@article{hatcher_2011, title={Becoming an Ethical Scholarly Writer}, volume={42}, ISSN={["1710-1166"]}, DOI={10.3138/jsp.42.2.142}, abstractNote={A new perspective of the ethics of scholarly writing is described that may overcome some of the problems associated with more familiar approaches to solving the ethical dilemmas that writers face. Instead of relying on an external standard, such as a code of ethics, authors are encouraged to internalize the ethics of scholarly writing as a part of developing their own moral identity. Socialization into a profession is discussed as an incubator of moral identity. Several assumptions are put forward in support of these perspectives.}, number={2}, journal={JOURNAL OF SCHOLARLY PUBLISHING}, author={Hatcher, Tim}, year={2011}, month={Jan}, pages={142–159} }
 @article{how a professional conference creates new learning: preliminary findings of a case study_2006, volume={30}, number={4}, journal={International Journal of Training and Development}, year={2006}, pages={256–271} }
 @article{hatcher_wiessner_storberg-walker_chapman_2006, title={How a research created new learning: A case study}, volume={30}, number={4}, journal={Journal of European Industrial Training}, author={Hatcher, T. and Wiessner, C. A. and Storberg-Walker, J. and Chapman, D.}, year={2006}, pages={256–349} }
 @inproceedings{chapman_wiessner_storberg-walker_hatcher_2006, title={New learning: The next generation of evaluation?}, booktitle={Proceedings of the 2006 Academy of Human Resource Development International Research Conference, Columbus, OH}, author={Chapman, D. D. and Wiessner, C. A. and Storberg-Walker, J. and Hatcher, T.}, year={2006} }
 @inproceedings{hatcher_wiessner_storberg-walker_chapman_2005, title={How a professional conference created new learning: A case study}, booktitle={Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on HRD Research and Practice Across Europe Conference, Leeds, UK}, author={Hatcher, T. and Wiessner, C. A. and Storberg-Walker, J. and Chapman, D.}, year={2005} }
 @article{hatcher_storberg-walker_2004, title={Developing ethical adult dducators: A re-examination of the need for a code of ethics}, volume={14}, DOI={10.1177/104515950401400206}, abstractNote={Consider the following fictitious scenarios involving adult educators: * Nancy just found out her literacy student's husband is stealing money from the church where he is employed. Nancy could choose to turn him in, but instead she encourages her student to talk with him and get him to turn himself in. * Under contract Bing is interviewing workers in a small manufacturing firm to identify specific skills and knowledge. The firm's owner requests that he share with her which employees are 'negative' and which are 'positive.' Bing suspects she will use this information during anticipated layoffs. He decides not to share this information because he believes he has a responsibility to the employees to treat their feedback as confidential. * Pat is the only volunteer qualified to teach English to a group of Hispanic women working in the maid service at a local motel. One week before the training is scheduled to begin she finds out the only time they can meet with her is on the weekends. Pat decides she cannot give up her weekends and so tells the volunteer agency she must decline to help. * Professor Big from Reputable University responds to a request for proposals distributed by a company headquartered in Saudi Arabia. The compensation from the contract will help to fund the adult education and human resource development programs. The Saudi company awards the proposal to Professor Big, who begins the long-term process of working for the 'client' and the money flows into Reputable University's program. Both adult education students and human resource development students begin to reap the benefits through graduate assistantships and research opportunities. However, because the company is headquartered in Saudi Arabia, Professor Big is able to send male colleagues and students to work for the company, but is not able to send female colleagues and students. Each of the adult educators in the above scenarios made a decision that impacted learners based on individual morals and ethics. The decisions were not made based on a professional code of ethics, however defined; nor were they necessarily made on the grounds of teaching or program development skills. Each individual was left to navigate the ethical terrain given their own level of ethical competence. We argue here that we can do more to develop shared understandings of ethics in the profession of adult education. As a profession, we need to answer several questions: How did these adult educators come to make these decisions? How do adult educators develop the kinds of moral character and ethical behaviors so that learners benefit from their relationship with them? How do we ensure that adult educators are not doing harm? Are we content to leave the possibility of harm to individuals who have little or no understanding of ethics or what is expected of them as a moral adult educator? This issue of Adult Learning is about best practices: best advising, best facilitation, best planning, best administrative strategies, and best ethical practice. We know what makes a program good or bad, and we know what makes instruction excellent or poor and planning a success or a failure. We know these things because we have learned what excellence in these areas looks like through our experience and through formal or informal education. In other words, as we develop competencies and we have taken on the persona of an adult educator, we possess the skills and knowledge to know what to do and how to do it when faced with problems related to adult learning. But when it comes to ethical dilemmas like those described above, what skills or competencies should we use? Where do we go for help when we are faced with the complexity and perplexing consequences of our moral decisions? How do we even know when to frame a situation in ethical terms? Even if we have a sound character, how can we have the best ethical practice if we don't know what it means to be an ethical adult educator? …}, number={2}, journal={Adult Learning}, author={Hatcher, T. and Storberg-Walker, J.}, year={2004}, pages={21} }
 @article{hatcher_2004, title={Environmental ethics as an alternative for evaluation theory in for-profit business contexts}, volume={27}, ISSN={["1873-7870"]}, DOI={10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.009}, abstractNote={The predominant context for evaluation in for-profit organizations is economics coupled with a distinctly anthropocentric worldview. A case is made for environmental ethics as a more sustainable theoretical foundation for evaluation in for-profit firms.}, number={3}, journal={EVALUATION AND PROGRAM PLANNING}, author={Hatcher, T}, year={2004}, month={Aug}, pages={357–363} }
 @article{mathison_hatcher_2004, title={Ethics, evaluation and for-profit corporations}, volume={27}, DOI={10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.006}, abstractNote={Ethical problems encountered by foundation officers in their evaluation-related work were identified via an email survey of a sample of Council on Foundations member organizations. Of the respondents who had worked with evaluators, one-third indicated that they had faced ethical challenges. Most challenges fell into one of four categories: Evaluation Findings, Internal Functioning of the Foundation, Authorship/Ownership/Dissemination of the Evaluation, and Evaluator-Focused Issues. Conflicts of interest involving a variety of stakeholders were reported. The potential for foundation officers to define “ethical problems” differently from evaluators is raised, and the role that attributional processes can play in descriptions of the sources of ethical conflicts is addressed. The study's findings underscore the practical importance of developing an in-depth understanding of the views of ethical problems held by both foundation officers and evaluators.}, number={3}, journal={Evaluation and Program Planning}, author={Mathison, S. and Hatcher, T.}, year={2004}, pages={333–334} }