{"id":1451,"date":"2023-08-30T17:02:32","date_gmt":"2023-08-30T15:02:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/uncategorized\/participativne-zalozene-evaluacni-pristupy\/"},"modified":"2023-09-16T00:48:49","modified_gmt":"2023-09-15T22:48:49","slug":"participatory-evaluation-approaches","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/articles\/participatory-evaluation-approaches\/","title":{"rendered":"Participatory Evaluation Approaches"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Participatory Evaluation Approaches<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstrakt<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

C\u00edlem stat\u011b je systematizovat kl\u00ed\u010dov\u00e9 znaky, kter\u00e9 odli\u0161uj\u00ed participativn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstupy od ostatn\u00edch zp\u016fsob\u016f prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed. Na z\u00e1klad\u011b proveden\u00e9 srovn\u00e1vac\u00ed anal\u00fdzy jednotliv\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f jsou proto identifikov\u00e1ny spole\u010dn\u00e9 znaky, kter\u00e9 jsou v \u010dl\u00e1nku p\u0159edstaveny a vysv\u011btleny. \u00dast\u0159edn\u00ed \u010d\u00e1st stat\u011b je v\u011bnov\u00e1na dv\u011bma odli\u0161n\u00fdm tradic\u00edm, s nimi\u017e se lze v r\u00e1mci participativn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f setkat, a to na jedn\u00e9 stran\u011b praktick\u00fdm participativn\u00edm evaluac\u00edm, je\u017e jsou v \u010dl\u00e1nku reprezentov\u00e1ny utiliza\u010dn\u00edm p\u0159\u00edstupem M. Pattona, a na stran\u011b druh\u00e9 pak transformativn\u00edm participativn\u00edm evaluac\u00edm dokumentovan\u00fdch sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdm p\u0159\u00edstupem D. Fettermana. P\u0159edkl\u00e1dan\u00e1 sta\u0165 krom\u011b toho poukazuje na historick\u00e9 souvislosti vzniku a rozvoje participativn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f a identifikuje jejich inspirace a ideov\u00e9 prameny. V tomto ohledu sta\u0165 p\u0159ibli\u017euje podstatn\u00e9 charakteristiky dal\u0161\u00edho z p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f (responzivn\u00edho), kter\u00fd m\u011bl podstatn\u00fd vliv na utv\u00e1\u0159en\u00ed a rozvoj participativn\u00edch evaluac\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Main goal of the paper is to present the review of main characteristics that differentiate the participatory approaches from other ways of conducting evaluations. Based on comparative analysis, the five main characteristics are identified, explained and critically assessed. Central part of the paper is devoted to two different traditions within the participatory approaches. Frist one is practical participatory evaluation represented by utilization-focused approach by M. Patton. The second tradition is transformative participatory evaluation where the attention is put on empowerment evaluation approach by D. Fetterman. Moreover, the paper describes the historical framework within that the participatory approaches developed and it also identifies its inspirations. In this respect, the paper also presents the responsive approach that significantly influenced participatory evaluations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kl\u00ed\u010dov\u00e1 slova<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Participativn\u00ed evaluace, responzivn\u00ed evaluace, utiliza\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup, sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e1 evaluace<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Keywords<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Participatory evaluation, responsive evaluation, utilization-focused approach, empowerment evaluation<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 Tento \u010dl\u00e1nek byl zpracov\u00e1n v r\u00e1mci Programu rozvoje v\u011bdn\u00edch oblast\u00ed na Univerzit\u011b Karlov\u011b (PRVOUK) \u010d. P07.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. \u00davod<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

    Participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edstupy se v evaluac\u00edch rozv\u00edjej\u00ed zejm\u00e9na v posledn\u00edch dvaceti letech, nicm\u00e9n\u011b jejich ko\u0159eny a ideov\u00e9 inspirace lze vzt\u00e1hnout k obdob\u00ed po\u010d\u00e1tku 70. let, kdy R. Stake p\u0159edstavil sv\u016fj responzivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup k prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed. D\u016fkladn\u011bj\u0161\u00ed anal\u00fdza jeho v\u00fdznamu pro dal\u0161\u00ed rozvoj evaluac\u00ed, a zejm\u00e9na pak pro vznik a rozvoj participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f, je uvedena n\u00ed\u017ee. \u00davodem je v\u0161ak t\u0159eba uv\u00e9st, \u017ee responzivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup inspiroval participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 evaluace sv\u00fdm zam\u011b\u0159en\u00edm na zainteresovan\u00e9 strany. Dal\u0161\u00ed rozvoj participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed nastal pot\u00e9, kdy E. Guba a Y. Lincolnov\u00e1 p\u0159edstavili konstruktivistick\u00fd p\u0159\u00edstup[1]<\/sup><\/a>, kter\u00fdm se vymezili v\u016f\u010di do t\u00e9 doby p\u0159evl\u00e1daj\u00edc\u00edm pozitivisticky zalo\u017een\u00fdm evaluac\u00edm. Nov\u00e1 perspektiva otev\u0159en\u00e1 konstruktivistick\u00fdm p\u0159\u00edstupem zalo\u017een\u00fdm na odli\u0161n\u00e9m paradigmatick\u00e9m z\u00e1kladu, otev\u0159ela prostor jak pro nov\u00e1 t\u00e9mata, tak tak\u00e9 pro nov\u00e9 metody prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed. Participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edstupy navazuj\u00ed na konstruktivistick\u00fd p\u0159\u00edstup zejm\u00e9na ideou sd\u00edlen\u00e9 odpov\u011bdnosti v\u0161ech z\u00fa\u010dastn\u011bn\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran za v\u00fdsledek proveden\u00e9 evaluace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    C\u00edlem t\u00e9to stat\u011b je charakterizovat hlavn\u00ed rysy participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f a pouk\u00e1zat na jejich odli\u0161nosti od ostatn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f, kter\u00e9 lze ozna\u010dit jako tradi\u010dn\u00ed \u010di klasick\u00e9. P\u0159edm\u011btem stat\u011b je d\u00e1le rozbor hlavn\u00edho ideov\u00e9ho zdroje a historick\u00e9 inspirace participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f \u2013 responzivn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu. Dal\u0161\u00edm z c\u00edl\u016f je charakterizovat hlavn\u00ed v\u011btve participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed a dokumentovat jejich podobnosti a odli\u0161nosti na z\u00e1klad\u011b podrobn\u00e9ho rozboru hlavn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f, kter\u00e9 tyto v\u011btve reprezentuj\u00ed. Obdobn\u00fdm zp\u016fsobem, jak\u00fdm je zpracov\u00e1n v\u00fdchoz\u00ed responzivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup, jsou p\u0159ibl\u00ed\u017eeny tak\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edstupy utiliza\u010dn\u00ed (utilization-focused) M. Pattona a sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fd (empowerment) D. Fettermana. Zvolen\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edstupy toti\u017e v\u00fdznamn\u00fdm zp\u016fsobem ovlivnily pohled na evaluace, na jejich funkci a ovlivnily tak\u00e9 samotn\u00fd zp\u016fsob jejich prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed. D\u00edl\u010d\u00ed prvky t\u011bchto p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f toti\u017e nach\u00e1zej\u00ed \u0161ir\u0161\u00ed uplatn\u011bn\u00ed i v n\u011bkter\u00fdch dal\u0161\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstupech, \u010d\u00edm\u017e p\u0159ekro\u010dily vlastn\u00ed \u00fazce vymezen\u00fd metodologick\u00fd r\u00e1mec.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \n
    1. Obecn\u00e1 charakteristika participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

      V r\u00e1mci participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f lze rozli\u0161it dv\u011b hlavn\u00ed v\u00fdvojov\u00e9 v\u011btve \u010di ideov\u00e9 proudy. Evaluace, kter\u00e9 jsou prov\u00e1d\u011bny v tomto duchu, b\u00fdvaj\u00ed ozna\u010dov\u00e1ny jako praktick\u00e9 participativn\u00ed evaluace, zat\u00edmco druh\u00e1 v\u011btev zahrnuje evaluace transformativn\u00ed. Prvn\u00ed v\u011btev, kter\u00e1 shrnuje evaluace prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 p\u0159edev\u0161\u00edm s c\u00edlem \u0159e\u0161it konkr\u00e9tn\u00ed probl\u00e9my dan\u00e9 evaluace, podpo\u0159it vyu\u017eitelnost jej\u00edch v\u00fdsledk\u016f a poskytovat instrument\u00e1ln\u00ed i konceptu\u00e1ln\u00ed podporu p\u0159i rozhodov\u00e1n\u00ed (Cousins, Earl 1995), je reprezentov\u00e1na utiliza\u010dn\u00edm p\u0159\u00edstupem M. Pattona. Vedle toho druh\u00e1 v\u011btev transformativn\u00edch evaluac\u00ed se zam\u011b\u0159uje na rozv\u00edjen\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch dovednost\u00ed
      mezi zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami, kter\u00e9 nemaj\u00ed zku\u0161enosti s prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00edm evaluac\u00ed (Alkin 2004). Tyto p\u0159\u00edstupy vyu\u017e\u00edvaj\u00ed \u00fa\u010dasti ostatn\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran na prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 evaluaci k tomu, aby podpo\u0159ily sd\u00edlen\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch dovednost\u00ed a usnadnily ostatn\u00edm zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed jejich vlastn\u00edch evaluac\u00ed. V r\u00e1mci t\u00e9to v\u011btve se lze setkat s celou \u0159adou p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f, zejm\u00e9na pak s p\u0159\u00edstupem sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdm, ale tak\u00e9 s evaluacemi emancipa\u010dn\u00edmi a demokratick\u00fdmi.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      I p\u0159es mnoh\u00e9 diference, kter\u00e9 jsou d\u00e1ny zejm\u00e9na odli\u0161n\u00fdm d\u016frazem,
      kter\u00fd auto\u0159i p\u0159ikl\u00e1daj\u00ed \u00fa\u010delu evaluac\u00ed, roli evalu\u00e1tora a zp\u016fsobu zapojen\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, maj\u00ed evaluace prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 v souladu se z\u00e1sadami jednotliv\u00fdch participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f mnoho spole\u010dn\u00e9ho.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Prvn\u00edm ze spole\u010dn\u00fdch rys\u016f participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f je, \u017ee evalu\u00e1to\u0159i, kte\u0159\u00ed tento p\u0159\u00edstup pou\u017e\u00edvaj\u00ed, se zam\u011b\u0159uj\u00ed na subjekty \u00fa\u010dastn\u00edc\u00ed se evaluovan\u00e9 intervence a jejich pot\u0159eby. \u010cin\u00ed tak zp\u016fsobem, kter\u00fd zahrnuje nejen jejich prost\u00fd popis nebo samotnou anal\u00fdzu, ale p\u0159\u00edmo tyto subjekty zapojuje do tvorby designu samotn\u00e9 evaluace. St\u0159edobodem jejich z\u00e1jmu tedy nen\u00ed evaluace ov\u011b\u0159uj\u00edc\u00ed dosa\u017een\u00ed c\u00edl\u016f intervence jako tomu je v p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b Tylerova konfirma\u010dn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu (goal-based) \u010di Scrivenova p\u0159\u00edstupu explora\u010dn\u00edho (goal-free). Nen\u00ed j\u00edm ani hodnocen\u00ed charakteristik samotn\u00e9 intervence a popis interven\u010dn\u00ed logiky jako je tomu v p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b Chenova p\u0159\u00edstupu veden\u00e9ho teori\u00ed (Chen 1990).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 evaluace jsou reflexivn\u00edm p\u0159\u00edstupem, kter\u00fd se sna\u017e\u00ed rozv\u00edjet schopnosti v\u0161ech zainteresovan\u00fdch stran t\u00edm, \u017ee jim poskytuje p\u0159\u00edle\u017eitost poznat a uv\u011bdomit si dosa\u017een\u00fd pokrok a bari\u00e9ry p\u0159i prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed dan\u00e9 intervence (Mertens, Wilson 2012). Tyto p\u0159\u00edstupy tak vedou nejen k samotn\u00fdm evalua\u010dn\u00edm z\u00e1v\u011br\u016fm, ale napom\u00e1haj\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdm zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m rozum\u011bt princip\u016fm evalua\u010dn\u00ed \u010dinnosti a pom\u00e1haj\u00ed jim ch\u00e1pat souvislosti mezi jednotliv\u00fdmi \u010dinnostmi. V d\u016fsledku tak mohou zlep\u0161it zapojen\u00ed dot\u010den\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran do proces\u016f, je\u017e jsou p\u0159edm\u011btem evaluace, nap\u0159. zvy\u0161ov\u00e1n\u00ed pracovn\u00edho v\u00fdkonu, zlep\u0161ov\u00e1n\u00ed vztah\u016f mezi zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami \u010di rozvoj organiza\u010dn\u00ed kultury (Harrison 2005).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      D\u00edl\u010d\u00ed odli\u0161nosti mezi jednotliv\u00fdmi participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdmi p\u0159\u00edstupy jsou patrn\u00e9 v po\u010dtu a povaze zapojovan\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. Z\u00e1jem evalu\u00e1tor\u016f se tak m\u016f\u017ee soust\u0159edit na jednu konkr\u00e9tn\u00ed zainteresovanou stranu, jako nap\u0159. utiliza\u010dn\u00ed evaluace M. Pattona nebo m\u016f\u017ee zahrnovat \u0161ir\u0161\u00ed spektrum zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, jako nap\u0159. v p\u0159\u00edstupech kolaborativn\u00edm \u010di sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9m.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Druh\u00fdm z typick\u00fdch rys\u016f participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f je, \u017ee evaluace nepostupuj\u00ed podle p\u0159edem definovan\u00e9ho pl\u00e1nu. Design evaluace toti\u017e vznik\u00e1 postupn\u011b na z\u00e1klad\u011b p\u0159edchoz\u00edch etap a s ohledem k informac\u00edm a poznatk\u016fm, kter\u00e9 evalu\u00e1to\u0159i a dal\u0161\u00ed \u00fa\u010dastn\u00edci takto prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed z\u00edsk\u00e1vaj\u00ed (Fitzpatrick et al. 2004). Postupn\u00e9 utv\u00e1\u0159en\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edho designu, operativn\u00ed nasazov\u00e1n\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdch metod a technik vych\u00e1z\u00ed ze snahy o maximalizaci tematick\u00e9ho pokryt\u00ed a souvis\u00ed s explora\u010dn\u00edm charakterem tohoto typu evaluac\u00ed. Ty p\u0159itom oby\u010dejn\u011b sm\u011b\u0159uj\u00ed k vyhled\u00e1v\u00e1n\u00ed konkr\u00e9tn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edle\u017eitost\u00ed a mo\u017enost\u00ed ke zlep\u0161en\u00ed \u010di rozvoji hodnocen\u00e9 intervence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      T\u0159et\u00ed z typick\u00fdch charakteristik participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f m\u00e1 rovn\u011b\u017e metodologick\u00fd charakter a t\u00fdk\u00e1 se pou\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed informac\u00ed, \u00fadaj\u016f a dat z mnoha r\u016fzn\u00fdch pramen\u016f. V tomto ohledu ji\u017e nejde o rys participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed, kter\u00fd by se u jin\u00fdch, ne-participativn\u00edch, p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f ji\u017e neobjevoval. Nicm\u00e9n\u011b z\u00e1jem o pou\u017eit\u00ed \u0161irok\u00e9ho spektra \u00fadaj\u016f je vlastnost\u00ed, kter\u00e1 koresponduje se snahou participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f identifikovat a pochopit pohled jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran vstupuj\u00edc\u00edch do dan\u00e9 evaluace (Guijt 2014).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      \u010ctvrt\u00fdm rysem participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f je ji\u017e v \u00favodu zm\u00edn\u011bn\u00fd interpretativn\u00ed, resp. konstruktivistick\u00fd z\u00e1klad, kter\u00fd p\u0159edznamen\u00e1v\u00e1 metodologickou orientaci t\u011bchto p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f na induktivn\u00ed postupy. To v\u0161ak neznamen\u00e1, \u017ee se v participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstupech neuplat\u0148uj\u00ed deduktivn\u00ed postupy, nebo \u017ee zde nejsou testov\u00e1ny hypot\u00e9zy \u010di se p\u0159i realizaci tohoto typu evaluac\u00ed nepracuje s kvantitativn\u00edmi daty (Guba, Lincoln 1989). Naopak. Tyto metody pr\u00e1ce, a kvantitativn\u00ed \u00fadaje coby jejich produkt, v\u0161ak nejsou v r\u00e1mci participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f vn\u00edm\u00e1ny jako reflexe objektivn\u00ed reality, n\u00fdbr\u017e jsou zde pova\u017eov\u00e1ny za jeden z mnoha mo\u017en\u00fdch v\u00fdkladov\u00fdch r\u00e1mc\u016f \u010di jin\u00fdmi slovy za jednu z n\u011bkolika verz\u00ed p\u0159\u00edb\u011bhu o posuzovan\u00e9 intervenci a jej\u00edch dopadech.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edstupy jsou \u010dastokr\u00e1t myln\u011b spojov\u00e1ny v\u00fdlu\u010dn\u011b s kvalitativn\u00edmi metodami, patrn\u011b proto, \u017ee se v jejich p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b o\u010dek\u00e1v\u00e1 vy\u0161\u0161\u00ed m\u00edra pochopen\u00ed, vhledu a obecn\u011b v\u011bt\u0161\u00ed prostor, je\u017e m\u00e1 zkouman\u00fd subjekt k dispozici ke sv\u00e9mu vlastn\u00edmu vyj\u00e1d\u0159en\u00ed. Nicm\u00e9n\u011b plat\u00ed, \u017ee participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edstupy se k \u017e\u00e1dn\u00e9 konkr\u00e9tn\u00ed metod\u011b nep\u0159imykaj\u00ed, nav\u00edc n\u011bkte\u0159\u00ed p\u0159edstavitel\u00e9 (Wadsworth 1993; Cousins, Whitmore 2007) sami vyvracej\u00ed n\u00e1zor, \u017ee kvalitativn\u00ed v\u00fdzkumn\u00e9 techniky vedou nutn\u011b k vy\u0161\u0161\u00ed m\u00ed\u0159e zapojen\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdch stran.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      P\u00e1t\u00fdm rysem participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f je, \u017ee umo\u017e\u0148uj\u00ed aktivn\u00ed a p\u0159\u00edm\u00e9 zapojen\u00ed relevantn\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran do v\u0161ech etap procesu prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluace. Participace, je\u017e je j\u00e1drem v\u0161ech t\u011bchto p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f, tedy spo\u010d\u00edv\u00e1 mj. v mo\u017enosti v\u0161ech zainteresovan\u00fdch stran ovliv\u0148ovat design evaluace (Stufflebeam et al. 2000). To je v p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b ostatn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f k prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed odli\u0161n\u00e9 \u2013 design stanovuje obvykle jen evalu\u00e1tor (jako nap\u0159. p\u0159i explora\u010dn\u00edch (goal-free) evaluac\u00edch) a evalu\u00e1tor je rovn\u011b\u017e zodpov\u011bdn\u00fd za to, \u017ee evaluace dos\u00e1hne stanoven\u00fdch c\u00edl\u016f. V praxi se lze setkat s t\u00edm, \u017ee n\u011bkter\u00e9 evaluace jsou ozna\u010dov\u00e1ny jako participativn\u00ed s odkazem, \u017ee v jejich r\u00e1mci bylo provedeno \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed mezi beneficienty \u010di hloubkov\u00e1 interview s p\u0159edstaviteli r\u016fzn\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. V takov\u00e9m p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b se v\u0161ak o uplatn\u011bn\u00ed participativn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu nejedn\u00e1, nebo\u0165 \u00fa\u010dastn\u00edci t\u011bchto \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed nemohli ovliv\u0148ovat samotn\u00fd design evaluace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      V\u00fdhody participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f vypl\u00fdvaj\u00ed ze samotn\u00e9ho faktu zapojen\u00ed kl\u00ed\u010dov\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran do dan\u00e9ho evalua\u010dn\u00edho procesu. T\u00edm jsou syst\u00e9mov\u011b vytv\u00e1\u0159eny lep\u0161\u00ed p\u0159edpoklady pro re\u00e1ln\u00e9 a intenzivn\u00ed vyu\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed v\u00fdsledk\u016f evaluace, co\u017e vede k odpov\u011bdn\u011bj\u0161\u00edmu p\u0159\u00edstupu jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran k jednotliv\u00fdm \u010dinnostem, z nich\u017e je evalua\u010dn\u00ed proces slo\u017een. Podstatnou v\u00fdhodou t\u011bchto p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f je, \u017ee napom\u00e1haj\u00ed p\u0159i budov\u00e1n\u00ed a roz\u0161i\u0159ov\u00e1n\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch kapacit, pom\u00e1haj\u00ed zvy\u0161ovat a roz\u0161i\u0159ovat evalua\u010dn\u00ed dovednosti a podporuj\u00ed rozvoj evaluac\u00ed. Participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edstupy d\u00edky sv\u00e9mu d\u016frazu na induktivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstupy rovn\u011b\u017e umo\u017e\u0148uj\u00ed identifikovat relevantn\u00ed ot\u00e1zky a v neposledn\u00ed \u0159ad\u011b posiluj\u00ed roli \u00fa\u010dastn\u00edk\u016f, resp. aktivn\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Naopak mezi hlavn\u00ed probl\u00e9my t\u011bchto p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f pat\u0159\u00ed laicizace evalua\u010dn\u00edch technik a v\u00fdzkumn\u00fdch metod. Ukazuje se, \u017ee participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 evaluace sice vedou k vy\u0161\u0161\u00edmu sd\u00edlen\u00ed dosa\u017een\u00fdch v\u00fdsledk\u016f, ale \u010dastokr\u00e1t formulovan\u00e9 z\u00e1v\u011bry nevypl\u00fdvaj\u00ed z dat, interpretace jsou zav\u00e1d\u011bj\u00edc\u00ed a metodika m\u00e9n\u011b exaktn\u00ed. Mezi praktick\u00e1 omezen\u00ed pat\u0159\u00ed nez\u00e1jem n\u011bkter\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran anga\u017eovat se v projektu, kter\u00fd s jejich \u010dinnost\u00ed souvis\u00ed t\u0159eba jen nep\u0159\u00edmo (jin\u00e9 pracovn\u00ed priority). Participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00e9 p\u0159\u00edstupy b\u00fdvaj\u00ed v neposledn\u00ed \u0159ad\u011b tak\u00e9 kritizov\u00e1ny, jako snaha evalu\u00e1tor\u016f zbavit se individu\u00e1ln\u00ed odpov\u011bdnosti za \u00fasp\u011b\u0161n\u00e9 dokon\u010den\u00ed evaluac\u00ed \u2013 d\u00edky sd\u00edlen\u00e9 odpov\u011bdnosti jsou toti\u017e za p\u0159\u00edpadn\u00fd nezdar odpov\u011bdn\u00ed v\u0161ichni.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      V souvislosti s participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdmi evaluacemi je t\u0159eba upozornit na potenci\u00e1ln\u00ed ohro\u017een\u00ed vnit\u0159n\u00ed validity; tyto evalua\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstupy v d\u016fsledku sv\u00e9 prim\u00e1rn\u00ed orientace na omezov\u00e1n\u00ed bari\u00e9r zapojen\u00ed co nej\u0161ir\u0161\u00edho spektra zainteresovan\u00fdch stran a s ohledem k jasn\u00e9 orientaci tohoto p\u0159\u00edstupu na v\u00fdsledek procesu, kter\u00fd je sp\u00ed\u0161e participativn\u00ed ne\u017e evalua\u010dn\u00ed, zakl\u00e1daj\u00ed sv\u00e9 z\u00e1v\u011bry na evalua\u010dn\u00edch postupech, kter\u00e9 by v r\u00e1mci jin\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f (nap\u0159. v konfirma\u010dn\u00edm) nebyly akceptovateln\u00e9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Aplika\u010dn\u00ed potenci\u00e1l participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed je omezen z\u00e1jmem zainteresovan\u00fdch stran zapojit se aktivn\u011b do evalua\u010dn\u00edho procesu. Tato na prvn\u00ed pohled snadn\u00e1 a samoz\u0159ejm\u00e1 podm\u00ednka je v\u0161ak v mnoha konkr\u00e9tn\u00edch situac\u00edch z\u00e1sadn\u00ed bari\u00e9rou, kv\u016fli kter\u00e9 nen\u00ed mo\u017en\u00e9 participativn\u00ed evaluace prov\u00e9st. Nelze pova\u017eovat za samoz\u0159ejm\u00e9, \u017ee se jednotliv\u00e9 zainteresovan\u00e9 strany budou cht\u00edt zapojit do evaluace interven\u010dn\u00edho programu, kter\u00fd je obr\u00e1cen proti jejich z\u00e1jm\u016fm, nen\u00ed mo\u017en\u00e9 p\u0159edpokl\u00e1dat, \u017ee v\u0161echny zainteresovan\u00e9 strany budou m\u00edt z\u00e1jem seznamovat se s evalua\u010dn\u00ed metodikou (Shnoes, Mur\u00e9ny-Berman, Chambers 2000) a osvojovat si zp\u016fsoby prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed hodnocen\u00ed. Rovn\u011b\u017e se v mnoha p\u0159\u00edpadech ukazuje, \u017ee nedostate\u010dn\u00e1 schopnost jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran spolu komunikovat neumo\u017e\u0148uje p\u0159i vyu\u017eit\u00ed t\u011bchto p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f dos\u00e1hnout uspokojiv\u00e9ho v\u00fdsledku.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
      1. Responsivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup k evaluaci (responsive evaluation; Robert Stake)<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

        Responzivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup p\u0159edstavuje jeden ze dvou hlavn\u00edch ideov\u00fdch z\u00e1klad\u016f participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f. R. Stake p\u0159i uveden\u00ed sv\u00e9ho p\u0159\u00edstupu, kter\u00fd nab\u00eddl po\u010d\u00e1tkem 70. let, pouk\u00e1zal na fakt, \u017ee \u0159ada do t\u00e9 doby prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed zd\u016fraz\u0148ovala tvrzen\u00ed o c\u00edlech, akcentovala pou\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed objektivn\u00edch test\u016f a poukazovala na standardy (ne)dodr\u017eovan\u00e9 administr\u00e1tory dan\u00e9 intervence (Stake, 1980). Jako protiklad k takto koncipovan\u00fdm evaluac\u00edm, jejich\u017e design R. Stake s\u00e1m ozna\u010doval jako p\u0159edem definovan\u00fd (pre-ordinate<\/em>), navrhl vlastn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup, jeho\u017e typick\u00fdm znakem je, \u017ee \u017e\u00e1dn\u00fd pevn\u00fd design nemaj\u00ed. Ten se toti\u017e vytv\u00e1\u0159\u00ed postupn\u011b krok za krokem a\u017e v pr\u016fb\u011bhu realizace dan\u00e9 evaluace v\u017edy na z\u00e1klad\u011b poznatk\u016f a d\u00edl\u010d\u00edch z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f vypl\u00fdvaj\u00edc\u00edch z p\u0159edchoz\u00ed f\u00e1ze. Evalu\u00e1tor se tedy sna\u017e\u00ed citliv\u011b reagovat na postupn\u011b se r\u00fdsuj\u00edc\u00ed kontury z\u00e1jm\u016f jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran a operativn\u011b jim p\u0159izp\u016fsobuje design prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 evaluace. Responsivn\u00ed evaluace tak p\u0159esouvaj\u00ed t\u011b\u017ei\u0161t\u011b evalu\u00e1torovy pozornosti od c\u00edl\u016f interven\u010dn\u00edch program\u016f a jejich napln\u011bn\u00ed \u010di nenapln\u011bn\u00ed k d\u016fkladn\u00e9mu a detailn\u00edmu popisu hlavn\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran a jejich z\u00e1jm\u016f. Responsivn\u00ed evaluace tak v mnoha p\u0159\u00edpadech nesp\u011bj\u00ed k tak jednozna\u010dn\u00fdm odpov\u011bd\u00edm, kter\u00e9 nab\u00edz\u00ed nap\u0159. konfirma\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup, zato v\u0161ak podrobn\u011b mapuj\u00ed p\u0159edpoklady pro jejich dosa\u017een\u00ed a rozkr\u00fdvaj\u00ed p\u0159\u00edpadn\u00e9 bari\u00e9ry, kv\u016fli kter\u00fdm nemohou b\u00fdt o\u010dek\u00e1van\u00e9 c\u00edle napln\u011bny.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Responsivita Stakeova p\u0159\u00edstupu se napl\u0148uje ve dvou z\u00e1kladn\u00edch sm\u011brech. Zaprv\u00e9 plat\u00ed, \u017ee evalu\u00e1tor je vn\u00edmav\u00fd v\u016f\u010di subjekt\u016fm zapojen\u00fdm do procesu evaluace, co\u017e ve Stakeov\u011b pojet\u00ed znamen\u00e1 apel na zohledn\u011bn\u00ed z\u00e1jm\u016f t\u011bch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, kter\u00e9 jsou realizac\u00ed evaluace nejv\u00edce dot\u010deny. Responsivn\u00ed evalu\u00e1to\u0159i tak v\u011bnuj\u00ed v\u00fdznamnou pozornost zejm\u00e9na administr\u00e1tor\u016fm jednotliv\u00fdch program\u016f, jejich p\u0159\u00edpadn\u00fdm zam\u011bstnanc\u016fm, klient\u016fm a beneficient\u016fm, sna\u017e\u00ed se zohlednit z\u00e1jmy t\u011bchto zainteresovan\u00fdch stran a nech\u00e1vaj\u00ed si jakoby \u201evnutit\u201c jejich pohled, jejich vn\u00edm\u00e1n\u00ed a jejich argumenty (Greene, Abama 2001). Zadruh\u00e9 responsivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup p\u0159edpokl\u00e1d\u00e1 vn\u00edmavost evalu\u00e1tor\u016f v\u016f\u010di po\u017eadavk\u016fm, ot\u00e1zk\u00e1m a o\u010dek\u00e1v\u00e1n\u00edm, kter\u00e1 od prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed maj\u00ed zadavatel\u00e9 evaluac\u00ed a u\u017eivatel\u00e9 evalua\u010dn\u00edch v\u00fdsledk\u016f. Na prvn\u00ed sm\u011br Stakeova p\u0159\u00edstupu odkazuj\u00ed pozd\u011bji se rozvinuv\u0161\u00ed konstruktivistick\u00e9 evaluace[2]<\/sup><\/a>. Druh\u00fd sm\u011br pozd\u011bji rozvinul M. Patton, kter\u00fd obr\u00e1til pozornost na n\u00e1vrh evaluac\u00ed podporuj\u00edc\u00edch vyu\u017eitelnost v\u00fdsledk\u016f t\u00edm, \u017ee evalu\u00e1tor do procesu tvorby evalua\u010dn\u00edho designu zapojuje zadavatele.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Evaluace realizovan\u00e9 na z\u00e1klad\u011b responzivn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu neodv\u00edjej\u00ed legitimitu sv\u00fdch z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f na pojmech a konstruktech obvykl\u00fdch v kvantitativn\u00edch spole\u010denskov\u011bdn\u00edch v\u00fdzkumech, jako je nap\u0159. validita, n\u00fdbr\u017e ji odvozuje z faktu, \u017ee jsou dosa\u017een\u00e9 z\u00e1v\u011bry akceptov\u00e1ny konsenzem d\u016fle\u017eit\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. R. Stake se v tomto p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b op\u00edr\u00e1 o koncept kvantitativn\u00ed objektivity[3]<\/sup><\/a>, \u010d\u00edm\u017e stav\u00ed responsivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup do kontrapozice jak v\u016f\u010di konfirma\u010dn\u00edmu p\u0159\u00edstupu (goal-based), tak tak\u00e9 v\u016f\u010di p\u0159\u00edstupu explora\u010dn\u00edmu (goal-free).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        V tomto ohledu nep\u0159ekvap\u00ed, \u017ee se responsivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup metodologicky op\u00edr\u00e1 o p\u0159\u00edpadov\u00e9 studie; d\u016fraz je kladen na anal\u00fdzu forem vn\u00edm\u00e1n\u00ed interven\u010dn\u00edch program\u016f ze strany jejich beneficient\u016f a dal\u0161\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. R. Stake poukazuje tak\u00e9 na roli kontextu, ve kter\u00e9m jsou dan\u00e9 evaluace prov\u00e1d\u011bny a ve kter\u00e9m dan\u00e9 intervence p\u016fsob\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Responsivn\u00ed evaluace neb\u00fdvaj\u00ed zavr\u0161eny ultimativn\u00edmi z\u00e1v\u011bry, kter\u00e9 by d\u00e1valy odpov\u011b\u010f, zdali posuzovan\u00fd interven\u010dn\u00ed program vyvol\u00e1v\u00e1 o\u010dek\u00e1van\u00e9 efekty, \u010di nikoliv. Nam\u00edsto toho jsou dosa\u017een\u00e9 v\u00fdsledky vztahov\u00e1ny k o\u010dek\u00e1v\u00e1n\u00edm jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, a t\u00edm poskytuj\u00ed podp\u016frn\u00e9 informace pro rozhodov\u00e1n\u00ed o dal\u0161\u00edm sm\u011b\u0159ov\u00e1n\u00ed sledovan\u00e9 intervence[4]<\/sup><\/a>. P\u0159i aplikaci responzivn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu je evalu\u00e1tor\u016fv z\u00e1m\u011br vsazen do kontextu vyj\u00e1d\u0159en\u00e9ho p\u0159\u00ednosem intervence tak, jak ho vn\u00edmaj\u00ed relevantn\u00ed zainteresovan\u00e9 strany.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Pohledem v\u00fdzkumn\u00e9 metodologie je Stake\u016fv p\u0159\u00edstup de facto<\/em> apelem na vyu\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed sm\u00ed\u0161en\u00e9 metodologie. Jak s\u00e1m uv\u00e1d\u00ed: \u201eoba zp\u016fsoby my\u0161len\u00ed mohou st\u00e1t vedle sebe\u201c (Stake 2004). R. Stake sice explicitn\u011b nep\u00ed\u0161e o kvalitativn\u00ed, resp. kvantitativn\u00ed metodologii, nicm\u00e9n\u011b kvalitativn\u011b-kvantitativn\u00ed diskurs je p\u0159esto v pozad\u00ed jasn\u011b patrn\u00fd. R. Stake ve sv\u00e9m responsivn\u00edm p\u0159\u00edstupu sice vol\u00e1 po takov\u00fdch postupech, kter\u00e9 by p\u0159i prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed dok\u00e1zaly reflektovat komplexitu posuzovan\u00fdch intervenc\u00ed, sou\u010dasn\u011b v\u0161ak zd\u016fraz\u0148uje, \u017ee koncept m\u011b\u0159en\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdch jev\u016f nelze opustit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Ve Stakeov\u011b responsivn\u00edm p\u0159\u00edstupu je z\u0159eteln\u00e1 inspirace p\u0159\u00edstupem M. Scrivena a jeho apelem na uskute\u010d\u0148ov\u00e1n\u00ed hodnot\u00edc\u00edch soud\u016f[5]<\/sup><\/a>. R. Stake v\u0161ak ve sv\u00e9m p\u0159\u00edstupu usiluje o zjemn\u011bn\u00ed Scrivenova ultimativn\u00edho imperativu t\u00edm, \u017ee varuje p\u0159ed kontraproduktivn\u00ed eskalac\u00ed vztah\u016f mezi evalu\u00e1torem a zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami, k n\u00ed\u017e d\u016fsledn\u00e9 n\u00e1sledov\u00e1n\u00ed Scrivenovy v\u00fdzvy nevyhnuteln\u011b vede. V neposledn\u00ed \u0159ad\u011b poukazuje na relativitu t\u011bchto z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f danou mnohost\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran,
        nebo\u0165 co je nejlep\u0161\u00ed pro jednu stranu, nemus\u00ed b\u00fdt nejlep\u0161\u00ed pro ostatn\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Responsivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup zohled\u0148uje t\u00e9mata, kter\u00e1 jsou pova\u017eov\u00e1na za z\u00e1sadn\u00ed z pohledu t\u011bch, kte\u0159\u00ed se p\u0159\u00edmo \u00fa\u010dastn\u00ed implementace, a hled\u00e1 odpov\u011bdi na evalua\u010dn\u00ed ot\u00e1zky formulovan\u00e9 r\u016fzn\u00fdmi zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami. T\u00edm do procesu evaluace (a n\u00e1sledn\u011b do vyu\u017eit\u00ed jej\u00edch v\u00fdsledk\u016f) zapojuje v\u0161echny hlavn\u00ed zainteresovan\u00e9 strany. Responsivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup d\u00e1le vede k \u201eosv\u00edcen\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdch stran\u201c (Owen 2006); zp\u016fsob proveden\u00ed evaluace, kter\u00e1 n\u00e1sleduje tento p\u0159\u00edstup, toti\u017e ukazuje jednotliv\u00fdm zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m konkr\u00e9tn\u00ed procesy a d\u00edl\u010d\u00ed aktivity, je\u017e jsou v r\u00e1mci evaluace prov\u00e1d\u011bny. T\u00edm t\u011bmto stran\u00e1m umo\u017e\u0148uje hlub\u0161\u00ed ch\u00e1p\u00e1n\u00ed jejich podstaty, ale sou\u010dasn\u011b p\u0159in\u00e1\u0161\u00ed podstatn\u011b v\u011bt\u0161\u00ed rozsah a hloubku informac\u00ed o samotn\u00e9 intervenci. Intenzivn\u00ed pocit u\u010den\u00ed se a sd\u00edlen\u00ed poznatk\u016f je tak kl\u00ed\u010dov\u00fdm faktorem, kter\u00fd zvy\u0161uje pou\u010denost zapojen\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. Z\u00e1sadn\u00ed v\u00fdhodou responzivn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu je vysok\u00e1 flexibilita,
        kter\u00e1 snadno zohled\u0148uje prom\u011bnliv\u00fd charakter kontextu samotn\u00e9 evaluace i hodnocen\u00e9 intervence. V neposledn\u00ed \u0159ad\u011b plat\u00ed, \u017ee tento typ evaluac\u00ed dok\u00e1\u017ee \u00fa\u010dinn\u011b zachytit \u0161irok\u00e9 spektrum vedlej\u0161\u00edch efekt\u016f i nezam\u00fd\u0161len\u00fdch d\u016fsledk\u016f (House 1983). Responzivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup je tedy otev\u0159en\u00fd v tom smyslu, \u017ee umo\u017e\u0148uje zachycovat slo\u017eitost samotn\u00e9 intervence, je\u017e nemus\u00ed b\u00fdt zprvu zn\u00e1ma a umo\u017e\u0148uje popsat jej\u00ed kontext.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        Na druh\u00e9 stran\u011b responsivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup vy\u017eaduje pro sv\u00e9 proveden\u00ed prost\u0159ed\u00ed vz\u00e1jemn\u00e9 d\u016fv\u011bry mezi zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami a jejich spolupr\u00e1ci; av\u0161ak v mnoha p\u0159\u00edpadech (kde jsou siln\u00e9 protich\u016fdn\u00e9 z\u00e1jmy jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran) je tato podm\u00ednka nesplniteln\u00e1. Dal\u0161\u00ed omezen\u00ed je patrn\u00e9, kdy\u017e n\u011bkter\u00e1 ze zainteresovan\u00fdch stran z\u016fstane v pr\u016fb\u011bhu realizace evaluace pasivn\u00ed. V neposledn\u00ed \u0159ad\u011b plat\u00ed, \u017ee responzivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup nesm\u011b\u0159uje k jednozna\u010dn\u00fdm evalua\u010dn\u00edm z\u00e1v\u011br\u016fm. Naopak takov\u00e9to evaluace jsou zavr\u0161eny nap\u0159. lakonick\u00fdm konstatov\u00e1n\u00edm p\u0159etrv\u00e1vaj\u00edc\u00edch n\u00e1zorov\u00fdch rozd\u00edl\u016f mezi jednotl<\/a><\/a>iv\u00fdmi zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          \n
        1. Utiliza\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup k evaluaci (utilization-focused evaluation; Michael Quinn Patton)<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

          Tento p\u0159\u00edstup je reprezentantem prvn\u00ed v\u011btve participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed, kter\u00e1 b\u00fdv\u00e1 ozna\u010dov\u00e1na jako praktick\u00e9 participativn\u00ed evaluace (practical participatory evaluations). Jde o v\u011btev, kter\u00e1 usiluje o uplatn\u011bn\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f v praxi a zejm\u00e9na pak o podporu vyu\u017eitelnosti a vyu\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed v\u00fdsledk\u016f evaluace v rozhodovac\u00ed \u010donnosti konkr\u00e9tn\u00edch subjekt\u016f. V r\u00e1mci takto prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed jsou proto zapojov\u00e1ni nejen beneficienti, ale tak\u00e9 ostatn\u00ed zainteresovan\u00e9 strany v\u010detn\u011b sponzor\u016f evaluovan\u00e9 intervence, administr\u00e1tor\u016f dan\u00e9ho programu a dal\u0161\u00ed. C\u00edlem utiliza\u010dn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu M. Pattona je v\u00edc ne\u017e pouh\u00e9 zapojov\u00e1n\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran do evalua\u010dn\u00edho procesu; utiliza\u010dn\u00edmu p\u0159\u00edstupu z\u00e1le\u017e\u00ed na vyu\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed dosa\u017een\u00fdch evalua\u010dn\u00edch v\u00fdsledk\u016f p\u0159i praktick\u00e9m rozhodov\u00e1n\u00ed a \u0159\u00edzen\u00ed dan\u00fdch intervenc\u00ed (Rodr\u00edguez-Campos 2005). M. Patton a jeho utiliza\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup ukazuje, \u017ee p\u0159\u00edm\u00e9 zapojen\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran posiluje d\u016fv\u011bryhodnost evalua\u010dn\u00edch z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f, co\u017e se n\u00e1sledn\u011b pozitivn\u011b odr\u00e1\u017e\u00ed ve vy\u0161\u0161\u00ed m\u00ed\u0159e jejich vyu\u017eit\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

          Z\u00e1kladn\u00ed my\u0161lenka tohoto p\u0159\u00edstupu nen\u00ed zcela origin\u00e1ln\u00ed, nebo\u0165 ji\u017e R. Stake v\u011bnoval polovinu responsivity sv\u00e9ho p\u0159\u00edstupu vyu\u017eitelnosti proveden\u00fdch evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed a nab\u00e1dal, aby evalu\u00e1to\u0159i byli vn\u00edmav\u00ed v\u016f\u010di po\u017eadavk\u016fm zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, kter\u00e9 budou v\u00fdsledky proveden\u00fdch evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed vyu\u017e\u00edvat. Tak\u00e9 Suchman (1967) uv\u00e1d\u00ed, \u017ee \u201e\u00fasp\u011bch evalua\u010dn\u00edho projektu je z\u00e1visl\u00fd na jeho u\u017eite\u010dnosti pro zadavatele, kter\u00fd se sna\u017e\u00ed zlep\u0161it poskytovan\u00e9 slu\u017eby\u201c. E. Suchman d\u00e1le shrnuje, \u017ee evalu\u00e1tor mus\u00ed m\u00edt neust\u00e1le na pam\u011bti potenci\u00e1ln\u00ed u\u017eite\u010dnost sv\u00fdch z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f. M. Patton v\u0161ak u\u010dinil z krit\u00e9ria vyu\u017eitelnosti a u\u017eite\u010dnosti proveden\u00fdch evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed j\u00e1dro sv\u00e9ho p\u0159\u00edstupu, zasadil ho do n\u00e1le\u017eit\u00e9ho kontextu a dopracoval do podoby ucelen\u00e9ho p\u0159\u00edstupu k prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            \n
          1. Patton ve sv\u00e9m pojet\u00ed p\u0159edpokl\u00e1d\u00e1, \u017ee evalua\u010dn\u00ed \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed jsou od sv\u00e9ho po\u010d\u00e1tku vedena v t\u011bsn\u00e9 interakci evalu\u00e1tora s kl\u00ed\u010dov\u00fdmi zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami, a to zejm\u00e9na s t\u011bmi, kter\u00e9 na z\u00e1klad\u011b v\u00fdsledk\u016f dokon\u010den\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed \u010din\u00ed konkr\u00e9tn\u00ed rozhodnut\u00ed. V jeho snaze nejde o pouh\u00e9 zohledn\u011bn\u00ed pot\u0159eb a po\u017eadavk\u016f u\u017eivatel\u016f evalua\u010dn\u00edch zpr\u00e1v, ale jde o rozs\u00e1hlou zm\u011bnu v designu evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed a o \u00fapravu jednotliv\u00fdch postup\u016f a procedur, d\u00edky n\u00ed\u017e jsou v\u00fdsledky evaluac\u00ed nad\u00e1ny vysok\u00fdm potenci\u00e1lem vyu\u017eitelnosti v dan\u00fdch podm\u00ednk\u00e1ch. S t\u00edm rovn\u011b\u017e souvis\u00ed zp\u016fsobilost z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed podporovat zainteresovan\u00e9 strany s rozhodovac\u00edmi pravomocemi ve vztahu k interven\u010dn\u00edmu prost\u0159ed\u00ed, p\u0159in\u00e1\u0161et tak skute\u010dnou a prakticky vyu\u017eitelnou zp\u011btnou vazbu a pod\u00edlet se na dal\u0161\u00edm sm\u011brov\u00e1n\u00ed prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch intervenc\u00ed. M. Patton zd\u016fraz\u0148uje, \u017ee smysluplnost evaluac\u00ed a vyu\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed jejich poznatk\u016f p\u0159i \u0159\u00edzen\u00ed intervenc\u00ed je do zna\u010dn\u00e9 m\u00edry z\u00e1visl\u00e1 na tom, zdali a v jak\u00e9 m\u00ed\u0159e zadavatel\u00e9 evaluac\u00ed a dal\u0161\u00ed zainteresovan\u00e9 strany akceptuj\u00ed v\u00fdsledky proveden\u00e9 evaluace. Sv\u00fdm p\u0159\u00edstupem se tedy M. Patton sna\u017e\u00ed p\u0159edej\u00edt tomu, aby v\u00fdsledky proveden\u00fdch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed byly mana\u017eery interven\u010dn\u00edch program\u016f odkl\u00e1d\u00e1ny pro nepochopen\u00ed, pro jejich (domn\u011blou) irelevanci nebo z d\u016fvodu nedostate\u010dn\u00e9 spolehlivosti formulovan\u00fdch z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

            Nejde v\u0161ak jen o d\u016fraz na apriorn\u00ed identifikaci u\u017eivatel\u016f v\u00fdsledk\u016f evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed coby specifick\u00e9ho typu zainteresovan\u00e9 strany; M. Patton sou\u010dasn\u011b zd\u016fraz\u0148uje roli aktu\u00e1ln\u00ed situace a konkr\u00e9tn\u00edho zp\u016fsobu, jak\u00fdm jsou v\u00fdsledky proveden\u00e9ho evalua\u010dn\u00edho \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed vyu\u017e\u00edv\u00e1ny. V tomto ohledu lze tedy hovo\u0159it o du\u00e1ln\u00ed specifi\u010dnosti: na jedn\u00e9 stran\u011b je t\u0159eba uva\u017eovat o specifi\u010dnosti subjektu, tedy p\u0159esn\u00e9 identifikaci a vymezen\u00ed subjekt\u016f, kter\u00fdm jsou doru\u010dov\u00e1ny v\u00fdsledky proveden\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed. Na druh\u00e9 stran\u011b jde o specifi\u010dnost pou\u017eit\u00ed, tedy stanoven\u00ed podm\u00ednek, mo\u017enost\u00ed a omezen\u00ed, za kter\u00fdch budou v\u00fdsledky evaluac\u00ed vyu\u017e\u00edv\u00e1ny (oby\u010dejn\u011b se povaha a typ rozhodnut\u00ed, kter\u00e1 se od v\u00fdsledk\u016f evaluace budou odv\u00edjet, \u010dasov\u00fd r\u00e1mec dan\u00e9ho rozhodnut\u00ed, dopady rozhodnut\u00ed u\u010din\u011bn\u00e9ho na z\u00e1klad\u011b v\u00fdsledk\u016f proveden\u00e9 evaluace apod. specifikuje v zad\u00e1vac\u00ed dokumentaci k proveden\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edho \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed). Pou\u017e\u00edvan\u00e9 metody a techniky jsou pak zvoleny s ohledem k povaze zainteresovan\u00fdch stran pou\u017e\u00edvaj\u00edc\u00edch v\u00fdsledky evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed a zp\u016fsobu jejich pou\u017eit\u00ed (Patton 1987).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Utiliza\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup tedy z cel\u00e9ho spektra zainteresovan\u00fdch stran obrac\u00ed svou pozornost k t\u011bm subjekt\u016fm, kter\u00e9 \u010din\u00ed na z\u00e1klad\u011b proveden\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed dal\u0161\u00ed rozhodnut\u00ed. To toti\u017e v\u00fdznamn\u00fdm zp\u016fsobem determinuje zp\u016fsob, jak\u00fdm jsou evaluace prov\u00e1d\u011bny. V porovn\u00e1n\u00ed s responsivn\u00edm p\u0159\u00edstupem, kter\u00fd jako by balancoval mezi odpov\u011bdnost\u00ed v\u016f\u010di zadavatel\u016fm evaluac\u00ed a odpov\u011bdnost\u00ed v\u016f\u010di beneficient\u016fm \u010di klient\u016fm, M. Patton p\u0159en\u00e1\u0161\u00ed ve\u0161ker\u00fd d\u016fraz na z\u00e1jmy zadavatel\u016f evaluac\u00ed. Vysok\u00e1 pozornost v\u011bnovan\u00e1 vyu\u017eitelnosti v\u00fdsledk\u016f prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed nach\u00e1z\u00ed sv\u016fj odraz tak\u00e9 v jejich metodice, ve kter\u00e9 je prvo\u0159ad\u00e1 pozornost v\u011bnov\u00e1na extern\u00ed validit\u011b. Vzhledem k tomu se u M. Pattona setk\u00e1me s v\u011bt\u0161\u00edm odstupem od prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed experiment\u016f a pou\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed experiment\u00e1ln\u00edho designu. D\u016fraz na zainteresovan\u00e9 strany vede k individualizovan\u00e9mu \u010di snad a\u017e personifikovan\u00e9mu popisu evalua\u010dn\u00ed situace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Zat\u00edmco R. Stake p\u0159edkl\u00e1d\u00e1 sv\u016fj responzivn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup jako obecn\u00fd zp\u016fsob prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed, M. Patton od za\u010d\u00e1tku koncipuje sv\u016fj p\u0159\u00edstup jako alternativu[6]<\/sup><\/a>. R. Stake nazna\u010duje, \u017ee jin\u00e9 ne\u017e responsivn\u00ed evaluace nemohou poskytnout tak bohat\u00fd popis posuzovan\u00e9ho prost\u0159ed\u00ed, jak\u00fd nab\u00edz\u00ed j\u00edm navrhovan\u00fd p\u0159\u00edstup. M. Patton v tomto ohledu uv\u00e1d\u00ed, \u017ee ka\u017ed\u00e1 evaluace je vlastn\u011b sv\u00fdm zp\u016fsobem (a v jist\u00e9 m\u00ed\u0159e) utiliza\u010dn\u011b zam\u011b\u0159en\u00e1 (Patton 2008). Pokud v\u0161ak jde o celkov\u00fd p\u0159\u00edstup k volb\u011b uspo\u0159\u00e1d\u00e1n\u00ed dan\u00e9ho evalua\u010dn\u00edho \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed, je ponech\u00e1no na evalu\u00e1torovi samotn\u00e9m, zdali pod\u0159\u00edd\u00ed z\u00e1jm\u016fm zadavatele cel\u00fd design, \u010di nikoliv, zdali zvol\u00ed utiliza\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup, \u010di se rozhodne pro n\u011bjak\u00fd jin\u00fd. P\u0159irozenou konsekvenc\u00ed utiliza\u010dn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu k prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed je normativn\u00ed relativismus: prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e1 evalua\u010dn\u00ed \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed mohou jednostrann\u011b zohled\u0148ovat normy a hodnoty spojen\u00e9 s jednou jedinou zainteresovanou stranou \u2013 se zadavatelem. Utiliza\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup m\u00e1 tedy v tomto ohledu mnohem bl\u00ed\u017ee ke Stakeov\u011b responsivn\u00edmu p\u0159\u00edstupu, kter\u00fd je rovn\u011b\u017e zalo\u017een na p\u0159edpokl\u00e1dan\u00e9m hodnotov\u00e9m relativismu vych\u00e1zej\u00edc\u00edm z hodnot jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            Utiliza\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup nen\u00ed zalo\u017een na rozvinut\u00ed jin\u00e9ho konceptu \u010di na jeho kritice. M. Patton jej op\u00edr\u00e1 o sv\u00e9 vlastn\u00ed zku\u0161enosti s realizac\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed a o praktick\u00e9 zku\u0161enosti mnoh\u00fdch dal\u0161\u00edch evalu\u00e1tor\u016f, kte\u0159\u00ed se p\u0159i prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed pot\u00fdkaj\u00ed s prom\u011bnliv\u00fdm p\u0159ijet\u00edm sv\u00fdch snah, vych\u00e1zej\u00edc\u00edm z individu\u00e1ln\u00ed podstaty jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. Nap\u0159. Cronbach poukazoval na skute\u010dnost, \u017ee nic neovliv\u0148uje vyu\u017e\u00edv\u00e1n\u00ed v\u00fdsledk\u016f evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed v\u00edce ne\u017e osobn\u00ed faktor \u2013 z\u00e1jem zadavatel\u016f pou\u010dit se z proveden\u00e9ho evalua\u010dn\u00edho \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed a snaha evalu\u00e1tora zaujmout sv\u00e9 auditorium (Cronbach 1980).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

            To, co je na jedn\u00e9 stran\u011b kl\u00ed\u010dovou v\u00fdhodou utiliza\u010dn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu (tedy zapojen\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdch stran do samotn\u00e9ho st\u0159edu prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed dan\u00e9ho evalua\u010dn\u00edho \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed), je sou\u010dasn\u011b tak\u00e9 jeho nejv\u011bt\u0161\u00ed slabinou. P\u0159\u00edpadn\u00e1 zm\u011bna ve slo\u017een\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdch stran (by\u0165 by se jednalo o v\u00fdm\u011bnu jednoho jedin\u00e9ho pracovn\u00edka), toti\u017e m\u016f\u017ee cel\u00fd proces evaluace vr\u00e1tit na sam\u00fd za\u010d\u00e1tek nebo ho fakticky zastavit \u010di v\u00fdznamn\u011b zdr\u017eet. Spol\u00e9h\u00e1n\u00ed se na hodnoty, z\u00e1jmy a o\u010dek\u00e1v\u00e1n\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran sice p\u0159ibli\u017euje prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 evaluace skute\u010dn\u00fdm situac\u00edm (a pravd\u011bpodobn\u011b tak posiluje jejich vn\u011bj\u0161\u00ed validitu a zvy\u0161uje pravd\u011bpodobnost jejich faktick\u00e9ho vyu\u017eit\u00ed), nicm\u00e9n\u011b stav\u00ed t\u00edm evalu\u00e1tory do st\u0159edu manipulativn\u00edch z\u00e1m\u011br\u016f jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, kter\u00e9 se mohou sna\u017eit prost\u0159ednictv\u00edm formulace vlastn\u00edch po\u017eadavk\u016f dosahovat sv\u00fdch partikul\u00e1rn\u00edch c\u00edl\u016f (Stufflebeam, Shinkfield 2007). Jin\u00e1 problemati\u010dnost utiliza\u010dn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu k prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed pramen\u00ed ze samotn\u00e9ho zp\u016fsobu vyu\u017eit\u00ed jejich v\u00fdsledk\u016f. Zdaleka ne v\u017edy lze zp\u016fsob pou\u017eit\u00ed p\u0159edem stanovit \u010di odhadnout. D\u00e1le se v konkr\u00e9tn\u00ed aplika\u010dn\u00ed praxi ukazuje, \u017ee zp\u016fsoby vyu\u017eit\u00ed v\u00fdsledk\u016f proveden\u00fdch evalua\u010dn\u00edch \u0161et\u0159en\u00ed mohou b\u00fdt mnoha\u010detn\u00e9, a tak by stanoven\u00ed adekv\u00e1tn\u00ed v\u00e1hy (a pota\u017emo i v\u00fdznamu jednotliv\u00fdch zp\u016fsob\u016f pou\u017eit\u00ed) mohlo b\u00fdt v \u0159ad\u011b p\u0159\u00edpad\u016f n\u00e1ro\u010dn\u011bj\u0161\u00ed ne\u017e samotn\u00e9 proveden\u00ed evaluace. Utiliza\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstup tak vlastn\u011b vypov\u00edd\u00e1 o snaze evalu\u00e1tor\u016f vyj\u00edt vst\u0159\u00edc zadavatel\u016fm evaluac\u00ed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              \n
            1. Sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fd p\u0159\u00edstup[7]<\/sup><\/strong><\/sup><\/a> k evaluaci (Empowerment Evaluation; David Fetterman)<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

              Tento p\u0159\u00edstup je jedn\u00edm z n\u011bkolika p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f, kter\u00e9 b\u00fdvaj\u00ed za\u0159azov\u00e1ny do druh\u00e9 z v\u011btv\u00ed participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed. Souhrnn\u011b jsou evalua\u010dn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstupy v t\u00e9to v\u011btvi naz\u00fdv\u00e1ny jako transformativn\u00ed participativn\u00ed evaluace (transformative participatory evaluations). Jejich obecn\u00fdm specifikem je, \u017ee poskytuj\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m, kter\u00e9 nejsou evalu\u00e1tory, n\u00e1stroje a znalosti pomoc\u00ed kter\u00fdch mohou transformovat sv\u00e9 prost\u0159ed\u00ed a okolnosti implementace dan\u00e9 intervence. Tyto zainteresovan\u00e9 strany, kter\u00e9 jsou typicky anga\u017eovan\u00e9 p\u0159i spr\u00e1v\u011b \u010di \u0159\u00edzen\u00ed dan\u00e9 intervence, se aktivn\u011b \u00fa\u010dastn\u00ed p\u0159i prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed dan\u00e9 evaluace. To jim umo\u017e\u0148uje osvojit si z\u00e1kladn\u00ed dovednosti vyu\u017eiteln\u00e9 nejen p\u0159i samotn\u00e9 evaluaci,
              n\u00fdbr\u017e i p\u0159i vlastn\u00edm \u0159\u00edzen\u00ed intervence a p\u0159i zapojov\u00e1n\u00ed ostatn\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. V r\u00e1mci t\u00e9to v\u011btve se lze setkat s celou \u0159adou p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f, zejm\u00e9na pak s p\u0159\u00edstupem sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdm (empowerment), ale tak\u00e9 s evaluacemi emancipa\u010dn\u00edmi (emancipatory) a demokratick\u00fdmi (democratic).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              Sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace, resp. evaluace prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 sv\u00e9pomoc\u00ed s dohledem a pod veden\u00edm zku\u0161en\u00e9ho evalu\u00e1tora maj\u00ed za c\u00edl krom\u011b vlastn\u00ed evaluace dan\u00e9 intervence pom\u00e1hat zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m k tomu, aby si mohly pom\u00e1hat samy (Fetterman 1994). Sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace sou\u010dasn\u011b zahrnuj\u00ed evaluaci do pl\u00e1nov\u00e1n\u00ed a \u0159\u00edzen\u00ed programu \u010di organizace. Kl\u00ed\u010dovou ot\u00e1zkou tohoto p\u0159\u00edstupu je: \u201cJak zapojit zainteresovan\u00e9 strany do procesu vlastn\u00edho hodnocen\u00ed? Jak mohou b\u00fdt tyto zainteresovan\u00e9 strany podpo\u0159eny?\u201c.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

              P\u0159\u00edstup byl uveden v polovin\u011b devades\u00e1t\u00fdch let Davidem Fettermanem jako p\u0159\u00ednosn\u00e1 a praktick\u00e1 alternativa k tradi\u010dn\u00edm p\u0159\u00edstup\u016fm k evaluaci interven\u010dn\u00edch program\u016f. Wandersman et al. (2005) vymezuje sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace jako p\u0159\u00edstup, kter\u00fd si klade za c\u00edl zv\u00fd\u0161it pravd\u011bpodobnost \u00fasp\u011bchu intervence t\u00edm, \u017ee poskytuje zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m n\u00e1stroje pro pl\u00e1nov\u00e1n\u00ed a implementaci a sebe-hodnocen\u00ed vlastn\u00edho programu. S\u00e1m D. Fetterman sv\u016fj p\u0159\u00edstup definoval jako \u201epou\u017eit\u00ed evalua\u010dn\u00edch koncept\u016f, technik a zji\u0161t\u011bn\u00ed s c\u00edlem podpo\u0159it zlep\u0161en\u00ed a sebeur\u010den\u00ed (svobodn\u00e9 rozhodnut\u00ed)\u201c (Fetterman 1996), a d\u00e1le specifikoval p\u011bt hlavn\u00edch charakteristik tohoto p\u0159\u00edstupu:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                \n
              1. a) u\u010d\u00ed ostatn\u00ed prov\u00e1d\u011bt jejich vlastn\u00ed evaluace a posiluje tak jejich sob\u011bsta\u010dnost a nez\u00e1vislost,<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              2. b) vede ostatn\u00ed p\u0159i prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed jejich vlastn\u00edch evaluac\u00ed,<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              3. c) obhajuje smysl a v\u00fdznam evaluac\u00ed, co\u017e umo\u017e\u0148uje prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 evaluace l\u00e9pe zac\u00edlit,<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              4. d) objas\u0148uje a poskytuje pou\u010den\u00ed v mnoha \u00farovn\u00edch implementace hodnocen\u00e9 intervence,<\/li>\n\n\n\n
              5. e) zrovnopr\u00e1v\u0148uje zainteresovan\u00e9 strany, nebo\u0165 je osvobozuje od zaveden\u00fdch o\u010dek\u00e1v\u00e1n\u00ed a rol\u00ed.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                Fetterman\u016fv p\u0159\u00edstup reagoval na tendence, kter\u00e9 sm\u011b\u0159ovaly k \u201epolitizaci evaluac\u00ed, striktn\u00edm term\u00edn\u016fm, omezen\u00fdm rozpo\u010dt\u016fm a k nadm\u011brn\u00e9mu zd\u016fraz\u0148ov\u00e1n\u00ed hospod\u00e1rnosti prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed, kter\u00e9 v mnoha p\u0159\u00edpadech pok\u0159ivily evalua\u010dn\u00ed postupy\u201c (Hopkins 1989). Sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace pracuj\u00ed v\u017edy se skupinou n\u011bkolika zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, nebo\u0165 jen tak lze \u00fa\u010dinn\u011b br\u00e1nit tomu, aby evaluace a jej\u00ed v\u00fdsledky byly usurpov\u00e1ny n\u011bkterou ze zainteresovan\u00fdch stran (co\u017e se m\u016f\u017ee snadno st\u00e1t nap\u0159. v p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b utiliza\u010dn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu). Evalu\u00e1tor tedy mus\u00ed na za\u010d\u00e1tku evaluace db\u00e1t na to, aby jednotliv\u00e9 zainteresovan\u00e9 strany byly p\u0159i prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluace adekv\u00e1tn\u011b zastoupeny a m\u011bly prostor a p\u0159\u00edle\u017eitost vyj\u00e1d\u0159it sv\u00e1 stanoviska.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                D\u016fraz je v r\u00e1mci tohoto p\u0159\u00edstupu kladen nejen na samotn\u00e9 zapojov\u00e1n\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdch stran (tak tomu je ostatn\u011b v p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b v\u0161ech participativn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f), ale v p\u0159\u00edpad\u011b sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed jde je\u0161t\u011b nav\u00edc o snahu podpo\u0159it sebe-rozvoj ostatn\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, pos\u00edlit jejich nez\u00e1vislost a podpo\u0159it sebe-uv\u011bdom\u011bn\u00ed jednotliv\u00fdch \u00fa\u010dastn\u00edk\u016f. P\u0159edm\u011btem kou\u010dingu ze strany evalu\u00e1tora nen\u00ed jen samotn\u00e1 evalua\u010dn\u00ed metodologie (tj. nau\u010dit zainteresovan\u00e9 strany samostatn\u011b prov\u00e1d\u011bt evaluaci), ale tak\u00e9 dal\u0161\u00ed \u010dinnosti, kter\u00e9 s evaluacemi souvis\u00ed. Zejm\u00e9na pak spr\u00e1vn\u00e1 definice a formulace c\u00edl\u016f intervence, schopnost uskute\u010d\u0148ovat, zaznamen\u00e1vat a vykazovat pokrok intervence sm\u011brem ke stanoven\u00fdm c\u00edl\u016fm. Sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace umo\u017e\u0148uj\u00ed extenzivn\u00ed participaci hlavn\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran ve v\u0161ech f\u00e1z\u00edch procesu evaluace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Tento p\u0159\u00edstup napom\u00e1h\u00e1 p\u0159i rozvoji evalua\u010dn\u00edch kapacit, d\u00e1v\u00e1 rozli\u010dn\u00fdm zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m p\u0159\u00edle\u017eitost vyj\u00e1d\u0159it se a otev\u00edr\u00e1 otev\u0159enou diskusi o v\u00fdhod\u00e1ch a nev\u00fdhod\u00e1ch hodnocen\u00fdch \u010dinnost\u00ed. Vysok\u00fd v\u00fdznam v tomto ohledu m\u00e1 rozvoj schopnost\u00ed identifikovat pot\u0159eby, stanovit c\u00edle, na\u010drtnout pl\u00e1n \u010dinnost\u00ed, naj\u00edt vhodn\u00e1 data a u\u010dinit z\u00e1v\u011br o m\u00ed\u0159e napln\u011bn\u00ed vyty\u010den\u00fdch c\u00edl\u016f.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace projevuj\u00ed hlubok\u00fd respekt ke schopnosti vytv\u00e1\u0159et znalost. Proto pova\u017euj\u00ed \u017eitou zku\u0161enost jednotliv\u00fdch lid\u00ed za validn\u00ed pramen znalost\u00ed, je\u017e mohou iniciovat spole\u010denskou zm\u011bnu, sp\u00ed\u0161e ne\u017e poznatky zachycen\u00e9 v an\u00e1lech v\u011bdeck\u00e9 komunity (Vanderplaat 1995). Evaluace je pova\u017eov\u00e1na za prost\u0159edek, kter\u00fd zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m zapojen\u00fdm do procesu p\u0159\u00edpravy \u010di pl\u00e1nov\u00e1n\u00ed politik a program\u016f umo\u017e\u0148uje vlastn\u00ed rozvoj (samostatn\u00e9 prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed). Sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace poukazuj\u00ed, \u017ee \u00fa\u010dinnost intervence nen\u00ed d\u00e1na jen dosa\u017een\u00edm stanoven\u00fdch c\u00edl\u016f \u010di vyhov\u011bn\u00edm n\u011bjak\u00e9mu (vesm\u011bs extern\u00edmu) modelu, ale tak\u00e9 t\u00edm, \u017ee si \u00fa\u010dastn\u00edci intervence osvojuj\u00ed dovednosti a strategie, ch\u00e1pou a reflektuj\u00ed jednotliv\u00e9 procesy. Ke zlep\u0161ov\u00e1n\u00ed nedoch\u00e1z\u00ed na\u0159\u00edzen\u00edm shora, ale zapojen\u00edm, prax\u00ed a osvojen\u00edm t\u011bch, kte\u0159\u00ed jsou sou\u010d\u00e1st\u00ed syst\u00e9mu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Fetterman (2001) uv\u00e1d\u00ed t\u0159i kroky realizace sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                1) P\u0159\u00edprava mise a vize<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                C\u00edlem specifikace mise a vize, resp. \u00fa\u010delu sledovan\u00e9 intervence je dosa\u017een\u00ed souhlasu mezi jednotliv\u00fdmi zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami t\u00fdkaj\u00edc\u00edho se z\u00e1kladn\u00edch hodnot, smyslu a pl\u00e1novan\u00fdch dopad\u016f dan\u00e9 intervence. I pokud je mise a vize pro danou intervenci ji\u017e formulov\u00e1na, p\u0159esto je t\u0159eba ji mezi zainteresovan\u00fdmi stranami v r\u00e1mci prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 evaluace diskutovat. Vzhledem k povaze sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace je \u017e\u00e1douc\u00ed strategick\u00e9 sm\u011bry intervence v r\u00e1mci diskuse rekonstruovat, pop\u0159. revidovat. Nejde toti\u017e jen o c\u00edle samotn\u00e9, ale o tvorbu a diseminaci skupinov\u00fdch hodnot, vytv\u00e1\u0159en\u00ed v\u00fdznam\u016f a poskytov\u00e1n\u00ed prostoru jednotliv\u00fdm zainteresovan\u00fdm stran\u00e1m.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                2) Inventura<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Tento krok zahrnuje p\u0159edev\u0161\u00edm brainstorming zam\u011b\u0159en\u00fd na hodnocen\u00ed nejd\u016fle\u017eit\u011bj\u0161\u00edch aktivit prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch v r\u00e1mci intervence a stanoven\u00ed priorit. V\u00fdsledkem je robustn\u00ed z\u00e1klad v\u00fdchoz\u00edch p\u0159edpoklad\u016f, parametr\u016f a dat umo\u017e\u0148uj\u00edc\u00ed jednak sledov\u00e1n\u00ed b\u011bhu dan\u00e9 intervence a posuzov\u00e1n\u00ed jej\u00edch siln\u00fdch a slab\u00fdch str\u00e1nek.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                3) Pl\u00e1nov\u00e1n\u00ed<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                Jsou identifikov\u00e1ny realistick\u00e9 c\u00edle (goals) jednotliv\u00fdch aktivit spolu se zp\u016fsobem jejich dosa\u017een\u00ed (strategie) a vyu\u017eit\u00e9 zdroje informac\u00ed (evidence), kter\u00e9 umo\u017e\u0148uj\u00ed monitorovat pokroky p\u0159i dosahov\u00e1n\u00ed t\u011bchto d\u00edl\u016f.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  \n
                1. Fetterman se n\u00e1vrhem sv\u00e9ho p\u0159\u00edstupu sna\u017eil p\u0159ekonat obvykl\u00fd nedostatek ostatn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f k prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00ed evaluac\u00ed, kter\u00e9 prov\u00e1d\u011bj\u00ed hodnocen\u00ed pouze k jednomu konkr\u00e9tn\u00edmu datu a poskytuj\u00ed tak informaci v podob\u011b \u010dasov\u00e9ho sn\u00edmku. Naproti t\u00e9to statick\u00e9 reflexi prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch intervenc\u00ed, D. Fetterman usiloval o to, aby evaluace mohly p\u0159in\u00e1\u0161et zp\u011btnou vazbu dlouhodob\u011b, a proto se tento p\u0159\u00edstup typicky zam\u011b\u0159uje na posuzov\u00e1n\u00ed procesu. Hodnot\u00ed tedy nejen, jak\u00e9 v\u00fdsledky dan\u00e1 intervence dos\u00e1hla, ale klade d\u016fraz na v\u00fdvoj dan\u00e9 intervence v dlouhodob\u011bj\u0161\u00ed \u010dasov\u00e9 perspektiv\u011b. Sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace se tak zam\u011b\u0159uj\u00ed na proces intervence dan\u00e9ho programu.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                  Hlavn\u00ed v\u00fdhody, kter\u00e9 sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace p\u0159in\u00e1\u0161ej\u00ed, vypl\u00fdvaj\u00ed z jejich participativn\u00edho charakteru. Krom\u011b ji\u017e zm\u00edn\u011bn\u00e9ho zam\u011b\u0159en\u00ed na procesn\u00ed str\u00e1nku prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch intervenc\u00ed, spo\u010d\u00edv\u00e1 jejich p\u0159\u00ednos v zapojov\u00e1n\u00ed \u0161irok\u00e9ho spektra zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. Ze strany evalu\u00e1tora je motivace v tomto ohledu d\u00e1na snahou podpo\u0159it vyu\u017eitelnost prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 evaluace a maximalizovat tak dopady dosa\u017een\u00fdch evalua\u010dn\u00edch z\u00e1v\u011br\u016f na \u010dinnost a fungov\u00e1n\u00ed dan\u00e9 intervence. Z hlediska ostatn\u00edch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran (zejm\u00e9na t\u011bch, kter\u00e9 jsou spjaty s \u010dinnost\u00ed dan\u00e9ho programu \u2013 tj. administr\u00e1to\u0159i \u010di pracovn\u00edci) je motivace k co nej\u0161ir\u0161\u00edmu zapojen\u00ed d\u00e1na snahou podpo\u0159it zastupitelnost konkr\u00e9tn\u00edch \u010dlen\u016f v r\u00e1mci zapojen\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran (nap\u0159. zastupitelnost mezi zam\u011bstnanci) a snahou zv\u00fd\u0161it efekt z kou\u010dingu poskytovan\u00e9ho evalu\u00e1torem. Itera\u010dn\u00ed charakter evaluace, kter\u00fd se krok za krokem zam\u011b\u0159uje na jednotliv\u00e9 f\u00e1ze implementa\u010dn\u00edho procesu a podrobuje je evaluaci, umo\u017e\u0148uje inkrement\u00e1ln\u00ed zlep\u0161ov\u00e1n\u00ed dan\u00e9 intervence. V neposledn\u00ed \u0159ad\u011b je v\u00fdhodou sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed, \u017ee mechanismus hodnocen\u00ed intervence je p\u0159\u00edmo zakomponov\u00e1n do procesu implementace dan\u00e9ho programu a sou\u010dasn\u011b toho hodnocen\u00ed institucion\u00e1ln\u011b zakotvuje. V d\u016fsledku toho toti\u017e mohou b\u00fdt jednotliv\u00e9 intervence flexibiln\u011b \u0159\u00edzeny a mohou promptn\u011b reagovat na soustavn\u011b se prom\u011b\u0148uj\u00edc\u00ed kontext, ve kter\u00e9m jsou tyto programy vykon\u00e1v\u00e1ny.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Hlavn\u00ed nev\u00fdhodou Fettermanova p\u0159\u00edstupu je jeho konceptu\u00e1ln\u00ed v\u00e1gnost. Nen\u00ed toti\u017e z\u0159ejm\u00e9, jak p\u0159esn\u011b se jeho p\u0159\u00edstup sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed odli\u0161uje od ostatn\u00edch participativn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f \u010di od p\u0159\u00edstupu utiliza\u010dn\u00edho. Z\u0159etelnou diferenciaci nav\u00edc komplikuje s\u00e1m D. Fetterman, kter\u00fd sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace nahodile ztoto\u017e\u0148uje nejen s evaluacemi participativn\u00edmi, a s evaluacemi kolaborativn\u00edmi, ale dokonce tak\u00e9 s vlastn\u00edm hodnocen\u00edm a dokonce s organiza\u010dn\u00edm u\u010den\u00edm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                  Rovn\u011b\u017e lze sv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdm evaluac\u00edm vytknout, \u017ee mohou v\u00e9st k vych\u00fdlen\u00fdm z\u00e1v\u011br\u016fm, a to v z\u00e1vislosti na tom, jak funguje syst\u00e9m vz\u00e1jemn\u00e9ho vyva\u017eov\u00e1n\u00ed z\u00e1jm\u016f r\u016fzn\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran. Zejm\u00e9na ti, kte\u0159\u00ed jsou p\u0159\u00edmo odpov\u011bdn\u00ed za administraci a \u0159\u00edzen\u00ed hodnocen\u00e9 intervence mohou ma\u0159it (\u010di minim\u00e1ln\u011b vychylovat) snahy o jej\u00ed vyv\u00e1\u017een\u00e9 posouzen\u00ed. D. Fetterman v neposledn\u00ed \u0159ad\u011b neuv\u00e1d\u00ed praktick\u00e1 doporu\u010den\u00ed, jak rozd\u011blit kompetence a odpov\u011bdnost za evaluaci prov\u00e1d\u011bnou sv\u00e9pomoc\u00ed a kdo by m\u011bl toto rozd\u011blen\u00ed prov\u00e9st (jist\u011b v tomto ohledu nelze spol\u00e9hat na sv\u00e9pomoc zapojen\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran). D. Fetterman d\u00e1le nespecifikuje, pro jak\u00fd typ intervenc\u00ed, pop\u0159. pro jak\u00fd druh organiza\u010dn\u00edho uspo\u0159\u00e1d\u00e1n\u00ed se sv\u00e9pomocn\u00e9 evaluace hod\u00ed, a pro kter\u00fd nikoliv.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    \n
                  1. Z\u00e1v\u011bry<\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n

                    Participativn\u00ed p\u0159\u00edstupy tak zachycuj\u00ed a popisuj\u00ed realitu jako mnoha\u010detnou entitu sp\u00ed\u0161e ne\u017e jako jednoduch\u00fd kauz\u00e1ln\u00ed \u0159et\u011bzec p\u0159\u00ed\u010din a n\u00e1sledk\u016f. P\u0159edpokl\u00e1daj\u00ed, \u017ee \u017e\u00e1dn\u00e1 ze zainteresovan\u00fdch stran nedok\u00e1\u017ee zprost\u0159edkovat \u00fapln\u00fd obraz hodnocen\u00e9ho programu \u010di intervence, a proto je p\u0159i evaluac\u00edch prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00fdch n\u011bkter\u00fdm z participativn\u011b zalo\u017een\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f d\u016fle\u017eit\u00e9 zachycovat, jak r\u016fzn\u00e9 strany vn\u00edmaj\u00ed a interpretuj\u00ed jednotliv\u00e9 procesy, aktivity a ud\u00e1losti. D\u016fle\u017eit\u00fdm v\u00fdsledkem takto pojat\u00fdch evaluac\u00ed je pochopen\u00ed podstaty intervence, jej\u00ed dopady na jednotliv\u00e9 zainteresovan\u00e9 strany a v\u00fdznam v\u0161ech kontextov\u00fdch vliv\u016f.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    I p\u0159es otev\u0159en\u011b vyj\u00e1d\u0159enou inspiraci Stakeov\u00fdm responzivn\u00edm p\u0159\u00edstupem se od n\u011bj participativn\u00ed evaluace nejm\u00e9n\u011b v jednom ohledu z\u00e1sadn\u011b odli\u0161uj\u00ed. Zat\u00edmco R. Stake volal pro zohledn\u011bn\u00ed situace dot\u010den\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran a usiloval o interakci s nimi, participativn\u00ed evaluace tento r\u00e1mec zapojen\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdch stran p\u0159ekra\u010duj\u00ed a p\u0159edpokl\u00e1daj\u00ed plnohodnotn\u00e9 a aktivn\u00ed zapojen\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdch stran v cel\u00e9m evalua\u010dn\u00edm procesu. Oproti responzivn\u00edmu p\u0159\u00edstupu, kter\u00fd nepo\u017eaduje v\u00edce, ne\u017e aby evalu\u00e1to\u0159i zam\u011b\u0159ili svou pozornost na zainteresovan\u00e9 strany, jich\u017e se dan\u00fd evalua\u010dn\u00ed projekt dot\u00fdk\u00e1 (co\u017e v mnoha p\u0159\u00edpadech znamen\u00e1 nap\u0159. dotazov\u00e1n\u00ed vzorku v\u0161ech dot\u010den\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran), participativn\u00ed evaluace \u010din\u00ed ze zainteresovan\u00fdch stran \u201ekolegy-evalu\u00e1tory\u201c,
                    kte\u0159\u00ed ovliv\u0148uj\u00ed design prov\u00e1d\u011bn\u00e9 evaluace, a jsou tak vta\u017eeni do procesu rozhodov\u00e1n\u00ed o postupu evalua\u010dn\u00ed \u010dinnosti, sb\u011bru dat i anal\u00fdzy a vyhodnocen\u00ed v\u00fdsledk\u016f. Oproti responzivn\u00edmu p\u0159\u00edstupu, vych\u00e1zej\u00ed tedy participativn\u00ed evaluace z p\u0159edstavy plnohodnotn\u00e9ho, p\u0159\u00edm\u00e9ho a aktivn\u00edho zapojen\u00ed zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, co\u017e \u010din\u00ed z evalua\u010dn\u00edho procesu hust\u00e9 p\u0159edivo interaktivn\u00edch \u010dinnost\u00ed, kter\u00e9 nejsou jednozna\u010dn\u011b adresov\u00e1ny ani evalu\u00e1tor\u016fm (viz v ostatn\u00edch p\u0159\u00edstupech nap\u0159. formulace ot\u00e1zek \u010di p\u0159\u00edprava zpr\u00e1vy), ani zadavatel\u016fm (zejm. stanoven\u00ed c\u00edl\u016f, definice po\u017eadavk\u016f, konfirmace krit\u00e9ri\u00ed pro posuzov\u00e1n\u00ed). Evalu\u00e1tor p\u0159i participativn\u00edch evaluac\u00edch vystupuje jako partner jednotliv\u00fdch zainteresovan\u00fdch stran, jako konzultant \u010di kou\u010d, kter\u00fd stimuluje, rozv\u00edj\u00ed a vyb\u00edz\u00ed jednotliv\u00e9 zainteresovan\u00e9 strany k aktivit\u011b v r\u00e1mci jednotliv\u00fdch etap evalua\u010dn\u00ed \u010dinnosti.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    Zdroje<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [1]        ALKIN, M. C. (2004) Evaluation Roots<\/em>. London, SAGE Publication.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [2]        CHEN, H-T. (1990) Theory-Driven Evaluations<\/em>. London, SAGE Publishing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [3]        COUSINS, J. B., EARL, L. M. (1995) Participatory Evaluation in Education: Studies in Evaluation use and Organizational Learning<\/em>. London: Falmer Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [4]        COUSINS, J. B., WHITMORE, E. (2007) Framing Participatory Evaluation. In New Directions for Evaluation<\/em> No 114, San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [5]        CRONBACH, L. (1980) Toward Reform of Program Evaluation<\/em>. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [6]        EISNER, E. (1979) The Educational Imagination<\/em>. New York: MacMillan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [7]        FETTERMAN, D. (1994) Empowerment Evaluation. Evaluation Practice<\/em>, 15, 1\u201315.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [8]        FETTERMAN, D. M. (1996) Empowerment Evaluation \u2013 An Introduction to Theory and Practice. In FETTERMAN, D. M., KAFTARIAN, S. J., WANDERSMAN, A. (eds.) 1996. Empowerment Evaluation \u2013 Knowledge and Tools for Self-Assessment and Accountability<\/em>. pp. 3\u201346, London, Sage Publications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [9]        FETTERMAN, D. (2001) Foundations of Empowerment Evaluation<\/em>. California, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [10]      FITZPATRICK, J. L., SANDERS, J. R., WORTHEN, B. R. (2004) Program Evaluation. Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines<\/em>. London: Sage Publications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [11]      GREENE, J. C., ABMA, T. A. (editors), (2001) Responsive Evaluation<\/em>. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [12]      GUBA E. G., LINCOLN, Y. S. (1989) Fourth Generation Evaluation<\/em>. London, SAGE Publishing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [13]      GUIJT, I. (2014) Participatory Approaches, Methodological Briefs: Impact Evaluation 5, UNICEF Office of Research, Florence. Retrieved from: http:\/\/devinfolive.info\/impact_evaluation\/img\/downloads\/Participatory_Approaches_ENG.pdf<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [14]      Harrison, M. I. (2005) Diagnosing Organizations (Methods, Models and Processes)<\/em>. London, SAGE Publishing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [15]      HOUSE, E. R. (ed.), (1983) Philosophy of evaluation. In: New Directions for Program Evaluation<\/em>, No. 19. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [16]      HOPKINS, D. (1989) Evaluation for School Development.<\/em> Buckingham: Open University Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [17]      MERTENS, D. M., WILSON, A. T. (2012) Program Evaluation Theory and Practice. A Comprehensive Guide<\/em>. New York, The Guilford Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [18]      OWEN, J. M. (2006) Program Evaluation. Forms and Approaches<\/em>. New York, The Guilford Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [19]      PATTON, M. Q. (1987) How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation<\/em>. London, SAGE Publishing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [20]      PATTON, M. Q. (2008) Utilization-Focused Evaluation<\/em>. London, SAGE Publishing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [21]      RODR\u00cdGEZ-CAMPOS, L. (2005) Collaborative Evaluations<\/em>. Florida, Llumina Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [22]      SCRIVEN, M. (1967) The Methodology of Evaluation. In Stake R. E. (ed.) Curriculum evaluation. American Educational Research Association Monograph Series on Evaluation No 1. Chicago, Rand McNally.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [23]      SCRIVEN, M. (1972) Objectivity and Subjectivity in Educational Research. In: THOMAS, L. (ed.), Philosophical Redirection of Educational Research<\/em> (71st<\/sup> Yearbook of the NESSE; pp. 94\u2013142). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [24]      SCHNOES, C. J., MURPHY-BERMAN, V., CHAMBERS, J. M. (2000) Empowerment Evaluation Applied: Experiences, Analysis and Recommendations from a Case Study. American Journal of Evaluation<\/em>, 21(1), 53-64.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [25]      STAKE, R. E. (1980) Program Evaluation, Particularly Responsive Evaluation. In Dockrell W. B., Hamilton D. (eds.) Rethinking Educational Research<\/em>. London, Hodder and Stoughton.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [26]      STAKE, R. E. (2004) Standards-Based & Responsive Evaluation.<\/em> London: SAGE Publishing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [27]      STUFFLEBEAM, D. L., SHINKFIELD, A. J. (2007) Evaluation, Theory, Models & Applications<\/em>. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [28]      STUFFLEBEAM, D. L., MADAUS, G. F., KELLAGHAN, T. (2000) Evaluation Models. Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Evaluation<\/em>. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [29]      SUCHMAN, E. A. (1967) Evaluative Research: Principles and Practice in Public Service and Social Action Programs<\/em>. New York, Russell Sage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [30]      VANDERPLAAT, M. (1995) Beyond Technique: Issues in Evaluating for Empowerment. Evaluation<\/em>, 1, 81\u201396.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [31]      WADSWORTH, Y. (1993) \u201cWhat is Participatory Action Research?\u201d Melbourne, Action Research Issues Association.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [32]         WANDERSMAN, A. et al. (2005) The Principles of Empowerment Evaluation. In: FETTERMAN, D. M., WANDERSMAN, A. (Eds.), Empowerment Evaluation Principles in Practice<\/em> (pp. 27\u201341). New York: Guilford Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    \n\n\n\n

                    [1]<\/a> O konstruktivistick\u00e9m p\u0159\u00edstupu viz Remr, J. (2013). \u201eSrovn\u00e1n\u00ed vybran\u00fdch p\u0159\u00edstup\u016f k realizaci evaluac\u00ed\u201c. Evalua\u010dn\u00ed teorie a praxe 1(1): 27\u201349<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [2]<\/a> E. Guba, coby reprezentant konstruktivistick\u00e9ho sm\u011bru v oblasti evaluac\u00ed, na R. Stakea p\u0159\u00edmo odkazuje a \u010din\u00ed z responzivn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu jeden z pil\u00ed\u0159\u016f konstruktivistick\u00e9ho p\u0159\u00edstupu.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [3]<\/a> Kvantitativn\u00ed objektivita nast\u00e1v\u00e1 konsenzem zainteresovan\u00fdch stran; jde v\u0161ak o pouhou pseudo-objektivitu, nebo\u0165 ani stoprocentn\u00ed konsenzus nezaru\u010duje, \u017ee se z\u00fa\u010dastn\u011bn\u00e9 zainteresovan\u00e9 strany ve sv\u00e9m hodnocen\u00ed nem\u00fdl\u00ed, a \u017ee jejich \u00fasudek odpov\u00edd\u00e1 realit\u011b (Scriven 1972; Eisner 1979)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [4]<\/a> Ve Stakeov\u011b pojet\u00ed je my\u0161lenka formativn\u00ed funkce evaluac\u00ed velmi z\u0159eteln\u00e1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [5]<\/a> Scriven (1967) p\u00ed\u0161e: \u201eEvaluators must judge.\u201c<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [6]<\/a> Nap\u0159. v\u00fdchoz\u00ed definici utiliza\u010dn\u00edho p\u0159\u00edstupu formuluje jako dopln\u011bk k obecn\u00fdm definic\u00edm evaluace.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

                    [7]<\/a> V \u010desk\u00e9m p\u0159ekladu pou\u017e\u00edv\u00e1m uveden\u00fd pojem nam\u00edsto pojmu \u201eposiluj\u00edc\u00ed evaluace\u201c,
                    kter\u00fd se v n\u011bkter\u00fdch p\u0159ekladech rovn\u011b\u017e objevuje. Zd\u00e1 se toti\u017e, \u017ee pojem \u201esv\u00e9pomocn\u00fdp\u0159\u00edstup k evaluaci\u201c \u010di \u201esv\u00e9pomocn\u00e1 evaluace\u201c vystihuje hlavn\u00ed rys tohoto p\u0159\u00edstupu.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                    Main goal of the paper is to present the review of main characteristics that differentiate the participatory approaches from other ways of conducting evaluations. Based on comparative analysis, the five main characteristics are identified, explained and critically assessed. Central part of the paper is devoted to two different traditions within the participatory approaches. Frist one is practical participatory evaluation represented by utilization-focused approach by M. Patton. The second tradition is transformative participatory evaluation where the attention is put on empowerment evaluation approach by D. Fetterman. Moreover, the paper describes the historical framework within that the participatory approaches developed and it also identifies its inspirations. In this respect, the paper also presents the responsive approach that significantly influenced participatory evaluations.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1451","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1451","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1451"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1451\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1454,"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1451\/revisions\/1454"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1451"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1451"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/evaltep.xcreative.cz\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1451"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}