The main goal of knowledge translation (KT) is to ensure that diverse communities benefit from academic research results through improved social and health outcomes. But despite growing interest in researcher-user collaborations, little is known about what makes or breaks these types of relationships. Knowledge Translation in Context is an essential tool for researchers to learn how to be effective partners in the KT process. Drawing on expertise and studies from across the globe, Elizabeth Banister, Bonnie Leadbeater, and Anne Marshall outline a variety of perspectives on KT processes. Case studies outline the uses of KT in many contexts, including community, policy, Indigenous, and non-profit organizations. While recognizing the specificity of each situation, Knowledge Translation in Context highlights the most important elements that have led KT to succeed (or fail) as a dynamic, multidirectional process.

Rapid progress in health research has led to generation of new knowledge and innovative practices in management of illness. This has resulted in a significant challenge for health professionals: if today we discovered a new therapy through research, when will this discovery be regularly prescribed or utilized to treat all patients suffering from this condition? Knowledge translation is the non-linear and often complicated process of translating knowledge into routine health practices. Technology enabled knowledge translation (TEKT) is the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) to accelerate knowledge translation. With the ubiquity of the internet, the proliferation of different approaches in communication and social networking, and the continuously improving technologies from netbooks to smartphones, there are rich opportunities for TEKT in health education, service delivery, and research.

Indigenous Methodologies is a groundbreaking text. Since its original publication in 2009, it has become the most trusted guide used in the study of Indigenous methodologies and has been adopted in university courses around the world. It provides a conceptual framework for implementing Indigenous methodologies and serves as a useful entry point for those wishing to learn more broadly about Indigenous research. The second edition incorporates new literature along with substantial updates, including a thorough discussion of Indigenous theory and analysis, new chapters on community partnership and capacity building, an added focus on oracy and other forms of knowledge dissemination, and a renewed call to decolonize the academy. The second edition also includes discussion questions to enhance classroom interaction with the text. In a field that continues to grow and evolve, and as universities and researchers strive to learn and apply Indigenous-informed research, this important new edition introduces readers to the principles and practices of Indigenous methodologies.

This paper was developed as a part of the National Aboriginal Health Organization's (NAHO) strategic planning activities in order to identify key issues of concern and recommendations for follow-up to improve population health, health promotion, disease prevention, and health protection services and programs for Aboriginal people. Recommendations include engaging in activities and linkages related to knowledge transfer; addressing key promotion/prevention issues; undertaking specific research and developing strategic research partnerships; facilitating the recruitment. retention and training and utlization of Aboriginal health workers; and promoting traditional healing practices.

This volume teams up familiar literature in knowledge utilization with related theories of diffusion, implementation, transfer, and translation. Each of these knowledge-for-action theories is reviewed for its disciplinary roots, assumptions about change, key variables, and contextual influences. Cross-talk among these heretofore parallel theories identifies priorities and implications for evaluation practice. This issue provides evaluators with multiple lenses to capture change, including a consideration of complexity, rather than succumb to single-discipline perceptions of value. If we think about the new knowledge enshrined within a policy or program under evaluation as the foreground, then complexity invites evaluators to think more critically about the background, that is, the dynamic properties of the setting or system into which a policy program is introduced and the implications this raises for evaluation. This is the 124th volume of the Jossey-Bass quarterly report series New Directions for Evaluation, an official publication of the American Evaluation Association.