ABSTRACT
This paper focuses on how researchers might approach judging community scholarship and what criteria might be used to evaluate this work. It is suggested that rather than adopting a criteriologist approach that proposes pre-established, permanent and universal criteria, a relativist approach is more suitable for making fair and informed judgments about the quality of research. This approach proposes that criteria should be viewed as lists of characterising traits that are open to reinterpretation as times, conditions and purposes change. Informed by a relativist approach to validity, a list of criteria to evaluate community scholarship coupled with recommendations for application is offered for consideration.
