISSN: 10976736     EISSN: 1534875X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ev.20055     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. American Evaluation Association (AEA). (2011). Public statement on cultural competence in evaluation. Fairhaven, MA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.eval.org
2. Bledsoe, K. (2011, November). Transformative mixed methods. Presentation at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Anaheim, CA.
3. Chilisa, B. (2005). Educational research with postcolonial Africa: A critique of HIV/AIDS research in Botswana. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18, 659-684.
4. Chilisa, B. (2012). Indigenous research methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Cram, F. (2009). Maintaining indigenous voices. In D. M. Mertens & P. Ginsberg (Eds.), Handbook of social research ethics (pp. 308-322). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
6. Greene, J. (2006). Evaluation, democracy and social change. In I. Shaw, J. C. Greene, & M. M. Mark (Eds.), The Sage handbook of evaluation (pp. 118-140). London, England: Sage.
7. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 191-216). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Harris, R., Holmes, H., & Mertens, D. M. (2009). Research ethics in sign language communities. Sign Language Studies, 9(2), 104-131.
9. House, E., & Howe, K. R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. LaFrance, J., & Nichols, R. (2010). Reframing evaluation: Defining an indigenous evaluation framework. The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23(2), 13-31.
11. LaFrance, J. L., & Crazy Bull, C. (2009). Researching ourselves back to life: Taking control of the research agenda in Indian country. In D. Mertens & P. Ginsberg (Eds.), Handbook of social science research ethics (pp. 135-149). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
12. Meadow-Orlans, K., Mertens, D. M., & Sass-Lehrer, M. (2002). Parents and their deaf children. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
13. Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York, NY: Guilford.
14. Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15. Mertens, D. M., & Wilson, A. T. (2012). Program evaluation theory and practice: A comprehensive guide. New York: Guilford.
16. Quigley, D. (2006). A review of improved ethical practices in environmental and public health research: Case examples from native communities. Health Education and Behavior, 33, 130-147.
17. Stake, R. E. (1974). Program evaluation, particularly responsive evaluation (Occasional Paper No. 5.). Kalamazoo, MI: Western Michigan University Evaluation Center.