“You Get a PhD and We Get a Few Hundred Bucks”: Mutual Benefits in Participatory Action Research?

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 549-555
Author(s):  
Jennifer K. Felner
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Community Health ◽  
Participatory Action Research ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Participatory Action ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Participatory Approaches ◽  
Research Studies

Participatory action research (PAR), community-based participatory research, and other participatory approaches continue to gain popularity within the field of public health and allied disciplines in an effort to democratize the production of knowledge and contribute to sustainable community health improvements. Consequently, more students and early-career scholars will elect to incorporate participatory approaches in their dissertations and other early-career research studies in an effort to meaningfully influence community health equity in a variety of contexts. While there is a growing body of literature on the processes and challenges involved in PAR, community-based participatory research, and other participatory research, early-career scholars infrequently critically reflect on and detail learnings from their participatory research studies in the academic literature. I respond to this gap by sharing and reflecting on three critical learning points from my own youth-led PAR dissertation study examining how youth of color experience aging out of LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer or questioning)–supportive youth services. In particular, I interrogate how the processes in our academic–youth partner collaboration shaped the possibility of a mutually beneficial praxis and offer recommendations to other early-career scholars embarking on their own participatory research studies.

Finding a place for my research to belong: experiences of early-career social work participatory action researchers in neoliberal academia

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine S. Kramer ◽  
Darren Cosgrove ◽  
Sarah Mountz ◽  
Eunwoo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Participatory Action Research ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Early Career ◽  
Participatory Action ◽  
Community Based ◽  
The Us

Social workers face complex challenges that demand practice-engaged research and research-engaged practice. Participatory action research and community-based participatory research span the boundaries that often exist between the research and practice communities. Some social workers argue the values underpinning participatory action research and community-based participatory research align with the values of the profession; however, such methodologies are not widely represented in social work research in the US. This article presents the findings of a study examining the lived experiences of 15 early-career scholars, mostly based in the US, who were pursuing participatory action research and community-based participatory research. The neoliberalisation of the academy pervaded their experiences, presenting significant barriers to their ability to pursue action-oriented methodologies. Review of the international participatory action research literature also suggests the US may contrast with other regions in the world like Asia and Latin America, where participatory action research is more robust. Recommendations to better develop participatory action research social work literature are offered.

Comunidad Maya Pixan Ixim and University Researchers: Partnering in Community Health Development

2012 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-40
Author(s):  
Luis Marcos ◽  
M. Rosales ◽  
Alexander Rödlach ◽  
John Stone
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Participatory Action Research ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Healthcare Research ◽  
Local Health ◽  
Participatory Action ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Marginalized Communities ◽  
Working Together

Applied anthropologists value participatory action research (PAR). In 2008, the Society for Applied Anthropology bestowed the 2008 Bronislaw Malinowski Award upon Orlando Fals-Borda, who is best known for developing the theory and methodology of this approach and his leadership in social and political activism on behalf of and with marginalized communities. Fals-Borda argues that PAR encourages value-driven and collaboratively-conducted research that transforms the relationship between marginalized communities and the organizations that serve them so as to improve their socio-political situation (Fals-Borda and Rahman 1991). Comparably, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality of the US Department of Health and Human Services has recognized the value of community-based participatory research for both researchers and the community being studied (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality 2004:1). The Agency has emphasized the importance of academic professionals and community members working together in community-based participatory research as equal partners in developing, implementing, and using research findings to improve local health and healthcare. Community-based participatory research and participatory action research share many features.

Community-Based Participatory Research

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracey Marie Barnett
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Collaborative Action Research ◽  
Participatory Action ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Partnership Approach

Community-based participatory research (CBPR) embraces a partnership approach to research that equitably involves community members, organizational representatives, social workers, and researchers in all aspects of the research process. CBPR begins with a research topic of importance to the community and has the aim of combining knowledge with action and achieving social change. It is community based in the sense that community members become part of the research team and researchers become engaged in the activities of the community. Community–researcher partnerships allow for a blending of values and expertise, promoting co-learning and capacity building among all partners, and integrating and achieving a balance between research and action for the mutual benefit of all partners. Various terms have been used to describe this research, including participatory action research (PAR), action research (AR), community based research (CBR), collaborative action research (CAR), anti-oppressive research, and feminist research.

The Role of Identity in Motivating and Shaping the Experiences of Social Work Participatory Action Research Scholars

Affilia ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 552-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darren Cosgrove ◽  
Catherine S. Kramer ◽  
Sarah Mountz ◽  
Eunwoo Lee
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Participatory Action Research ◽  
Social Transformation ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Early Career ◽  
The Body ◽  
Power Sharing ◽  
Participatory Action ◽  
Social Work Values

Participatory action research (PAR) and Community-based participatory research (CBPR) prioritize collaborative research approaches with the goal of social transformation. Themes from this qualitative study of 15 early career social work PAR and CBPR scholars indicate that they are strongly motivated to pursue these methodologies because of their own experiences with disempowerment as well as their connection to social work values. Participants reflected upon their experiences with marginalization (due to observed and unobserved identities/experiences), which fostered a commitment to emphasizing power sharing and elevating marginalized voices. Additionally, identity played a role in how researchers experienced doing PAR/CBPR. Researchers described being simultaneously an insider and outsider in the communities in which they worked, especially the ways that their status as university researchers impacted their positioning in the communities they considered their own. This article explores how identity motivates and presents challenges that scholars must navigate when pursuing PAR/CBPR. Additionally, findings indicate that some scholars who hold marginalized identities experience increased vulnerability within academia when they engage in PAR/CBPR. Such experiences may impact whose voices are represented in the body of social work literature.

scholarly journals Adapting the Community-based Health Planning and Services (CHPS) to engage poor urban communities in Ghana: protocol for a participatory action research study

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (7) ◽  
pp. e049564
Author(s):  
Mary Abboah-Offei ◽  
Akosua Gyasi Darkwa ◽  
Andrews Ayim ◽  
Adelaide Maria Ansah-Ofei ◽  
Delanyo Dovlo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Participatory Action Research ◽  
Urban Communities ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Health Planning ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Participatory Action ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Key Stakeholders

IntroductionWith rapid urbanisation in low-income and middle-income countries, health systems are struggling to meet the needs of their growing populations. Community-based Health Planning and Services (CHPS) in Ghana have been effective in improving maternal and child health in rural areas; however, implementation in urban areas has proven challenging. This study aims to engage key stakeholders in urban communities to understand how the CHPS model can be adapted to reach poor urban communities.Methods and analysisA Participatory Action Research (PAR) will be used to develop an urban CHPS model with stakeholders in three selected CHPS zones: (a) Old Fadama (Yam and Onion Market community), (b) Adedenkpo and (c) Adotrom 2, representing three categories of poor urban neighbourhoods in Accra, Ghana. Two phases will be implemented: phase 1 (‘reconnaissance phase) will engage and establish PAR research groups in the selected zones, conduct focus groups and individual interviews with urban residents, households vulnerable to ill-health and CHPS staff and key stakeholders. A desk review of preceding efforts to implement CHPS will be conducted to understand what worked (or not), how and why. Findings from phase 1 will be used to inform and co-create an urban CHPS model in phase 2, where PAR groups will be involved in multiple recurrent stages (cycles) of community-based planning, observation, action and reflection to develop and refine the urban CHPS model. Data will be managed using NVivo software and coded using the domains of community engagement as a framework to understand community assets and potential for engagement.Ethics and disseminationThis study has been approved by the University of York’s Health Sciences Research Governance Committee and the Ghana Health Service Ethics Review Committee. The results of this study will guide the scale-up of CHPS across urban areas in Ghana, which will be disseminated through journal publications, community and government stakeholder workshops, policy briefs and social media content. This study is also funded by the Medical Research Council, UK.

Modeling the Principles of Community-Based Participatory Research in a Community Health Assessment Conducted by a Health Foundation

2009 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Jaynes Williams ◽  
Patricia Gail Bray ◽  
Carrie K. Shapiro-Mendoza ◽  
Ilana Reisz ◽  
Jane Peranteau
Keyword(s):  
Community Health ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Health Assessment ◽  
Community Based Participatory Research ◽  
Local Area ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Health Assessment ◽  
Practical Applications

The authors discuss strategies used and lessons learned by a health foundation during development of a community health assessment model incorporating community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches. The assessment model comprises three models incorporating increasing amounts of CPBR principles. Model A combines local-area analysis of quantitative data, qualitative information (key informants, focus groups), and asset mapping. Model B, a community-based participatory model, emphasizes participatory rural appraisal approaches and quantitative assessment using rapid epidemiological assessment. Model C, a modified version of Model B, is financially more sustainable for our needs than Model B. The authors (a) describe origins of these models and illustrate practical applications and (b) explore the lessons learned in their transition from a traditional, nonparticipatory, quantitative approach to participatory approaches to community-health assessment. It is hoped that this article will contribute to the growing body of knowledge of practical aspects of incorporating CBPR approaches into community health assessments.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document