Reclaiming the Potential of Transformative Scholarship to Enable Social Justice

Abstract

Scholars within critical qualitative inquiry and health sciences are becoming increasingly interested in transformative scholarship as a means to pursue greater justice in society. However, transformative scholarship has been taken up within frameworks that given a lack of consistent alignment with the critical paradigm seem to fall short in this intention. This article aims to reclaim transformative scholarship as an epistemological and methodological space that transforms and challenges the social order, situating social justice at the forefront of inquiry. The article begins by addressing the call for work toward social justice within critical qualitative inquiry. Subsequently, Creswell and Mertens' frameworks are analyzed as examples of transformative scholarship that has distanced itself from its critical roots. Based on this analysis, we raise three problematics to illustrate the dangers of this distancing. We conclude by proposing to reframe transformative scholarship within the critical paradigm to (re)connect it to political stances and values.

Working Towards the Promise of Participatory Action Research: Learning From Ageing Research Exemplars

“…169, 170) have been compounded, in addition to concerns that definitions and practices contrary to its critical roots have evolved (McTaggart, 1991; MacDonald, 2012). Although PAR is a value-laden and context-specific approach to inquiry that resists methodological dogmatism (Grimwood, 2015), the contemporary rise in the uptake of PAR mandates critical discussions surrounding what constitutes an authentic PAR project that is aligned with its critical tenets and practices (Farias, Laliberte Rudman, Magalhães, & Gastaldo, 2017).…”

Practice analysis: Critical reflexivity on discourses constraining socially transformative occupational therapy practices

“…Considering the potential of occupation for social transformation (Frank and Zemke, 2008), our goal is to foster critical dialogue in relation to key foundational challenges to furthering practice that seeks to prioritize social concerns related to occupation. Based on the first author’s dissertation, which examined contemporary efforts to enact socially transformative occupational therapy practices (Farias, 2017), and engagement by both authors in interdisciplinary literature addressing transformative scholarship (Farias et al., 2017), we offer critical reflections and suggestions for discursive reconfiguration of practices in more socially responsive directions.…”

Occupational therapy and occupational science: building critical and transformative alliances

“…Uncritical acceptance of these conditions of possibility can also lead to theoretical imperialism and cognitive injustice involving the promotion of particular ways of understanding issues as universally applicable, and a failure to respect and learn from culturally diverse ways of producing, organizing and disseminating knowledge (HAMMELL, 2011;OWENS, 2017;SANTOS, 2014). As well, , Farias, Rudman and Magalhães (2016) and Farias et al (2017) have highlighted how a reliance on positivist and post positivist assumptions risks perpetuating social and occupational injustices given that such approaches do not question how social problems have come to be framed, nor draw attention to the ways power relations simultaneously create situations of privilege and marginalization. Given that several aspects of conditions of possibility have been identified as constraining transformative possibilities, I now propose some ways forward in expanding these conditions.…”

“…Within this section, I provide a summary of directions proposed to foster the transformative potential of occupational science and enhance its ability to work in critical alliances with occupational therapy that I have previously published within the Journal of Occupational Science and with colleagues in other venues (RUDMAN, 2013(RUDMAN, , 2014RUDMAN et al, 2008;FARIAS;. These various publications are grounded in the writings of several critical and transformative scholars (for example, CANNELLA; LINCOLN, 2009;FREIRE, 1972;LATHER, 1986) and seek to expand conditions of possibility in occupational science.…”

“…For example, this would involve pushing scholarship in occupational science beyond occupations that are socially sanctioned or normative within dominant societal groups (KIEPEK et al, 2014), and questioning long-standing assumptions about occupation that have become factoids that circulate through our literature (POLLARD et al, 2010). Such exploration and questioning is vital to enhance openness to diverse ways of knowing and doing, as well as to embracing democratized, participatory practices that involve working with collectives experiencing marginalization (FARIAS et al, 2017). As well, intercultural dialogue and translation is essential to create new possibilities for knowing and doing, but this must be done in ways that avoid perpetuating relations of power in which particular ways of knowing and doing are positioned as more legitimate (SANTOS, 2014).…”