Level 3: Cycles of Learning

A mature partnership is one which has formed and decided on its values and strategic plan for action. It has to ensure that it is in a position to improve continuously. It has to learn about itself and take every opportunity for learning. It has to improve as a partnership as well as improving in its activities. Its ability to do so depends on the systems of feedback and review which it has developed to evaluate its effectiveness. Such systems must ideally not only look at actions taken. They must also look at potential, i.e. what is not done but could have been done.

The partnership initiatives in Learning Cities in Britain are quite new. Not many have reached a stage where there is a complex mass of activity to reflect upon. Most are confined to the education sector. However, even within these constraints there are some places where evaluative structures are being put into place, and more where individual projects are being evaluated.

Ideas for Action

Some of the practices used for consultation may become cyclical. Annual conferences, rather than a launch conference can fulfil a number of uses which might include reviewing progress, resetting agendas, considering new necessities and offering feedback opportunities to the wider constituency of the initiative.

The partners themselves will wish to evaluate within their own institutions, and with their own client groups, the value of the initiative and the added value it is seen to give to the institution's own performance.

Action plans should be monitored for their success and their effectiveness. Is the partnership working and using its resources effectively? Such evaluation should be built in to the planning cycle to make the next planning round more effective.

Means to involve users and target groups - surveys, forums, citizens' juries - serve a double purpose of evaluation and initiating discussion.

Where specific targets have been identified, both progress against them and their continuing relevance can be checked.

Partners should evaluate with their wider constituency whether the partnership itself is still adequate and appropriate for the work in hand, and whether the leadership still works. There is sometimes a need for change over time.

Pitfalls and Perils

Not building in a process that reviews the continuing form and usefulness of the partnership itself. Not having some reference to the outside may lead to the partnership becoming self- referential, and not growing and changing as the initiative develops.

Not completing the loop is a common problem with evaluation. Systems must lead to change and development and be planned to coincide with new planning cycles for maximum effectiveness.

Essential

Evaluation, particularly of such large and complex initiatives is not easy to deal with. It is vital that all partners are comfortable with admitting that initiatives have not worked. Celebrating success is easier, but the vital learning which comes from approaches which fail will be lost. The learning city must allow for new ways of working. It must evaluate the efficacy of its methods thoroughly and not replicate the practice which does not pay off.

Assessing Progress in Level Three

Has the initiative got identified evaluation strategies for each of its joint projects?

Has the initiative an action plan with targets?

In assessing the outcome of the action plan, is attention given to the resources needed to achieve outputs, as well as outputs achieved?

Are there systems to check the perceived effectiveness of the partnership - within constituent organisations - with outside organisations?

Has the partnership changed its membership or structure. Has it reviewed the necessity of doing so since the initiative began?

When improvements need to be made, how are they fed into the action planning cycle? Is evaluation continuing so that this can happen in time for the next planning round?

Is it clear who is responsible for evaluation? Is it shared between the partners so they can learn from and about each other?

Facts and Figures

In order to have an appropriate and SMART* action plan, data will need to have been collected or the source identified. [* Specific; Measurable; Attainable; Realistic; Time-related].

Facts on participation and achievement in publicly-funded education in and post-school should be available as a baseline.