0

For ART’s sake. Action Research Transformations and ARJ

At Action Research Journal (ARJ), we have refreshed and deepened our commitment to emphasizing Action Research for Transformations (ART).

Deepening commitment to ART

Our commitment means that, henceforth, we’ll publish action research that is “transformative.” (Right that is not a simple matter; there is not a simple definition!).  The journal’s associate editors  – names listed at the end – have been in regular dialogue about what this means for well over a year. We’ve now clarified enough to have refreshed the journal’s seven “quality choicepoints.”

We want to share these choicepoints widely. See below. It turns out they’re useful not just for publishing but also when doing quality checks on various aspects of action researching, such as design and proposal development, etc. We share them also because we’re hoping that your work aligns with our new emphasis. If so, we happily invite your papers into peer review with us.

Why the refreshed emphasis?

Civilizational, structural transformation — transforming our social, political and economic systems – is now urgent. The Associate Editors at ARJ, i.e., those charged with developing papers for publication, have issued a call to action researchers to better tie efforts, practice and inquiry, to this challenge. Action Research for Transformations (ART) helps articulate the heart of the ART (Bradbury et al, 2019).

ART means that ARJ’s knowledge creation:

• Has, as its purpose, the support of our collective thriving on this planet.
• Includes and transcends individualistic rationalist empiricism because we acknowledge whole selves who are relational beings.
• Starts with stakeholders’ felt experiences and a joint willingness to tackle unilaterally held power that divides us.
• Embraces multiple ways of knowing-for-action.
• Integrates personal/reflexive (first person-), interpersonal/relational (second person-) and impersonal knowledge (third person-) knowledge; all three are needed to empower us to shape the social world of our aspirations.

We’re adopting a critical view of transformation itself asking for whom, from where, in what specific form, and with what permanency, as we empower agency, reflexivity and transformative action through the following choicepoints:

The Seven Quality Choicepoints in support of ART.

We do not look to an individual paper to be perfect in all choicepoints. We do, however, ask that action researchers reflect deeply on their work through the lens of the following choicepoints. Our ultimate aim is to advance work that builds on what has gone before it and that the action research we make available contributes – over time – to a more sustainable and equitable world.

1. Clarity and Significance of Purpose and Objectives.

This choicepoint refers to the extent to which the insights are significant, in content and process, in support of transformation. Important here are the UN’s 17 sustainable development goals: they serve as guardrails and mileposts for lasting change that mitigates global inequity, stimulates individual wellbeing, and promotes our collective thriving on this planet. By significant content we mean having meaning and relevance beyond their immediate context in support of the flourishing of persons, communities, and the wider ecology by generating both local and public knowledge. By process we mean involvement of stakeholders through strategies and methods that connect people and knowledges in ways that help them develop a strong and authentic sense of development and evolution in their practices, their understandings of their practices, and the transformation of the situations in which they practice.

2. Quality of Partnership.

This refers to the extent to, and means by which, participative values are evident in the relational component of research. Partnership exists on a continuum from consultation with stakeholders to stakeholders as full co-researchers. It embraces multiple ways of knowing-for-action and ensures room for questions of “whose knowledge counts?” We expect authors to explicitly reflect on the appropriateness of the depth and breadth of participation of different stakeholders in the design, implementation and outcomes of the action research.

3. Contribution to action research theory/practice.

This refers to the extent to which action researchers build on and create explicit links to previous work, and contribute to and extend a wider body of practice, knowledge and theory. Beyond this, scholarship should specifically address the question, “What is the author doing to ensure that the benefits discovered or created do not end with the project?” Scholarship must look at ways of moving beyond limited, local AR to creating social impact through networking, scaling, or other creative methods.

4. Participative methods and process.

This refers to the extent to which the action research approach/methodology and related methods are clearly articulated as providing for increasing participative interactivity and transformative potential and intent. In addition, the extent to which papers expand the palette of innovative (including digital) and creative methods and data considered appropriate for contribution to ART.

5. Actionability.

This refers to the extent to which the action research provides new ideas to guide action in response to the urgency of need and nature of transformations needed.

6. Developmental Reflexivity.

This refers to the extent to which action researchers take a personal, involved and self-critical stance on their role throughout the action research process, addressing the context of their research, their own identities and biases and how they might be received by participants, and what led to their involvement in this research. We invite action researchers to reflect on what they’ve learned and acknowledge the role participants, relationships, and experiences in contributing to their own knowledge and transformation.

7. Practitioner Relevance and Engagement.

This refers to the extent to which the action research engages the interested practitioner. This may range from illustrations that “show” and not just “tell,” e.g., including voices of participants in the research, to offering more practitioner friendly work. Reaching practitioners with new practices that lead to sustained transformation promotes scaling of our efforts as action researchers.

Acknowledgment:

This blog post is developed from the editorial statement in Action Research Volume 18. Issue 1. 2020 written by  the Editors of Action Research journal: Hilary Bradbury, Kent Glenzer, Marina Apgar, Dusty Embury, Victor Friedman, Sofia Kjellstrom, Miren Larrea, Cherese Childers-McKee, Hsiao-Chuan, Hsia, Alfredo Ortiz, Paul Gray, Hok Bun (Ben), Ku, Melissa Parenti, James Trager, Rob Warwick, Simon Divecha.