This section offers guidance on evaluating the results of your project in a way that is consistent with a social learning approach. Like the monitoring described in the previous section, "Gathering Evidence", the evaluation carried out as part of a social learning-appropriate M&E system should incorporate elements of, and reflect the ethos of, social learning.
Reflecting on your project or program may bring to light some of the ways in which your institution supported or hindered the social learning approach. This section also offers guidance on how to use the results of your work to identify changes that could be made within your institution to better enable it to support social learning efforts.
Data collected in the areas described in the section "Gathering Evidence" can be analyzed to determine the success of the social learning methodology/ies chosen for your project or program. Examining the qualitative evidence you collect against the theory of change (ToC) will help you to assess the accuracy of your assumptions about key actors, pathways of change, and the context of your project/program. Improvements to the TOC following analysis as part of ongoing learning and adaptive management can help to improve impact.
In the context of social learning approaches, collectively assessing the current opportunities, barriers, achievements and failures best allows a project/program to make appropriate, beneficial and sustainable adjustments to ways of working in subsequent iterations. These adjustments should ultimately lead to better project/program outcomes. Keep in mind that participatory evaluation does not necessarily equate to genuine social learning--it is important to make the distinction between participation and social learning.
For a discussion on key areas to collect evidence in, a table of M&E tools and approaches, and other resources relating to collecting evidence for social learning, please see the previous section Gathering evidence.
2. Guidance on challenging institutions
The success of social learning initiatives can depend in part on the institutions supporting them. Are the institutions providing the mindset, structure and incentives needed to encourage social learning? In reflecting on the results of your project or program it is important to also consider the ways in which your institution helps or hinders social learning efforts, and how you might challenge or influence it to provide a better atmosphere for social learning.
A stocktaking exercise of social learning-related efforts within the CGIAR pointed to a number of institutional factors key to the success of these efforts in a research organization. These factors may be worth considering as you evaluate how your institution could improve its ability to support social learning:
Institutional objectives and orientation: explicit development objectives, social learning and participation goals
Enabling environment and structure: leadership attitudes, adequate channels for internal and external coordination
Recognition and incentives: support for impact, cooperation, and a diversity of knowledge products
Partnership equality: partners engaged as equals
Local context considered: through input of local people and institutions
Engagement at all scales: partnerships and platforms or networks used to engage individuals, communities and beyond
Open mindedness: a broad definition of SL and openness to the diversity of SL approaches and potential results
For more details the stocktaking exercise and key institutional factors listed above, see CCAFS Working Paper 37: "A new relevance and better prospects for wider uptake of social learning within CGIAR".
A workshop on communication and social learning in the climate change context also identified five different areas in which research is needed to increase social learning's utility and uptake. The first two are related to institutional change and may also be worth reflecting on:
Documentation: documenting social learning efforts supported by the institution
Endogenous social learning: local systems, governance and culture are taken into consideration in SL projects
Social differentiation: the makeup of different stakeholder groups and the power relations between them is taken into consideration in SL projects
Timescales: an effort is made to consider and reconcile the short-term and long-term perceptions of different stakeholders in SL projects
For detailed guidance in each area, you can refer to the CCAFS synthesis paper, “5 key institutional change areas for adopting a social learning methodology with CCAFS and the CGIAR system”, which builds on the outcomes of the workshop. You can also access proceedings around each change area during the CCAFS-ILRI Workshop on Communications and Social Learning in Climate Change using the five bulleted links above.
Further information about social differentiation in the context of social learning and climate change can also be found in CCAFS Working Paper 43, "Catalysing learning for development and climate change: an exploration of social learning and social differentiation in CGIAR".
CCSL Framework and Toolkit
Identifying insights and actions
This section offers guidance on evaluating the results of your project in a way that is consistent with a social learning approach. Like the monitoring described in the previous section, "Gathering Evidence", the evaluation carried out as part of a social learning-appropriate M&E system should incorporate elements of, and reflect the ethos of, social learning.
Reflecting on your project or program may bring to light some of the ways in which your institution supported or hindered the social learning approach. This section also offers guidance on how to use the results of your work to identify changes that could be made within your institution to better enable it to support social learning efforts.
Table of Contents
1. Guidance on data analysis
Data collected in the areas described in the section "Gathering Evidence" can be analyzed to determine the success of the social learning methodology/ies chosen for your project or program. Examining the qualitative evidence you collect against the theory of change (ToC) will help you to assess the accuracy of your assumptions about key actors, pathways of change, and the context of your project/program. Improvements to the TOC following analysis as part of ongoing learning and adaptive management can help to improve impact.
In the context of social learning approaches, collectively assessing the current opportunities, barriers, achievements and failures best allows a project/program to make appropriate, beneficial and sustainable adjustments to ways of working in subsequent iterations. These adjustments should ultimately lead to better project/program outcomes. Keep in mind that participatory evaluation does not necessarily equate to genuine social learning--it is important to make the distinction between participation and social learning.
For a discussion on key areas to collect evidence in, a table of M&E tools and approaches, and other resources relating to collecting evidence for social learning, please see the previous section Gathering evidence.
2. Guidance on challenging institutions
The success of social learning initiatives can depend in part on the institutions supporting them. Are the institutions providing the mindset, structure and incentives needed to encourage social learning? In reflecting on the results of your project or program it is important to also consider the ways in which your institution helps or hinders social learning efforts, and how you might challenge or influence it to provide a better atmosphere for social learning.
A stocktaking exercise of social learning-related efforts within the CGIAR pointed to a number of institutional factors key to the success of these efforts in a research organization. These factors may be worth considering as you evaluate how your institution could improve its ability to support social learning:
For more details the stocktaking exercise and key institutional factors listed above, see CCAFS Working Paper 37: "A new relevance and better prospects for wider uptake of social learning within CGIAR".
A workshop on communication and social learning in the climate change context also identified five different areas in which research is needed to increase social learning's utility and uptake. The first two are related to institutional change and may also be worth reflecting on:
For detailed guidance in each area, you can refer to the CCAFS synthesis paper, “5 key institutional change areas for adopting a social learning methodology with CCAFS and the CGIAR system”, which builds on the outcomes of the workshop. You can also access proceedings around each change area during the CCAFS-ILRI Workshop on Communications and Social Learning in Climate Change using the five bulleted links above.
Further information about social differentiation in the context of social learning and climate change can also be found in CCAFS Working Paper 43, "Catalysing learning for development and climate change: an exploration of social learning and social differentiation in CGIAR".
Other resources:
Previous section: Gathering evidence Back to Framework & Toolkit home Next section: Sharing your work