[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-603309-105":59,"doc-detail-603309-en":129},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":122,"head_meta":124,"extra_data":126,"updated_unix":128},105,"en","disrupting-dialogue-envisioning-performance-ethnography-for-research-and-evaluation","Disrupting Dialogue: Envisioning Performance Ethnography for Research and Evaluation","","A scholarly paper by Sheryl Conrad Cozart, Jenny Gordon, Michael G. Gunzenhauser, Monica B. McKinney, and Jean A. Petterson examines performance ethnography used to evaluate the North Carolina A+ Schools Program. Grounded in multi-year field data and an alternative dramatic format, it analyzes audience resistance encountered at AERA and, more pointedly, among A+ Fellows. The work applies Bakhtin’s concepts of monologue versus dialogue to explain how evaluative representations must be renegotiated through dialogic encounters and reflection.",{"@graph":69,"@context":121},[70,84,104],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/disrupting-dialogue-envisioning-performance-ethnography-for-research-and-evaluation/603309/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":98,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":99,"interactionStatistic":100},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/disrupting-dialogue-envisioning-performance-ethnography-for-research-and-evaluation/603309.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"moss~","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":101,"interactionType":102,"userInteractionCount":4},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":103},"ViewAction",{"@type":105,"mainEntity":106},"FAQPage",[107,113,117],{"name":108,"@type":109,"acceptedAnswer":110},"What is the central concept of the paper?","Question",{"text":111,"@type":112},"The paper conceptualizes performance ethnography as a dialogic encounter where performers and audience exchange meanings, especially in research and evaluation contexts.","Answer",{"name":114,"@type":109,"acceptedAnswer":115},"How did the authors use performance in their evaluation work?",{"text":116,"@type":112},"They created a play that dramatized how schools participating in the A+ Program performed the program for parents, communities, evaluators, and themselves, using observed scenes and interview data organized by themes.",{"name":118,"@type":109,"acceptedAnswer":119},"Why did the performance become challenging for the A+ Fellows audience?",{"text":120,"@type":112},"Instead of validating the authors’ viewpoint, the A+ Fellows resisted the themes, questioned accuracy, and raised suspicions about motives, which pushed the authors to reconsider and rewrite their analysis.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":123,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":125,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":127,"site_id":62},603309,1792096051,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":130},{"doc_id":127,"user_id":131,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":132,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":133,"file_id":134,"file_url":135,"file_type":136,"file_size":137,"view_count":4,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":138,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":128,"read_time":143},962090895452,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_a8503ba1806abce46bf441b54a3ca4cd","Sheryl Conrad Cozart and Jenny Gordon are assistant professors in the Graduate School of Education at George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia. Michael G. Gunzenhauser is an assistant professor of educational studies in the College of Education at Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma.  \nMonica B. McKinney is an assistant professor in the School of Education at Meredith College, Raleigh, North Carolina. Jean A. Patterson is an assistant professor ofeducational leadership at Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas.  \nDisrupting Dialogue: Envisioning  \nPerformance Ethnography for Research and Evaluation  \nBy Sheryl Conrad Cozart, Jenny Gordon, Michael G. Gunzenhauser, Monica B. McKinney,  \n& Jean A. Petterson1  \nI’m concerned about what I saw. I’m not happy, not thrilled. It’s not what you did but what you said. It should be of deep concern to people who are honestly trying to be A+. (Audience member, June 1998)  \nMost researchers who have extended ethnographic fieldwork into public performance will experience resistance and hostility from audiences from time to time. This disquieting antagonism, however, more than the audience approval, signals most clearly that ethnographicperformanceis a formofconductdeeply enmeshedinmoralmatters.(Conquergood,1985,p.2)  \nFor the 1998 American Educational Research Association (AERA) meeting in San Diego, the authors of this paper created a performance ethnography that  \ncame from our work on the research team evaluating the North Carolina A+ Schools Program. The performance was a play on performance itself. We dramatized how schools participating in the A+ Program (an arts integration reform) performed the program to parents, to their communities, to the program evaluators, and to themselves as they learned about the program and attempted to convince others that they were doing it well. Using a genre that we describe retroactively as a cross between ethnodrama (Mienczakowski, 2001) and readers’ theater (Donmoyer & Yennie-Donmoyer, 1995), we dramatized scenes we had observed in schools and shared interview data organized around themes (Cozart, Gordon, Gunzenhauser, McKinney, & Patterson, 1998) .  \nRich with several years of field data, this performance was well received in the context of AERA as we portrayed ethnographic evaluation data in an alternative format before an audience of educatorsand researchers. We then performed the same material before theA+ Fellows, a group of arts and classroom teachers from schools participating in the A+ Program along with artists and higher education faculty. What was intended to give voice to a polyphony of perspectives and present data in a theoretically playful manner became problematic in front of this audience. While we intended to engage the audience in playing along with our metaphor of performance, instead we encountered resistance to our themes, challenges to our accuracy, and suspicions about our motives.  \nInstead of validating our point of view, the A+ Fellows forced us to consider other perspectives and rework our own, a process that has led to this paper. In Bakhtin’s (1986) terms, the encounter with the audience of A+ Fellows ended our monologue and forced a dialogue for which we were unprepared. For Bakhtin, monologic thought is a closed circuit, which admits nothing new and exists in search of validation. In contrast, dialogue invites new thoughts and welcomes change. Our performance began as a monologue and became dialogic only at the insistence of the A+ Fellows audience as they reclaimed ownership of the data andreformulated our analysis and representation of it.  \nWe construe our performance as failing to grasp the relational basis of dialogic encounter. Through reflection on our experience, we explore the implications of performance ethnography as a powerful tool for representing themes that emerge from evaluation research. Using Bakhtin’s (1986) distinction between monologue and dialogue, we develop a rationale for the us","cbCaikf3vyabSY4u","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaikf3vyabSY4u","pdf",49396,17,"English","# Disrupting Dialogue: Envisioning Performance Ethnography for Research and Evaluation\n## Transforming the Data into a Performance Text","[{\"question\":\"What is the central concept of the paper?\",\"answer\":\"The paper conceptualizes performance ethnography as a dialogic encounter where performers and audience exchange meanings, especially in research and evaluation contexts.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the authors use performance in their evaluation work?\",\"answer\":\"They created a play that dramatized how schools participating in the A+ Program performed the program for parents, communities, evaluators, and themselves, using observed scenes and interview data organized by themes.\"},{\"question\":\"Why did the performance become challenging for the A+ Fellows audience?\",\"answer\":\"Instead of validating the authors’ viewpoint, the A+ Fellows resisted the themes, questioned accuracy, and raised suspicions about motives, which pushed the authors to reconsider and rewrite their analysis.\"}]","Disrupting Dialogue: Envisioning Performance Ethnography for Research and Evaluation | PDF",43]