Below is an excerpt from the summary action step conclusions of from the following report from www.ColoradoTrust.org:
*******************************
Novice evaluators can begin by concentrating on the culture dimension. They should recognize the role of culture in evaluation and set aside time and resources to deliberately learn about the cultures of the evaluation’s stakeholders. To do this, evaluators can:
- Identify and work with a bridge builder or cultural translator
- Listen, observe carefully and ask questions respectfully
- Find out about previous experiences and lessons learned
- Avoid assuming that a particular concept or term means the same thing for everyone
- Consult expert translators and interpreters
- Pilot test questions and instruments.
Next, evaluators can focus on the social identity and group membership dimension. They should develop an understanding of the interplay between multiple social identity groups, the varied and changing expectations among stakeholders, and the dynamic context within which the evaluation is operating. To do this, evaluators can:
- Set aside time and resources to build trust and relationships and to understand the cultural groups and cultural context
- Continuously sharpen one’s understanding of the dynamic context in which the evaluation is operating
- Foster collaboration among all the stakeholders to encourage a broader and more inclusive view.
Finally, evaluators should expand and deepen their knowledge about the dynamics of privilege and power in evaluation. To do so, they can:
- Accept that there are status differences
- Strive to demystify evaluation
- Create a comfortable setting for evaluation participants
- Partner with others who have expertise that complements their own
- Consider the terms and concepts used and be aware if they reduce or perpetuate existing prejudices
- Consider contextual conditions and structural equities
- Carefully examine the demographic variables
used in the analysis.
The evaluator who has the increased ability to conduct culturally competent evaluations must commit to do so for every stage of the evaluation, from design to reporting. More importantly, the evaluator’s behavior and decisions must be intentional to ensure cultural competency.
Stakeholders and consumers of evaluations should not automatically assume that all evaluators who are committed to participatory and empowerment approaches are cross-culturally competent. Evaluators
with a belief in the importance of engaging stakeholders and recognizing the importance of culture have only partially achieved cross-cultural competency. Cross-culturally competent evaluators deliberately pay close attention to the micro-level, with a focus on such things as which stakeholders (particularly from
the cultural group affected by the evaluation) should be involved, who should contact them, what is the most convenient meeting time and location for them, what language should be used to ensure that the participants can express themselves confi dently, who is the best person to facilitate the meeting and how this person should dress, what compensation is appropriate and what should be the seating arrangement.
It is true that all good evaluations are also cross-culturally competent evaluations. It is inconceivable that an evaluation involves only homogenous groups; after all, every person has at least two social identities and group memberships based on some form of culture. Once these practices are given equal deliberation and value in an evaluation design, as are sampling and measurement, the words cross-culturally competent evaluation won’t be necessary – that will be understood. Until that time, the discussion must continue to be
present as a constant reminder of the diversity and complexity of our world.
| 