In today’s Social Work Podcast, Corey too Sandy distinguish betwixt Participatory Action Research (PAR) too Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) too utter why they utilisation PAR rather than CBPR inwards their locomote amongst communities. They give examples of how challenging it is to really do PAR. They talked close the demand to span the gap betwixt enquiry too do too how that was i of their motivations for writing their text, Change Research. Throughout our conversation Sandy too Corey remove upwards lots of ideas that are perfect give-and-take points for enquiry classes, both at the masters too doctoral level.
Download MP3 [45:36]Bios
Corey Shdaimah, LL.M., PhD, is Associate Professor at the University of Maryland, School of Social Work amongst degrees inwards police force too social work. Dr. Shdaimah’s enquiry too writing focuses on how people respond too conform to policies too programs that they perceive every bit ineffective or unjust. She has investigated these responses inwards housing-related fry welfare decisions, courtroom responses to truancy, and, most recently, option criminal jurist responses to prostitution. Dr. Shdaimah relies on primarily qualitative methods, which elicit the of import insights that people receive got close improving the systems inwards which they locomote too interact. She has published numerous articles inwards journals too edited volumes too is the writer of Negotiating Justice: Progressive Lawyering, Low-Income Clients, too the Quest for Social Change (New York University Press) and, amongst Sanford Schram too Roland Stahl, Change Research: Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 Case Study of Collaborative Methods for Social Workers too Advocates (Columbia University Press).Sanford Schram has taught social theory too policy at the Graduate School of Social Work too Social Research since 1997. Schram serves on the editorial board of the Social Service Review, every bit good every bit the boards for a number of other scholarly journals. He is the writer or co-author of 7 books too co-editor of some other five. Schram’s first off mass Words of Welfare: The Poverty of Social Science too the Social Science of Poverty (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1995) won the Michael Harrington Award from the American Political Science Association inwards 1996. His most recent book, Disciplining the Poor: Neoliberal Paternalism too the Persistent Power of Race (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011), is co-authored amongst Joe Soss too Richard C. Fording too was also selected for the Michael Harrington Award for 2012, making Schram the first off soul to writer 2 books that receive got won that prestigious prize. Disciplining the Poor has also been selected for the 2012 Oliver Cromwell Cox honor from the American Sociological Association for the best mass inwards the prior 2 years for combating racism. Schram is the 2012 recipient of the Charles McCoy Career Achievement Award from the American Political Science Association.
Transcript
Introduction
IntroductionToday's episode of the Social Work Podcast is on research. Don’t plough it off. Give me a remove a opportunity to pitch it to you. Why did you lot acquire into social locomote inwards the first off place? Uh huh, um, yes, Ok, therefore I exactly heard from 100,000 of you lot too you lot all basically gave me the same answer: the pay check. I’m sorry. My producer exactly tapped me on the shoulder too said that nosotros had some cross-feed amongst the Motley Fool podcast. Because you lot wanted to brand a divergence inwards the ground – that’s why you lot got into social work. At some indicate inwards your life you lot said, “there is a occupation out at that topographic point too I want to endure share of the solution.” Still amongst me? Excellent. Ok. Research. Wait, don’t locomote anywhere. Research is how nosotros document that nosotros are really making a difference. You can’t exactly tell “this works, trust me.” Remember the DARE program? Police officers came into schools, gave out dark t-shirts amongst ruby letters, too claimed to locomote on kids off of drugs? So, afterwards spending nearly ½ billion tax-payer dollars to furnish this program, researchers evaluated the programme too learned that the kids who went through the DARE programme were NO LESS LIKELY to utilisation drugs than kids who did non locomote through the program. So, if you lot were a schoolhouse social worker passionate close keeping kids off of drugs too you lot advocated for your schoolhouse to pay for DARE instead of providing other services, you lot would receive got been sold a neb of goods. In share because of debacles similar DARE, funders are requiring community groups to demonstrate that what they are doing works. Research. So, if you lot got into social locomote because you lot wanted to brand a divergence therefore at some indicate you lot receive got to brand peace amongst the fact that enquiry is the way to document that you’re making a difference. So why are therefore many students too practitioners totally turned off yesteryear the thought of research? And why do therefore many researcher seem to endure totally dispassionate close social problems? My guests advise that i of the places where the disconnect occurs is inwards the classroom: Students come upwards inwards passionate close problems, but what they larn close is methods. For example, you’re passionate close improving the lineament of life of people amongst schizophrenia. But, instead of edifice on that passion, your enquiry course of instruction focuses on how you lot are operationalizing “quality of life,” how you lot are establishing who has schizophrenia, what measures you lot are using, the setting, type too duration of intervention, exclusion criteria, too potential sources for funding. The enquiry prof volition want to know if you lot demand to compare changes inwards betwixt 2 groups of people (ANOVA), or are you lot predicting the likelihood that someone volition endure successful inwards a for sure programme (Regression)? If you lot observe that your encephalon is turning off every bit I’m talking close research, therefore this episode is for you. If you lot observe yourself getting excited – therefore this episode is also for you. If you lot are an advocate or practitioner who has found the experience of working amongst researchers to endure completely confusing too or frustrating, this episode is for you. Basically this episode is for everyone.
Today’s episode is close how to repose the demands of doing goodness enquiry amongst the passion that practitioners too advocates receive got for addressing the social problems that human face upwards their communities. My guests are Corey Shdaimah too Sanford Schram. Dr. Shdaimah’s enquiry too writing focuses on how people respond too conform to policies too programs that they perceive every bit ineffective or unjust. She uses primarily qualitative enquiry methods to investigate these responses inwards housing-related fry welfare decisions, courtroom responses to truancy, and, most recently, option criminal jurist responses to prostitution. Dr. Schram’s enquiry too writing focuses on social theory too policy. He has written or edited 12 books. He is the only scholar to receive got won the Michael Harrington Award from the American Political Science Association twice, first off for his 1995 mass Words of Welfare: The Poverty of Social Science too the Social Science of Poverty, published yesteryear University of Minnesota Press too his most recent book, Disciplining the Poor: Neoliberal Paternalism too the Persistent Power of Race, published yesteryear University of Chicago Press, 2011. Dr. Schram is the 2012 recipient of the Charles McCoy Career Achievement Award from the American Political Science Association. Drs Shdaimah too Schram, along amongst Roland Stahl, co-authored the 2011 text that is the focus of today’s interview: Change Research: Influenza A virus subtype H5N1 Case Study on Collaborative Methods for Social Workers too Advocates published yesteryear Columbia University Press.
In today’s Social Work Podcast, Corey too Sandy distinguish betwixt Participatory Action Research (PAR) too Community-Based Participatory Research (CBPR) too utter why they utilisation PAR rather than CBPR inwards their locomote amongst communities. They give examples of how challenging it is to really do PAR. They talked close the demand to span the gap betwixt enquiry too do too how that was i of their motivations for writing their text, Change Research. Throughout our conversation Sandy too Corey remove upwards lots of ideas that are perfect give-and-take points for enquiry classes, both at the masters too doctoral level. They utilisation lots of large words too throw around lots of large ideas, AND you lot tin nevertheless tell that they are passionate close making the ground a improve place.
For those of you lot interested inwards learning to a greater extent than close doing the sort of community-based alter enquiry that nosotros utter close inwards today’s episode, I posted a listing of resources on socialworkpodcast.com that Corey real generously provided. You tin connect amongst other social workers at the Social Work Podcast Facebook page, www.facebook.com/swpodcast, or follow the Twitter feed @socworkpodcast. You tin brain to the Social Work Podcast from socialworkpodcast.com, yesteryear downloading the episodes through iTunes or whatever number of other apps, or you lot tin current the 10 most recent episodes correct from your mobile device using the Stitcher Radio mobile app (http://stitcher.com/s?fid=31925&refid=stpr). One quick annotation close the interview: I recorded it at Sandy’s beautiful household inwards Philadelphia inwards Nov of 2011 correct afterwards the mass was published. At the fourth dimension of the interview Corey was a not-yet-tenured assistant professor at the University of Maryland at Baltimore. She has since been awarded tenured too promoted to associate professor. Congratulations Corey.
And now, without farther ado, on to episode 82 of the Social Work Podcast. The Challenges too Rewards of Collaborative Community-Based Social Work Research: Interview amongst Corey Shdaimah too Sanford Schram.
Interview
Corey, Sandy, give cheers you lot therefore much for beingness hither today too talking on the Social Work Podcast close your book, Change Research. The first off inquiry that I receive got is, therefore inwards your mass you lot distinguish betwixt community-based participatory enquiry too participatory activity research, tin you lot tell us what the divergence is?Corey: Community-based participatory enquiry is relatively new, it comes out of earth wellness research. When I tell relatively novel probably, the yesteryear fifteen years, too starting to remove too definitely very, real pop correct now. And I’d tell inwards its most idealistic models, it does remove the input of people who were affected yesteryear problems seriously inwards damage of enquiry too how nosotros should do enquiry inwards monastic tell to engage them inwards solutions. However, if you lot aspect too for the mass nosotros really did a review of mag articles, for example, published on community-based research.
It’s real hard to avoid the feeling that community-based enquiry is non necessarily community driven. That it is largely researchers who involve the community inwards monastic tell to sympathise how to acquire them to endure to a greater extent than compliant, how to acquire them to endure to a greater extent than amongst the program. It’s largely focused on problems that are very, real of import problems, I don’t want to diminish the importance. In the mass nosotros utter this every bit well, nosotros are addressing, let’s say, obesity or cancer or things that impact people, but real much focus on individualized medicalize understandings of problems, the source of the problems, too agreement of how to solve them, right.
So how do nosotros acquire depression income minority women to locomote acquire mammogram, concealment themselves for pectus cancer, to swallow better, those sort of things. And I watch real fiddling evidence of people doing community-based participatory research, where they involve the community inwards all aspects. So for example, if nosotros are trying to holler back close asthma prevention, nosotros locomote into a community-and tell to them, what do you lot holler back close that? Maybe they’ll say, I wishing the factories were located somewhere else. But really what most of it is, are nosotros trying to acquire them to receive got people halt smoking inwards homes or how to do preventative treatments but non really address systemic issues.
So I holler back that to me says nosotros haven’t really asked people what do they want to watch inwards their communities. We are looking at fairly narrow parameters that researchers are setting, therefore when they invite the community in, at that topographic point are decisions that receive got already been made. Again, at that topographic point are exceptions to this rule, too I holler back that some of the broadest community participatory decisions or ideal programs really laid broader parameters for participation but most of the projects that nosotros are seeing are individualized too do non involve community except really to the extent of how tin nosotros acquire them to acquire onboard amongst the programme that we’ve set.
The participatory activity enquiry really comes out of a model from the ’70s. And it really has an ethical too a moral base. I’m non engaging the community inwards monastic tell to holler back close how to endure to a greater extent than effective. I am engaging the community or people that are affected yesteryear a occupation because I am morally obligated to do so. I am going to come upwards up amongst recommendations that are going to impact people’s lives. And it’s really non ethically responsible for me to do that without talking to them. And I holler back that that moral ground makes a real large divergence inwards how nosotros approach people.
People know when they are beingness approached instrumentally every bit a way to a goal rather than I receive got a describe solid belief that you lot should receive got a tell inwards what affects you. And I holler back that that moral ground is much to a greater extent than inwards describe amongst social locomote values. So nosotros tin do participatory-based enquiry but really nosotros should endure doing it only if it comes from that moral base.
The other thing that I similar close participatory activity enquiry is nosotros receive got those pieces of participation, too that’s total participation because I am morally obligated to involve you lot at whatever stages you lot want to endure involved, setting the questions, determining what sort of enquiry to do, thinking close how to interpret, thinking close how to utilisation the research. And that’s where the activity piece, I am doing research, in i lawsuit again similar we’ve said non for its ain sake but I know from the offset that I want something to come upwards from it. I want at that topographic point to endure activity that comes out of it. And to a greater extent than oft than non that activity is where advocates really receive got their – the competence too skills where researchers don’t.
So it also points to a greater extent than to a collaboration that recognizes the dissimilar science sets too the dissimilar expertise that researchers too advocates remove to the table. And it puts them I holler back to a greater extent than on par. And I holler back that that’s the other thing that I observe appealing too dissimilar close PAR when nosotros are thinking close enquiry amongst advocates or when nosotros are thinking close enquiry amongst communities. And I watch them every bit key differences, it’s non exactly the linguistic communication thing, it’s non just, “Oh, this is the ’70s, too straightaway nosotros are up, too it’s afterwards 2000 too nosotros demand to holler back differently.” But I really holler back nosotros demand to holler back close what is the ground why nosotros are doing this, too that give-and-take matters.
Jonathan: So you lot are really advocating for participatory activity research, PAR, every bit the approach. If you lot are genuinely engaging amongst the community, amongst what the community wants at the occupation level, at the how do nosotros locomote close this too what are nosotros looking to locomote out of this rather than the CBPR, which you lot are describing every bit how tin nosotros acquire buy-in from a community to improve compass our goals every bit academics, every bit researchers, every bit policymakers, that sort of thing.
Sanford: I holler back that’s true, I holler back in i lawsuit again it goes dorsum to whether or non nosotros are interested inwards noesis for its ain sake too nosotros are preoccupied amongst method driven enquiry versus noesis that’s going to serve the community too nosotros are interested inwards occupation driven research, that’s going to inform community’s efforts to address the problems they are struggling with. Ultimately it’s close control.
So a lot of people inwards the enquiry community are saying, ‘Look, if you’re going to do existent participatory activity research, you lot are going to lose credibility, your enquiry is non going to receive got its ain integrity, you lot are going to lose control. And the termination is you’re non going to endure able to determine whether the enquiry was done properly, whether or non the interpretations are objective, whether or non you lot are really beingness scientific, therefore on too therefore forth.’
What I holler back they are missing at that topographic point is that yesteryear giving upwards command inwards a participatory activity project, where your partners from the community are the ones that are inwards control. They are setting the agenda. This is our problem, this is what nosotros are struggling with. This is how nosotros watch enquiry plumbing equipment in, nosotros similar the enquiry conducted inwards a credible fashion, but to serve our efforts to address that problem. When you lot give them control, what you’re really gaining is a lot of local noesis that is intimately familiar amongst the problems they are struggling with. And you lot every bit a researcher are learning that much more.
And you lot are inwards a topographic point straightaway to participate inwards a projection that is much to a greater extent than informed close what the occupation is, too how it ought to endure addressed too how it ought to endure researched. So I holler back at that topographic point is ability to endure gained inwards giving upwards command too beingness inwards alliance amongst the community, that’s going to non exactly aid serve the community, but brand your enquiry better.
Jonathan: So how did that play out inwards the projection you lot are involved in?
Sanford: I think, having said what I exactly said, I hateful inwards all honesty too I promise people read the mass too relish the story nosotros tell because it’s non easy. In other words anything that’s worth doing too doing good is difficult, too community based-research, participatory activity research, if you lot are going to do it really well, too really endure inwards alliance amongst people, at that topographic point are challenges. It’s exactly similar doing whatever other sort of research, at that topographic point is a goodness way to do it, at that topographic point is a bad way to do it.
And nosotros were really committed to working amongst our community partners to receive got a genuinely participatory activity enquiry projection that could inform their efforts inwards trying to brand a divergence on these housing issues inwards Philadelphia. And at that topographic point were times when nosotros said nosotros can’t do that or at that topographic point are times when nosotros say, “Well, you’re bespeak me to do things that every bit a researcher is non really a goodness thought to do.” And at that topographic point were tensions too at that topographic point were struggles.
And every bit Corey said, nosotros all had dissimilar roles, the community advocates had their roles, the researchers had their roles, too at times every bit everyone was preoccupied nosotros are trying to fulfill their role every bit good every bit they could. We come upwards into conflict too nosotros would receive got to struggle amongst that, too nosotros tell that story too how nosotros locomote that out. And ultimately what it’s close is relationships too trust too respect, too these are things that nosotros oft don’t utter close when nosotros utter close enquiry but they are essential.
Corey: And I tin really give an instance that nosotros utter close inwards the mass on this. So i thing was really our advocate partners knew a lot to a greater extent than close this expanse than nosotros did. None of us were housing researchers, too nosotros talked close inwards some way how that give them leverage too it made us to a greater extent than attractive to them. We were goodness researchers, nosotros knew what nosotros are doing inwards damage of our arts and crafts too nosotros had worked inwards similar areas. So nosotros would see people’s homes, nosotros would do the information analysis on the sort of homes that people were living in, too the sort of problems they are facing.
And nosotros were coming upwards – nosotros kept coming dorsum to the same question. We receive got a high aeroplane of homeownership inwards Philadelphia, but people are living inwards homes that are inwards extreme state of disrepair. And it’s real expensive for people to alive inwards homes inwards disrepair. So you’ve got leaky windows, therefore your heating costs are really high, too they swallow a huge per centum of their income, therefore nosotros kept thinking to ourselves, this is leading us to the conclusion that why should nosotros endure advocating for supportive homeownership.
And nosotros came to our enquiry partners amongst this, therefore their first off reaction is, this isn’t really the story nosotros want to tell. Right straightaway nosotros are advocating for habitation repair so. But through that conversation, nosotros didn’t surrender that share of the story, that share of the story is there, too nosotros insisted on telling that share of the story. That’s share of what I utter close when I tell beingness opened upwards to unexpected findings, including findings that mightiness non endure what you lot had hoped for if you lot had a goal every bit an advocate.
On the other hand, inwards our conversations amongst them, too at that topographic point were challenges to us close that. We came to sympathise homeownership at a whole dissimilar level. Homeownership, nosotros realized, nosotros would receive got stopped there, but therefore the utter amongst them, it made us realize that homeownership is really very, real of import despite the disrepair, too it is therefore inwards several ways. So homeownership is of import because when you lot aspect at the alternative, right, it’s non therefore great. It’s non similar nosotros had goodness rental housing, it’s non similar nosotros receive got plenty rental housing.
So a lot of times the option to living inwards a habitation that’s real expensive to maintain too is falling apart around your ears is that you lot demand to endure really endure out on the streets. So looking at, they pushed us to aspect at the alternatives too Pb us to say, yeah, really right, nosotros should endure looking at programs that are geared at low-income homeowners. The other thing is that their agreement of community too they are putting inwards touch, us inwards touch, for example, for some of the qualitative interviews that nosotros did amongst homeowners made us sympathise that regardless of whether homeownership is helpful economically, people experience that it’s of import for them.
And that’s non something that would’ve come upwards through if it was only enquiry driven yesteryear a bunch of researchers. That comes through from their intimate noesis of community, every bit therefore if a soul tells me that she cares close living inwards a habitation because she feels, it makes her experience similar it’s share of community, fifty-fifty if it’s driven yesteryear suicidal understandings that nosotros could critique every bit beingness critical too analytic researchers.
If it nevertheless way something to those people inwards the community, therefore it’s of import for us to consider. And that’s non something that I holler back nosotros would receive got considered if nosotros were coming from the outside, too nosotros stopped our conversation yesteryear maxim this is what nosotros found too non talking to our WCRP advocate counterparts. And I holler back that that does necktie into our social locomote values. We are non doing this for our ain sake or to acquire the coin that they top for the resources or to locomote on our jobs. We are doing this because nosotros attention close the community, that the community is facing problems. And for me to determine for them where they should endure is anathema to social locomote inwards my eyes.
Jonathan: Which brings upwards some other inquiry for me which, therefore who did you lot write this mass for?
Sanford: I holler back it’s really interesting to acquire dorsum into the mass too holler back close it because of every bit it evolved it became clear to us that nosotros were writing on multiple levels to a diverseness of audiences. And Corey insisted that nosotros alter the subtitle to receive got advocates inwards there. And afterwards a piece I started to appreciate that nosotros were writing for advocates who real oft are real skeptical close enquiry too the role it tin play, real oft because they watch researchers is preoccupied amongst trying to acquire the truth objectively, independently, irrespective of how it mightiness affair to what they are trying to achieve.
So that became an of import audience. We were also interested inwards talking to our enquiry colleagues close how professional person social locomote researchers receive got dissimilar ways of going close doing enquiry too that it doesn’t receive got to endure disconnected, therefore at that topographic point is a pushback on that side every bit well. But nosotros also I holler back felt that nosotros were talking to social locomote practitioners who real oft experience that enquiry doesn’t really speak to them, tell similar what is the evidence-based practice, does it really relate to what I’m trying to do, how do I apply this research? And nosotros receive got a give-and-take that runs through the mass close that every bit well.
But I holler back inwards the destination nosotros really felt nosotros were also talking to students, students non exactly at the doctoral aeroplane that are going to endure interested inwards learning to do enquiry too contribute to social locomote noesis but also master copy students who are required to remove enquiry courses where the text are oft recipe cookbook method driven rules too how to really deport research, where they oft don’t watch the connexion to the thought of similar helping people, caring close people, trying to brand things improve inwards the world.
Corey: The mass was also an endeavour to brand things to a greater extent than transparent, too for everybody. Initially I was thinking, nosotros were inwards some ways trying to reveal the enquiry procedure for advocates who are thinking about, nosotros don’t really sympathise what goes on here. We are non really for sure why nosotros demand this but we’ve been told that nosotros demand this, because nosotros needed to locomote on our funding or nosotros needed to convince policymakers but nosotros don’t really sympathise how it happens. And nosotros don’t really sympathise why it’s important, too it’s non really important, it’s exactly something that nosotros demand to do because nosotros are required to do it.
And that way that a lot of advocates are straightaway having to engage amongst enquiry without having the leverage too the agreement to really impact what questions acquire asked, how the enquiry gets used, how nosotros sympathise our findings. And I holler back yesteryear making that procedure to a greater extent than human, yesteryear telling our ain story is to a greater extent than engaging. It also gives them leverage when they are working amongst researchers to figure out what questions to ask, how to concur researchers accountable, demystifying the enquiry process. So I holler back that that was also the demystification too humanizing the enquiry process.
So a lot of times you lot aspect at a enquiry textbook, too it says this is what you lot should do every bit if learning how to do that sprung fully-formed from the authors. But everyone who is engaged inwards enquiry goes through a procedure of learning how to do it, figuring out what it means. The other thing is that the mass really, nosotros tin holler back it’s close enquiry or for enquiry classes, but I also holler back it would endure useful, for example, inwards policy classes or community organizing classes, thinking close if I’m going to endure involved inwards an organizing effort, how would I utilisation enquiry inwards monastic tell to heighten those efforts, how do I sympathise enquiry that other people are throwing at me, how do I holler back close how to bundle this or how to explicate this to a policy audience.
Jonathan: So every bit you lot guys were exactly talking about, at that topographic point is this thought inwards most enquiry textbooks that enquiry is objective too it follows a recipe. And it seems to endure impersonal, but inwards your text you lot really fighting that passion too a dedication to social jurist is essential to doing goodness research. And you lot advise that social work’s traditional approach really takes the advocacy too social jurist out of research. And you lot argued that social locomote enquiry doesn’t receive got to endure that way too shouldn’t endure that way. So how tin someone endure passionate close a topic without beingness likewise biased? And how tin someone who is passionate close a receive endure a goodness researcher?
Corey: I holler back at that topographic point is really 2 questions inwards there. So possibly I’ll remove the first off i first. Again I’m going to force on our research, on our code of ethics. So inwards social locomote nosotros receive got a value scheme that’s inwards place. Some of those values are close non-disempowering practice, close trying to locomote amongst people who mightiness endure marginalized, whether they are marginalized from a policy arena or societally, too for trying to locomote towards jurist too equity too fairness. And you lot can’t remove whatever of the activities that were required to do every bit social workers or social locomote educators, too split them from the value-based. The value-based applies to all our activities.
And those activities include research. That is something that you lot were supposed to endure doing, it’s non split from, it’s non a dissimilar activity, therefore those values are supposed to infuse enquiry at the ground of research. So I don't really watch that every bit social workers nosotros tin endure ethical social workers if nosotros split the values. It’s not, nosotros don’t do enquiry for its ain sake, nosotros do enquiry inside the framework too for the purposes of furthering our ethical commitments to our clients, too our clients are broadly defined. If you lot aspect at the Definition of clients it includes individuals too families too communities too society.
So nosotros demand to holler back close the impact of our enquiry on all of our clients too nosotros also demand to holler back close who nosotros do locomote with. So if nosotros are doing research, therefore it’s the outcome of the enquiry but it’s also the procedure of the research. Are nosotros doing enquiry inwards a way that is respectful? Are nosotros doing enquiry inwards a way that is empowering, or at to the lowest degree non disempowering? Are nosotros doing enquiry inwards a way that is exactly too equitable?
So I holler back that needs to endure really where nosotros start from ever inwards all of our activities. I don’t know if you lot want to speak to that earlier nosotros sort of tackle the side yesteryear side part, which is, tin you lot inwards fact do goodness research, but I don't know if you lot don’t want to speak to the ethical piece.
Sanford: I holler back they are related, therefore I holler back to some extent our mass is promoting enquiry too the role it tin play inwards social locomote practice, inwards social locomote advocacy, inwards social alter efforts. On the other mitt inwards many ways the mass is also a critique of mainstream conventional ways of how to deport enquiry every bit social workers, every bit professionals, every bit scholars, researchers too therefore on too therefore forth. So its alter researches upon. You receive got to alter how you lot do enquiry if you’re going to do enquiry that promotes change. So it cuts inwards both directions.
And I holler back that’s because nosotros recognize that values every bit Corey was maxim informed the entire enquiry procedure from the topics you lot select to the efforts you lot position frontward on how to pattern a projection to the methods of information collection to, of course, how you lot translate that too force conclusions too how you lot advise that relates to do or efforts to locomote inwards the community. So I holler back it’s really clear too nosotros totally fundamentally refuse the fact value dichotomy too nosotros want researchers to endure to a greater extent than sensitive to how values are infused throughout the entire enquiry process.
And I holler back when people start to do that, they locomote to a greater extent than self-conscious, to a greater extent than reflexive close the role of values, their ain values inwards research, possibly yesteryear doing what nosotros did, which is reverberate upon our ain involvement inwards the enquiry process, inwards the advocacy exertion too how our ain values, our ain interests, our ain concerns were real much constantly beingness challenged yesteryear others, too nosotros had to holler back close that.
I holler back it’s going to Pb to a to a greater extent than robust objectivity, a to a greater extent than reflexive objectivity, that’s aware of the illimitable role that values play inwards all enquiry regardless of how nosotros want to utter about.
Corey: And I holler back at that topographic point is a way inwards which – I hateful I want to endure clear also close our – the thing close the social locomote code of ethics, nosotros are supposed to do research. It just, it’s non that you lot say, ‘Oh, nosotros receive got values too that we’ll only do enquiry if they are … ’ It’s non that, it’s that we, therefore to reiterate that Sandy is maxim nosotros demand to enshroud enquiry but nosotros demand to holler back close what sort of enquiry too how it’s done too why.
And when I holler back close your question, tin you lot do enquiry inwards a way that’s biased? I hateful inwards some ways what nosotros are saying, at that topographic point is ever a bias. Research is created yesteryear human beings amongst human beings for human beings, therefore the thought that at that topographic point tin endure no bias. So really for me it’s to a greater extent than close beingness transparent close what your bias is, if you lot receive got one. It’s close thinking systematically. And I’d tell i of the other hallmarks is thinking close beingness opened upwards to unexpected findings.
And those are things that mightiness – too Roland too I receive got really written close this inwards some of our other pieces that nosotros are share of the ground for the book. What happens is at that topographic point is some line, researchers too advocates are non fungible. There is some describe where you lot say, nosotros locomote together but nosotros had dissimilar roles. And where would that role start to blur inwards a way that researchers tin no longer endure valuable to advocacy efforts because they’ve lost both the legitimacy too the skills too the crafts that brand them valuable.
And I holler back those mightiness endure some of the exterior parameters. The infinitesimal nosotros are non opened upwards to unexpected findings, it doesn’t hateful nosotros shouldn’t acquire by amongst them too what do nosotros do amongst them, but the thought that nosotros tin alter it for whatever is happening. No, therefore that would endure i hallmark of what keeps a researcher fifty-fifty when they are involved inwards advocacy efforts. Again, beingness systematic too transparent, beingness clear close what steps you lot are taking, too beingness willing to endure opened upwards to debate your findings, to endure inwards dialogue both amongst an academic community too amongst the community of practitioners too amongst the policy community. And beingness able to ground through saying, ‘Okay, this is why I am maxim what I’m saying,’ too beingness opened upwards to taking inwards novel information.
And I holler back those were some of the hallmarks of what would locomote on researchers honest every bit researchers too it would locomote on them valuable than to advocacy efforts. Because the advocates don’t want to lose our value every bit researchers because therefore nosotros are exactly to a greater extent than advocates, too nosotros every bit researchers also receive got our ain professional person norms too our ain integrity close our research. So I don’t holler back that the thought of having values is mutually exclusive, too I don’t holler back the thought of bias precludes you lot from beingness a goodness researcher every bit long every bit you lot are opened upwards amongst yourself too amongst others close what those biases mightiness be.
I holler back at that topographic point is a existent temptation to think, oh, the infinitesimal you’re working on something relevant every bit opposed to something real distant, too ivory tower, that it’s somehow tainted. But at that topographic point is a growing - too nosotros do write close this inwards some of the initial chapters inwards the mass - at that topographic point is a growing tendency across discipline, if nosotros are talking close world sociology or of, if nosotros are talking close phronetic social science, a want to endure involved. Why are nosotros doing research? If you lot aspect dorsum at the roots of social science, it really was to holler back close relevant social problems too how nosotros tin alter those.
So somehow the thought that if nosotros are therefore distance from that, too if nosotros stopped caring that that makes us improve researchers, I am non for sure that that really holds H2O or if it really is what nosotros are calling traditional social science. And that’s the other slice I holler back that that when you lot had asked the inquiry close traditional social locomote research. If you lot really aspect at our roots inwards social locomote research, therefore the traditional or the pre-social locomote tradition, if you lot aspect at people similar Jane Adams, they were non doing distance research. They were non doing enquiry because they didn’t care. And it didn’t hateful that they weren’t doing goodness research.
So if nosotros aspect at our roots inwards social work, our roots is inwards enquiry that makes a difference, where at that topographic point is an of import value on research, what it tin do for people, but doing it inwards a way that does non locomote against the values are the real things that nosotros are instead inwards promoting or shoring up. So I holler back inwards social locomote at that topographic point are 2 traditions. There is the existent traditional tradition, our roots, too nosotros do write close that, too therefore at that topographic point is the novel tradition, which is to a greater extent than driven inwards share yesteryear funding too inwards share yesteryear ideas of positivistic social science.
But I holler back if nosotros really aspect at our roots too really aspect at why it is, what makes social locomote enquiry possibly dissimilar from other forms of enquiry or goodness leader inwards the displace to holler back close doing relevant enquiry that makes the divergence to communities too that takes inwards a polyphony of voices. We are goodness instance inwards social work, too that’s something that nosotros should endure bringing frontward too sharing too talking close rather than trying to run afterwards too do goodness enquiry inwards someone else’s eyes or what nosotros holler back volition acquire us to a greater extent than funding.
Jonathan: So, Corey, I thought it was really interesting, you lot were really emphasizing this indicate that when social worker researchers halt beingness value-based, is it really social locomote enquiry that nosotros are doing? What constitutes valuable enquiry inwards academia does non necessarily overlap amongst what constitutes valuable enquiry inwards the community. And furthermore community agencies bargain amongst timeframes too evaluation needs that are real dissimilar than those of typical academic research, therefore how tin researchers locomote amongst advocates inwards a way that’s respectful to their goals piece retaining their scholarly integrity?
Corey: Again, I holler back that at that topographic point are factors inwards academia that force for sure ways too therefore element inwards the exterior ground that force other ways. The most of import thing I holler back when researchers are working amongst academics is to lay out what are the factors that are influencing their choices.
Jonathan: So when researchers are working amongst academics or …?
Corey: Sorry, when researchers are working amongst community groups. So the community grouping has a timeframe too they have, for example, the enquiry has a purpose. If you lot holler back close our book, at that topographic point was a item crusade that they were trying to – they were trying to acquire coin inwards the metropolis council, metropolis council to vote coin inwards a habitation repair budget, therefore at that topographic point is a for sure timeframe for that, at that topographic point is a for sure context for that. So beingness upfront close what that context is too what the parameters are is helpful inwards negotiating, tin this endure a mutually beneficial project? And non ignoring that. Because if the projects are non mutually beneficial, they’re in all likelihood non going to work.
Jonathan: So what would endure beneficial to a researcher that wouldn’t endure beneficial to the advocates?
Corey: So, for example, too this mightiness differ from researcher to researcher, therefore remove me because the mass is real personal – a personalize account. So I’m on a tenure-track topographic point at a academy that prizes research. So that way if I want to locomote on my task for a length of time, what I demand to do is I demand to endure publishing inwards peer-reviewed journals, I demand to receive got a for sure output, I demand to do a for sure type of research, too it needs to endure published inwards a for sure arena.
That is a procedure that unremarkably takes a fiddling flake to a greater extent than time. The products that I mightiness create that would endure accepted inwards a scholarly publication mightiness endure pitched inwards a way that would non endure helpful inwards a policy arena. It mightiness endure a fiddling flake opaque, it mightiness endure likewise long, it mightiness utilisation linguistic communication that is off-putting, nobody volition attention close my methods. So that’s something I demand to endure upfront about.
On the other hand, nosotros receive got – advocates who receive got specific goals too needs that they have. Sandy too I nosotros do too Roland, nosotros write close this inwards the book, nosotros are both real lucky that nosotros are at institutions that furnish some supports. So piece I do receive got those factors that mightiness force against me working less amongst advocacy groups. I mean, that’s the other share of it that this sort of enquiry is real time-consuming. And if I’m supposed to create 12 articles inwards vi years, I mightiness non receive got the fourth dimension to sit down amongst the advocates too assay to sympathise what they are trying to do too therefore trying to explicate my enquiry procedure to them. So that’s some other element that pushes against academics working amongst community groups or amongst advocates. Can I, for example, create 2 dissimilar kinds of reports or a written report that would endure valuable inwards a policy arena but that is of import to endure based on my enquiry but tin I also possibly write an article from this that volition endure useful to people exterior of the metropolis of Philadelphia who are thinking out habitation repair.
Sanford: I holler back your existent challenge is, I mean, this projection was sort of interesting because first off i way of looking at it, exactly the way it was authorized too funded too the way nosotros got to boot it off, nosotros locomote to the Institutional Review Board to acquire approving to do enquiry amongst the community therefore that they tin improve the housing budget, the habitation repair budget, acquire the affordable housing trust fund created inwards Philadelphia, therefore nosotros acquire that approved. And therefore afterwards a piece I said to Corey too Roland, I said you lot guys would receive got to locomote dorsum to the IRB too acquire a instant projection approved, a projection to study the project.
So there, correct at that topographic point you lot watch at that topographic point is like, nosotros are doing enquiry inwards the community too that’s for the community inwards that sense, but therefore nosotros also decided to receive got a instant project, which became the book, which is sort of reflecting upon our ain involvement. So I holler back it tin endure a win-win, I personally refuse the thought that at that topographic point really should endure a disjuncture, at that topographic point is a juncture betwixt doing scholarly enquiry that’s objective, scientific too therefore on, too doing community-based research, which is sort of oft dismissed every bit yesteryear the topographic point of your pants too partisan too therefore on therefore forth.
So I refuse the thought that they are noesis for its ain sake, noesis doesn’t receive got a sake. Knowledge every bit people oft tell is to serve some end, too that destination I would promise to endure laudable that it improves the well-being of people inwards the community. So for me it’s never been this sort of thing nosotros receive got to choose. I do holler back institutionally what’s interesting is at that topographic point is this sort of real similitude, exactly every bit nosotros were writing close the neoliberalization of housing policy too the procedure yesteryear which programs acquire evaluated too decided too how it’s real much performance driven, nosotros receive got to document outcome, therefore on too therefore forth inwards ways that oft I holler back is likewise bottom-line oriented too is dismissive of option approaches, similar helping depression income people remain inwards their homes.
There is a neoliberalization of higher instruction of social locomote where high-impact mag performance has to endure demonstrated that you’ve published inwards X amount of articles inwards X amount of journals that are this aeroplane of visibility, irrespective of the existent lineament or to what extent it contributes to the community.
So for me I am non really that interested inwards method driven research, though I abide by all my colleagues too all those methods that enable us to create credible information that’s going to serve the community, therefore if you lot want to do clinical trials, too that’s going to help, great. If you lot are going to do surveys, that’s great. If you lot are going to do an analysis of secondary information that has been produced inwards highly quantitative ways, that’s great.
On the other mitt I holler back it should endure occupation driven, too that’s why I am a proponent of mix methods, remove a occupation that’s related to making the ground a improve place, a occupation that people are struggling with, too therefore utilisation every bit many dissimilar methods every bit you lot tin inwards every bit competent too capable a fashion, professional. However you lot want to utter close it, scientific, to address that problem.
Problem-driven enquiry from the bottom upwards that helps the community struggle too address the concerns it has is the existent sort of noesis that I holler back inwards the destination I holler back Corey is correct that nosotros haven’t been alone neoliberalized, that at that topographic point is plenty of our colleagues too plenty of our institutional leaders appreciate goodness locomote that really serves the community. And if you lot exactly ignore all of the other pressures, I holler back you lot tin acquire that done.
Corey: That’s i of the ground nosotros don’t dictate a item sort of research. Really the only sort of enquiry that nosotros tell must endure gone is thoughtful enquiry that is filtered through the lens of social locomote values rather than whatever item method. It’s really close the opinion that nosotros remove when nosotros are approaching research. And if nosotros remove a enquiry stance, a alter enquiry stance, what nosotros really would endure doing, nosotros would endure thinking close the impact that our enquiry has too who it has an impact on, too therefore involving people inwards the broadest way possible inwards every aspect inwards the enquiry stage, including how it gets used.
Sanford: I holler back nosotros are at pains inwards the book, too I want to underscore that hither is that nosotros are close trying to opened upwards things up, creating to a greater extent than possibilities that at that topographic point should endure methodological pluralism, that at that topographic point is a fourth dimension too identify for a diverseness of dissimilar types of research, some of it is non intimately involved inwards the communities where it is fourth dimension to stair dorsum too assay to acquire some facts, independent. There is a identify for that.
I holler back what nosotros are trying to do is trying to write the repose that things receive got locomote a fiddling flake likewise imbalanced where to a greater extent than too to a greater extent than force per unit of measurement area is to only do the enquiry independent of the community where nosotros sort of similar lost our way where nosotros are preoccupied amongst the method, nosotros are preoccupied amongst getting the evidence irrespective of whether it’s inside a for sure context or whether it really serves a for sure community.
And nosotros are only trying to write the repose too say, at that topographic point is a identify for beingness connected to the community, too that that’s really important, too nosotros are losing sight of that every bit the force per unit of measurement area grows for us to document performance whether it’s evidence-based do or programme evaluation or performance administration systems or the neoliberalization of doing goodness generally, to document statistically demonstrate performance according to standards that are laid yesteryear somebody else.
So I holler back nosotros were trying to exactly say, let’s non forget where nosotros come upwards from, too what we’ve been involved inwards traditionally, too how of import that is, too sort of remove that dorsum inwards to non close it downward but opened upwards it up.
Jonathan: Thank you lot therefore much for taking the fourth dimension to utter to us close Change Research. I promise that lots of folks read the mass because the stories that you lot tell them at that topographic point are exactly first-class illustrations to a lot of these concepts.
Corey: Thank you, Jonathan.
Sanford: Thank you, Jonathan, for having us.
Online transcription provided yesteryear Rev.com
References
Shdaimah, C. S., Stahl, R. W., & Schram, S. (2011). Change research: a instance study on collaborative methods for social workers too advocates. New York: Columbia University Press.
Collaborating amongst community members adds a critical dimension to social locomote research, providing practitioners amongst intimate noesis of a community's goals too needs piece equipping community advocates amongst vital skills for social change. Sharing the inspiring story of i such partnership, Corey Shdaimah, Roland Stahl, too Sanford F. Schram recount their efforts working amongst an affordable housing coalition inwards Philadelphia, helping activists enquiry low-income habitation ownership too repair. Their collaboration helped create the Philadelphia Housing Trust Fund, which funnels millions of dollars to people inwards need. This mass describes the origins of their partnership too its growth, including developing tensions too their diffusion inwards ways that contributed to the research. The authors personalize methods of enquiry too the possibilities for advocacy, ultimately connecting their encounters to to a greater extent than general, critical themes. Building on the field's commitment to social justice, they effectively demonstrate the potential of alter enquiry to facilitate widespread, long-term divergence too improve community outcomes.
Resources for Doing Community-Based Research
- Community-Campus Partnerships for Health (http://www.ccph.info/) provides the most comprehensive laid of resources for learning close CBPR too non exactly for health-policy concerns. It includes definitions, tools too resources, too CBPR course of instruction syllabi. Most but non all summaries too links listed inwards this appendix come upwards from this organization’s Web site.
- Center for Urban Epidemiologic Studies (http://www.nyam.org/initiatives/cues.shtml) was established yesteryear the New York Academy of Medicine inwards partnership amongst the New York City Department of Health too amongst the cooperation of multiple collaborating institutions. The center’s utilisation is to study social determinants of wellness using a CBPR approach, amongst an emphasis on investigating the role of social back upwards too social cohesion. The geographical communities of focus are East too Central Harlem, areas where a substantial proportion of the residents are pathetic people of color.
- Center for Urban Research too Learning (http://www.luc.edu/curl/) promotes cooperation betwixt Loyola University researchers too community-based organizations, citywide organizations, social service agencies, wellness attention providers, too government. The centre recognizes the importance of working amongst communities too organizations inwards seeking novel solutions to pressing urban problems.
- Colorado Community-Based Research Network (http://www.ccbrn.org/) is a network of academy too college faculty, staff, too students; nonprofit too community-based organizations; too foundations interested inwards conducting community-based enquiry that benefits the metro-Denver area.
- Community Linked Interdisciplinary Research (http://clir.buffalo.edu/) has the mission of linking together community enquiry needs inwards earth too private sectors amongst enquiry expertise amid University of Buffalo faculty to furnish additional opportunities for undergraduates to participate inwards enquiry that is of utilisation to western New York industry, government, community groups, schools, too social service agencies.
- Community Research too Learning Network (http://www.coralnetwork.org/) links upwards academy faculty too students inwards the Washington, D.C., tube expanse amongst community-based organizations. Its Web site provides opportunities for researchers too community-based organizations to listing their interests inwards CBPR too to observe ways to locomote together.
- Davydd Greenwood’s publications Davydd J. Greenwood, a Goldwin Smith Professor of Anthropology at Cornell University too i of the leading theorists regarding CBPR (http://anthropology.cornell.edu/faculty/Davydd-Greenwood.cfm).
- Detroit Community: Academic Urban Research Center (http://www.sph.umich.edu/urc/) industrial plant to flora partnerships betwixt the University of Michigan School of Public Health, the Detroit Health Department, too vi community-based organizations therefore that they tin locomote together to improve the lineament of life of the communities on the eastern too southwestern sides of Detroit.
- East St. Louis Action Research Project (http://www.eslarp.uiuc.edu/) establishes too nurtures mutually enhancing partnerships betwixt community-based organizations inwards distressed urban areas too students, staff, too faculty at the University of Illinois every bit good every bit on other campuses.
- Institute for Community Research (http://www.incommunityresearch.org/index.htm) is an independent, nonprofit enquiry organisation inwards Hartford, Connecticut, dedicated to using enquiry to promote equal access to health, education, too cultural resources inwards a various society. It collaborates amongst community too institutional partners inwards enquiry too evolution to improve services, foster private too community strengths, influence world policy, too contribute to social scientific discipline theory too practice.
- COMM-ORG: The On-Line Conference on Community Organizing (http://comm-org.wisc.edu/) Edited too moderated yesteryear Randy Stoecker, Professor of Sociology at the University of Wisconsin. This provides resources for organizers too scholars, including an active listerv, papers, syllabi, too organizing resources on a diverseness of specific topics.
- James Jennings’ Advocacy Research (http://www.tufts.edu/ jjenni02/reports.html), created yesteryear Tufts University planning professor James Jennings, explicitly practices community-based advocacy enquiry inwards ways that demonstrate how long-standing commitments to locomote amongst community groups tin pay off for both the researcher too the groups.
- Just Connections (http://www.ferrum.edu/aca/justconnections/index.htm) invigorates grassroots republic amid residents of distressed mount communities yesteryear creating too using models for participatory enquiry too service.
- Office of Community-Based Research at the University of Victoria, British Columbia, Canada (http://web.uvic.ca/ocbr/), is share of the university’s strategic vision of increasing civic engagement. It industrial plant toward democratizing knowledge, supporting community-driven enquiry initiatives, too supporting students too faculty who are doing or who wishing to do community-based research.
- Pam Oliver’s Advocacy Research (http://www.ssc.wisc.edu/ oliver/RACIAL/racelinks.htm#ActivismPolicy), ready yesteryear University of Wisconsin sociology professor Pam Oliver, does advocacy enquiry on race too incarceration. It explicitly embraces an advocacy opinion inwards ways that are refreshing too illuminating.
- Southeast Community Research Center (http://scrc.squarespace.com/) was established to promote, facilitate, too deport participatory too community-based enquiry throughout the southeastern United States.
- Toronto Community Based Research Network (http://torontocbr.ning.com/) brings together community practitioners, academics, funders, too community members from across the Greater Toronto Area who are or receive got been involved inwards CBPR projects.
- University Community Collaborative of Philadelphia (http://www.temple.edu/uccp/) conducts enquiry on community engagement, best practices inwards youth leadership development, too academy community collaboration. Much of this enquiry is done inwards concert amongst community partners. It has been presented at local workshops every bit good every bit at professional person conferences too has appeared inwards professional person journals including Journal of Urban Affairs, Political Economy of the Good Society Journal, too American Political Science Newsletter, amid others.
APA (6th ed) citation for this podcast:
Singer, J. B. (Producer). (2013, June 28). The challenges too rewards of collaborative community-based enquiry for social change: Interview amongst Corey Shdaimah too Sanford Schram [Episode 82]. Social Work Podcast [Audio Podcast]. Retrieved from /search?q=change-research
Buat lebih berguna, kongsi:
