方法对比

	面向评估的实用混合方法	行动研究	项目评估
领域	研究设计	质性研究	田野方法
方法族	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
起源年份	1990s–2000s	1946	1960s–1970s (Scriven 1967; Stufflebeam CIPP model 1971)
提出者	Jennifer C. Greene; Abbas Tashakkori & Charles Teddlie	Kurt Lewin; expanded by Kemmis, McTaggart, Reason & Bradbury	Michael Scriven; Daniel Stufflebeam; Peter Rossi
类型	Mixed methods research design	Method	Applied evaluation methodology
开创性文献	Greene, J. C. (2007). Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. Jossey-Bass. ISBN: 978-0787984090	Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46.	Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A Systematic Approach (7th ed.). Sage. ISBN: 978-0761908944
别名	pragmatic evaluation mixed methods, program evaluation mixed methods, applied pragmatic mixed methods, mixed methods program evaluation	Participatory Action Research, PAR, Collaborative Inquiry	evaluation research, program assessment, educational evaluation, systematic program evaluation
相关	2	1	3
摘要	Evaluation-oriented pragmatic mixed methods is a research design that combines quantitative and qualitative data collection within a pragmatist philosophical stance, expressly to evaluate programs, policies, or interventions. Rather than adhering rigidly to a single paradigm, it selects methods for their fitness to answer evaluation questions about program effectiveness, outcomes, and stakeholder experiences. The design is widely applied in education, public health, social services, and development evaluation contexts.	Action research is a collaborative research methodology in which researchers work with practitioners and community members to investigate a problem, implement change, and evaluate outcomes, cycling through reflection, action, and learning. Developed by Kurt Lewin (1946), action research bridges research and practice, aiming simultaneously to produce knowledge and practical improvement.	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.