Capitalising on Local Knowledge - Community knowledge exchange
Monitoring & evaluation as learning processes
Monitoring for self-correction
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Monitoring
and evaluation as learning processes
Monitoring and
evaluation can be understood as the “observe and reflect” aspects of the
learning cycle (refer to the Learning section and the diagram of the learning
cycle on page 7), and as such they are not just an important vehicle for
learning, but also provide critical information for decision-making processes.
Sometimes a sharp distinction is made between monitoring and evaluation. However, monitoring is really a simpler and more continuous form of evaluation. Both involve reviewing experiences and evidence of impact of activities, and both involve reflection and learning towards improving how things are done in the future.
Many people have come to understand evaluation in a negative way as a process of inspection. Often a successful external evaluation can lead to further support from government or donor agencies, and a negative evaluation report can mean the end of a project. It is vital to ensure that people understand that they will be involved a participatory evaluation process, and that it is designed to support their learning and decision making processes.
Monitoring can be focused on both the immediate processes and results, and on the longer-term impacts.
Monitoring
for self-correction
Monitoring is an on-going process of observing, reflecting and responding
to opportunities and challenges. It is a powerful tool for group learning,
and should be used in an on-going manner to build on learning opportunities
and to develop common understanding within the group or community.
An exchange visit is a complex affair from many points of view, and participants will have to face a bewildering number of situations that are not familiar and may be unexpected. A group-based monitoring process will help participants to respond optimally to the new experiences and the challenges that they face during the visit (see Step 4: Knowledge exchange visit).
Following the visit, monitoring will help everyone involved in the process to assess whether their actions are supporting them to attain their vision for development, and if not, what corrective action they can take. It will also draw attention to other opportunities or obstacles that need attention.
Monitoring
the impacts
It will take time before the positive results of the exchange visit become
apparent at the community level in terms of better health, improved crops
or better incomes. It is a good idea to understand how the stimulus of
the visit has contributed to positive change in the community. Identifying
indicators with the participants for the monitoring of the long-term impacts
of the community exchange intervention is a good idea. Try to build an
on-going ability to monitor the impacts into work programmes of NGO or
government support agencies.
Identifying
indicators
Ask the participants to think about what they will be able to see that
will indicate that things have changed as a result of the exchange experience
and associated processes, and how. This will depend on the focus of the
exchange visit. See the process exercises: Identifying
indicators.
An excellent resource for participatory monitoring and evaluation is the GATE publication “Participatory Impact Monitoring” by Germann, Gohl and Schwartz, ISBN 3-528-02086-5
Evaluating
the process
Evaluation at the conclusion of each process in a knowledge exchange (and
follow-up activities) is a powerful opportunity for learning and adjusting
the course of a process.
Because participatory evaluation engages all of those who have been part of a process, it gives a voice to the humble and helps the more powerful to understand how their actions affect others. Everyone should have an equal opportunity to share their reflections on the process. The facilitator should remind people that this is not a process of being tested (as in an examination), but an opportunity to learn. Feedback should be regarded as a gift, a rare opportunity to look into the mirror. Even though it is often uncomfortable, it provides the doorway to change and improvement.
If power dynamics have had a negative effect on the participation of individuals and sub-groups, and indeed on the ownership of the process and outcomes, evaluation offers an opportunity to share and compare experiences in a relatively non-threatening way. The evaluation should always conclude on a note of self-responsibility for improving performance in the future.
See the “Daily reflection” exercise under process exercises.
Evaluating
the impacts
If we understand monitoring and evaluation as versions of essentially
the same process, evaluation is the more formal and less frequent process.
Evaluation should
draw on the indicators and reflections of the monitoring process to give
participants an overview of a linked set of processes of cause and effect.
At the conclusion of a project, or a phase of work, it is important to “take stock” of what has been achieved (or not) in the course of the activities. Evaluation can give people who have participated in an endeavour the opportunity to reflect on their achievements, and can enhance self-esteem and common purpose. The process should enable the lessons of an experience to be articulated and debated so that a collective analysis can be carried out. Where failure and negative impacts have to be faced, they should be embraced as opportunities to learn. Only by trying to achieve something will we have the chance to learn what might succeed, and how. Not fully succeeding the first time is only a problem if people give up without learning how to succeed more fully on the next attempt.
If the indicators for success have been clearly identified in the early stages of the knowledge exchange process, and revised and improved in the course of the process, monitoring will provide rich material to reflect on in any evaluation.
If well formulated, the indicators should lead the evaluation towards reflecting on the achievement of the objectives of the process. If the objectives are not adequate, it will also be important to reflect on them. Attention should also be paid to any protocols or team contracts.
In conclusion, evaluation should be viewed as a discourse, a critical process of understanding causes and effects of our actions, and how to improve upon these. It should never be allowed to degenerate into a means of apportioning blame to individuals or institutions.
