Mixed-method evaluation: A way of democratically engaging with difference 1

Arendt H. 1968, Between past and future: Eight exercises in political thought, Penguin Books, New York.

Biesta G.J.J. 2001, ‘How difficult should education be?’, Educational theory, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 385–4000.

Boyte H.C. 2000, ‘Professions as public crafts’, background paper prepared for the working conference on New Information Commons, Racine, Wisconsin.

Coulter D. , & Wiens J.R. 2002, ‘Educational judgment: Linking the actor and the spectator’, Educational Researcher, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 15–25.

Greene J.C. , Benjamin L. , & Goodyear L. 2001, ‘The merits of mixing methods in evaluation’, Evaluation, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 25–44.

Greene J.C. , & Caracelli V.J. 2002, ‘Making paradigmatic sense of mixed method practice’, in Tashakkori A. , & Teddlie C. (eds), Handbook of mixed methods in social behavioural research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California.

Guba E.G. , & Lincoln Y.S. 1989, Fourth generation evaluation, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California.

Mark M.M. , Henry G.T. , & Julnes G. 2000, Evaluation: an integrated framework for understanding, guiding, and improving policies and programs, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.

McNeil C. 2002, ‘Evaluator as steward of citizen deliberation’, American Journal of Evaluation, vol. 23, pp. 45–54.

Pawson R. , & Tilley N. 1997, Realistic evaluation, Sage, London.

Schwandt T.A. 2002, Evaluation practice reconsidered, Peter Lang, New York.