team working together in the debrief sessions to articulate ‘levels’ of knowledge
improvement, capacity to advocate, and practice and policy impact – and then
assessing how many girls and boys in each focus group were at each level. Defining
levels for scalar translation was a challenging process, particularly within the
timeframe of a debrief session. The notion of scalar measures also prompted
discussions about the appropriate baseline, adjustments for age level, and adjustments for variations in ‘external’ factors such as the overall level of education,
access to media or other information, and whether or not children had themselves
experienced climate-related disasters. Nevertheless, these discussions about how to
quantify changes were in themselves valuable for the team to reflect on not only
what level, but qualitatively what kind of changes were expected and could be
expected as a result of the project.
16.4.4 Step D: Further Analysis
The learning and reflection aims were achieved through steps A to C, but an
optional extra step was developed and trialled, and could be implemented if further
resources and time are available. The aim of further analysis – detailed consideration of notes and transcripts from FGDs, interviews and the debrief sessions – is to
produce written narrative that can be used to record, share, report and compare
learnings, and be used as examples to inform CCA practice on the ground. Ideally,
the draft narrative could be shared with those children and youth who participated
in the FGDs to gather their further reflections and feedback. In practice however,
time availability was a major constraint limiting this aspect of the method.
16.5 Conclusions
These FGDs have been really useful for me as a member of the project implementation
team. We have had the chance to stop, reflect, and listen to the children about what they
have learned about climate change adaptation and what difference the project is making. –
Theresa Abogado, member of the project implementing team in the Philippines.
Key to the success of this method was its participatory foundations –
operationalising the principle that since ultimately adaptation is local, local voices
and perspectives matter in understanding the impact of a project. The method
focused on hearing the perspectives of participants and facilitating structured, but
open discussion and sharing between participants, and with project implementers.
There are three main avenues by which this participatory, rights-based approach
underpinned an effective evaluation that generated learnings and in itself contributed to project outcomes. Firstly, the indicators and process itself were developed
through piloting in a participatory fashion with children and their communities,
which in and of itself contributed to overcoming the challenges of balancing the
302
J. Chong et al.
improvement, capacity to advocate, and practice and policy impact – and then
assessing how many girls and boys in each focus group were at each level. Defining
levels for scalar translation was a challenging process, particularly within the
timeframe of a debrief session. The notion of scalar measures also prompted
discussions about the appropriate baseline, adjustments for age level, and adjustments for variations in ‘external’ factors such as the overall level of education,
access to media or other information, and whether or not children had themselves
experienced climate-related disasters. Nevertheless, these discussions about how to
quantify changes were in themselves valuable for the team to reflect on not only
what level, but qualitatively what kind of changes were expected and could be
expected as a result of the project.
16.4.4 Step D: Further Analysis
The learning and reflection aims were achieved through steps A to C, but an
optional extra step was developed and trialled, and could be implemented if further
resources and time are available. The aim of further analysis – detailed consideration of notes and transcripts from FGDs, interviews and the debrief sessions – is to
produce written narrative that can be used to record, share, report and compare
learnings, and be used as examples to inform CCA practice on the ground. Ideally,
the draft narrative could be shared with those children and youth who participated
in the FGDs to gather their further reflections and feedback. In practice however,
time availability was a major constraint limiting this aspect of the method.
16.5 Conclusions
These FGDs have been really useful for me as a member of the project implementation
team. We have had the chance to stop, reflect, and listen to the children about what they
have learned about climate change adaptation and what difference the project is making. –
Theresa Abogado, member of the project implementing team in the Philippines.
Key to the success of this method was its participatory foundations –
operationalising the principle that since ultimately adaptation is local, local voices
and perspectives matter in understanding the impact of a project. The method
focused on hearing the perspectives of participants and facilitating structured, but
open discussion and sharing between participants, and with project implementers.
There are three main avenues by which this participatory, rights-based approach
underpinned an effective evaluation that generated learnings and in itself contributed to project outcomes. Firstly, the indicators and process itself were developed
through piloting in a participatory fashion with children and their communities,
which in and of itself contributed to overcoming the challenges of balancing the
302
J. Chong et al.