Flexibility in evaluative research design does not necessitate the abandonment of ran
domly constructed comparison groups. Three designs are reviewed which provide at least
the option of randomization while maintaininggreatflexibility. The strengths and weak
nesses of the designs are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boruch, R.F. (1976) "On common contentions about randomized field experiments ," pp. 158-194 in G. V. Glass (ed.) Evaluation Studies Review Annual, Vol. l. Beverly Hills: Sage.
2.
Campbell, D.T., and J.C. Stanley (1966) Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally .
3.
Cook, T.D. and D.T. Campbell (1976) "The design and conduct of quasi-experiments and true experiments in field settings," in M. D. Dunnette (ed.) Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Research. New York: Rand McNally .
4.
Hobbs, G.W. (1977) "A program evaluation of individual and group therapy in a university counseling center." Ph.D. dissertation, Southern Illinois University.
5.
Oetting, E.R. (1976) "Evaluation research and orthodox science: Part I." Personnel and Guidance. J.55 (September): 11-15.
6.
Voss, J.R. (1977) "Program evaluation in sex education: the effectiveness of sexual awareness weekend workshops." Ph.D. disseration, Southern Illinois University
