Ash Center for Democratic Governance and Innovation, Suite 200N, 124 Mt Auburn Street, Cambridge
4:15pm to 5:30pm
Quantitative or qualitative: which evaluation method is more useful? This has long been a contentious debate in the field of international development. Yet while individual methods like randomized control trials, ethnography, structured observations, and interviews are each well-placed to reveal parts of the picture, each can also miss important parts of the whole. Thus the question is: how can researchers become more deliberate and holistic in using mixed methods to understand the full picture? The Transparency for Development Project is seeking to answer that question in its pursuit of understanding of whether, where, and how citizen-led transparency and accountability interventions can improve health. Join us as T4D Principal Investigators Archon Fung, Dan Levy, and Stephen Kosack reflect on the T4D project’s mixed method approach and draw on early insights from the evaluation that demonstrate the importance of integrating qualitative and quantitative methods in evaluating development programs.