|
Participatory Systems Change Evaluation: Involving all Users in All Stages of Systems Change Assessment
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Dianna Newman,
University at Albany,
dnewman@uamail.albany.edu
|
| Anna Lobosco,
New York State Developmental Disabilities Planning Council,
alobosco@ddpc.state.ny.us
|
| Abstract:
Grassroots efforts are yielding changes to service delivery systems. These efforts frequently require or are based on a system evaluation as opposed to a program evaluation. Because of the grassroots nature of these demands, it is becoming increasingly important to include consumers in systems change evaluation. This includes looking at the underlying assumptions, relationships, and connections of service systems as well as the delivery process and expected outcomes. In addition, consumers must be actively involved in the design, implementation, analysis, and use phases of the systems change evaluation process. The Three I Model, an approach to evaluating systems change, provides a framework for documenting these complex change efforts consistent with participatory and empowerment approaches to evaluation. This paper will provide details related to use of this evaluation model in consumer-oriented evaluation along with examples from practice and will address how it complements and adds to participatory and empowerment practices.
|
|
Rethinking Participatory Evaluation's Conceptualization: Toward the Development of a “Full-Blown”, Useful Concept
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Pierre-Marc Daigneault,
Université Laval,
pierre-marc.daigneault.1@ulaval.ca
|
| Steve Jacob,
Université Laval,
steve.jacob@pol.ulaval.ca
|
| Abstract:
Participatory evaluation is a generic term that stretches to cover very different realities. Except for a few valuable endeavors towards its conceptualization (Cousins & Whitmore, 1998; Weaver & Cousins, 2004), participatory evaluation remains largely “under-theorized”. Using Goertz's (2006) approach to concepts, we examine and question the current conceptualization of stakeholder involvement in evaluation. We show on the one hand that participatory evaluation is a concept “stuck at the secondary level of conceptualization” that needs to be fully articulated and, on the other, that some of its dimensions need to be rethought. We then put forward what we deem to be an improved, three-level conceptualization of participatory evaluation. Toward this purpose, we developed two concepts, “self managed democratic evaluation” and “technocratic-scientific evaluation”, and a participation index that allows for better differentiation between collaborative approaches. Finally, we succinctly check for the usefulness of this model by applying it to a few selected evaluation approaches.
|
|
Participatory Evaluative Action Research (PEAR): Social Learning and Place-based Data as Democratic Practice
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Annalisa Raymer,
Cornell University,
alr26@cornell.edu
|
| Abstract:
How might the practice of evaluation be enacted in framing and designing public goods in a manner that builds public life?
This question was the stating point of a multi-year collaborative research engagement, the outcomes of which include a new model of inquiry called Participatory Evaluative Action Research (PEAR). Expressly public-oriented and place-sensitive, PEAR is participatory action research (PAR) with a specific aim of supporting public deliberation and public decision-making through evaluation. Accordingly, it is also democratic evaluation enacted as participatory action research. At the core of PEAR is a vision of social learning and knowledge generation for robust civic life and vital public realm as the means and medium of healthy democracies and a sustainable future. Presented in this presentation are: 1) an overview of the PEAR model (with case illustrations) and 2) the developmental research design that lead to PEAR's inception and development.
|
|
Hear Us Out: Youth-led Participatory Evaluation in an Urban Community
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Sherri Lauver,
University of Rochester,
slauver@warner.rochester.edu
|
| Abstract:
Youth often feel as if they have little representation in policies that affect their lives. Hear Us Out! is a youth-led participatory evaluation to bring youth voice to important community problems facing young people in Rochester, New York. Partners include nineteen students from the Rochester After School Academy and faculty from the University of Rochester. Youth ages 14-18 designed and carried out an evaluation to assess beliefs and experiences of young people to offer a collective “voice” to policy makers. The purpose of the presentation is to examine how this participatory evaluation provides a context for identity development and community engagement among youth. It also describes successes and challenges in its pilot year. Data sources include focus groups, surveys, and observations. Findings suggest that youth gain an emerging identity as “change agent” while continuing to wrestle with alienation and cynicism in their schools and community.
|
| | | |