|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Debates, Notes and Queries
The Debates, Notes and Queries section provides an opportunity for evaluation-related issues to be debated as well as for more general interchange. Debates can take the form of sustained arguments by the advocates of different approaches or of briefer thoughts or notes. Contributors may also wish to comment and raise questions about material that has previously appeared in the journal or simply use the section to draw readers' attention to relevant issues, ongoing research, evaluation activities and other events.
Evaluation, Vol. 2, No. 2,
213-219 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/135638909600200207

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Levin-Rozalis
Abduction: A Logical Criterion For Programme and Project Evaluation
Evaluation,
October 1, 2000;
6(4):
415 - 432.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Redfern
Evaluation: Drawing comparisons or achieving consensus?
Journal of Research in Nursing,
January 1, 1998;
3(6):
464 - 474.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
R. Laughlin and J. Broadbent
Redesigning Fourth generation Evaluation: An Evaluation Model for the Public-sector Reforms in the UK?
Evaluation,
October 1, 1996;
2(4):
431 - 451.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Adelman
Anything Goes: Evaluation and Relativism
Evaluation,
July 1, 1996;
2(3):
291 - 305.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
|
|