Critical Emancipatory Research Paradigm: Undoing Hierarchies in the Research Process

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-189
Author(s):  
Mothofela Msimanga ◽  
Dipane Hlalele
Keyword(s):  
Research Process ◽  
Research Paradigm

Moving between theory and practice within an Indigenous research paradigm

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 418-436 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle Pidgeon
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Paradigm Shift ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Indigenous Research ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Research Projects ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Indigenous Research Methodologies

There has been a paradigm shift amongst Indigenous peoples and researchers about how research with Indigenous peoples is conceived, implemented, and articulated. The result has been referred to as the Indigenous research paradigm (Wilson, 2003) and has taken the shape of Indigenous research methodologies and processes. The purpose of this article is to discuss the tenets of the Indigenous research paradigm in relation to its practical application within two research projects conducted in higher education settings in British Columbia, Canada. In sharing how these principles are lived during the research process, it discusses how each project embodied Indigenous research processes by being respectful, relevant, responsible, and reciprocal.

Accomplished works and facts

2020 ◽  
pp. 129-149
Author(s):  
Anne Storch
Keyword(s):  
Research Process ◽  
Endangered Languages ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
User Community ◽  
Field Linguistics ◽  
Similarities And Differences

There are different traditions that focus on ‘capturing’ endangered languages such as field linguistics and documentary linguistics. They position themselves somewhat differently to the language or practices they aim to represent, their user community(/ies), and the nature of the enterprise. Focusing on aspects such as research goals, methods, outcomes, and agents, this chapter examines the similarities and differences between these traditions to uncover their ideological underpinnings based on an assessment of (classic) training manuals or guides. Despite critical voices and changes in these traditions, both remain preoccupied with amassing data to feed Northern scientific activities, notions such as objectivity, representativeness, replicability, and, among other things, asymmetries between speakers’ and researchers’ interests are not resolved. Change has not fundamentally transformed the research paradigm on endangered languages, freeing it from its colonial origins, because there is a reluctance among linguists to embrace reflexivity as part of their research process.

Family+Stories=Research

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 345-355
Author(s):  
Francis Bobongie
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Indigenous Research ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Research Project ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Family Stories ◽  
Kinship System ◽  
Torres Strait ◽  
Collection Phase

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to draw on the author’s research involving girls who leave their Torres Strait Island communities for boarding colleges in regional Queensland, Australia, and the academic, social and cultural implications that impede the transition process between community and school. While this paper discusses some of the research outcomes, its main focus is the unique indigenous research paradigm “Family+Stories=Research”, devised for and utilised within this project. This paradigm centres on the Australian indigenous kinship system and was implemented in two specific phases of the research process. These were: the preliminary research process leading up to the implementation of the research project; and the data collection phase. In turn, both phases enable the cultural significance of the kinship system to be better understood through the results. Because observations and storytelling or “yarning” were primarily used through both phases, these results also endorse the experience of the participants, and the author – both professionally and personally – without requiring further analysis. Design/methodology/approach The indigenous research paradigm and methodology unique to this research project implements the kinship system, allowing the researcher to access the appropriate resources and people for the project. Prior to the data collection phase, contact with significant community members in both boarding colleges and the Torres Strait Region was made. The methodology implemented for the research project was ethnographic and used observations, individual interviews and focus groups. The views and experiences of 26 past and present students, and 15 staff, both indigenous and non-indigenous, across three different boarding colleges were recorded. Findings Through both phases of the research project, the kinship system played a significant role in the ethnographic research process and data collection phase, which focussed on two key areas encompassed within the kinship system: “business” and the “care of children”. Stories from the researcher and the participants confirm the significant role that the kinship system can play within the indigenous research paradigm: Family+Stories=Research. Originality/value The paper introduces an indigenous research paradigm and methodology designed around two factors: family and stories. This paper brings to light the impact of the kinship system used within communities of the Torres Strait Islands and explains how this system advantaged the research process and the data collection phase by enabling the researcher to freely access stories specific to the research project.

Practical Steps to Community Engaged Research: From Inputs to Outcomes

2012 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 904-914 ◽  
Author(s):  
Malika Roman Isler ◽  
Giselle Corbie-Smith
Keyword(s):  
Research Process ◽  
Multidisciplinary Teams ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Recruitment Strategies ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Culturally Appropriate ◽  
Community Settings ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Engaged Research ◽  
Conducting Research

For decades, the dominant research paradigm has included trials conducted in clinical settings with little involvement from communities. However, concerns about the relevance and applicability of the processes or outcomes of such research have led to calls for greater community engagement in the research process. As such, there has been a shift in emphasis from simply recruiting research participants from community settings to engaging community members more broadly in all aspects of the research process. The move toward community engaged research (CEnR) is in part driven by the recognition that inclusion of diverse perspectives in multidisciplinary teams is essential to addressing complex problems. Investigators have come to recognize the inherent value of engaging community members as collaborators in multidisciplinary teams that are conducting research on issues of concern to communities. The insider perspective from community members is now recognized as essential in designing effective and well-received recruitment strategies, culturally appropriate measures, and identifying meaningful and broad-reaching venues for dissemination.

Community-Based Research

2014 ◽  
pp. 484-517
Author(s):  
Margaret R. Boyd
Keyword(s):  
Research Process ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Research Partnership ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Multiple Stakeholders ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Traditional Research ◽  
Emerging Issues ◽  
Synergistic Relationship

Community-based research challenges the traditional research paradigm by recognizing that complex social problems today must involve multiple stakeholders in the research process—not as subjects but as co-investigators and co-authors. It is an “orientation to inquiry” rather than a methodology and reflects a transdisciplinary paradigm by including academics from many different disciplines, community members, activists, and often students in all stages of the research process. Community-based research is relational research where all partners change and grow in a synergistic relationship as they work together and strategize to solve issues and problems that are defined by and meaningful to them. This chapter is an introduction to the historical roots and subdivisions within community-based research and discusses the core principles and skills useful when designing and working with community members in a collaborative, innovative, and transformative research partnership. The rationale for working within this research paradigm is discussed as well as the challenges researchers and practitioners face when conducting community-based research. As the scholarship and practice of this form of research has increased dramatically over the last twenty years, this chapter looks at both new and emerging issues as well as founding questions that continue to be debated in the contemporary discourse.

Community-Based Research: A Grass-Roots and Social Justice Orientation to Inquiry

2020 ◽  
pp. 740-771
Author(s):  
Margaret R. Boyd
Keyword(s):  
Research Process ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Community Members ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Community Based Research ◽  
Early 21St Century ◽  
Professional Boundaries ◽  
Grass Roots ◽  
Social Justice Orientation ◽  
Traditional Research

Community-based research challenges the traditional research paradigm by recognizing that complex social problems in the early 21st century must involve multiple stakeholders in the research process—not as subjects but as coinvestigators and coauthors. It is an orientation to inquiry rather than a methodology and reflects a transdisciplinary paradigm by including academics from many disciplines, community members, activists, and often students in all stages of the research process. Community-based research is relational research where all participants change and grow in a synergistic relationship as they work together and strategize to solve issues and problems that are defined by and meaningful to the community. This chapter is an introduction to the historical and philosophical roots of community-based research and discusses the core principles and skills useful when designing and working with community members in a collaborative, innovative, and transformative research partnership. The rationale for working within this research paradigm is discussed, as well as the challenges researchers and practitioners face when conducting community-based research. This chapter ends with a discussion of the continuing need for discussion, reflection, and case studies from the field regarding professional boundaries, institutional barriers, ethical research practices, and project evaluation.

Research, recovery and mental health: challenges and opportunities

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 174-179
Author(s):  
Padraig Collins ◽  
Sarah Crowe
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Traditional Approach ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Service Users ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Traditional Research ◽  
Challenges And Opportunities ◽  
Oriented Approach

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the limitations of the current research paradigm in mental health, particularly from a recovery perspective, and to suggest an alternative approach to clinical research which may be more in line with recovery principles. Design/methodology/approach – The paper will first review the dominant research methodology utilised by the mental health disciplines, discussing some of the limitations of this approach, particularly from a recovery perspective. Existing research methodologies which embody recovery principles will then be outlined, before an alternative, more recovery-oriented, approach to research is discussed. Findings – The findings from this paper suggest that the current research paradigm utilised by the mental health disciplines may not be producing the most optimal results, and that a more recovery-oriented approach could help add to the value of this research, while also involving service users and their carers in the research process in a more meaningful way. Research limitations/implications – This paper will explore possibilities for undertaking recovery-informed research, which has implications, not only for researchers, service users and their families, but also for the practice of mental health disciplines more broadly. Originality/value – This paper will introduce a critique of traditional research methodology in mental health and will present an alternative recovery-oriented approach which could help to overcome some of the limitations of the more traditional approach.

scholarly journals Beadworking as an Indigenous Research Paradigm

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-57
Author(s):  
Tiffany Dionne Prete
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous People ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Research Methodology ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Indigenous Research ◽  
Conceptual Basis ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Research Paradigms ◽  
Indigenous Research Methodology ◽  
Indigenous Worldview

In this article, I outline three principles that form the conceptual basis of an emerging Indigenous research paradigm that I call beadworking. I then relate how beadworking informs my understanding of and engagement with an Indigenous research methodology. Beadworking addresses how Indigenous Peoples’ creation of beadwork can be used to help Indigenous researchers navigate the research process, while being grounded from within an Indigenous worldview. It is my hope that in sharing my research paradigm, it will inspire other Indigenous researchers to define and articulate their own research paradigms through the unique positionality of their own Indigenous People.

Paradigmatic Confusions and the Evasion of Critical Issues in Naturalistic Research

1989 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 131-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew C. Sparkes
Keyword(s):  
Physical Education ◽  
Research Process ◽  
Methodological Pluralism ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Critical Issues ◽  
Technical Issues ◽  
Epistemological Framework

This paper considers the implications of claiming allegiance to the naturalistic research paradigm. It suggests that the two paradigms that presently dominate research into physical education are separate and distinct, with attempts to bring them together in a “marriage of convenience” being misguided. Claims for compatibility are focused upon in order to highlight the prevailing confusion between philosophical and technical issues in the research process which often leads to calls for methodological pluralism. These two issues are seen to be intimately linked in the production of a resonant research process that raises questions as to the appropriateness, and ability, of certain methodologies to properly reflect the epistemological framework in which they are embedded. The implications of such a linkage is explored, and naturalistic researchers are implored to reduce their parasitic reliance upon positivism by confronting the central dilemmas of engagement with their own antifoundational paradigm.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document