E N G A G I N G Y O U N G P E O P L E I N

E V A L U AT I O N

U N I V E R S I T Y O F G U E L P H

E D R D * 6 0 0 0

R A N A T E L F A H , 2 0 1 6

PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

• Theoretical Overview

• Participatory Evaluation

• The Role of Young People in Evaluation

• Declaration of Principle for Youth Participation in Community Research and Evaluation.

• Youth Participation in Community Evaluation

• Benefits of Youth Participatory Evaluation

• Obstacles of Youth Participatory Evaluation

• The Stages of Planning Participatory Youth Evaluation

• Case Study 1: The “MTGK” program

• Case Study 2: The “No limits” Project

• Conclusions

• References

THEORETICAL OVERVIEW PARTICIPATORY APPROACHES; ACTION RESEARCH AND

EMPOWERMENT EVALUATION(POWERS, J. , TIFFANY, J. 2006).

• They have evolved over the past several decades, where they encourage oppressed or

marginalized groups to collectively study the issues and conditions that affect their well being.

• Participatory research relies on local knowledge and emphasizes the involvement of non-

academics who have expertise as individuals who live the research issue.

• Earlier in participatory research projects, which have addressed international development

issues or community development, have engaged adolescents as subjects or respondents, and

not as resources or partners in the discovery of the new knowledge. Moreover, Young people’s

knowledge and understanding have often been undervalued or dismissed as invalid.

• Youth participatory research have roots in various related fields such as action research,

community development and empowerment evaluation.

WHAT IS PARTICIPATORY EVALUATION

Participatory evaluation

Checkoway & Richards-Schuster (2009)

Is a process in which people joint together and develop knowledge for action and change.

It encompasses persons involved in program evaluation, community assessment, and policy analysis.

It could be a formal process that needs significant resources or informal one that addresses few questions, such

as what are you trying to accomplish, how well are doing, and how could you improve.

THE ROLE OF YOUNG PEOPLE IN EVALUATION

HART’S LADDER (1992 ,1997)“LADDER OF YOUTH PARTICIPATION”

Quality of participation Examples

Young People and adults share decision making. When young people have the ideas and invite adults to join them in making decision

through out the project.

Young People lead and initiate action Young people have the initial idea and decide how the project is to be carried out.

Adult-initiated, shared decisions with young people. Adults have the initial idea and young people are involved in making decisions, planning

the project.

Young People are consulted and informed. Adults design and facilitate the project, and young people’s opinions are given weight in

decision making.

Young People assigned but informed. Adults decide on the project and young people volunteer for it

Tokenism Young people are given a limited voice and little choice about what they can say and how

they can communicate.

Decoration Young People take part in an event in a very limited capacity and have no role in decision

making.

Manipulation Adults have complete and unchallenged authority and abuse their power.

YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY EVALUATION

• Youth participation in community evaluation, refers to their active participation and real

influence in the decisions that affect their lives, not to their token or passive presence in adult

agencies. In this approach, adults employ efforts to involve young people in the research of

public agencies. The work is done by youth to organize their research projects with or without

adults assistance (Checkoway, B., Richards-Schuter, K., 2009).

• Youth Participation occurs throughout the evaluation process which involves; young people are

involved in identifying appropriate questions; ➣ Planning the evaluation design; ➣ Decide on

appropriate measures and data collection methods; ➣ Gathering and analyzing data; ➣

Reaching consensus about findings, conclusions and recommendations; ➣ Disseminating results

and preparing an action plan to improve program performance (Zukoski,&luluquisen, 2002).

DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLE FOR YOUTH PARTICIPATION IN COMMUNITY RESEARCH AND EVALUATION

(FLORS, 2008)

Youth Participation in Community Research Evaluation

1- Improves young people ways of knowing, Strategies and methods used to acquire knowledge.

2- Empowers young people, by recognizing the experience and expertise of all young people, and respects their

leadership activities.

3- Builds mutually respectful relationships, by fostering youth- youth and youth-adult working relationships.

4- Equalizes power relationships between youth and adults. Where it builds an environment that respects the

involvement of young people, and adults train youth in decision making and leadership.

5- Involves young people in all stages of the process from defining the problem, to gathering and analyzing data

for decision making.

6- Includes young people continuously in the evaluation process, by clarifying and reflecting upon its content and

purpose.

BENEFITS OF YOUTH PARTICIPATORY EVALUATION(CHECKOWAY& RICHARDS-SCHUSTER, 2009).

• Youth participation develops the knowledge of young people for social action; when they plan to

make changes in community, and use evaluation results as a credible source of information to take

action and improve communities.

• Youth participation enables young people to exercise their political rights, express their own views

and meet with others.

• Youth participation encourages diverse young people to share in the democratization of knowledge,

which enable youth to have a voice beside technical and expert knowledge. for example; evaluation

offers opportunities for young women to develop knowledge in ways which respect gender as a force

for change.

• Youth participation engages young people in a democratic society, it encourages young people to

have real role in their community.

• Youth participation strengthens the social development of young people in various ways; by

increasing their individual involvement, their organizational development, and their ability to create

community change (Checkoway& Richards-Schuster, 2009).

OBSTACLES TO YOUTH PARTICIPATION

(CHECKOWAY, B. , RICHARDS-SCHUTER, K. ,2009)

Various obstacles that prevent young people from participating in evaluation process, such as;

• Young People are busy and do not have the time to be involved in an evaluation project.

• Young People will not be energized by the absence of adults in the evaluation process.

• Adults consider youth as passive recipients rather than active producers of information.

• Adults believe that evaluation is a process which requires special expertise.

• Adults do not want to share their power with young people.

THE STAGES OF PLANNING PARTICIPATORY YOUTH EVALUATION (STUART, MAYNARD, ROUNCEFILED, 2015)

STAGE ONE

Contextual influences

Determine the context in which evaluation is

done; the context involves mapping the

organizational beliefs, values and practice

regarding evaluation, the values of the

organization regarding young people, the reason

why stakeholders are looking to perform the

evaluation. And to consider any tensions that may

arise between different actors.

STAGE TWO

Methodology

In this stage it is important to weigh up the beliefs

that underpins evaluation.

The paradigm used should includes researcher

beliefs about the nature of reality, about what he

wants to know (ontology), and how he will find

the knowledge (methodology), and what data

(quantitative or qualitative) will give the data.

The results is a choice between – a positivistic or

a scientific way of working. Which focus on

proving an objective truth. Or post- positivistic

way of working, which focuses on understanding

a range of truths from different perspectives.

THE STAGES OF PLANNING PARTICIPATORY YOUTH EVALUATION (STUART, MAYNARD, ROUNCEFILED, 2015)

STAGE TWO: METHODOLOGY

QUANTITATIVE

Includes: survey,

the aim of using surveys is to collect basic

demographic information about participants;

their thoughts; their perceptions and

understanding, awareness, attitudes and

behaviors .

QUALITATIVE

• Includes: key informant interviews, semi

structured interviews, focus group discussions

(FGDs), participatory learning and appraisal

(PLA) techniques (including scoring, voting

and ranking) and observation. The aim of

conducting interviews is to gather in depth

information about activities or outcomes.

While, focus groups generates new ideas, will

strengthen social interaction and contribute to

group development. PLA techniques used to

explore people’s perceptions, elicit their

criteria and understand their choices. Finally,

observation is an informal way of gathering

information by assessing activities.

THE STAGES OF PLANNING PARTICIPATORY YOUTH EVALUATION

(STUART, MAYNARD, ROUNCEFILED, 2015 )

STAGE THREE

Type of evaluation

whether you are evaluating the outcome or impact

of the work have been done with the youth, or

evaluating the process of working with them.

Impact evaluations measure changes in outcomes,

while process evaluations measures how the

project was delivered.

STAGE FOUR

Ethical principles

Ethical consideration should be taken into account

when working with youth.

Ethics committee members tend to be ensuring when

doing research with young ( who are, by definition,

vulnerable) are treated as autonomous agents.

Therefore, consent must be fully informed, research

must do no harm youth, and their confidentiality must

be protected (Williams, 2006).

Confidentiality and anonymity need to be clearly

explained to young people before they involved in

research (Williams, 2006).

THE STAGES OF PLANNING PARTICIPATORY YOUTH EVALUATION (STUART, MAYNARD, ROUNCEFILED, 2015 )

Power

Need to map the stakeholders; the power they hold over other stakeholders in the evaluation

process. Need to reflect on the level of participation at each level of participation.

STAGE FIVE

M O VIN G T H E G O AL PO S T S K IL IFI (M T G K ) , A C O M M U N IT Y BAS ED O RG AN IZ AT IO N O N T H E C O AS T O F K EN YA, D ED IC AT ED TO EM PO WERM EN T O F G IRL S AN D Y O U N G WO M EN

T H O U G H FO O T BAL L

(M C K EN Z IE , FO RD E, T H EO BAL D , 2 0 0 6 ) .

• MTGK program is based in Kilifi District, Coast Province, Kenya, established in 1999. The organization

promotes and teaches football for girls and young women, and fosters players life skills, such as self-esteem,

confidence and team work.

• The aim of the study is to arrive at the indicators and methods for MTGK, Participatory Monitoring and

Evaluation Strategy.

• A qualitative approach was particularly well suited to this study. All participants were selected purposefully

according to their knowledge, and a number of techniques were used in gathering data, including: key

informant interviews, semi structured interviews, focus group discussions (FGDs), participatory learning and

appraisal (PLA), and observation.

• A main researcher was in charge of the evaluation process and two research assistants were selected from

female players at MTGK. As part of this study, it was anticipated that players would participate in the

planning, tool refinement, data collection and analysis. Therefore, capacity building shaped research team and

planning group to increase participation.

• This process increased the players participation, and empowered them through capacity building. And the

methods, particularly FGDs, and PLA allowed the players rather than MTGK staff or the principal researcher

to identify indicators and methods used in the study.

THE “NO LIMITS: PROJECT IN NORTHUMBERLAND

(BOSTOCK, J . , & FREEMAN, J . , 2003 )

• The “No limits” project was funded by Norththumberland Health Action Zone in the UK , which had been set up to

support public involvement, to improve health, increase service responsiveness, and accountability. In this project, a

participatory approach used to involve young people in researching their needs & views of how sources of support can

be improved & developed.

• Young people worked with health workers to develop effective and use-friendly models of health care and improve

young people ‘s access to existing services.

• Young people were involved in research design; to refine the themes to be covered in the research through a

consultation process, they were also involved in managing and undertaking the research, and analyzing and

interpreting the data.

• Focus groups were decided to be used as the primary source of data collection.

• different groups of youth were involved at each stage of the research, with no core group of youth participating

throughout the project : a youth focus group was created to help guide research questions; other youth were involved

as focus group participants, but not moderators; and three (other) youth volunteers assisted with data analysis.

• A participatory approach meant that the recommendations had validity for young people in Northumberland.

QUESTIONS

• What are the limitations of including youth in participatory evaluation?

• What additional resources are needed to include youth in the evaluation process?

CONCLUSION

Advantages of youth involvement in evaluation; allow understanding to be widely shared and

the change to be pursued with commitment among stakeholders.

If young people are to be actively involved in the evaluation, it is essential to ensure that they

are engaged at earlier stages – at the planning of the project evaluation. This would allow

young people to act as partners in evaluation.

Qualitative methods used; such Focus Group discussions, Participatory Learning and

Appraisal techniques allow to empower young people, because they place the youth in a

position to make decisions.

It is recommended to use Qualitative methods as they elicit youth’s opinions in an interactive

way.

REFERENCES

• Bostock, J., & Freeman, J. (2003) ‘No Limits’: Doing participatory action research with young people in Northumberland.

Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 13(6), 464-474.

• Checkoway, B., Richards-Schuter, K. (2009).” Youth Participation in Community Evaluation Research”. American Journal of

Evaluation. Vol.24,No.1,2003,pp.21–33.

• Flors, S. K. (2008). “ Youth Participatory Evaluation: Strategies for engaging Young People”. Published by Jossy-Bass. San-

Francisco: USA.

• Stuart, K., Maynard, L., Rouncefield, C. (2015).” Evaluation Practice for Projects with Young People: A Guide to Create

Research”. Sage Publications LTd. London: UK.

• Williams, B. (2006). “ Meaningful Consent to Participate in Social Research on the Part of People under the Age of 18”.

Research Ethics, 2(1).

• Meckenzie, M., Forde, S., Theobald, S. (2006). “ Development of a participatory monitoring and evaluation”. Evaluation and

Program Planning. 29 (2006) 365-376

• Zukoski, A., Luluquisen, M. (2002).” Participatory Evaluation: What is it? Who do it? What are the challenges”.

• Powers, J., Tiffany, J. (2006). “ Engaging Youth in Participatory Research and Evaluation”. Public Health Management

Practice.