방법 비교
선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.
| 디지털 교육 실행 연구× | 프로그램 평가× | |
|---|---|---|
| 분야 | 현장 조사법 | 현장 조사법 |
| 계열 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 기원 연도≠ | 1990s–2000s (digital integration of Lewinian action research traditions) | 1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971) |
| 창시자≠ | Rooted in Carr & Kemmis (1986); digital adaptation developed by Lankshear, Knobel, and others from mid-1990s onward | Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi |
| 유형≠ | Applied qualitative-cyclical research design | Applied evaluation methodology |
| 원전≠ | Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (2004). A Handbook for Teacher Research: From Design to Implementation. Open University Press. ISBN: 978-0335211357 | Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944 |
| 별칭 | technology-integrated action research, online educational action research, digital-mediated practitioner inquiry, DEAR | evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation |
| 관련≠ | 5 | 3 |
| 요약≠ | Digital educational action research is a cyclical, practitioner-led inquiry method in which educators systematically investigate a problem or question arising in digitally mediated teaching and learning environments. Drawing on the action research tradition of Carr, Kemmis, and Lewin, it integrates digital tools — learning management systems, social media, video, online collaborative platforms — both as the context of inquiry and as instruments for data collection, making it particularly suited to contemporary technology-rich classrooms. | 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. |
| ScholarGate데이터셋 ↗ |
|
|