Search results

This conversation highlights the need to rethink how we approach disaster risk reduction in different South Asian contexts.

This paper is based on the webinar held as part of Asia Week at the University of Copenhagen which was organised by Asian Dynamics Initiative and Copenhagen Centre for Disaster Research on the September 12, 2023.

The prominent themes emerging from this conversation represents hybridity, self-rule and self-recovery. Along with this we suggest a fundamental turn to ensuring hope, solidarity and empathy is part of a post-colonial future.

The conversation contributes to the ongoing discussions on moving away from colonial practices in disaster risk reduction and disaster studies broadly.

Researchers who work in partnership with older adults in participatory studies often experience various advantages, but also complex ethical questions or even encounter obstacles during the research process. This paper aims to provide insights into the value of an intersectional lens in participatory research to understand how power plays out within a mixed research team of academic and community co-researchers.

Four academic researchers reflected in a case-study approach in a dialogical way on two critical case examples with the most learning potential by written dialogical and via face-to-face meetings in duos or trios. This study used an intersectionality-informed analysis.

This study shows that the intersectional lens helped the authors to understand the interactions of key players in the study and their different social locations. Intersections of age, gender, ethnicity/class and professional status stood out as categories in conflict. In hindsight, forms of privilege and oppression became more apparent. The authors also understood that they reproduced traditional power dynamics within the group of co-researchers and between academic and community co-researchers that did not match their mission for horizontal relations. This study showed that academics, although they wanted to work toward social inclusion and equality, were bystanders and people who reproduced power relations at several crucial moments. This was disempowering for certain older individuals and social groups and marginalized their voices and interests.

Till now, not many scholars wrote in-depth about race- and age-related tensions in partnerships in participatory action research or related approaches, especially not about tensions in research with older people.

In this chapter, we discuss the merits and challenges of organic communication within an inclusive, iterative research design through our research project ‘Improving the quality of life of families with parents with intellectual disabilities (IDs) and their children (<12 years) by means of assistive robotics’. We will discuss the research process, its key steps and preliminary findings, as well as how inclusivity of participants was taken along throughout this process. The links between research design, designers and project participants are explored and reflected on. Our positions as researchers within the research process are also reflected upon. We will additionally address the implications of our research for the broader field of inclusive design for assistive robotics and the creative methodologies employed and tailored to the needs of families headed by parents with an ID and their children. In this, we keep a close eye on the difficulties such families face within the context of our research project. Lastly, we reflect on several key markers of collaboration within marginalised communities we encountered in our research.

In this chapter, we report on the perspectives of marginalised voices of disabled children and young people (CYP) in the Palestinian territories of the West Bank. The conflict has contributed to many of the barriers preventing the rights of children to a quality education, such as the lack of schools, schools in a poor state of repair, attacks and the threat of attacks on schools, teachers and students. The research questions focused on the extent to which the children felt they belonged in their school or community and whether they were included in the design of their curriculum. Eight focus groups with CYP using a variety of participatory research methods were used to elicit their views on inclusion and their lives under occupation. The findings reveal that CYP are rarely involved in decisions about their education. Using participatory action research (PAR), we learnt that CYP with disabilities can provide intelligent and astute insights into their lived experiences, and that meaningful learning can occur if creative approaches to teaching and learning are adopted. To remain true to the emancipatory, egalitarian and democratic principles of PAR, the needs of the research participants should guide the research design, create maximum opportunities for participants to take part in data collection and decide on actions to create change.

This study explores the beliefs of ‘high expectation teachers’, and the practices through which teachers aim to build an inclusive learning environment in addition to the ways they develop strategies that do not rely on pre-determined ability labelling. The study is a case study design focused on one phenomenon, that of the beliefs and practices of high-expectation teachers, and one bounded case illustrates the phenomenon. The case is specific and bounded by time and location. It emphasises uniqueness through the in-depth exploration of the participants' experiences. Following the use of thematic analysis to analyse data collected through questionnaires, interviews and focus groups, the phenomena of high teacher expectation remained only partially scrutinised in terms of social justice. Therefore, the social concerns raised throughout this study are also explored through the theories of Bourdieu, to make sense of the wider issues of inequality inherent in this study. Habitus is helped by, and helps shape, pedagogical action. Findings include the requirement to recognise that in education, socially advantaged interests and voices dominate in terms of social mobility agendas. Furthermore, teachers are only granted space in the public domain through technical competency. Teachers must however be emotionally committed to different aspects of their jobs, as their sense of moral responsibility lies at the core of their professional identity.

Values have long guided special education services and supports for students with extensive support needs; over the past four decades, those values have been backed by research evidence demonstrating the critical nature of values related to inclusive education, self-determination, and seeking strengths and assets. In this chapter, we investigate these values and their supporting research, documenting strengths and needs in extant research. We emphasize the need to continue to embrace and maintain these values while pursuing research that addresses research gaps while centering the priorities, perspectives, and preferences of people with extensive support needs.

Through a review of the literature, this article seeks to outline and understand the evolution and extent of user–participant involvement in the existing library and information science (LIS) research to identify gaps and existing research approaches that might inform further methodological development in participant-oriented and design-based LIS research.

A scoping literature review of LIS research, from the 1960s onward, was conducted, assessing the themes and trends in understanding the user/participant within the LIS field. It traces LIS research from its early focus on information and relevancy to the “user turn”, to the rise of participatory research, especially design-based, as well as the recent inclusion of Indigenous and decolonial methodologies.

The literature review indicates that despite the reported “user turn”, LIS research often does not include the user as an active and equal participant within research projects.

The findings from this review support the development of alternative design research methodologies in LIS that fully include and involve research participants as full partners – from planning through dissemination of results – and suggests avenues for continuing the development of such design-based research. To that end, it lays the foundations for the introduction of a novel methodology, Action Partnership Research Design (APRD).

Responding to the continuing separation of participants and researchers in LIS participatory research, a new methodology is proposed: action partnership research design (APRD). It is asserted that APRD can mitigate or remove the hierarchical structures often inherent in the research process, thus allowing for equal contribution from all.

Building on the bonded design (BD) methodology and informed by a scoping literature review conducted by the same authors, APRD is a human-centered research approach with the goal of empowering and valuing community partnerships. APRD originates from research investigating the use of participatory design methods to foster collaboration between two potentially disparate groups, firstly with adult researchers/designers and elementary school children, and secondly with university faculty and IT professionals.

To achieve this goal, in addition to BD techniques, APRD draws inspiration from elements of indigenous and decolonization research methodologies, particularly those with an emphasis on destabilizing power hierarchies and involving research participants as full partners.

APRD, which emerged from findings from previous participatory design studies, especially those of BD, is based on the premise of partnership, recognizing that each member of a design team, whether researcher or participant/user, has unique expertise to contribute. By considering participants/users as full research partners, APRD aims to flatten the hierarchies exhibited in some LIS participatory research methodologies, where participants are treated more like research subjects than partners.

The purpose of this paper is to offer an accessible and interdisciplinary research strategy in organisational ethnography, called action ethnography, that acknowledges key concepts from action research and engaged and immersive ethnography. It aims to encourage methodological innovation and an impact turn in ethnographic practice.

A working definition of “action ethnography” is provided first. Then, to illustrate how an action ethnography can be designed by considering impact from the outset, the author draws on a study she is undertaking with a grassroots human rights monitoring group, based in England, and then discusses advantages and limitations to the approach.

The author suggests three main tenets to action ethnography that embrace synergies between action research and ethnography: researcher immersion, intervention leading to change and knowledge contributions that are useful to both practitioners and researchers.

This paper provides researchers who align with aspects of both action research and ethnography with an accessible research strategy to employ, and a better understanding of the interplay between the two approaches when justifying their research designs. It also offers an example of designing an action ethnography in practice.

Whereas “traditional” ethnography has emphasised a contribution to theoretical knowledge, less attention has been on a contribution to practice and to those who ethnographers engage with in the field. Action ethnography challenges researchers to consider the impact of their research from the outset during the research design, rather upon reflection after a study is completed.