Let’s get realistic: why ‘what works’ will probably not work in evaluative sport research

ABSTRACT

In this commentary, we critically discuss realist evaluation approaches in the broad field of social sport research. Although evidence-based approaches have been problematised both in and beyond sport research, what has, however, not been sufficiently problematised are realist-oriented approaches. Currently, amongst sport scientists and consultants, there seems to be an unquestioned (blind) belief in and uncritical acceptance of realist evaluation approaches. However, realist evaluation delimits the space for democratic contestation through downgrading the expertise and agency of practitioners. Practitioners still need to be able to decide not to act according to academic evidence about ‘what works’, if they judge that such a line of action would be undesirable for the people they work with. What is needed is an evaluative approach that moves away from a narrow pre-occupation on (measuring) outcomes and the construction of (programme) theories. This also implies that the current knowledge power-imbalance needs to be tipped in the direction of practitioners.

KEYWORDS:

• Critical realism
• sport
• realist evaluation
• sport for development
• monitoring and evaluation

Acknowledgments

Parts of the mentioned field research in this paper was subsidised by the Flemish Government Agency for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (VLAIO project nr. 150060). We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Vlaams Agentschap Innoveren en Ondernemen (VLAIO) [150060].