Critical Thinking for Development Education; moving from Evaluation to Research: DERN CONFERENCE OCTOBER 2009 Son Gyoh MSc Development Management The Role of Research & Learning in mainstreaming Southern perspective

Introduction Two major challenges to global south dimensions: Low Level of Research and Learning Resistance/reluctance from dominant actors to re learn The word ‘mainstream’ is used only in a generic way to describe dominant perspectives/actors and by no means confer or imply the superiority of one perspective over the other.

Implications: Attempts to include global dimensions dominated by evaluation approaches Resistance within global north epistemology to shift conceptual boundaries Compromise professional premise of southern actors/practice

Context  Practice environment of isolated impact measurement than learning  perspective boundaries remain polarised A new space for critical thinking & dialogue Efforts to improve methodologies OSPDE

Imperatives of Agenda based approaches to DE Development connotes an agenda of progressive change (Thomas, A. 2000). Education aimed at understanding and challenging global inequalities serves an agenda Global south actors work around specific issues to mobilise action for change at various levels

Critical questions  What informs southern Perspectives to DE? (the urgency of real life experiences?)  What constitutes a methodology?  Is the concept of universality in methodology an abstraction?

Challenge for southern actors  Theorising the ‘agenda’ nature of southern perspectives into systematic knowledge  overarching influence of ‘the principles of education’ over ‘a vision of development’  Solidarity remains underexplored in securing global civil consciousness and partnership.

Constrained learning spaces  Current engagement favour mini grant projects with clear benchmarks  Conferences un able to sustain the learning circle leave more questions unanswered  disconnect between theory and practice  Evaluation approaches not permitted critical analysis of how southern DE concepts and perspectives are constructed.

Evaluation as an intervention tool measurement of performance against set objectives (Wiess, 1972p1). Aims more at accountability than investigation marginal value for learning (Edwards & Hulmes; 1995) Rossi and Freeman: evaluation as a proactive programme planning tool (1993, p.5)

Positivist Hegemony saw rise of cost and benefit analysis in project determination in public and civil society sectors of development. Summative retrospective Formative decision oriented  Summative evaluation has not offered adequate space to explore new meanings in conceptual gaps Dominance of evaluation

Research as a learning tool for intervention Participatory Action Research PAR: links learning to action (theory to practice) promotes participation (Stinger 1996). Substitutes ‘expert’/dominant knowledge with stakeholder experience (de Koning & Martin legitimises other forms of knowledge by emphasising stakeholder perspectives Research: systematic information gathering, investigation & analysis that support learning and decision making; PAR?

Developmental PAR research model examines processes & outcomes, provides formative evaluation Widening participation initiative External inputs Internal inputs Review of strategy ‘Listening to voices’

Conclusion Evaluation approaches has not permitted the critical analysis of perspective definitions of DE concepts; the influence of development challenges on how perspectives are constructed. Evaluation and research not mutually exclusive but complementary in PAR for intervention.