Justifying conclusions in naturalistic evaluations: An interpretive perspective |
| |
| Authors: | James A Pearsol |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Faculty of Education, University of Macau, China;2. Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, China;3. School of Education, Guangzhou University, China;4. Department of Family Studies and Human Development, The University of Arizona, USA;1. Department of English Language and Literature, University of Balamand, Lebanon;2. School of Education, Durham University, United Kingdom;1. CalTeach, University of California, Merced, CA 95343, USA;2. Departments of Learning, Teaching & Curriculum and Physics & Astronomy, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211, USA;1. School of Education, Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia;2. uImagine Digital Learning Innovation Laboratory, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia;3. Centre for the Study of Higher Education, The University of Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia;4. School of Education, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga, NSW 2678, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | Use of an interpretive perspective in naturalistic inquiry is one way to reconcile assumptions and practice in naturalistic evaluations, particularly concerning the justification of evaluation conclusions. In this paper I conclude that naturalistic evaluation based on an interpretive perspective cannot appeal to external methodological criteria, like trustworthiness criteria, for protection against bias in reaching evaluation conclusions. I suggest that claims for evaluation conclusions depend on the evaluator as interpreter — using his or her skills of persuasion and analysis to mediate among perspectives, selected evidence and claims for conclusions. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
