Reported credibility techniques in higher education evaluation studies that use qualitative methods: A research synthesis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

31 Scopus citations

Abstract

This synthesis study examined the reported use of credibility techniques in higher education evaluation articles that use qualitative methods. The sample included 118 articles published in six leading higher education evaluation journals from 2003 to 2012. Mixed methods approaches were used to identify key credibility techniques reported across the articles, document the frequency of these techniques, and describe their use and properties. Two broad sets of techniques were of interest: primary design techniques (i.e., basic), such as sampling/participant recruitment strategies, data collection methods, analytic details, and additional qualitative credibility techniques (e.g., member checking, negative case analyses, peer debriefing). The majority of evaluation articles reported use of primary techniques although there was wide variation in the amount of supporting detail; most of the articles did not describe the use of additional credibility techniques. This suggests that editors of evaluation journals should encourage the reporting of qualitative design details and authors should develop strategies yielding fuller methodological description.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)157-165
Number of pages9
JournalEvaluation and Program Planning
Volume68
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2018
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd

Keywords

  • Credibility techniques
  • Mixed methods synthesis
  • Qualitative evaluation

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Reported credibility techniques in higher education evaluation studies that use qualitative methods: A research synthesis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this