程序和参与性伦理:实践中的社区评价

Q2 Social Sciences
Tony O’Connor
{"title":"程序和参与性伦理:实践中的社区评价","authors":"Tony O’Connor","doi":"10.1177/1035719X231166206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that it can be beneficial for institution-based, procedural ethics review of evaluation design in the planning stage to be followed by community-based oversight of ethical issues in the field. Deferring to an institutional review board (IRB) for ethical assessment when a project is underway can be impractical for community-based projects that are designed to be responsive to local needs and interests, especially when community leaders expect to have a meaningful say in determining what is the right thing to do. This article discusses a 2-year project in New Zealand, where community leaders and the project funder formed a project steering group to, among other things, provide ethical oversight. Ethical issues that arose during the project and the steering group’s role in considering the most suitable response are discussed and linked to literature about participatory ethics.","PeriodicalId":37231,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","volume":"23 1","pages":"91 - 100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Procedural and participatory ethics: community-based evaluation in practice\",\"authors\":\"Tony O’Connor\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1035719X231166206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that it can be beneficial for institution-based, procedural ethics review of evaluation design in the planning stage to be followed by community-based oversight of ethical issues in the field. Deferring to an institutional review board (IRB) for ethical assessment when a project is underway can be impractical for community-based projects that are designed to be responsive to local needs and interests, especially when community leaders expect to have a meaningful say in determining what is the right thing to do. This article discusses a 2-year project in New Zealand, where community leaders and the project funder formed a project steering group to, among other things, provide ethical oversight. Ethical issues that arose during the project and the steering group’s role in considering the most suitable response are discussed and linked to literature about participatory ethics.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evaluation Journal of Australasia\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"91 - 100\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evaluation Journal of Australasia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X231166206\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation Journal of Australasia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1035719X231166206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文认为,在规划阶段对评价设计进行基于制度的程序性伦理审查,然后对该领域的伦理问题进行基于社区的监督,可能是有益的。当一个项目正在进行时,对机构审查委员会(IRB)进行道德评估是不切实际的,因为以社区为基础的项目旨在满足当地的需求和利益,特别是当社区领导人希望在决定什么是正确的事情时有意义的发言权时。本文讨论了新西兰一个为期两年的项目,社区领导人和项目资助者组成了一个项目指导小组,除其他事项外,提供道德监督。讨论了项目期间出现的伦理问题以及指导小组在考虑最合适的回应方面的作用,并将其与有关参与性伦理的文献联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Procedural and participatory ethics: community-based evaluation in practice
This article argues that it can be beneficial for institution-based, procedural ethics review of evaluation design in the planning stage to be followed by community-based oversight of ethical issues in the field. Deferring to an institutional review board (IRB) for ethical assessment when a project is underway can be impractical for community-based projects that are designed to be responsive to local needs and interests, especially when community leaders expect to have a meaningful say in determining what is the right thing to do. This article discusses a 2-year project in New Zealand, where community leaders and the project funder formed a project steering group to, among other things, provide ethical oversight. Ethical issues that arose during the project and the steering group’s role in considering the most suitable response are discussed and linked to literature about participatory ethics.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Evaluation Journal of Australasia
Evaluation Journal of Australasia Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信