Pragmatism, Evidence, and Mixed Methods Evaluation

Abstract

Abstract Mixed methods evaluation has a long‐standing history of enhancing the credibility of evaluation findings. However, using mixed methods in a utilitarian way implicitly emphasizes convenience over engaging with its philosophical underpinnings (Denscombe, 2008). Because of this, some mixed methods evaluators and social science researchers have been criticized for an a‐paradigmatic stance (Greene, 2007). Critics posit that this seemingly unreflective “what‐works” (Denzin, 2012) approach threatens the validity of findings (Lipscomb, 2008). This chapter maintains this position and argues that evaluators need to examine their philosophical orientations and how this informs credible evidence in mixed methods evaluation. Accordingly, this work provides an overview of Deweyan pragmatism, emphasizing intelligent action. Next, important aspects of intelligent action are used to explore central questions in mixed methods evaluation and evidenced‐based practice. To conclude, a case example, illustrating how intelligent action can inform mixed methods evaluation, is offered. © Wiley Periodicals, Inc., and the American Evaluation Association .