Shifting power in evaluation: Lessons from child-led evaluations

Q2 Social Sciences African Evaluation Journal Pub Date : 2023-09-29 DOI:10.4102/aej.v11i1.682
Laura Hughston
{"title":"Shifting power in evaluation: Lessons from child-led evaluations","authors":"Laura Hughston","doi":"10.4102/aej.v11i1.682","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In 2015, Plan International UK undertook a bold experiment: enabling children in participating in the multi-sectoral programme Building Skills for Life to evaluate the programme. Objectives: The primary objective of this experiment was to assess if a child-led evaluation is feasible, valuable and desirable. Feasible, in consideration of children’s abilities and the intricacies of a multisectoral evaluation; valuable in comparison with expert-led evaluations and desirable in relation to the evidence already available. Method: These experiments used a range of methodologies to facilitate children’s collecting and analysing data to return full evaluative judgements. While these experiments were deemed successful and credible on account of the reviews and support received by the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) community and the donor, the years that followed did not see child-led monitoring and evaluation flourish across the international development sector, despite renewed interest and international commitments, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Results: This article explores the contribution these experiences can bring to today’s evaluation practice and argues that child participation in monitoring and evaluation is not simply desirable; it is a right and an opportunity to sharpen the objectives of programmes addressed to children. Conclusion: This article concludes that it is time to abandon M&E practices carried out on children particularly in child-focused programmes and insist on M&E to be, at the very least, carried out with children, if not, as is preferable, by children. Contribution: This article highlights that involving children in social development aimed at changing the societies in which they will grow up and live, is not a matter of good practice or inclusion, but a matter of justice.","PeriodicalId":37531,"journal":{"name":"African Evaluation Journal","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Evaluation Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v11i1.682","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In 2015, Plan International UK undertook a bold experiment: enabling children in participating in the multi-sectoral programme Building Skills for Life to evaluate the programme. Objectives: The primary objective of this experiment was to assess if a child-led evaluation is feasible, valuable and desirable. Feasible, in consideration of children’s abilities and the intricacies of a multisectoral evaluation; valuable in comparison with expert-led evaluations and desirable in relation to the evidence already available. Method: These experiments used a range of methodologies to facilitate children’s collecting and analysing data to return full evaluative judgements. While these experiments were deemed successful and credible on account of the reviews and support received by the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) community and the donor, the years that followed did not see child-led monitoring and evaluation flourish across the international development sector, despite renewed interest and international commitments, such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Results: This article explores the contribution these experiences can bring to today’s evaluation practice and argues that child participation in monitoring and evaluation is not simply desirable; it is a right and an opportunity to sharpen the objectives of programmes addressed to children. Conclusion: This article concludes that it is time to abandon M&E practices carried out on children particularly in child-focused programmes and insist on M&E to be, at the very least, carried out with children, if not, as is preferable, by children. Contribution: This article highlights that involving children in social development aimed at changing the societies in which they will grow up and live, is not a matter of good practice or inclusion, but a matter of justice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估中的权力转移:儿童主导评估的经验教训
背景:2015年,英国国际培幼会进行了一项大胆的实验:让儿童参与多部门的“生活技能建设”项目,对该项目进行评估。目的:本实验的主要目的是评估儿童主导的评估是否可行、有价值和可取。考虑到儿童的能力和多部门评价的复杂性,是可行的;与专家主导的评估相比是有价值的,与现有证据相比是可取的。方法:这些实验使用了一系列的方法,以方便儿童收集和分析数据,以返回充分的评价判断。虽然由于监测和评价界和捐助者的审查和支持,这些实验被认为是成功和可信的,但在随后的几年里,尽管重新引起了兴趣并作出了诸如《儿童权利公约》等国际承诺,但在整个国际发展部门,以儿童为主导的监测和评价并没有蓬勃发展。结果:本文探讨了这些经验对今天的评估实践的贡献,并认为儿童参与监测和评估不仅仅是可取的;这是明确针对儿童的方案的目标的权利和机会。结论:本文的结论是,现在是时候放弃对儿童进行的M&E实践,特别是在以儿童为中心的方案中,并坚持M&E至少是与儿童一起进行的,如果不是,最好是由儿童进行。贡献:本文强调,让儿童参与旨在改变他们将在其中成长和生活的社会的社会发展,不是一个良好做法或包容的问题,而是一个正义的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
African Evaluation Journal
African Evaluation Journal Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles merit on any subject related to evaluation, and provide targeted information of professional interest to members of AfrEA and its national associations. Aims of the African Evaluation Journal (AEJ): -AEJ aims to be a high-quality, peer-reviewed journal that builds evaluation-related knowledge and practice in support of effective developmental policies on the African continent. -AEJ aims to provide a communication platform for scholars and practitioners of evaluation to share and debate ideas about evaluation theory and practice in Africa. -AEJ aims to promote cross-fertilisation of ideas and methodologies between countries and between evaluation scholars and practitioners in the developed and developing world. -AEJ aims to promote evaluation scholarship and authorship, and a culture of peer-review in the African evaluation community.
期刊最新文献
Erratum: Review of Goldman and Pabari’s book through the lens of the work of Sulley Gariba Table of Contents Vol 11, No 1 (2023) Improving citizen-based monitoring in South Africa: A social media model A results-based monitoring and evaluation system for the Namibian Child Support Grant programme Lessons learned from an occupational therapy programme needs assessment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1