Transformative research is rooted in the axiological assumption that priority be given to the furtherance of human rights and the pursuit of social justice (Mertens, 2009; 2010; Mertens, Holmes, & Harris, 2009). This belief provides a basis for subsequent decision making about methodology. Planning for utilization of findings to influence health and social policy is essential during the initial stages of research design, as well as throughout the course of the study in order to improve the probability that data are gathered and disseminated in a way that they can be used to achieve the goals of social change and social justice. Transformative researchers can use policy analysis and advocacy as avenues to social change. This paper focuses on the value of putting research side-by-side with policy making to integrate their pathways in the pursuit of social justice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChilisaB. (2009). Indigenous African-centered ethics: Contesting and complementing dominant models. In MertensD. M., & GinsbergP.E. (Eds.), Handbook of Social Research Ethics. (pp. 407–426. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2.
ChilisaB. (2005). Educational research within postcolonial Africa: A critique of HIV/AIDS research in Botswana.International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18, 659–684.
3.
ChiuL. F. (2003). Transformational potential of focus group practice in participatory action research.Action Research, 1(2), 165–183.
CornwallA., HarrisonE., & WhiteheadA. (2004). Repositioning feminisms in gender and development.Brighton, Sussex, UK: University of Sussex Press.
6.
CramF. (2009). Maintaining indigenous voices. In MertensD. M., & GinsbergP.E. (Eds.), Handbook of Social Research Ethics pp. 308–322. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
CramF., OrmondA., & CarterL. (2004). Researching our relations: Reflections on ethics and marginalization. Paper presented at the Kamehauneha Schools 2004 Research Conference on Hawaiian Well-being, Kea'au, HI. Retrieved September 15, 2006, from www.ksbe.edu/pase/pdf/KSResearchConference/2004presentations.
8.
DuBoisW. E. B. (1920). The souls of white folk (from Darkwater.) In HugginsN. (Ed.), W. E. B. DuBois: Writings (pp. 357–547). New York: Library of America.
9.
Fals BordaO. (2006). Participatory (action) research in social theory. In ReasonP., & BradburyH. (Eds.), Handbook of action research (pp. 27–37). London: Sage. (Original work published 2001)
10.
GaventaJ., & CornwallA. (2006). Power and knowledge. In ReasonP., & BradburyH. (Eds.), Handbook of action research (pp. 71–82). London: Sage. (Original work published 2001)
HarrisR., HolmesH., & MertensD. M. (2009). Research ethics in sign language communities.Sign Language Studies, 9(2).
13.
KendallF. E. (2006). Understanding white privilege.New York: Routledge.
14.
LaFranceJ., & Crazy BullC. (2009). Researching ourselves back to life: Taking control of the research agenda in Indian Country. In MertensD. M., & GinsbergP.E. (Eds.), Handbook of Social Research Ethics (pp. 135–149). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
McCreanorT., & NairnR. (2002). Tauiwi general practitioners’ explanations of Mãori health: Colonial relations in primary healthcare in Aotearoa/New Zealand.Journal of Health Psychology, 7(5), 509–518.
16.
MertensD. M. (2010). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17.
MertensD. M. (2007). Transformative paradigm: Mixed methods and social justice.Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 212–225.
18.
MertensD. M. (2009). Transformative evaluation and research.NY: Guilford Press.
19.
MertensD.M., & WilsonA.T. (in press). Program evaluation.NY: Guilford Press.
20.
MertensD. M., HolmesH., & HarrisR. (2009). Transformative research and ethics. In MertensD. M., & GinsbergP. (Eds.), Handbook of social research ethics (pp. 85–102). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21.
MertensD.M., HolmesH., & HarrisR., & BrandtS. (2007). Experiences of new teachers for deaf students who have a disability. Presentation at the annual meeting of the Association of College Educators/Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Montery CA, January, 2007.
22.
MyersC. (2004). Differences from somewhere: The normativity of whiteness in bioethics in the United States.The American Journal of Bioethics, 3, 1–11.
23.
NtseaneP. G. (2009). The ethics of the researcher-subject relationships: experiences from the field. In MertensD. M., & GinsbergP.E., (Eds.), Handbook of Social research ethics, pp. 295–307. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
ReasonP., & BradburyH. (Eds.). (2006a). Handbook of action research.London: Sage.
26.
SegoneM. (Ed.). (2006). New trends in development evaluation.Geneva: UNICEF Regional Office for CEE/CIS and IPEN, Issue #5. Available at www.unicef.org/ceecis/resources_1220.html.
27.
SelenerD. (1997). Participatory action research and social change.Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
28.
SmithL. T. (2004). Researching in the margins: Issues for Mãori researchers. Unpublished manuscript.
29.
United Nations. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. Retrieved February 11, 2008, from www.un.org/Overview/rights.html.
30.
United Nations. (1969). The international convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination.New York: Author. Retrieved February 11, 2008, from www.ohchr.org/english/law/pdf/cerd.pdf.
United Nations. (1990b). International convention on the protection of the rights of all migrant workers and members of their families. Retrieved February 11, 2008, from www.un.org/millennium/law/iv-13.htm.
35.
United Nations. (2003–2004). The United Nations and disabled persons: The first fifty years. Retrieved June 19, 2007, from www.un.org/esa/socdev/enable/dis50y00.htm.
United Nations. (2006b). Declaration of ad hoc committee on a comprehensive and integral international convention on the protection and promotion of the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from www.un.org/disabilities.
