方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法;存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 批判性项目评估× | 教育行动研究× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 田野方法 | 田野方法 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1970s–1990s (deliberative democratic strand formalised ~1999; transformative paradigm ~2009) | 1940s (Lewin); educational context developed 1970s–1980s |
| 提出者≠ | Ernest House, Ken Howe, Donna Mertens (transformative/deliberative democratic evaluation traditions) | Kurt Lewin (action research foundations); Lawrence Stenhouse and John Elliott (educational adaptation) |
| 类型≠ | Qualitative/mixed-methods evaluation approach | Participatory qualitative research design |
| 开创性文献≠ | Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative Research and Evaluation. Guilford Press. ISBN: 978-1606230787 | Elliott, J. (1991). Action Research for Educational Change. Open University Press. ISBN: 978-0335096190 |
| 别名 | critical evaluation, emancipatory evaluation, critical-emancipatory program evaluation, transformative evaluation | EAR, practitioner research, teacher action research, classroom action research |
| 相关≠ | 4 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | Critical program evaluation is an approach to assessing programs that integrates critical theory with standard evaluation methods. It moves beyond measuring whether a program met its stated objectives to interrogating whose interests the program serves, how power and privilege shape its design and outcomes, and whether it advances or hinders equity and social justice. The approach draws on deliberative democratic evaluation (House and Howe) and the transformative paradigm (Mertens), treating evaluation as an inherently value-laden, politically situated practice. | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|