Priority Card Sorting

• In Event: Three Critical Participatory Inquiry Methods: Ripples of Change, Priority Card Sorting, and Force Field Analysis

Abstract

Priority Card Sorting can take place as a dialogic process or after another process, like Ripples of Change. Once a research collective has arrived at a place where they agree on a vision for change, they should also tease out what their priorities are for moving toward that change. This activity has similar components to Ripples of Change in that it places a premium on dialogue. The goal is to come to an understanding of the various priorities of collective members, not to arrive at agreement or consensus. It is important to begin with the understanding that this consensus may happen in the process but is not the primary objective.
In this process, co-researchers / community members first engage in a brainwriting process in which they have the individual space to document their interests, ideas, and/or goals on their own pieces of paper (e.g., index cards, sticky notes). After completing this brainwriting process, these artifacts are placed in a pile, which serves to anonymize comments. Members of the collective are then asked to communicate within the group and prioritize their desired changes as low, medium, or high priority. As in Ripples of Change, it is usually beneficial to ask those who are typically in positions of less power or have fewer opportunities to voice their opinions to begin the prioritization process. This process might involve physically moving the original cards to another area or creating a list on sheets of paper. Facilitators may want to ask the members of the research collective to list their own priorities as a way to compare or to start dialogue, but this is not necessary.
Once priority lists have been created, the group can engage in dialogue about what has been deemed low, medium, or high priority and why. It is important at this step for facilitators to help collective members engage in respectful and humble ways, so rules might need to be established. For example, each member might be given a set amount of time to voice their opinions, going around in a circle to make sure everyone gets an equal chance to speak, with an opportunity to “pass” if desired. Facilitators may also ask members to silently compare their priorities with those set by the smaller group and reflect on why there are differences before speaking. Alternatively, there may be a set of questions that members of the collective are asked to reflect on or a fill-in-the-blank approach such as, “I appreciate the priority to _______________ because _____________;” followed by: “I think it’s interesting that I did not prioritize _______________ because ________________:” or “I wonder if we should consider _____________.” Following an introduction, examples, and demonstration of Priority Card Sorting, session participants will engage in a shortened version of the process using the envisioned changes generated during the Ripples of Change activity. Once again, the demonstration will close with a discussion of applications to participants’ work.

Author

• Giovanni P. Dazzo, University of Georgia
  Presenting Author