We encourage ambition! Action Research journal team quality “composting” at the age of 21

I am founder and editor in chief at the peer reviewed, premier Action Research journal (ARJ).  Over the past few months, along with the dozen of us who make up the editorial team,* we have been reflecting on the journal’s mission. It’s a mission that takes off from our understanding that our escalating global eco-social crisis deserves much more attention from scholarly-practitioners.  Importantly, we’ve articulated how we translate this mission into an understanding of social science that goes beyond description toward helping transformations happen.  We’ve also further refreshed our review criteria, what we call our quality choicepoints. I offer a short summary below and a related podcast interview with Felix “Skip” Bivens for Yes/And.

Because we offer an unusually collegial, developmental (and therefore time consuming!) review process we want to be careful about which papers we initially select for development toward publication. The quality choicepoints allow us to be transparent in choosing papers for developmental review and in letting go of others. The QCP have other uses too, not least for those that teach and support action research.

In our own small way we see our journal work as increasing the mycelial – often invisible – support for the uptake of action research around the world. And in truth –  because the review process gets more interactive after an initial round of anonymous review – it’s also quite fun. Our taking time to reflect together is also a way to compost what’s been working, and not, as the journal closes its 21st year.

Action Research journal has been developing and publishing actionable knowledge since 2003, remaining true to the original intention, namely, to support learning for transformations among people, organizations and the larger ecology.  Since 2019 we’ve been explicitly encouraging authors to link their change work in the external world to reflection on what is transforming for themselves and their stakeholders, and how this influences the surrounding structures – concrete and subtle.

The level of integration we aspire to in what we publish means hard work; it’s rare in social science. And we think it’s worth it. We want to elevate the action research that helps realize the social world of our aspirations. This means we’re inviting action research for transformations among people, organizations, communities and societies at multiple levels inner and outer: personal, organizational, methodological, conceptual/discursive. 

My own sense of the journal’s 21 year journey is that the formerly niche approach of action research – and its primary niche journal among social scientists  – has itself developed and transformed.  Based on the dozens of submissions that appear in my inbox each week, we are now attracting people a bit on the edge of their academic and or community worlds.  The edge is where the energy is! These are folks who are determined, despite many trials and tribulations (that’s for another blog), to realize positive change with others.  Action research is coming in from community practitioners and academically homed scholar practitioners, and so we see concepts and practices of action research hybridize and spread. 

Judging by the citation index and volume of papers, we appear to be doing well. This means striking a balance needed at any peer reviewed journal. We’re navigating a middle path between responding to problems within living communities and contributing to research-based theory.  All the while we keep in mind that particular stakeholders, and the larger society as a whole, is being helped to grapple with our greatest human concerns. 

A journal alone  – even one with developmental review processes – cannot overcome the great trials and tribulations of doing quality action research. These range from the lack of support in graduate schools and thus a slim pipeline, to the (almost but not quite) totalizing dominance of positivism, not to mention the sheer multi-dimensionality needed to do good action research. But that’s for another blog! For now,

at ARJ, we encourage actionable ambition! 

  • ARJ homepage: https://journals.sagepub.com/home/arj
  • ARJ editorial 2024 team comprises: Marina Apgar, Koen Bartels, Felix Bivens, Hilary Bradbury, Simon Divecha, Victor Friedman, Tetsu Hirasawa, HO, Denny Kwok-leung, Micol Pizzolati, Rob Warwick, Joanna Wheeler and Julia Wittmeyer.
  • Find our mission statement / aka call for more action research for transformations: https://actionresearchplus.com/action-research-transformations-free-download-spanish-version-also/
  • Check out podcasts with authors and associate editors where we share encouragement for action researchers and talk about the details of doing it well!
  • A summary of the Seven Quality Choicepoints:
    1.   Quality of clarity and significance of purpose.  

    This choicepoint refers to the extent to which the action research insights are significant, in content and process, in support of transformation and contribution – over time – to a more sustainable, democratic, and equitable world.

    1.   Quality of partnership.

    This choicepoint refers to the extent to, and means by which, stakeholders’ engagement and participative values are evident in the relational component of research.  

    1. Quality of contribution to action research theory/practice.

    This choicepoint refers to the extent to which authors build on and create explicit links to previously published work, so that they extend practice, knowledge, and theory.  

    1. Quality of participative methods and process.

    This choicepoint refers to the extent to which the action research approach is clearly articulated. 

    1. Quality of proliferation of action.

    This choicepoint refers to the extent to which the action research offers new ideas whose related practices can proliferate.

    1. Quality of developmental reflexivity.

    This choicepoint refers to the extent to which authors take a personal, involved, and self-critical stance on their role throughout the action research process.

    1. Quality of writing. The medium matters.

    This choicepoint refers to the extent to which the language used in the article engages the interested practitioner.

 

Hilary Brad
Latest posts by Hilary Brad (see all)

Share this post:

Share on LinkedIn Share on WhatsApp
←Previous post Next post→