Abstract

In recent years evaluators of educational and social programs have expanded their method-ological repertoire with designs that include the use of both qualitative and quantitative methods. Such practice, however, needs to be grounded in a theory that can meaningfully guide the design and implementation of mixed-method evaluations. In this study, a mixed-method conceptual framework was developed from the theoretical literature and then refined through an analysis of 57 empirical mixed-method evaluations. Five purposes for mixed-method evaluations are identified in this conceptual framework: triangulation, complemen-tarity, development, initiation, and expansion. For each of the five purposes, a recommended design is also presented in terms of seven relevant design characteristics. These design elements encompass issues about methods, the phenomena under investigation, paradigmatic framework, and criteria for implementation. In the empirical review, common misuse of the term triangulation was apparent in evaluations that stated such a purpose but did not employ an appropriate design. In addition, relatively few evaluations in this review integrated the different method types at the level of data analysis. Strategies for integrated data analysis are among the issues identified as priorities for further mixed-method work. The inevitable organizational, political, and interpersonal challenges of program evaluation mandate the use of multiple tools from evaluators ' full methodological reper-toire (Cook, 1985; Mathison, 1988). In re-cent years, this repertoire has been consid-erably expanded with the acceptance of qualitative methods as appropriate, legiti-mate, and even preferred for a wide range of evaluation settings and problems. Concom-itantly, evaluators have expressed renewed interest in mixed-method evaluation designs An earlier version of this paper was presented as a panel at the 1988 Annual Meeting of the American Evaluation Association in New Orle-ans. The authors are indebted to Melvin Mark for his insightful and constructive comments on the work presented herein, both at the conference and in subsequent personal communications