ADESTE Evaluation Framework


Type of research: Report (Project Report)
Author: Gerald, Lidstone N.
Date of publication: 2017

Abstract:
This document illustrates the results of the evaluation that was carried out throughout the project ADESTE. The evaluation aimed at evaluating the ADESTE innovative training collecting feedbacks from trainers and trainees. The ADESTE piloting was a 10-month training involving 65 cultural professionals (trainees) and 13 trainers from 5 European countries from April 2015 to March 2016. The Evaluation process was not part of a separate work package, but it seemed useful to reflect on the overall project processes to see “What Works’. There are essentially four areas to this. Firstly how the organisational processes work in constructing and running the project, do each of the WP inform the next, from a research overview, definitions and competences, selection of participants to final implementation. Secondly in relation to specific areas of knowledge transfer, did the training [both parts] provide participants with the tools to both undertake ‘audience development’ and pass this knowledge and processes on to others. In the short term participants may have thoughts on this but only when those processes are applied can there be real reflection on the activity. This is therefore a summary of the key points of a very extensive gathering of information. It is essentially at three levels: ! What Works 1 The delivery of the initial workshop conducted by the Audience Agency to train trainers ! What Works 2 On those trainers training trainees1 ! What Works 3 Trainees delivering skills and knowledge in their organisations The third area of understanding of ‘What Works’ will come from the initial trainers [AA] as part of their delivery, in doing the work they obviously understand elements of how the learning works, but will also need the response of trainees. The final area of evaluation will be the response of those trained as they deliver their skills, knowledge and processes to trial organisations. As already understood from the initial research there are fundamental differences in partner countries to the structure of arts organisations, an understanding of audience development as a process, resources [such as the availability of data] and crucially the differing motivation of organisations in wanting to increase audience numbers for example, financial, social, government agency influence. This is also conditioned by a very different level of existing skills and support organisations, in audience development across partner countries. Therefore one of the key determinants of ‘What Works’ will be the flexibility and effectiveness of learnt AD processes in different cultural contexts.

Link: https://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/20491/1/ADESTE_Eval_Framework.pdf