IAEVG Conference 2009

The Client’s Contribution to the Quality Assurance Process in

Adult Guidance

Presenter: Lucy HearneWaterford Institute of Technology, Ireland

Contextual Background: Policy and Practice in Irish Adult Guidance Policy:Department of Education & Science (DES) White Paper

(2000)

Adult guidance positioned in lifelong learning

Public policy goals – learning, labour market and social equity

OECD Irish Review of Career Guidance Policies (2002) National Guidance Forum (NGF) Guidance for Life: An

Integrated Framework for Lifelong Guidance in Ireland (2007)

Discourse – progression primarily linear and upward

Scientific classification of outcomes through positivist paradigm

Contextual Background: Policy and Practice in Irish Adult Guidance Practice:Adult Educational Guidance Initiative (AEGI) est. 2000

Currently - 39 AEGI Projects nationwide

Management – National Centre for Guidance in Education (NCGE)

Quarterly monitoring of education and employment outcomes (quantitative) through client data management system

Formative (2005) & Summative Evaluation (2008) in AEGI

Research Site – Regional Educational Guidance Service for Adults (REGSA)

Focus - Empirical vs. presumptive measurement of client outcomes for development in longitudinal tracking systems

Approach – Interpretive case vignettes of client progression over 7-9 year timeframe

Overview of PhD Research Topic

Research Aim:

To consider the development of a best practice framework for the longitudinal tracking of client progression in adult educational guidance in Ireland

Research Objectives:

Examination of definitions of long-term ‘progression’ from viewpoint of 3 key stakeholders (clients, guidance practitioners and policy-makers)

Critical analysis of the discourse on measuring outcomes in the field of guidance

Exploration of the contribution of the client to the development of a quality longitudinal tracking system

Overview of PhD Research Topic

Methodology:Overarching critical constructivist paradigm in the form of a ‘bottom-up’ single-case study

Interpretive paradigm attending to issue of ‘criticality’ in guidance

Research argument - methodological pluralism in outcome measurement

Data Collection Methods: Individual Client Interviews Practitioner Focus Group Interviews Documentary Analysis of Irish Policy Documents

Observations of Two Tracking Systems (Irish & Finnish PES models)

Analytical Strategy: 3- Dimensional Discourse Analysis Framework

Literature Conceptual Framework

Policy Development Dimension: Bottom-up (clients) vs Top-down (policy-makers) Approach

DES

NCGE

AEGI SERVICES

CLIENTS of REGSA

Framework for Client Involvement in Quality Assurance (Plant, H. 2005:3)

The Client’s Voice

Individual level – Giving

Information: client satisfaction

data

Service level –

Consultation

Forums:

priorities, gaps,

unmet needs

Strategic level – Participation &

Partnership:shaping & reshapingpolicies & strategies

Interpretation of Findings Framework: Critical Discourse Analysis

(Source: Fairclough) i. Text: language of clients, practitioners, and

policymakers

ii. Discursive Practices: dissemination channels in policy and practice

iii. Social Practice: Ideology and hegemony underpinning adult guidance

RESEARCH TOPIC

CLIENTSPRACTITIONERS

OUTCOME RESEARCH: THE COMPETING DISCOURSES ON PROGRESSION IN ADULT GUIDANCE

STRUCTURE

INTERNATIONAL

EUROPEAN

NATIONAL

POLICY

AGENCY

Findings: Convergence & Divergence in Discourse on Progression Outcomes Progression as process & outcome

Non-linear, cyclical, zig-zag, retrospective

Personal construct – subjective vs. objective

Hard and soft outcomes for measurement

Soft (personal) outcomes – psychological, behavioural, social

Intrinsic variables – self-concept, decision making, motivation, attributes, personal barriers, expectations, goals

Extrinsic variables – financial constraints, structural barriers, support systems, mobility issues, economic contexts

Scientific classification in tracking systems decentres subjectivity of clients

Policy discourse – economic model underpinning outcome measurement

Policy rationale – accountability, cost-benefit analysis

Clients’ Contribution to Design of Tracking Systems Rationale for Tracking:

reciprocal process

legitimise clients experiences

stimulus mechanism

insights into non-progression

case studies in tracking - models for supporting clients Outcomes for Measurement:

hard & soft

ideal career vs. reality

achievements

goals

personal satisfaction

future decisions Language:

economic model vs. personal model

customer/consumer = financial transaction

client = person-centred

Recommendations for Policy & Practice: Constructivist Evaluation Framework

Democratic inclusion of all relevant stakeholders in evaluation process

Values in evaluation provide meaning

Accountability mutual amongst all stakeholders instead of praise/blame culture

Evaluators are subjective partners with stakeholders in the literal creation of evaluation of data

Evaluation data needs to be empirical rather than presumptive – stakeholders can contribute

Consensus on constructions of ‘outcomes’ amongst all stakeholders

(adapted from Guba & Lincoln, 1989)

Contact:

lhearne@wit.ie

Websites:

www.regsa.org

www.ncge.ie

www.wit.ie/education

“We all want progress, but if you’re on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case the person who turns back soonest is the most progressive”.

C.S. Lewis