Framing Participatory Evaluation
Citation: J. Bradley Cousins, Elizabeth Whitmore (1998) Framing Participatory Evaluation. New directions for evaluation (RSS)
DOI (original publisher): 10.1002/ev.1114
Semantic Scholar (metadata): 10.1002/ev.1114
Sci-Hub (fulltext): 10.1002/ev.1114
Internet Archive Scholar (search for fulltext): Framing Participatory Evaluation
Download: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ev.1114/abstract
Tagged: evaluation (RSS), participatory evaluation (RSS)
Summary
The chapter explores the meanings of participatory evaluation (PE) by identifying and explicating key conceptual dimensions. It also sets a framework for differentiating forms of collaborative evaluation and collaborative inquiry.
- Implications of PE: While doing an evaluation, researchers collaborate with individuals, groups or communities with an important stake in the program.
- Stakeholders: Those with a vested interest in the focus for evaluation, e.g. program sponsors, managers, developers, implementers and members of special-interest groups and program beneficiaries.
Two approaches to participatory evaluation
Practical participatory evaluation (P-PE)
Core premise: Stakeholder participation in evaluation will enhance evaluation relevance, ownership, and thus utilization, which can be conceptualized in three types:
- Instrumental: Supporting discrete decisions;
- Conceptual: Contributing knowledge
- Symbolic: For persuasive or political use; reaffirming decisions that have already been made or to further a particular agenda
- Impact is conceptualized in terms of effects on an undifferentiated group of "users" or "decision makers.”
Transformative participatory evaluation (T-PE)
Key concepts:
- Aim at empowering people through participation in the process of constructing and respecting their own knowledge and through their understanding of the· connections among knowledge, power, and control.
- The distance between researcher and researched is broken down; all participants are contributors working collectively.
- Critical reflection: Participants should question, doubt, and consider a broad range of social factors, including their own biases and assumptions.
Comparison of the two approaches
The two forms of PE differ in their primary functions: practical problem solving vs. empowerment. Yet, there are clearly overlaps between P-PE and T-PE in that they lead to (1) an understanding of program functions and processes and (2) the development of skills in systematic inquiry that would empower the program practitioner. Moreover, the development of valid local knowledge, based on shared understanding and the joint construction of meaning, is integral to both forms of PE.
Dimensions of collaborative inquiry
- Control of the evaluation process: From researcher controlled to practitioner controlled
- Stakeholder selection: From primary users to all legitimate groups
- Depth of participation: From consultation to deep participation
