This article offers a nuanced exploration of positionality within culturally responsive evaluation, emphasizing its significance in relational practice, particularly for evaluators of color operating in predominantly white contexts. By broadening the concept of identity to encompass physical characteristics, the authors deepen the discourse on how positionality shapes relationship-building. Rooted in case studies of Black-centered educational initiatives, this session provides critical insights into how evaluators' identities impact power relations with marginalized communities. This work is an important contribution to advancing equity and social justice in evaluation practice.
Aponte-SotoL.CasillasW.AliA.MaldonadoS. I.López-CevallosD. F. (2024). Honoring the authentic voices of Latina/o/e evaluators and the communities we serve. New Directions for Evaluation, 2024(181), 151–157. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20598
2.
AventC. M.ReidA.MollerJ. R.AdetogunA.Hooks SingletaryB.BoyceA. S. (2024). Navigating the field while black: A critical race analysis of peer and elder advice to and from black evaluators. American Journal of Evaluation, 45(2), 263–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/10982140231184902
3.
BoyceA. S.ReidA.AventC. M.AdetogunA.MollerJ.SingletaryB. (2023). Social justice as ontology: The intersection of Black evaluators’ identity, role, and practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 44(3), 528–548. https://doi.org/10.1177/10982140221108664
4.
GaniJ. K.KhanR. M. (2024). Positionality statements as a function of coloniality: Interrogating reflexive methodologies. International Studies Quarterly, 68(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqae038
5.
HoodS. (1998). Responsive evaluation Amistad style: Perspectives of one African American evaluator. In StakeR.WehlageD. L. (Eds.), Responsive evaluation: A symposium (pp. 15–24). Champaign, Illinois, USA: The Robert Stake Center for Learning Improvement.
6.
HoodS. (2004). A journey to understand the role of culture in program evaluation: Snapshots and personal reflections of one African American evaluator. New Directions for Evaluation, 2004(102), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.113
7.
HoodS.HopsonR. K.KirkhartK. E. (2015). Culturally responsive evaluation: Theory, practice, and future implications. In NewcomerK. E.HatryH. P.WholeyJ. S. (Eds.), Handbook of practical program evaluation (4th ed., pp. 281–317). San Francisco, California, USA; Jossey-Bass.
8.
ReidA.BoyceA. S.AdetogunA.MollerJ.AventC. M. (2020). If not us, then who: Evaluators of color, public policy, and social change. New Directions for Evaluation, 166, 23–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20407
9.
SeculesS.McCallC.MejiaJ. A.BeebeC.MastersA. S.Sánchez-PeñaM. L.SvyantekM. (2021). Positionality practices and dimensions of impact on equity research: A collaborative inquiry and call to the community. Journal of Engineering Education, 110(1), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20377
10.
SymonetteH. (2004). Walking pathways toward becoming a culturally competent evaluator: Boundaries, borderlands, and border crossings. New Directions for Evaluation, 2004(102), 95–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.118
11.
ThomasV. G.BledsoeK. L. (2023). Calling it like we see it!: Our reflections, positionality, and vision for CRE’s future. New Directions for Evaluation, 2023(180), 27–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20573
