Oral History in Evaluation: A New Partnership to Expand and Enhance Both Fields

Figures & data

Table 1. Participant Demographic Statistics

Gender	Percentage, n
Female	76%, n=28
Male	24%, n=9
Race/Ethnicity	Percentage, n
Asian/Asian American	19%, n=7
Black/African American	5%, n=2
Hispanic/Latinx	54%, n=20
Pacific Islander	3%, n=1
White/Caucasian	11%, n=4
Other (specified as “Filipinx American”, “Egyptian”, or “Latino/Middle Eastern”	8%, n=3

Table 2. Appropriate Evaluation Types and Focuses for Oral History Use

Evaluation type	Focus^1
Culturally-responsive	“ … focusing on the influences of cultural context and factors on program processes and outcomes”
Diversity focus	“The evaluation gives voice to different perspectives on and illuminates various experiences with the program.”
Inclusive	“ … deliberate emphasis on including groups that have historically experienced oppression and discrimination on the basis of gender, culture, economic level, ethnicity or race, disability, sexual orientation, language, or religious preference.”
Personalizing	“Portrayal of people’s lives and work as contexts within which to understand a program.”
Social justice focus	“How effectively does the program address social justice concerns?”

¹Excerpts from more-comprehensive table in Patton, Utilization-Focused Evaluation, 300-305.