evaluating informal education
Because evaluation is difficult does not mean we should ignore or avoid it.
Rather we must find ways of evaluating our work compatible with our values and
concern to foster democracy.
If
we have a concern with democracy then dialogue and conversation should be at the
heart of our evaluative efforts.
As well as considering the methods, we also need to be thinking about what is
to be evaluated. Here we might be asking questions about:
- Interactions
. What are the characteristics of these? What purposes
did they serve? What initiated them? To what extent were they educative? Are
they sustained? Do they reflect the sort of values we are seeking to encourage?
- Focus
. What issues and topics form the focus for conversation? Which
of these are initiated by us, and which by others? What are the most common
subjects or concerns?
- Setting
. Where is the work undertaken? What physical settings best
stimulate conversation? What is the impact of the setting upon subject matter,
the nature of those worked with, and the quality of interaction?
- Aims
. What were we as educators aiming to achieve? What were the aims
of others? Were there conflicts between the two?
- Strategies
. How did we, as educators, plan to achieve our aims? Who
set these? What moves did we make? How, if at all, were they altered and who
influenced this? What strategies did others have? How did they change?
- Outcomes
. Were outcomes set, and if so by whom? What appeared to be
the outcome for different participants? What did we learn from our engagement?
Are there issues and questions we need to address? Who needs to know about this?
|
 Taken from Tony
Jeffs and Mark K. Smith (2005) Informal Education. Conversation, democracy and
learning, Nottingham: Educational Heretics Press. |
© Tony Jeffs and Mark K. Smith
First published November 1999. Last update:
May 29, 2012
