1. After reading the Raygoze article, and perhaps the optional reading, what are your thoughts and feelings on using PAR in your work as an educational researcher? What are its limits and strengths?
2. What is an issue (or issues) in your discipline that could be explored or addressed through PAR?
1. (a) After reading the Raygoza (2016) and Baum (2006) articles, I was not quite sure about my thoughts and feelings on using participatory action research (PAR) in my work as an educational researcher focused on adult education issues. Although The two articles provided me a basic understanding of the PAR concept, I was not quite sure how PAR connected to adult education. Fortunately, I found a hint in the Baum (2006) article when it stated “Adult educators in low income countries drew on these intellectual perspectives to develop a form of research that was sympathetic to the participatory nature of adult learning. This perspective was strongly supported by the work of Freire, who used PAR to encourage poor and deprived communities to examine and analyze the structural reasons for their oppression” (Baum et al., 2006, p. 854). To my surprise, PAR has deep roots within the adult education community. Its roots can be traced back to Kurt Lewin (circa 1947) and others who were focused “on exploring the impact of autocratic and democratic leadership in group behavior and the ways these ideas were applied to adult learning” (Glassman, Erdem, & Bartholomew, 2013, p. 273). Based upon Lewin’s and others work, PAR evolved through the work of William Whyte who’s “Participatory action research focused less on democratic processes and egalitarian decision making and more on understanding organizational problems through the eyes of the participants” (Glassman et al., 2013, p. 273). The final evolution of the PAR concept within the adult education community is traced to the work of Paolo Freire (circa 1970). His PAR framework is “geared toward disenfranchised populations…that must learn to escape hegemonic organizations and create their own democratic communities” (Glassman et al., 2013, p. 285). With this new understanding of PAR, I can now appreciate the relevance of using PAR in my work as an educational researcher.
ReplyDelete1. (b) I feel the limits of PAR are also its strengths. For example, PAR requires a community or group approach to identify a problem, collect and analyze data, reflect on the analysis, and then develop and implement a plan of action. Based upon the readings, when this process works it can result in impressive changes in communities or groups. However, the need for collective action can also be its weakness. The mobilization of marginalized and disenfranchised communities or groups is no easy task. Educational researchers must appreciate the fact that the existing power structure will fight to maintain the status quo. Equally important, changing the minds of marginalized or disenfranchised people is a very challenging task.
2. Finally, I feel the cyclic nature of PAR which is based upon collective or group reflection, data collection and analysis, and action/implementation can be applied to a variety of adult education initiatives. These initiatives can include: adult education reform, civic engagement, financial literacy, and health literacy.
Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of epidemiology and community health, 60(10), 854-857.
Glassman, M., Erdem, G., & Bartholomew, M. (2013). Action Research and Its History as an Adult Education Movement for Social Change. Adult Education Quarterly, 63(3), 272-288.
Raygoza, M. C. (2016). Striving Toward Transformational Resistance: Youth Participatory Action Research in the Mathematics Classroom. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 9(2), 122-152.
Rachel-
ReplyDelete1. The idea of beloved community translates easily to the counselor education classroom, especially with regard to incorporating safety to explore multicultural issues/sensitive personal growth within a group of trusted and prized fellow learners. I am curious the extent to which PAR might dissuade funding agencies from reviewing proposals. Also, I realized after reading this article, that a large national funded center I worked at previously utilized PAR principles by incorporating community advisory boards to identify areas for grant research and biannual meetings to share findings and brainstorm solutions to ongoing problems. Mutual collaboration invigorated the research and helped both groups. The strength of PAR is sharing power and amplifying voices for change. The limitation with this may be "messy" designs that also involve having things out of your control as a researcher. Given demands and limited time in academia, I don't think this should be discounted. For instance, when it comes to dissertation, I have been encouraged to have as much control as possible to ensure I can graduate.
2. Lately I've been exploring trauma-informed medical settings and counseling/supervision, especially within integrated care settings. One study proposed that integrated care settings help physicians feel less burnout (a major problem with implications for patient care), so I could build a study with physicians (helpful since they respond to collaborative leadership) that captures their experience and voice, while also hopefully leading to improved clinic relations and well-being (helpful since they're burned out and have limited time for research!). However, regardless of study outcome, the design of PAR would increase their agency and develop systems of support that might also help alleviate burnout.
1. I was emotionally affected while reading the Raygoza article. During my time as a high school counselor, I saw the negative effects not having a voice can take on adolescents (as with any human). The anecdote about the student responding to his principal's questions and feeling validated as an individual, not just a principal's office frequent flyer, especially stuck with me. Raygoza spent considerable time and put her heart and soul into creating the beloved community and supporting and working with students to engage in transformational resistance. I think this article was also helpful in the inclusion of research materials within the figures and appendices to show what actual steps in a YPAR study can look like. Probably a large part of why I am so interested in PAR and YPAR is due to its similarities to counseling; in fact, I will be presenting in class on another article (Smith, David, & Bhowmik, 2010) which cautions researchers (I'm referring to educational researchers when I say this, I know the "participants" are researchers as well) they must be willing and proficient to take a "here-and-now orientation" and use "transparency". Much like a counselor, a researcher in PAR must be able to process interpersonal dynamics, use their own personhood in their work, and be able to effectively process the personal and cultural material which WILL emerge during this work. So, much like Bob Craig mentioned above, PAR's strengths can also be seen as its difficulties/limitations. Researchers need to be aware of the emotional impact PAR will have on the participants. As also mentioned previously by Rachel, time could be a huge impediment to conducting PAR. Smith et al., 2010 list "time" as the most important obstacle, and not just the researcher's like of time, but also the student's lack of time, or any other community member's lack of time. Another potential limitation depending on your personality and outlook is the unpredictability of PAR/YPAR. While some may see flexibility as a strength of theirs and an exciting prospect, others (like me) may be uncomfortable with a lack of a clear direction and structure. Its strengths are in its attention to power/empowerment and its potential for sustainability. Sustainability is crucial to conducting research in schools. I participated in a school counseling research network recently, and sustainability was a theme throughout- why would schools want researchers to come in, get the data they need, and leave? How are we impacting schools and students on a lasting basis?
ReplyDelete2. Underserved populations in schools are often "studied" in the literature from a deficit-oriented perspective, rather than a strengths-based perspective. I could work with FGS and their families to assess their concerns and perceived barriers to college readiness and success, but also their strengths, unique perspectives, social supports, etc. We could then collaboratively develop a curriculum for a counseling group or classroom lessons or a family program which infuses their ideas to support the students and families in transition to college. It could also be interesting to work with high school students to create a curriculum/community/mentoring program for younger students in the feeder school addressed at resiliency and persistence through graduation and into postsecondary education.
-Dana Brookover
Yingying-
ReplyDeletePAR seems found some peace in the “war” between researchers and practitioners, since researchers are involved in all “actions” during the process. The Baum article described “A community action cycle was developed whereby problems were identified and prioritized, joint planning took place, and the plan was implemented and then evaluated in a participatory way. The project developed innovative and engaging ways for staff and community members to work together effectively.” Again, feels like researchers are actively involving in the “action” stage from Dewey’s knowledge-action-knowledge cycle, which to me seems like the perfect kinds of research to do in the field. Some disadvantage may be, (totally from an outsider’s perspective and forgive my ignorance here), bias??? Wouldn’t it be harder to control researchers’ bias when they have to build relationship or network with participants? Sensitivity??? When researchers are able to adapt/change the process to the situation, it seems it’s less sensitive to the design? Well, these also can be considered as the value of PAR…I guess…
Dana Kieran:
ReplyDeleteAfter reading the assigned articles, I feel that PAR has a place in educational research. Specifically from the Baum, MacDougall, Smith article I was drawn in by their description of the root of methodology as a way to allow researchers to create partnerships with communities to work towards change. The idea of leading people and empowering them to have greater control over their lives. In this article, I was able to identify other paradigms that fit nicely with PAR and found that to increase its value as a type of research approach. While reading the article about the mathematics classroom I was interested in the ways in which the teacher layered her approach to have the students understand their relevance in the world and their ability to transform it through real world application problems. Mathematics is often seen as a results oriented subject instead of understanding bigger pictures of how mathematics plays integral part in our world and adds meaning. To further my interest in this article was the layer of social justice and bringing to light the need for things to change. The connections that the students were able to make about making research more meaningful and useable were evident. In my field of study of working with individuals with disabilities, PAR could offer some benefits as a framework. It would provide individuals with disabilities the opportunity to address their goals in a meaningful way and promote change. It would be helpful for this diverse population to identify their own struggles and analyze what could possibly be done to change their outcomes in living, education, and employment. With this greater understanding, individuals with disabilities could create opportunities for improving their quality of life. I would caution that this could be a hard framework to use with this population due to the recruitment of participants and the types of disabilities they may prohibit complete understanding and interaction with the research framework.
The framework behind PAR (and especially YPAR) seems to truly embody empowerment. I truly struggled with the idea of aligning myself with the identity of a researcher. We have talked in class about the gaps between theory and practice, and researcher and practitioner; as a relational person who truly values interactions and involvement with people, becoming a "researcher" just was not very appealing. PAR seems like it would allow me to conduct research in a way that feels less apart from the people I am aiming to help and empower. It does seem possible for objectivity to be compromised as you work so closely with participants. However, my understanding of PAR includes research that allows participants to experience new realizations, construct new narratives, and take action where necessary.
ReplyDeleteHigher education often makes the case of being in support of diversity as far as student admission, or even faculty hiring. "Commitment to diversity" and "culturally competent" seem to almost be buzzwords at this level of schooling. While I am in support of underrepresented students and faculty in higher ed., I am often struck by the lack of support minority students and faculty are offered once arriving to campus. The push to be inclusive does not seem to be complemented by systems of support once candidates arrive. I would be to curious to see how underrepresented students and faculty members have functioned within their first year of doctoral studies, and what kind of supports students and faculty might like to put in place (student-faculty mentor pairing, panel discussions, community partnerships, etc.) to bring about change.
-Erin Hanley
1. When assigned the -ism presentation, I immediately wanted to investigate PAR as my topic, because I had heard a little about its values and felt that it closely aligned with a lot of my own beliefs about power, empowerment, and participants' voice. After researching it further and discovering some of the foundational thinkers of PAR,I am not surprised that I was drawn to it with my background in 20th century Latin American literature and revolutionary movements. More about this during our presentation later...
ReplyDelete2. There are numerous ways that PAR can be used in language acquisition communities (which is my Master's degree and current teaching field), and also among Christian educators. The main strength of this research method is empowerment and authentic transformation of communities, which I feel relates to the personal transformative learning (Mezirow) I have been writing about this semester and will be presenting at the Christian Association of World Language next week. I guess my pressing thought at this point is: How can the transformation of communities through PAR relate to the transformative learning of Mezirow? Is there a relationship? How could this be explored further? Does that make any sense?
Hi, everyone. Cat here.
ReplyDeleteI have to admit that the Raygoza article -yep, the one I picked- left me with more questions than answers about YPAR. (I think this is due largely to the absence of documentation of student-driven research.) For the record, I see the convergence of critical mathematics and (Y)PAR as quite effective and logical. Now that I think of it, maybe my new questions are more about critical mathematics education than PAR, per se.
Raygoza describes some of the classroom activities that might fairly be categorized as “mathematics about social justice” (emphasis on “about”). I’m currently wrestling with this question: what kind of mathematics are unfolding here? It is contextually different from the commercial/administrative mathematics that characterizes most school mathematics, but does it – as one critic has suggested – “reproduce the logic that reduces all objects and decisions to their exchange value”? I will have to chew on that one.
Look, I’m not tossing anything out yet. There is exciting potential here. Think of a PAR response to the unjust practice of tracking. What narratives about might change as a result?
Hey all, I wanted to share an abstract of an article I found for Criminal Justice and PAR. It's an interesting concept and I think it has a lot of application in the new age. Clearly, it has it's drawbacks and I am curious about what you all have to say in class for our presentations on this concept!
ReplyDeleteAbstract - The Morris Justice Project: Participatory Action Research
By: Brett G. Stoudt & María Elena Torre
Published: 2014 | Product: SAGE Research Methods Cases
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/978144627305014535358
Methods: Participatory action research
- Less information
Academic Level: Introductory Undergraduate, Intermediate Undergraduate, Advanced Undergraduate, Postgraduate
Keywords: neighborhoods
Disciplines: Anthropology, Criminology and Criminal Justice, Psychology, Sociology
Online ISBN: 9781473951334
"Designed as participatory action research, Morris Justice Project brought together a diverse group of community members (ages 16–80 years: elders, mothers, fathers, and youth) from a 42-block neighborhood in South Bronx, United States—a poor and working-class community of color with disproportionately high rates of police activity including frequent use of physical force—with City University of New York faculty, students, organizers, and Pace University lawyers. Deeply concerned about order-maintenance policing as practiced by the New York Police Department, we came together in solidarity to document and challenge the current zero-tolerance policies including the controversial tactic of ‘stop and frisk’ whereby extremely high numbers of innocent people are stopped. Meeting bi-weekly in the local library, our participatory action research collective developed a survey and distributed it to over 1,000 residents, conducted focus groups and interviews, and provided legal services. The collective analyzed the quantitative and qualitative data together using participatory analysis techniques. The findings were used toward a broad set of local and citywide actions. Using such tools as charts and maps, film, and community photo walls, the Morris Justice Project employed traditional, creative, and grassroots methods to engage ongoing community analysis of the data and facilitate public conversations about structural and legal inequalities."
Hi everyone! Preeti here,
ReplyDeleteOn reading the two articles, I see PAR and YPAR as the ways and means to bridge the gap between researchers and practitioners in the education research. The assertions made by McTaggart (1991) that PAR is “motivated by a quest to improve and understand the world by changing it and learning how to improve it from the effects of the changes made” and that it “treats people as autonomous, responsible agents who participate actively in making their own histories and conditions of life” (p.181). Both of them present the essence of PAR as a research method. The first one brings the research close to the live action in the real world. And the second one provides participants the agency of their own actions as “PAR methodology recognizes people as experts of their own knowledge and lived experience” (Raygoza, 2016, p. 126). Since education is an endeavor to develop human beings as active agents of humanity, educational research has to come up with the ways to contribute to the advancement of human knowledge and its application for making the world sustainable. In that sense, PAR and YPAR has a great potential for development of educational research. At the same time, they also inculcate a sense of proactive citizenship in the participants so as enable them to understand the social justice issues and make the valuable contributions to create an equitable society . These can also be considered as the strengths of PAR.
However, PAR and YPAR have their own limitations too. By nature itself, PAR and YPAR call for action research on the part of the participants. This kind of methodology may be subject to some challenges in terms of social desirability bias of the participants influencing the research findings and lack of safeguards to reduce participants’ and / researchers’ bias. In the educational setting, there may be some additional limitations:
The alignment and integration of YPAR with the Subject curriculum may pose a remarkable challenge.
The policy and attitude of school administration may restrict the YPAR projects to flourish.
Otherwise also, some stakeholders such as community, parents or other teachers might oppose the implementation of YPAR in the school curriculum if they are not comfortable with its alignment with the content of curriculum.
In terms of educational psychology, I see PAR as a tool that can be used:
To develop the healthy relationships between teacher and students.
To create collaborative and creative learning community
To increase autonomy support to the teachers and ultimately to the students.
To address the issue of teachers’ effective professional development and equitable career growth by exploring their social, emotional needs on their own.