Creating Inspiring Workshops and Courses in Transdisciplinarity: A Guide - Manual / Resource - Page 106
change, page 79), but also scanning for outcomes (good or bad)
that may be unexpected but are emerging. Many of them will not
be immediately apparent, as it takes time for societal impacts
to unfold. And many of these outcomes may not be visible to
the researcher directly, unless dedicated efforts are made to
inquire about and investigate the longer-term outcomes. Thus,
even in the evaluation, it is important to collaborate with societal
partners.
This discussion alone makes it apparent that the usual evaluation
approach and metrics of research projects do not suffice. They
only cover limited aspects of TDR projects and are often limited
to scientific outputs. In TDR projects, participants are also
interested sustained engagement throughout; the relationships
formed or changed among those involved; the perceived
credibility, relevance, and legitimacy of produced information
and insights; and the effects that emerge outside the academic
realm, i.e., the societal impacts.
While such lists of metrics offer useful starting points, it is
important to ascertain what all involved partners want to learn
from the evaluation. They can weigh in on how, how often, when,
and what to evaluate — much in the same way the rest of the
project was co-designed. This ensures that all involved will learn
what they are most interested in, and the transparency further
builds trust, fosters sustained relationships, and improves the
process of TDR over time.
Who should be involved in evaluating TDR projects?
Who to involve in the evaluation is a matter of coherence.
Typically, many actors are involved in a transdisciplinary project:
researchers from multiple disciplines, engagement facilitators,
various societal actors, and probably also funders. The evaluation
should reflect that same diversity.
p. 101
Two levels of choice are important here:
•
Whose perspectives should be consulted in the evaluation?
Ideally, all perspectives should be included, because the
project team, partners, societal actors, and funders all
play an important role. They may have similar or diverging
views of the project – views that are always partial, as not
everyone is involved in all aspects. Moreover, everyone
has different needs for what they want to learn from
the evaluation. They may also apply different criteria to
measure its success. To be an appropriate evaluation of
a TDR project, evaluation thus should be inclusive and
participative.
•
Who should conduct the evaluation?
The question of who should design and conduct the
evaluation is an important one that must be answered in
the context of any specific TDR project. If there is good
trust among partners, someone from the research team
may be well-positioned to undertake the evaluation
(think of it much like a TDR project within your project).
If trust is less well developed, or if it is critical to convey
accountability to funders, sponsors, or societal partners,
an independent, external evaluator may be better
positioned to conduct the evaluation.
There are pros and cons and important trade-offs involved in
these choices. For example, an external evaluator may require
additional funding, may not know the project context as well as
those involved, and obviously was not involved in the conduct
of the project; but project partners may feel more comfortable
expressing their views freely (if asked confidentially), and thus
responses may be more honest and more useful. For that same
reason, funders often demand independent, external evaluations.
Practices Evaluation
