Search results

Those in prison have expert knowledge of issues affecting their health and wellbeing. The purpose of this paper is to report on work undertaken with male prisoners. This paper presents learning and findings from the process of engaging imprisoned men as peer researchers.

The peer researcher approach offers an emic perspective to understand the experience of being in prison. The authors established the peer research role as an educational initiative at a long-stay prison in Wales, UK to determine the feasibility of engaging imprisoned men as peer researchers. Focus groups, interviews and questionnaires were used by the peer researchers to identify the health and wellbeing concerns of men in prison.

The project positively demonstrated the feasibility of engaging imprisoned men as peer researchers. Four recurring themes affecting health and wellbeing for men in a prison vulnerable persons unit were identified: communication, safety, respect and emotional needs. Themes were inextricably linked demonstrating the complex relationships between prison and health.

This was the first prison peer-research project to take place in Wales, UK. It demonstrates the value men in prison can play in developing the evidence base around health and wellbeing in prison, contributing to changes within the prison to improve health and wellbeing for all.

The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of peer researchers in participant observation.

The research involved interviews with 11 fieldworkers aged 18–25 years.

The method improves access to settings and provides useful context information on participants.

It is a useful method in situations where normal access to participants and settings is problematic.

The paper is the first ever evaluation of supervised peer research (as opposed to peer-led research).

Kimbel Library used a peer reference model of service beginning in 2009 that was successful for several years but eventually phased out due to shifting priorities and needs. This article aims to describe Kimbel Library's second attempt at creating and using a peer reference program in 2018, how it was different from the original approach, and what ultimately happened.

In this article Reference Services Review Co-editor Sarah Barbara Watstein interviews Allison Faix, Instruction Coordinator and Librarian at Coastal Carolina University, about her experiences with peer reference services.

Because of the marked decline in the number of research-based questions asked at the library's help desk, the library found itself with smart, well-trained peer research assistants who were disappointed that their research assistance was not in greater demand.

This interview looks at two different ways that peer reference was implemented at the same institution starting in 2009.

The purpose of this paper is to draw on the authors’ experiences as a team made up of both “insiders” and “outsiders” in order to investigate how an insider-outsider peer research method facilitates productive forms of research into the lives of young Muslims, and to contribute to debates about ways of knowing youth. The authors aim to shift focus from a common claim that peer research methods simply improve research about youth to more deeply investigate how they enable, as well as limit, the production of particular kinds of knowledge, in this case, about Muslim youth in Australia.

The research aimed to explore how “ordinary” young Australian Muslims engage in civic life. Yet the authors were faced with the challenge of accessing and recruiting “ordinary” youth in times of Islamophobia, wherein Muslim communities expressed serious concerns about their voices being misinterpreted, misused and misappropriated. Therefore, the authors sought to utilise an approach of outsider-designed and guided research that was then shaped and executed by insider peer researchers. It is this research design and its execution that the authors interrogate in this paper.

As well as affording the authors access and the elicitation of rich, complex and high-quality data, the approach also fostered more complex stories about young Muslim identities and experiences, and enabled the authors to contest some common and homogenising representations. It also allowed opportunities for fundamental issues inherent in these kinds of qualitative research methods to be made explicit. These include the politics of performativity and issues of positionality in the peer research process. The authors suggest that the “insider” and “outsider” approach succeeded not so much because it got the authors closer to the “truth” about young Muslims’ civic lives, but because it revealed some of the mechanics of the ways stories are constructed and represented in youth research.

The originality and value of this paper lie in its contribution to a debate about the politics of knowledge production about young people and Muslims in particular, and in its effort to move forward a discussion about how to be accountable in youth research to the various communities and to one another in insider-outsider research teams.

This paper aims to describe both the development of a peer research consultant program – using student assistants to staff the reference desk with minimal supervision while providing high-quality research assistance to their undergraduate peers, and the steps taken to create buy-in for the program from campus and librarians.

The authors provide a description of peer reference services and describe how a remodel of the library building facilitated a redesign of services. The paper covers the process of developing program guidelines, securing funding, expectations of peer research consultants, the training process and lessons learned from a medium-sized academic library.

The findings after the first year demonstrate that undergraduates are highly skilled at providing high-quality reference services when provided with quality training and support. In addition, undergraduate students are now seeking out peer researchers for assistance with research items such as topic formation, keyword development in databases and proper citations.

No formal research or assessment of the program has been completed as of this time.

Well-trained Peer Research Consultants (PRCs) provide valued assistance to librarians in freshman composition classes, at the Ask Us reference desk, and to their peers. The program has allowed librarians to provide more outreach to their subject areas.

Students prefer going to their peers for research assistance rather than a professional librarian when given the choice. The training the PRCs are provided by librarians provides credibility and trust, which encourages undergraduate students to approach PRCs for assistance.

This paper draws on multiple iterations of peer reference models to create an original program, involving training student employees to provide reference services at a paraprofessional level, as well as providing the methodology for other academic libraries to develop and launch a similar program.

This paper describes the benefits found in undergraduate students working to provide research assistance to their peers. The discussion includes how soft skills are built, along with how the position has aided in both educational and building towards their future careers. The paper is submitted for the special issue on “The future of peer-led research services.”

The authors provide a viewpoint from both a peer research supervisor and a student currently working as a PRC. The paper covers the requirements and implementations at the beginning of the program along with the changes that have occurred to better streamline the process of hiring and training. The viewpoint of the PRC was a key factor in the process.

Soft skills are a key component of the program. The undergraduate PRCs develop confidence, leadership and communication skills through interactions with their peers. The campus community is responding to the peer model because the PRCs are currently taking the same classes or have recently taken them, and the campus is now asking for the peer mentors that assist librarians in teaching introductory classes.

For libraries considering the development of their own programs, the benefits presented can lend to their proposals on real-world application beyond the college experience, as well as how it benefits the busy schedules of librarians.

The training the PRCs are provided by librarians provides credibility and trust, which encourages their peers to utilize the services. Soft skills are also one of the most requested needs for businesses beyond college. The PRC program is providing these skills, which the peer mentors use both in career readiness and their daily interactions.

This paper views a program only a few years old on how it managed through a pandemic, as well as how the supervisor adjusted training to reflect a renovation that brought about a changing desk model. With a current undergraduate PRC as the co-author, a unique perspective is brought to the writing by showing what they personally are taking away from working in the program.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the relatively hidden phenomenon of researchers who not only study dirty work but who also occupy the position of dirty workers. Drawing on the sociological debate on insider-outsider categories in research, this paper describes how these types of “dirty work/er researchers” understand and negotiate their occupational subjectivity and the methodological and epistemological resources they bring to their research practice.

Two biographical narratives from different types of “dirty work/er researchers” are analysed using a feminist epistemology of corporeality, social difference and power.

Ambivalence is an underlying dynamic of the narratives which indicate that the stigma attached to certain types of dirty work histories act to both facilitate and constrain research practice. Ambivalence disrupts strict binary categories often relied on in research such as insiders and outsiders, empowered and powerless and researcher and Other.

The experiences of “dirty work/er researchers” indicate a need to reconsider ethical, methodological, epistemological issues within social research.

Participatory research frameworks such as peer research should pay closer attention to issues of professional status, power and risk. Further research is required on what happens after peer researchers leave the field.

This paper contributes to the knowledge of the relatively hidden world of the “dirty work/er researcher”, their occupational experiences and the methodological and epistemological resources they bring to their job.

The Inspiring Change Manchester (ICM) programme has aimed to improve outcomes, including employability, for people experiencing multiple disadvantage in Manchester. This paper aims to compare learning from the ICM partnership with wider literature to demonstrate what helps people with experience of multiple disadvantage to achieve training, volunteering or work outcomes and what may prevent this.

Semi-structured interviews with people with experience of multiple disadvantage and employers in Manchester working with this group were thematically analysed, and the findings were compared to wider literature, previous ICM research and programme data. The primary research took a peer research approach. Peer researchers co-designed the topic guides, co-facilitated interviews where possible and helped to identify key themes.

Entering and succeeding in training, volunteering and/ or paid work has many positive impacts for people experiencing multiple disadvantage. Ongoing and better awareness raising will be key for more individuals to benefit from such pathways, alongside accessible recruitment processes. Continuous personal and professional development opportunities are important to positive experiences, as is organisational culture. Short-term contracts arose as an issue in the research, more needs to be done to support people with experience of multiple disadvantage into secure work.

Although there is a range of literature on good practice and challenges to enable people to engage in training or employment, this often focuses on a particular characteristic or need, rather than experiences of people facing a combination of interrelated needs. This paper also includes first-person lived experience voice, rather than this perspective being interpreted through a particular lens.

The severe underrepresentation of African American males in counseling and psychology is significant, especially in light of these fields’ mandates as health professions. In this chapter, I will use a within-race intersectionality paradigm (gender, class, skin color) to inform my analysis of factors that affect the presence of African Americans males on counseling and psychology faculties. I will briefly elucidate factors that, early on, effectively “weed out” African American males from the pool of aspirants for higher education, and thence, from counseling and psychology programs and faculties. I will apply cooperative inquiry – a radical peer-to-peer research method regarded as a well-developed action research approach – to explore Black males’ experience along a range of narratives.

The purpose of this study was to examine the application of the collaborative research supervision approach (CRSA) to learning projects in higher education, using socialisation, externalisation, combination and internalisation (SECI) dimensions. The study, therefore, examined how these dimensions assisted learners in Botswana's higher education to generate research knowledge.

The study used a mixed-method research approach and exploratory research design. Purposive sampling was used to examine how the CRSA dimensions were employed in a classroom of 111 higher education learners who were carrying out research projects. Out of this population, 97 responded to a questionnaire, and 14 learners participated in a face-to-face interview. One hundred and eleven research documents produced by learners were analysed, and 42 observations were conducted.

The study found that the four dimensions of CRSA assist greatly in the development of knowledge of the research processes. This study confirms that the CRSA in higher education institutions has the potential to enhance research knowledge and skills, build learners' confidence in research, engage in learning, reduce workload, reduce the frustration of doing research and help learners complete their work in time. Learners with weak research skills easily catch up with their average-performing peers.

It is important to recognise the methodological limitations of this study. The study used a mixed method and a single case. As a result, the results' significance cannot be justified. Additionally, the context and methodology restrict the findings' generalisability. There is obviously potential for additional cases since this article only offers a preliminary analysis of the single case issue. Consequently, the study recommends that yet another study could be conducted to check if the approach could be used for graduate learners. Another study could also be conducted to check if the approach could be used as a supervisory approach that can provide prospects for knowledge sharing and creating learning in an organisation.

The study discovered that when properly implemented, CRSA arrangement enhances research knowledge development and reduces the workload for both the supervisor and the student. When choosing this desired research supervision approach, either in terms of policy or in actual practice, it is important to take the potential for information exchange into account. This might result in improved research supervision efficacy in higher education and hence the production of better quality graduate learning projects.

This study recommends the use of the CRSA in higher education, so as to help learners with weak research skills, to collaboratively work with learners with high and average research skills. It also improves the quality of supervisor–learner learning relationship.

The research results were given to participants and respondents for approval to find out if what was written was what they said. The research results were also given to colleagues to check whether the analysis is balanced and fair and to check biases and exaggerations.