Jennifer C. Greene is a professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She received her BA in psychology from Wellesley College and her PhD in educational psychology from Stanford University. Prior to Illinois, Greene held faculty positions at the University of Rhode Island and Cornell University. Greene’s work focuses on the intersection of social science methodology and social policy and aspires to be both methodologically innovative and socially responsible. Greene’s methodological research has concentrated on advancing qualitative and mixed methods approaches to social inquiry. In the field of evaluation, she has contributed both theoretical and practical scholarship in democratic and values-engaged approaches to evaluation. Greene has held leadership positions in the American Evaluation Association and the American Educational Research Association. She has also provided editorial service to both communities, including a six-year position as co-editor-in-chief of New Directions for Evaluation, and current positions as an associate editor of the Journal of Mixed Methods Research and series co-editor for the series Evaluation and Society. Her own publication record includes a co-editorship of the Sage Handbook of Program Evaluation and authorship of Mixed Methods in Social Inquiry. Greene is the past president of the American Evaluation Association.

Jennifer C. Greene's research interests focus on the intersections of social science and social policy. She works in the domain of educational and social program evaluation, and seeks to advance the theory and practice of alternative forms of evaluation, including qualitative, democratic, and mixed methods evaluation approaches. Her current work emphasizes evaluation as a venue for democratizing dialogue about critical social and educational issues, with a focus on conceptualizing evaluation as a "public good."

Jennifer C. Greene is an experienced teacher of social science methodology at the doctoral level. Her primary instructional ambitions are twofold. First, she aims to facilitate student understanding of the politics and power of method, of the premise that method importantly shapes the knowledge and understanding obtained from an empirical study. This is in contrast to an understanding of method as value-neutral and mainly a matter of technique. Greene’s second instructional ambition is to enable students to not only learn about various methodological traditions, but to begin to become wise practitioners of them. Methodological practice is ever so much more challenging than methodological theory. Greene’s own methodological expertise includes interpretivist-qualitative and mixed methods traditions.