Multi-method Approaches in Evaluation

PrEval Project's new PRIF Report analyzes the implementation in social science evaluation research

Cover des PRIF Reports 1/2022 (Foto: User 652234, Pixabay / Bearbeitung: Anja Feix).

How are multi-method evaluations implemented, to what extent do they work from multiple perspectives, and what conclusions can be drawn from this for the field of extremism prevention? In their latest PRIF Report, the authors of the PrEval Project provide an overview of what evaluators of social programs and projects mean when they describe their work as multi-method. The publication provides guidance for all those involved in the planning and implementation of evaluations, whether they are commissioners, being evaluated, or are evaluators themselves.

Extremism prevention in Germany has a diverse appearance, with different measures that follow different logics in terms of their impact goals, target groups, formats, and pedagogical approaches. Evaluations can set different foci and serve different purposes in this context. In order to be able to respond to the demands and to draw a picture of the evaluated work that is as appropriate as possible, it can be useful for evaluators to combine several research methods (multi­methodology), the authors note.

Future studies can use the present report as a basis to shed more light on the motivations for and against the use of multi­methodology and multi­perspectivity among evaluators.

 

Download: Klöckner, Mona/Verhovnik-Heinze, Melanie/Schlicht-Schmälzle, Raphaela/Nakamura, Reike/Strunk Julius (2022): Multimethodische Evaluationsdesigns: eine Erhebung der sozialwissenschaftlichen Praxis, PRIF Report 1/2022, Frankfurt/M.

Further information on the project “PrEval - Evaluation Designs for Prevention Measures” at preval.hsfk.de (in German).