Print

Print


Hi Emma,

 

You might remember me from Gills workshops at CDU.  I am slowly progressing my PhD using RE with regarding the implementation of research innovations is Indigenous primary health care research working with Menzies but student at Uni of Adelaide.   So I am in the zone so perhaps I should be waving my hand on this one!

I will be back in Darwin from next week so I when is a good time to come and talk?

 

Cheers

Louise

From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Emma Williams
Sent: Tuesday, 18 March 2014 10:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Realist ontology and interdisciplinary working

 

Hello, I am a beginner in realist approaches, but the Northern Institute (NI), a think tank at Charles Darwin University where I work, has made a commitment to realist evaluation, including inviting Gill Westhorp to join NI as an Adjunct Associate Professor, providing training in realist evaluation and hosting a realist evaluation ‘book club’ (usually journal articles, but still…).

In recognition of the Australasian Evaluation Society holding its annual conference at Charles Darwin University this year, the next issue of the NI Learning Communities journal has an ‘Evaluation’ theme, and we are hoping to have a number of papers in it on realist topics. We are particularly interested in any evaluations that have involved Aboriginal/Indigenous peoples from any area of the world, but cross-cultural evaluations involving other cultures would also be of interest.

If you are interested in publishing a (peer-reviewed) paper in the journal describing a realist-informed evaluation involving Aboriginal/Indigenous peoples or cross-cultural dynamics, and the learnings that resulted from the evaluative interactions, could you please contact me in the next couple of days? I look forward to hearing from you.

Emma Williams
Principal Scientist
Evaluation in Northern Contexts 
Northern Institute, Charles Darwin University 

(61) 413 283 268 

[log in to unmask]

 

On 11 Mar 2014, at 4:32 pm, Gill Westhorp <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

 

Hi Simon/Mark

 

I really like those questions – engaging with what we think reality is in the guise of engaging with the task at hand...

 

Another set might be:

 

If this program ‘works’, will it work for everyone?  Why / why not?  What does that mean for how programs cause outcomes?

 

I’ve found that commissioners, policy and program staff instantly answer ‘of course not’ to the first question.  The ‘why/why not’ bit gets them talking – it leads into ‘for whom’ (when they raise individual differences) and ‘context’ (when someone objects to it all being ‘blamed’ on individuals) and starts to surface assumptions about the program itself.  The third one provides the opportunity to introduce ‘a way of thinking about causation’… and all things realist that naturally follow from that.

 

Cheers

Gill    

 

 

 

From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Simon Carroll
Sent: Tuesday, 11 March 2014 6:32 AM
To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Realist ontology and interdisciplinary working

 

Hi Mark,

Here a few:

How would you describe the purpose of an evaluation/synthesis of evidence for understanding this set of phenomena? Is it to arrive at a 'best practice', an 'optimal policy solution', a 'deeper understanding', 'illumination', or some other purpose?

How do you think complexity and context relate to a policy/program's ability to affect positive changes in the outcomes you are concerned with?

How do you conceptualize 'outcomes' for this project? Are there process-related or implementation outcomes? What are the time-scales of the different outcomes (immediate, inter-mediate, long-term)? Are these outcomes related to each other in some sort of logic model or theorized causal chain?

Are you concerned to establish causal 'attribution' to the program or policy intervention for specified outcomes, or are you more concerned with analyzing how the program or policy 'contributes' to the outcomes?

Hope this helps

Cheers, Simon

 

On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Mark Pearson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

My experience is that as realist approaches make their way into the mainstream they are increasingly being called upon as components of wider research projects. This means working with a range of people who have more or less (probably less) of an understanding of realism and putting it into practice. It also often means that assumptions about the world are merrily skirted over in the hubbub of getting a project up-and-running, only to awkwardly pop up later on.

So - What questions would you ask at the start of a project to throw light on people’s assumptions about how the world ‘works’ and what it means for how we research it? (this is my effort at asking a question about ontology, which I’m taking here to mean ‘how the world must be in order for knowledge to exist’)

I’m not searching for a comprehensive list of questions, but perhaps a distillation of 2-3 key questions to start the conversation?

Mark

Mark Pearson PhD
Senior Research Fellow
Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG)
University of Exeter Medical School
E: [log in to unmask]
T: 0044 (0) 1392 726079
http://medicine.exeter.ac.uk/about/profiles/index.php?web_id=Mark_Pearson