Сравнение методов

	Многоуровневый дизайн смешанных методов, ориентированный на оценку	Оценка программы
Область	Дизайн исследования	Полевые методы
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Год появления	2000s–2010s	1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971)
Автор метода	Donna M. Mertens; John W. Creswell & Vicki L. Plano Clark (systematization)	Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi
Тип	Mixed methods evaluation design	Applied evaluation methodology
Основополагающий источник	Mertens, D. M. (2010). Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology: Integrating Diversity with Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods (3rd ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-1412975551	Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944
Другие названия	multilevel mixed methods evaluation, hierarchical mixed methods evaluation, MLM mixed methods, nested mixed methods evaluation	evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation
Связанные	2	3
Сводка	Evaluation-oriented multilevel mixed methods is a research design that combines quantitative and qualitative data across hierarchically nested levels of an organization or system — such as students within classrooms within schools — to evaluate a program, policy, or intervention. By capturing outcomes, processes, and contextual factors simultaneously at each level, this design produces richer evaluative inferences than either purely statistical multilevel models or single-level qualitative evaluations alone.	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.