Сравнение на методи
Прегледайте избраните методи един до друг; редовете с разлики са откроени.
| Образователни изследвания чрез действие× | Оценка на програми× | |
|---|---|---|
| Област | Полеви методи | Полеви методи |
| Семейство | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Година на възникване≠ | 1940s (Lewin); educational context developed 1970s–1980s | 1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971) |
| Създател≠ | Kurt Lewin (action research foundations); Lawrence Stenhouse and John Elliott (educational adaptation) | Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi |
| Тип≠ | Participatory qualitative research design | Applied evaluation methodology |
| Основополагащ източник≠ | Elliott, J. (1991). Action Research for Educational Change. Open University Press. ISBN: 978-0335096190 | Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944 |
| Други названия | EAR, practitioner research, teacher action research, classroom action research | evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation |
| Свързани≠ | 6 | 3 |
| Резюме≠ | Educational action research is a cyclical, practitioner-led inquiry method in which educators systematically investigate a problem or opportunity in their own classroom or school, implement a change, observe its effects, and reflect on findings to guide the next cycle. Rooted in Kurt Lewin's action research framework and developed for educational contexts by Lawrence Stenhouse and John Elliott, it bridges the gap between educational theory and classroom practice by making teachers agents of rigorous inquiry. | Program evaluation is a systematic, empirically grounded process of collecting and analyzing information about a program to determine its merit, worth, or significance. Applied across education, public health, social services, and policy, it addresses questions such as whether a program is reaching its target population, whether it is being implemented as designed, and whether it is producing the intended outcomes. It draws on both quantitative and qualitative methods and serves accountability, improvement, or knowledge-generation purposes. |
| ScholarGateНабор от данни ↗ |
|
|