Substantive Dimensions of the Deliberations

Forum rules

We encourage contributors to the Discussion Board to publicly identify by registering and logging in prior to posting. However, if you prefer, you may post anonymously (i.e. without having your post be attributed to you) by posting without logging in. Anonymous posts will display only after a delay to allow for administrator review. Contributors agree to the QTD Terms of Use.

To participate, you may either post a contribution to an existing discussion by selecting the thread for that topic (and then click on "Post Reply") or start a new thread by clicking on "New Topic" below.

The transition to Stage 2 of the deliberations is currently underway but will take some time to complete. In the meantime, we very much welcome additional contributions to the existing threads in this forum.

For instructions on how to follow a discussion thread by email, click here.

Hillel Soifer
Temple University
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2016 9:12 am

Where are the DA-RT supporters?

PostThu Apr 21, 2016 8:23 am

Colleagues, I'm beginning to wonder whether this conversation is as truly deliberative as it might be. Where are the voices in support of DA-RT? I should state for the record that I am on the fence about DA-RT and more supportive than most on here, but my main motive in posting this is that we would all benefit, no matter our viewpoint, from a true exchange of ideas rather than a simmering of discontent. If this conversation is really to produce a deliberation about this initiative, it should not be an echo chamber of opponents but a site of constructive engagement across this intellectual divide. What can we do to foster that exchange, which I don't see taking place based on having read nearly all of the posts so far?

Post Reply

Alan Jacobs
University of British Columbia
Posts: 38
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2016 9:59 pm

[Steering Committee] Where are the DA-RT supporters?

PostThu Apr 21, 2016 1:56 pm

Thanks for this comment and query, Hillel. We are extremely keen to generate the kind of diversity of perspectives that you're asking for. This is critical to making this a successful consultative, agenda-setting process.

We are doing all we can think of to raise the visibility of this process across a wide variety of research communities -- e.g., via organized section and other email lists, the APSA newsletter, PSNow, personal outreach -- but we are eager for help and other ideas. One way people can help is by pointing to the site and encouraging participation on Facebook and other social media. If you have ideas about how we can do more, please drop us a note. (You can send a message through the Contact form.)

It's also worth noting that we are not particularly looking for a debate between pro- and anti-DA-RT views as such (which I know is not what Hillel was calling for either). While we have to talk some about DA-RT as an important rule-making regime in this domain, the QTD is not primarily envisioned as a debate over DA-RT per se, and its outcome is not intended to be an up-or-down verdict on DA-RT. The QTD is, rather, intended to be a substantive discussion of the meaning, benefits, costs, and practicalities of transparency in different forms of qualitative research. What does transparency within for different logics of qualitative inquiry? What are useful methods of realizing transparency for different qualitative research approaches? What are the costs of different transparency practices? When are those costs higher or lower, and how might those costs be managed? When are the benefits of particular kinds of transparency greater or lesser? And so on....

Post Reply

Jonathan Fox
School of International Service, American University
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Apr 07, 2016 1:39 pm

Re: Where are the DA-RT supporters?

PostSun Apr 24, 2016 2:23 pm

Thanks Hillel, good question. One possible explanation might be that most advocates of DA-RT have concluded that they already had their deliberative process, which was the basis for their decision (clearly before the implications became clear to most qualitative scholars).

Post Reply