Deliberative democratic evaluation in preschools

Abstract

)Internal evaluation with expert help was conducted in four Icelandic preschools. The main factors regarding childcare and preschool services were assessed. A participatory approach to the evaluation, in particular democratic evaluation, was adopted. The directors of these four schools were interviewed, and they helped with the selection of participants for group interviews and focus groups. Group interviews were conducted with children aged four to five years and focus groups were held with the representatives of both the children’s parents and preschool personnel. This is a case of internal evaluation, carried out with the participation of the preschools’ main stakeholders, i.e. personnel, parents and children, but with the support of an external agent. The approach to the evaluation was deliberative democratic evaluation, which consists of three layers: a) inclusion, looking after the interests of all stakeholder groups and including them in the discussions; b) dialogue, having a dialogue in the beginning of the evaluation process, where the interests of all stakeholders are considered in the planning stage; and c) deliberation, where results are discussed by groups of stakeholders in order to determine the best ways of using those results as a basis for a development plan. The benefits and limitations of a deliberative democratic evaluation of preschool operations were considered. The limitations of a deliberative democratic approach mainly comprise how time consuming it is, as well as participants’ fear of interest conflicts. The primary benefit of a democratic evaluation consists in the dialogue between stakeholders on the value of evaluation and the criteria to be used in the process. The mosaic approach emphasizes the active participation of children in the evaluation work, listening to their views and conducting a constant dialogue with them on what goes on in their school. The views of the children provide an insight into the way in which they experience the school and give indications as to what could be done to promote learning and meet their needs. However, in spite of the obvious advantages of seeking children’s views, this is very seldom done when preschool work is evaluated. The method used for presenting their views in this study was having focus group conversations with three to four children at a time and having them draw their own pictures during conversations. Their views were then presented to focus groups of parents and personnel, along with the pictures that the children allowed the evaluator to use, and thoroughly discussed. Some surprising elements came up in these conversations. The children were, for example, not concerned with the length of time that they spent at preschool, as long as they were enjoying themselves, which was news to many parents and staff members. In spite of the staff trying to make sure that they had a democratic choice in what they were playing with at each time, they did not perceive that they had much choice. This was news to many of the parents and personnel as well, and engendered dialogue among those groups. Vacation times and length of time spent at school were delicate issues between parents and personnel. However, these issues were presented here and discussed, which is necessary if meaningful evaluation work is to be conducted. This, however, demands a level of trust which may have to be developed, as one group has the most power in these conversations, i.e. personnel. Other stakeholder groups need to be able to have their say as well, even on delicate matters. Thus it is possible to create a situation where operations are not only in the interest of a single stakeholder, i.e. personnel, but also take into account the views of others, i.e. children and parents.