Developing an ethical rationale for collaborative approaches to evaluation
As a deeply relational, dialogic, engaged and political approach, the collaborative research context is fairly unique in the world of research, and as such opens up an entirely new set of ethical considerations that serve to differentiate it from other approaches, repositioning ethics as a fundament...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Evaluation (London, England. 1995) England. 1995), 2021-07, Vol.27 (3), p.364-381 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 381 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 364 |
container_title | Evaluation (London, England. 1995) |
container_volume | 27 |
creator | Chouinard, Jill Anne Cousins, J. Bradley |
description | As a deeply relational, dialogic, engaged and political approach, the collaborative research context is fairly unique in the world of research, and as such opens up an entirely new set of ethical considerations that serve to differentiate it from other approaches, repositioning ethics as a fundamental rationale for collaborative inquiry. In this paper, we revisit the justifications for collaborative approaches to evaluation—the three Ps—which have become integral to our discourse about the genre. We then elaborate on our rationale for exploring ethics as a legitimate interest in collaborative approaches to evaluation, with special consideration given to why ethics should become an essential consideration moving forward, specifically in terms of the moral obligations of collaborative approaches to evaluation practitioners. We then re-envision the inclusion of an “ethic of engagement” along seven interconnected dimensions, what we refer to as the Seven Rs of collaborative practice: reflexivity, relationality, responsibility, recognition, representation, reciprocity, and rights. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1177/1356389020978501 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2557393650</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1356389020978501</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2557393650</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-d2ec837f64d390a9c2cc6b61e7a39a2e0dd300c142f6311a210fe875081892753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kM1LAzEQxYMoWD_uHgOeV2eSJtkcpX5T8KLnZZqd7Qdrsybbgv-9WysIgqcZ5v3e4zFCXCBcITp3jdpYXXpQ4F1pAA_ECMcWC4dGHw77IBc7_Vic5LwCQKsMjsTzLW-5jd1yPZe0ltwvloFamahfxjW1LJuYZIhtS7O4O25ZUtelSGHBWfZR8pbazTd9Jo4aajOf_8xT8XZ_9zp5LKYvD0-Tm2kRNPi-qBWHUrvGjmvtgXxQIdiZRXakPSmGutYAAceqsRqRFELDpTNQYumVM_pUXO5zhxofG859tYqbNJTNlTLGaa-tgYGCPRVSzDlxU3Vp-U7ps0Kodh-r_n5ssBR7S6Y5_4b-y38B1FJqOA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2557393650</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Developing an ethical rationale for collaborative approaches to evaluation</title><source>Access via SAGE</source><source>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><creator>Chouinard, Jill Anne ; Cousins, J. Bradley</creator><creatorcontrib>Chouinard, Jill Anne ; Cousins, J. Bradley</creatorcontrib><description>As a deeply relational, dialogic, engaged and political approach, the collaborative research context is fairly unique in the world of research, and as such opens up an entirely new set of ethical considerations that serve to differentiate it from other approaches, repositioning ethics as a fundamental rationale for collaborative inquiry. In this paper, we revisit the justifications for collaborative approaches to evaluation—the three Ps—which have become integral to our discourse about the genre. We then elaborate on our rationale for exploring ethics as a legitimate interest in collaborative approaches to evaluation, with special consideration given to why ethics should become an essential consideration moving forward, specifically in terms of the moral obligations of collaborative approaches to evaluation practitioners. We then re-envision the inclusion of an “ethic of engagement” along seven interconnected dimensions, what we refer to as the Seven Rs of collaborative practice: reflexivity, relationality, responsibility, recognition, representation, reciprocity, and rights.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1356-3890</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1461-7153</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1356389020978501</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Collaboration ; Collaborative approach ; Ethics ; Obligations ; Reciprocity ; Reflexivity</subject><ispartof>Evaluation (London, England. 1995), 2021-07, Vol.27 (3), p.364-381</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-d2ec837f64d390a9c2cc6b61e7a39a2e0dd300c142f6311a210fe875081892753</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-d2ec837f64d390a9c2cc6b61e7a39a2e0dd300c142f6311a210fe875081892753</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-1771-2085</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1356389020978501$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1356389020978501$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,21819,27924,27925,30999,43621,43622</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chouinard, Jill Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cousins, J. Bradley</creatorcontrib><title>Developing an ethical rationale for collaborative approaches to evaluation</title><title>Evaluation (London, England. 1995)</title><description>As a deeply relational, dialogic, engaged and political approach, the collaborative research context is fairly unique in the world of research, and as such opens up an entirely new set of ethical considerations that serve to differentiate it from other approaches, repositioning ethics as a fundamental rationale for collaborative inquiry. In this paper, we revisit the justifications for collaborative approaches to evaluation—the three Ps—which have become integral to our discourse about the genre. We then elaborate on our rationale for exploring ethics as a legitimate interest in collaborative approaches to evaluation, with special consideration given to why ethics should become an essential consideration moving forward, specifically in terms of the moral obligations of collaborative approaches to evaluation practitioners. We then re-envision the inclusion of an “ethic of engagement” along seven interconnected dimensions, what we refer to as the Seven Rs of collaborative practice: reflexivity, relationality, responsibility, recognition, representation, reciprocity, and rights.</description><subject>Collaboration</subject><subject>Collaborative approach</subject><subject>Ethics</subject><subject>Obligations</subject><subject>Reciprocity</subject><subject>Reflexivity</subject><issn>1356-3890</issn><issn>1461-7153</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kM1LAzEQxYMoWD_uHgOeV2eSJtkcpX5T8KLnZZqd7Qdrsybbgv-9WysIgqcZ5v3e4zFCXCBcITp3jdpYXXpQ4F1pAA_ECMcWC4dGHw77IBc7_Vic5LwCQKsMjsTzLW-5jd1yPZe0ltwvloFamahfxjW1LJuYZIhtS7O4O25ZUtelSGHBWfZR8pbazTd9Jo4aajOf_8xT8XZ_9zp5LKYvD0-Tm2kRNPi-qBWHUrvGjmvtgXxQIdiZRXakPSmGutYAAceqsRqRFELDpTNQYumVM_pUXO5zhxofG859tYqbNJTNlTLGaa-tgYGCPRVSzDlxU3Vp-U7ps0Kodh-r_n5ssBR7S6Y5_4b-y38B1FJqOA</recordid><startdate>202107</startdate><enddate>202107</enddate><creator>Chouinard, Jill Anne</creator><creator>Cousins, J. Bradley</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1771-2085</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202107</creationdate><title>Developing an ethical rationale for collaborative approaches to evaluation</title><author>Chouinard, Jill Anne ; Cousins, J. Bradley</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-d2ec837f64d390a9c2cc6b61e7a39a2e0dd300c142f6311a210fe875081892753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Collaboration</topic><topic>Collaborative approach</topic><topic>Ethics</topic><topic>Obligations</topic><topic>Reciprocity</topic><topic>Reflexivity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chouinard, Jill Anne</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cousins, J. Bradley</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Evaluation (London, England. 1995)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chouinard, Jill Anne</au><au>Cousins, J. Bradley</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Developing an ethical rationale for collaborative approaches to evaluation</atitle><jtitle>Evaluation (London, England. 1995)</jtitle><date>2021-07</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>364</spage><epage>381</epage><pages>364-381</pages><issn>1356-3890</issn><eissn>1461-7153</eissn><abstract>As a deeply relational, dialogic, engaged and political approach, the collaborative research context is fairly unique in the world of research, and as such opens up an entirely new set of ethical considerations that serve to differentiate it from other approaches, repositioning ethics as a fundamental rationale for collaborative inquiry. In this paper, we revisit the justifications for collaborative approaches to evaluation—the three Ps—which have become integral to our discourse about the genre. We then elaborate on our rationale for exploring ethics as a legitimate interest in collaborative approaches to evaluation, with special consideration given to why ethics should become an essential consideration moving forward, specifically in terms of the moral obligations of collaborative approaches to evaluation practitioners. We then re-envision the inclusion of an “ethic of engagement” along seven interconnected dimensions, what we refer to as the Seven Rs of collaborative practice: reflexivity, relationality, responsibility, recognition, representation, reciprocity, and rights.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/1356389020978501</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1771-2085</orcidid></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1356-3890 |
ispartof | Evaluation (London, England. 1995), 2021-07, Vol.27 (3), p.364-381 |
issn | 1356-3890 1461-7153 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2557393650 |
source | Access via SAGE; Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA) |
subjects | Collaboration Collaborative approach Ethics Obligations Reciprocity Reflexivity |
title | Developing an ethical rationale for collaborative approaches to evaluation |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T00%3A13%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Developing%20an%20ethical%20rationale%20for%20collaborative%20approaches%20to%20evaluation&rft.jtitle=Evaluation%20(London,%20England.%201995)&rft.au=Chouinard,%20Jill%20Anne&rft.date=2021-07&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=364&rft.epage=381&rft.pages=364-381&rft.issn=1356-3890&rft.eissn=1461-7153&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1356389020978501&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2557393650%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2557393650&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1356389020978501&rfr_iscdi=true |