Using WWC sanctioned rigorous methods to develop comparison groups for evaluation

Xingyuan Gao, Jianping Shen and Huilan Y. Krenn

Evaluation and Program Planning, 2017, vol. 65, issue C, 148-155

Abstract: Evaluation of program impact in the field of education has been a controversial topic over the years. Although randomized control trials have great advantages in causal inference, they often raise ethical and economic concerns in practice. As an alternative, quasi-experimental designs may provide valid evidence of influence if they are well-designed. In this article, we presented an evaluation case of a district-wide early learning improvement program. To strike a balance between practicability and academic rigor, we developed comparison groups from multiple perspectives, and used a series of tests consistent with WWC 3.0 standards to reach the most valid comparisons. Implications for evaluation practice were discussed.

Keywords: WWC 3.0; Quasi-experimental design; Randomized controlled trial (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718917301490
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:epplan:v:65:y:2017:i:c:p:148-155

DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.08.007

Access Statistics for this article

Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell

More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().