Denzin, N.K. and Y.S. Lincoln (2000) Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2.
Greene, J.C. (2000) `Challenges in Practicing Deliberative Democratic Evaluation', in K. R. Ryan and L. DeStefano (eds) Evaluation as a Democratic Process: Promoting Inclusion, Dialogue, and Deliberation, New Directions for Evaluation85, pp. 13-26. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
Greene, J.C. (2001) `Mixing Social Inquiry Methodologies', in V. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of Research on Teaching, 4th edn. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association .
4.
Greene, J.C. and V.J. Caracelli (1997) `Defining and Describing the Paradigm Issue in Mixed-method Evaluation', in J. C. Greene and V. J. Caracelli (eds) Advances in Mixed-method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms, New Directions for Evaluation74, pp. 5-17. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
5.
Greene, J.C., L. Benjamin and L. Goodyear (2001) `The Merits of Mixing Methods in Evaluation', Evaluation7(1): 25-44.
6.
House, E.R. and K.R. Howe (1999) Values in Evaluation and Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
Kincheloe, J.L. (2001) `Describing the Bricolage: Conceptualizing a New Rigor in Qualitative Research', Qualitative Inquiry7(6): 679-92.
8.
Kushner, S. (2000) Personalizing Evaluation. London : Sage.
9.
Mark, M.M., G.T. Henry and G. Julnes (2000) Evaluation: An Integrated Framework for Understanding, Guiding, and Improving Policies and Programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
10.
Schwandt, T.A. (1997) `Evaluation as Practical Hermeneutics', Evaluation3(1): 69-84.
11.
Schwandt, T.A. (forthcoming) Evaluation Practice Reconsidered. New York: Peter Lang.