Resúmenes
The impulse experimented by public programs and policies evaluation during the last years has brought about a remarkable increase of evaluative practices that, in contrast to traditional evaluation, grant the stakeholder groups a relevant, even hegemonic, role. The involvement of these groups in the evaluation is highly desirable, not only from an ethical but also from a methodological point of view. From this perspective, a reflection on the audience participation in evaluative studies is presented. To begin with, methodological considerations supporting this participation are put forward. Next, the more habitually involved groups are described. Thereafter the role played by the aforementioned groups in the evaluation design and implementation and in the subsequent decision-making is analysed from three evaluative pluralist approaches: stakeholder based evaluation, participatory evaluation and empowerment evaluation. Finally, some considerations regarding ethical and methodological difficulties that can arise from the above-mentioned participation are discussed.
public policy; evaluation; participation.
O impulso resultante da avaliação de programas e políticas públicas nos últimos anos levou a um aumento de práticas de avaliação que, distanciando-se da avaliação tradicional, outorgam um papel relevante, e inclusivamente hegemônico, aos vários grupos abrangidos em maior ou menor medida pelo programa e sua avaliação. A dita participação é desejável não só do ponto de vista ético, como também metodológico. Nesta linha, apresentamos uma reflexão em torno da participação das audiências nos estudos da avaliação. Em primeiro lugar, abordamos as considerações metodológicas que levam a potenciar esta participação; a seguir, apresentamos os vários tipos de grupos que são chamados a participar. Detemo-nos depois no papel que esses grupos desempenham no projeto e realização destes estudos e na tomada de decisões posteriores segundo três formas de avaliação pluralistas - a avaliação centrada nos implicados, a avaliação participativa e a avaliação potenciadora. Por último, apresentamos algumas considerações sobre as dificuldades éticas e metodo-lógicas que pode acarretar a dita participação.
políticas públicas; avaliação; participação.
public policy; evaluation; participation.
políticas públicas; avaliação; participação.
ARTIGOS DE DEMANDA CONTÍNUA
La participación de las audiencias desde distintos enfoques evaluativos - algunas consideraciones éticas y metodológicas
The audience participation since distinctly evaluative focusing - some ethic and methodological considerations
Esther Martínez Piñeiro
Doctora en Ciencias de la Educación. Área de Métodos de Investigación y Diagnóstico en Educación. Facultad de Ciencias de la Educación. Universidad de Santiago. mpineiro@usc.es
RESUMO
O impulso resultante da avaliação de programas e políticas públicas nos últimos anos levou a um aumento de práticas de avaliação que, distanciando-se da avaliação tradicional, outorgam um papel relevante, e inclusivamente hegemônico, aos vários grupos abrangidos em maior ou menor medida pelo programa e sua avaliação. A dita participação é desejável não só do ponto de vista ético, como também metodológico. Nesta linha, apresentamos uma reflexão em torno da participação das audiências nos estudos da avaliação. Em primeiro lugar, abordamos as considerações metodológicas que levam a potenciar esta participação; a seguir, apresentamos os vários tipos de grupos que são chamados a participar. Detemo-nos depois no papel que esses grupos desempenham no projeto e realização destes estudos e na tomada de decisões posteriores segundo três formas de avaliação pluralistas - a avaliação centrada nos implicados, a avaliação participativa e a avaliação potenciadora. Por último, apresentamos algumas considerações sobre as dificuldades éticas e metodo-lógicas que pode acarretar a dita participação.
Palavras-chave: políticas públicas, avaliação, participação.
ABSTRACT
The impulse experimented by public programs and policies evaluation during the last years has brought about a remarkable increase of evaluative practices that, in contrast to traditional evaluation, grant the stakeholder groups a relevant, even hegemonic, role. The involvement of these groups in the evaluation is highly desirable, not only from an ethical but also from a methodological point of view. From this perspective, a reflection on the audience participation in evaluative studies is presented. To begin with, methodological considerations supporting this participation are put forward. Next, the more habitually involved groups are described. Thereafter the role played by the aforementioned groups in the evaluation design and implementation and in the subsequent decision-making is analysed from three evaluative pluralist approaches: stakeholder based evaluation, participatory evaluation and empowerment evaluation. Finally, some considerations regarding ethical and methodological difficulties that can arise from the above-mentioned participation are discussed.
Key-words: public policy, evaluation, participation.
Texto completo disponível apenas em PDF.
Full text available only in PDF format.
REFERENCIAS
BRIYK, A. Stakeholder-based evaluation. New Directiones for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1983. v. 17.
BROWN, P. The role of the evaluator in Comprehensive Community Initiatives. In: CONNELL, J. P. et al. (Eds.). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives. Washinton: The Aspen Institute, 1995. p. 201-225.
BRUNNER, I.; GUZMAN, A. Participatory evaluation: a tool to assess projets and empower people. In: CONNOR, R. F.; HENDRICKS, M. H. (Eds.). International innovations in evaluation methodology. New Directions for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1989. v. 17.
COMITÉ CONJUNTO DE ESTÁNDARES PARA LA EVALUACIÓN EDUCATIVA. Estándares para la evaluación de programas. Bilbao: Mensajero, 1998.
COUSINS, J. B.; EARL, L. M. Paricipatory evaluation in education: studies in evaluation use and organizational learning. London: Falmer Press, 1995.
DE MIGUEL DÍAZ, M. La evaluación de programas sociales: fundamentos teóricos y enfoques metodológicos. Revista de Investigación Educativa, v. 18, n. 2, p. 289-317, 2000.
FETTERMAN, D. M. Empowerment evaluation and accreditation Higher Education. In: CHELIMSKY, E.; SHADIH, W. R. (Eds.). Evaluation for the 21st Century. A Handbook. California: Sage, 1997.
FETTERMAN, D. M. Foundations of empowerment evaluation. California: Sage, 2000.
GOLD, N. Stakeholder and program evaluation: Characterizations and reflextions. In: BRYK, A. (Ed.). Stakeholder-based evaluation. New directions for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1983. v. 17, p. 63-72.
GUBA, E. G.; LINCOLN, Y. S. Effective evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1981.
GUBA, E. G.; LINCOLN, Y. S. The coutenances of fouth-generation evaluation: description, judgment and negotiation. Evaluation Studies Review Annual, v. 11, p 70-88, 1986.
JACKSON, E. T., KASSAM, Y. Knowledge shared: participatory evaluation in development cooperation. West Hartford/Ottawa: Kumarian Press, 1998.
MARK, M. M.; SHOTLAND, R. L. Stakeholder-based evaluation and value judgments. In: CORDRAYS, D. S.; LIPSEY, M. W. (Eds.). Evaluation Studies Review Annual, Beverly Hills, v. 9, n. 5, p. 605-625, 1987.
MERTERNS, D. M. Research methods in Education and Psycology. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1998.
PATTON, M. Q. Qualitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1990.
REYNOLDS, A. J.; WALBERG, H. J. Program theory in evaluation. In: WALBERG, H. J.; HAERTEL, G. (Eds.). The international encyclopedia of educational evaluation. Oxford: Pergamon, 1990.
STUFFLEBEAM, D. L. Empowerment evaluation, objetivist evaluation and evaluation standars: Where the future of evaluation should not go and where it needs to go. Evaluation Practice, v. 15, n. 3, p. 321-338, 1994.
WEISS, C. H. The stakeholder approach to evaluation: origins and promise. In: BRIKS, A. S. (Ed.). Stakeholder-based evaluation. New Directions for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983. v. 17, p. 3-14.
WEISS, C. H. Towatd the future of stakeholder approaches in evaluation. In: A. S. BRIKS, A. S. (Ed.). Stakeholder-based evaluation. New Directions for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983. v. 17, p. 83-96.
WORTHEN, B. R.; SANDERS, J. R.; FITZPATRICK, J. L. Program evaluation. Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. New York: Longman, 1997.
Texto recebido em 14 mar. 2002
Texto aprovado em 12 maio 2002
1 Esta es la traducción que hemos empleado para la corriente evaluativa denominada "empowerment evaluation" dado que su finalidad principal, como explicaremos más adelante, es la potenciación de la autonomía de los individuos.
- BRIYK, A. Stakeholder-based evaluation New Directiones for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1983. v. 17.
- BROWN, P. The role of the evaluator in Comprehensive Community Initiatives. In: CONNELL, J. P. et al. (Eds.). New approaches to evaluating community initiatives. Washinton: The Aspen Institute, 1995. p. 201-225.
- BRUNNER, I.; GUZMAN, A. Participatory evaluation: a tool to assess projets and empower people. In: CONNOR, R. F.; HENDRICKS, M. H. (Eds.). International innovations in evaluation methodology. New Directions for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1989. v. 17.
- COMITÉ CONJUNTO DE ESTÁNDARES PARA LA EVALUACIÓN EDUCATIVA. Estándares para la evaluación de programas Bilbao: Mensajero, 1998.
- COUSINS, J. B.; EARL, L. M. Paricipatory evaluation in education: studies in evaluation use and organizational learning. London: Falmer Press, 1995.
- DE MIGUEL DÍAZ, M. La evaluación de programas sociales: fundamentos teóricos y enfoques metodológicos. Revista de Investigación Educativa, v. 18, n. 2, p. 289-317, 2000.
- FETTERMAN, D. M. Empowerment evaluation and accreditation Higher Education. In: CHELIMSKY, E.; SHADIH, W. R. (Eds.). Evaluation for the 21st Century A Handbook. California: Sage, 1997.
- FETTERMAN, D. M. Foundations of empowerment evaluation California: Sage, 2000.
- GOLD, N. Stakeholder and program evaluation: Characterizations and reflextions. In: BRYK, A. (Ed.). Stakeholder-based evaluation New directions for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1983. v. 17, p. 63-72.
- GUBA, E. G.; LINCOLN, Y. S. Effective evaluation San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1981.
- GUBA, E. G.; LINCOLN, Y. S. The coutenances of fouth-generation evaluation: description, judgment and negotiation. Evaluation Studies Review Annual, v. 11, p 70-88, 1986.
- JACKSON, E. T., KASSAM, Y. Knowledge shared: participatory evaluation in development cooperation. West Hartford/Ottawa: Kumarian Press, 1998.
- MARK, M. M.; SHOTLAND, R. L. Stakeholder-based evaluation and value judgments. In: CORDRAYS, D. S.; LIPSEY, M. W. (Eds.). Evaluation Studies Review Annual, Beverly Hills, v. 9, n. 5, p. 605-625, 1987.
- MERTERNS, D. M. Research methods in Education and Psycology Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1998.
- PATTON, M. Q. Qualitative evaluation methods Beverly Hills: Sage, 1990.
- REYNOLDS, A. J.; WALBERG, H. J. Program theory in evaluation. In: WALBERG, H. J.; HAERTEL, G. (Eds.). The international encyclopedia of educational evaluation Oxford: Pergamon, 1990.
- STUFFLEBEAM, D. L. Empowerment evaluation, objetivist evaluation and evaluation standars: Where the future of evaluation should not go and where it needs to go. Evaluation Practice, v. 15, n. 3, p. 321-338, 1994.
- WEISS, C. H. The stakeholder approach to evaluation: origins and promise. In: BRIKS, A. S. (Ed.). Stakeholder-based evaluation New Directions for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983. v. 17, p. 3-14.
- WEISS, C. H. Towatd the future of stakeholder approaches in evaluation. In: A. S. BRIKS, A. S. (Ed.). Stakeholder-based evaluation New Directions for program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1983. v. 17, p. 83-96.
- WORTHEN, B. R.; SANDERS, J. R.; FITZPATRICK, J. L. Program evaluation Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. New York: Longman, 1997.
Fechas de Publicación
-
Publicación en esta colección
04 Mar 2015 -
Fecha del número
Dic 2002
Histórico
-
Acepto
12 Mayo 2002 -
Recibido
14 Mar 2002
