Follow Us:
Learning : Essential Readings
-
Irene Guijt (2010) Accountability and learning: Exploding the myth of incompatibility between accountability and learning” in Ubels, J., N. Acquaye-Baddoo and A. Fowler (eds) Capacity Development in Practice, Earthscan, pp. 277-292
When accountability is understood as reporting on pre-defined deliverables, it is often considered to be irreconcilable with learning. This conventional wisdom inhibits an appreciation of their connection. In this chapter, Guijt provides practitioners with principles and basic good ideas that open up prospects for complementarity between these two frameworks.
-
Bruce Britton (2010) Self Reflection: monitoring and evaluation for personal learning, in Ubels, J., N. Acquaye-Baddoo and A. Fowler (eds) Capacity Development in Practice, Earthscan, pp. 264-276
Like any other development intervention, capacity development efforts need to undergo regular monitoring and evaluation. For many practitioners, however, this process is often viewed as an unpleasant performance assessment driven by the demands of management, donors and investors. This paper argues that such negative connotations can undermine the learning potential of monitoring and evaluation processes. Taking the perspective of the capacity development practitioner as an individual, as a team member and as a member of a capacity development organization, the author presents some creative approaches for transforming monitoring and evaluation into a tool for self development.
-
Simon Hearn & Nancy White (2009) Communities of practice: Linking knowledge policy and practice, ODI, November 2009
This paper describes the basic characteristics of CoPs and provides a rationale for their growing importance in international development. It also suggests some ways in which CoPs can be supported by development agencies, research institutes and donors to strengthen the linkages between knowledge, policy and practice.
-
Ben Ramalingam (2009) Organizational learning for aid, and learning aid organizations, Capacity.org # 33
In their efforts to promote organizational learning, many aid agencies have embraced two influential approaches – the learning loops model of Chris Argyris and Donald Schön, and the learning organization model of Peter Senge. In this article, Ben Ramalingam draws on the findings of research undertaken by the Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance (ALNAP) and the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), which illustrate some of the problems aid organizations face in applying these approaches. Based on these findings, he suggest two reasons why learning in aid agencies has proved so problematic, and what we might be able to do about it.
-
Peter Senge (1990) The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Currency Doubleday
Inspired by this book countless organizations have experimented with ways to improve their performance through learning. Although Senge drew mainly on experiences and insights gained in the private sector, his work inspired many working in the not-for-profit sector. Senge highlights five “ disciplines” that organizations should adopt in order to learn and boost performance: • Allowing and stimulating people to grow; • Becoming aware of and managing one's mental models on “ how the world works” ; • Building a shared vision; • learning collectively through dialogue; and • mastering systems thinking, or the ability to see connections between the different parts of the 'whole'. NB: the book needs to be purchased, but the link above points to a helpful introductory article published by infed (encyclopaedia of informal eduction), which provides a good introduction to Senge's thinking, with references for further reading.
