User:Mmnshah/sandbox

Mixed Method Evaluation

The term mixed methods evolved from "triangulation" studies, a military terminology that refers to using multiple elements to identify an object's location. It combines quantitative data (such as laboratory tests and government statistics) and qualitative data (such as surveys and interviews).

Mixed method evaluation includes involvement of two or more modes of data collection to carry out a structured analysis of the program processes and their aftereffects on the targeted audience with an objective of promoting its expansion and enhancement. Mixed method design for program evaluation involves a combination of the Quantitative and Qualitative data collection approaches. What distinguishes mixed-method evaluation form the traditional methods is the intentional and planned use of diverse methods to carry out a specific mixed-method evaluation making use of particular mixed-method designs, (Greene 2005:255) [] Making use of diverse data can enhance research findings, although mixed methods research have their disputes and drawbacks.

Mixed-method evaluations help us to answer How well did the program do and how much of success did it achieve?

Characteristics

 * Makes use of multiple sources and methods for data collection


 * Is always structured and planned by the evaluators


 * The planning, data collection and analysis all involve participation of the team members conducting the program


 * Gives a more better picture of the program effectiveness to the stakeholders

Pre-considerations
Mixed-method evaluation design should consider the following three objectives [] for effective results:


 * Political: Encompassing the objective of evaluation
 * Paradigm: Including our impressions of the social world and our ability to promote its exploration
 * Technical: Constituting of distinct methods and procedures for collecting as well as analyzing data.

Actors
Evaluators Program staff Investors Program focus (target) group

Methodology
Since, mixed-method evaluation uses more than one techniques or methods to collect the data required to answer one or more evaluation questions; there is no particular methodology that can be followed. There are various methods used for collecting data, some of that include a combination of reviewing existing data (information), structured surveys, collecting observations, face to face informant interviews along with pre and post intervention surveys. The method for conducting mixed-method evaluation has to be designed on case to case basis. This design includes collection and use of either or both quantitative and qualitative data to analyse impact and develop conclusions to support or resolve evaluation questions.

Advantages of using mixed method evaluation

 * Increased validatitiy and reliability of the data used for evaluation
 * In-depth understanding of the program effectiveness and outreach
 * Uncovers inconsistencies and discrepancies that alert the evaluator to the need for reexamining and redesigning the evaluation framework at any point during the data collection or evaluation
 * Combines various formative and summative methods (such as surveys, interviews, etc) for colletion of data
 * Gives a broader scope for understanding and evaluating the hinderences
 * Allows infusion of a different data collection while one is already in progress (eg: qualitative interviews can be initiated while a quantative survey is in progress)

Disadvantages of using mixed method evaluation

 * High in cost and involves participation of resources at all levels
 * Can not acheive target without co-operation from all the concerned actors
 * Involves an accurate pre-planning
 * Participants bias can not be completely eliminated

Applications

 * To analyze and moniter complex issues where either one (qualitative or quantative) approach can not provide a valid and fruitful result.
 * To improve instrumentation for data collection techniques and in improving the evaluator's understanding and findings.
 * To provide evident conclusions to all the stakeholders and minimize the interuption of biases.

Example/s
Waysman M and Savaya R, Mixed method evaluation: A Case study []

Further Readings
Directorate for Education and Human Resources, "User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations" []

Coghlan A T, Girault P, Prybylski D, "Participatory and Mixed-Method Evaluation of MSM hIV/AIDS Programs in Bangladesh, Nepal and Indonesia", []