• myGriffith
    • Staff portal
    • Contact Us⌄
      • Future student enquiries 1800 677 728
      • Current student enquiries 1800 154 055
      • International enquiries +61 7 3735 6425
      • General enquiries 07 3735 7111
      • Online enquiries
      • Staff phonebook
    View Item 
    •   Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    • Home
    • Griffith Research Online
    • Journal articles
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Browse

  • All of Griffith Research Online
    • Communities & Collections
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • This Collection
    • Authors
    • By Issue Date
    • Titles
  • Statistics

  • Most Popular Items
  • Statistics by Country
  • Most Popular Authors
  • Support

  • Contact us
  • FAQs
  • Admin login

  • Login
  • Conceptualizing indicator domains for evaluating action research

    Author(s)
    Piggot-Irvine, Eileen
    Rowe, Wendy
    Ferkins, Lesley
    Griffith University Author(s)
    Piggot-Irvine, Eileen
    Year published
    2015
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Abstract
    The focus of this paper is to share thinking about meta-level evaluation of action research (AR), and to introduce indicator domains for assessing and measuring inputs, outputs and outcomes. Meta-level and multi-site evaluation has been rare in AR beyond project implementation and participant satisfaction. The paper is the first of several associated with the Evaluative Study of Action Research (ESAR) in which we wish to establish the ways that espoused intents articulated in projects are realized and why certain approaches are adopted and seen to be effective. We seek to increase understanding of outcomes and impact of AR. ...
    View more >
    The focus of this paper is to share thinking about meta-level evaluation of action research (AR), and to introduce indicator domains for assessing and measuring inputs, outputs and outcomes. Meta-level and multi-site evaluation has been rare in AR beyond project implementation and participant satisfaction. The paper is the first of several associated with the Evaluative Study of Action Research (ESAR) in which we wish to establish the ways that espoused intents articulated in projects are realized and why certain approaches are adopted and seen to be effective. We seek to increase understanding of outcomes and impact of AR. Description is provided of multiple issues of complexity associated with establishing evaluative criteria and indicators categorized according to inputs, process, outputs, outcomes and impact. We explore theory associated with definition and practice of evaluation prior to presentation of the indicators. We think the time is ripe for deeper examination of AR practice and welcome the associated conversation and critique of our proposed indicators.
    View less >
    Journal Title
    Educational Action Research
    Volume
    23
    Issue
    4
    DOI
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2015.1042984
    Subject
    Education
    Education assessment and evaluation
    Action research
    Indicators
    Meta-level evaluation
    Multi-site
    Inputs
    Process
    Outputs
    Outcomes
    Impact
    Publication URI
    http://hdl.handle.net/10072/173199
    Collection
    • Journal articles

    Footer

    Disclaimer

    • Privacy policy
    • Copyright matters
    • CRICOS Provider - 00233E

    Tagline

    • Gold Coast
    • Logan
    • Brisbane - Queensland, Australia
    First Peoples of Australia
    • Aboriginal
    • Torres Strait Islander