When Worlds Collide

No, not a science fiction disaster story, but a look at what one important thing in my life, creating fabric with needles, has to say to another important thing, participant-engaged research and evaluation. I should not be surprised by this cross-fertilization. After all, my recent EdD was built around a metaphor of the layers of a quilt.

Last week I viewed the the launch of the Stitching Together: Good Practice Guidelines for participatory textile projects. In listening to the team that put the guidelines together I was struck by the thought that the principles they had developed could also provide guidance for research and evaluation that that depends on participation by others. Whether this is research that requires Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval or evaluation activities undertaken with clients, these principles, in my view offer an important base on which to layer our work.

1. Informed participation. When we ask people for their time, their thoughts, their views, and their labor it is absolutely essential that they know what they are being asked to do and why. They should be informed how their information will be used, by whom, and for how long And of course, this includes the ability not to participate and to change their mind at any time.

2. Maximal benefit with minimal risk. In participatory textile making, the benefits making should be first, and foremost for the participants. Participatory in textile-making projects are often slow-paced and may lead to a sense of intimacy, with the disclosure of personal information. This also may occur when we conduct interviews or focus groups. Explicit attention to the protection of privacy, for example, is crucial in our planning and execution. In addition, the spaces we create for this work must be accessible, safe, and recognize the power relations that exist.

3. Inclusivity based on mutual respect. For participatory textile making, this principle means that workshops or projects welcome different backgrounds, abilities, and identities. For researchers and evaluators, this means, first and foremost, we see our the participants, not as means to our ends or as stereotypes, but as individuals whose participation in this work is that of a fully formed person.

4. Appropriate planning and resourcing. Sometimes program evaluation is an afterthought. It is squeezed in with whatever time and funding is left. However, if we work with the principles above, then we need to make sure that we have planned, included participants as much as possible, and that the funding needed to support the plan is there. For example, have we given ourselves and our partners enough time to review protocols or invite participants? Do we have enough materials? Depending on the time of day and the length of the session, do we have a plan for food and drink?

What struck me in reading the guidelines was, how simple these principles are. While executing against them can sometimes seem time-consuming, doing so will lead, I believe, to work that is stronger, deeper, and that reflects the views and priorities of more people. The guidelines offer good examples in the area of participatory textile making that offer ideas on which other types of participatory work, such as evaluation, can build.