IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v39y2013icp1-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mixed-methods evaluation in complex programmes: The national reading plan in Portugal

Author

Listed:
  • Costa, António Firmino da
  • Pegado, Elsa
  • Ávila, Patrícia
  • Coelho, Ana Rita

Abstract

This article highlights the evaluation strategies of a complex programme, which were essentially based on a pluralist, integrating approach founded on the use of mixed methods. The programme under analysis is the National Reading Plan (NRP), a public policy initiative that aims to increase literacy levels and reading habits among the Portuguese population. It was evaluated throughout its first phase, which lasted five years (2006–2011), using an evaluation model that made it possible to continuously and systematically monitor and analyse the way in which this programme was developed and implemented. A number of different quantitative and qualitative methodological operations gathered information from a broad range of sources and social actors, covering the vast set of projects promoted by the NRP. We particularly look at the contributions made by mixing methods to the evaluation of the programme's impacts, and point out its potentials when it comes to evaluating wide-ranging, long and complex programmes.

Suggested Citation

  • Costa, António Firmino da & Pegado, Elsa & Ávila, Patrícia & Coelho, Ana Rita, 2013. "Mixed-methods evaluation in complex programmes: The national reading plan in Portugal," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 1-9.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:39:y:2013:i:c:p:1-9
    DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.02.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718913000062
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2013.02.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luo, Mingchu & Dappen, Leon, 2005. "Mixed-methods design for an objective-based evaluation of a magnet school assistance project," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 109-118.
    2. Berry, Tanya R. & Spence, John C. & Plotnikoff, Ronald C. & Bauman, Adrian & McCargar, Linda & Witcher, Chad & Clark, Marianne & Stolp, Sean, 2009. "A mixed methods evaluation of televised health promotion advertisements targeted at older adults," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 278-288, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Romero-Gutierrez, Miguel & Jimenez-Liso, M. Rut & Martinez-Chico, Maria, 2016. "SWOT analysis to evaluate the programme of a joint online/onsite master's degree in environmental education through the students’ perceptions," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 41-49.
    2. Yim, Moonjung & Fellows, Michelle & Coward, Chris, 2020. "Mixed-methods library evaluation integrating the patron, library, and external perspectives: The case of Namibia regional libraries," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gil, Alejandro & Brennan, Mark & Chaudhary, Anil Kumar & Maximova, Siela N., 2023. "Evaluation of cacao projects in Colombia: The case of the rural Productive Partnerships Project (PAAP)," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. Halder, Deepa & Pradhan, Debasis & Roy Chaudhuri, Himadri, 2021. "Forty-five years of celebrity credibility and endorsement literature: Review and learnings," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 397-415.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:39:y:2013:i:c:p:1-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.