Practicing Pragmatic Action Research for Social Change and Knowledge Generation

2001 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-39
Author(s):  
Allan Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Knowledge Generation

Unscrambling method and methodology in action research traditions: theoretical conceptualization of praxis and emancipation

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 395-407 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciana Cordeiro ◽  
Cassia Baldini Soares ◽  
Leslie Rittenmeyer
Keyword(s):  
Action Research ◽  
Participatory Approach ◽  
Knowledge Generation ◽  
Research Traditions ◽  
Self Reflection ◽  
Insight Into ◽  
Theoretical Conceptualization

Action research is a participatory approach that is used in an array of contexts. From its first proposition it comprises four core principles: participation and collaboration; a constant spiral cycle of self-reflection; knowledge generation; and practice transformation. Praxis and emancipation are two important analytical categories in AR, but are conceptualized differently in the two existing AR traditions. These conceptualizations reveal different AR aims, which lead to either the use of AR as a method (Northern tradition) or as a methodology (Southern tradition). Much depends on the researchers’ interest and worldview. Our objective in this paper is to compare how emancipation and praxis are theorized in both traditions. This discussion intends to add insight into the methodological understanding and utilization of AR.

scholarly journals “Despite the Odds”: Unpacking the Politics of Black Resilience Neoliberalism

2018 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin L. Clay
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Identity Development ◽  
Political Identity ◽  
Black Youth ◽  
Field Work ◽  
Participatory Action ◽  
Early Stages ◽  
Ethnographic Field Work ◽  
Policy Discourses

Through sustained ethnographic field work that inquired into youth participatory action researchers’ political identity development, I identified a politicized discourse engaged by youth during their early stages of action research that I have termed Black resilience neoliberalism (BRN). This study explicates BRN theory, tracing its connection to policy discourses related to Black youth and schools and exploring the ways its tenets are revealed in Black youth action researchers’ reflections on race/racism, inequality, and social change. I argue that BRN is both a conspicuous and an inconspicuous thread of neoliberal discourse and logic, which hides in plain sight as empowerment; however, it is entangled with the project of hegemony. To that end, destabilizing the legitimization of BRN is crucial to reconstituting empowerment.

scholarly journals Activating social change together: A qualitative synthesis of collaborative change research, evaluation and design literature

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Melida D Busch ◽  
Elizabeth Jean-Baptiste ◽  
Pamela F. Person ◽  
Lisa M Vaughn
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Action Research ◽  
North America ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Knowledge Creation ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Synthesis Process ◽  
Specific Method ◽  
Participatory Approaches

Researchers, evaluators and designers from an array of academic disciplines and industry sectors are turning to participatory approaches as they seek to understand and address complex social problems. We refer to participatory approaches that collaboratively engage/partner with stakeholders in knowledge creation/problem solving for action/social change outcomes as collaborative change research, evaluation and design (CCRED). We further frame CCRED practitioners by their desire to move beyond knowledge creation for its own sake to implementation of new knowledge as a tool for social change. In March and May of 2018, we conducted a literature search of multiple discipline-specific databases seeking collaborative, change-oriented scholarly publications. The search was limited to include peer-reviewed journal articles, with English language abstracts available, published in the last five years. The search resulted in 526 citations, 236 of which met inclusion criteria. Though the search was limited to English abstracts, all major geographic regions (North America, Europe, Latin America/Caribbean, APAC, Africa and the Middle East) were represented within the results, although many articles did not state a specific region. Of those identified, most studies were located in North America, with the Middle East having only one identified study. We followed a qualitative thematic synthesis process to examine the abstracts of peer-reviewed articles to identify practices that transcend individual disciplines, sectors and contexts to achieve collaborative change. We surveyed the terminology used to describe CCRED, setting, content/topic of study, type of collaboration, and related benefits/outcomes in order to discern the words used to designate collaboration, the frameworks, tools and methods employed, and the presence of action, evaluation or outcomes. Forty-three percent of the reviewed articles fell broadly within the social sciences, followed by 26 percent in education and 25 percent in health/medicine. In terms of participants and/or collaborators in the articles reviewed, the vast majority of the 236 articles (86%) described participants, that is, those who the research was about or from whom data was collected. In contrast to participants, partners/collaborators (n=32; 14%) were individuals or groups who participated in the design or implementation of the collaborative change effort described. In terms of the goal for collaboration and/or for doing the work, the most frequently used terminology related to some aspect of engagement and empowerment. Common descriptors for the work itself were ‘social change’ (n=74; 31%), ‘action’ (n=33; 14%), ‘collaborative or participatory research/practice’ (n=13; 6%), ‘transformation’ (n=13; 6%) and ‘community engagement’ (n=10; 4%). Of the 236 articles that mentioned a specific framework or approach, the three most common were some variation of Participatory Action Research (n=30; 50%), Action Research (n=40; 16.9%) or Community-Based Participatory Research (n=17; 7.2%). Approximately a third of the 236 articles did not mention a specific method or tool in the abstract. The most commonly cited method/tool (n=30; 12.7%) was some variation of an arts-based method followed by interviews (n=18; 7.6%), case study (n=16; 6.7%), or an ethnographic-related method (n=14; 5.9%). While some articles implied action or change, only 14 of the 236 articles (6%) stated a specific action or outcome. Most often, the changes described were: the creation or modification of a model, method, process, framework or protocol (n=9; 4%), quality improvement, policy change and social change (n=8; 3%), or modifications to education/training methods and materials (n=5; 2%). The infrequent use of collaboration as a descriptor of partner engagement, coupled with few reported findings of measurable change, raises questions about the nature of CCRED. It appears that conducting CCRED is as complex an undertaking as the problems that the work is attempting to address.

Methodological implications of Marxian praxis in action research

2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 294-309 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Cunningham
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Human Agency ◽  
Marxist Theory ◽  
Knowledge Generation ◽  
Active Process ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
Dominant Ideologies

When considering Karl Marx’s conception of praxis, numerous relations between it and action research come to the surface. These relations are not only important for understanding the roots of action research, but also future directions of the methodology. Marx’s short, but important text, the Theses on Feuerbach, not only constructs the foundation for Marxian praxis, but also can be read as an action research text, for it stands as an example of how to transform knowledge generation into a practical and active process. Moreover, praxis functions as a mode of epistemology and a revolutionary system that espouses human agency. One can further draw connections between Marxian praxis and action research in terms of how praxis requires researchers to be critical of dominant ideologies and methodologies. Therefore, revisiting Marxist theory, particularly its specific conception of praxis, is a crucial exercise for action researchers, particularly in a context where problems associated with the capitalist political economy continue to profoundly affect people’s lives.

The Problem-Solving Workshop as a Method of Research

2004 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 385-396 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald Fisher
Keyword(s):  
Conflict Resolution ◽  
Social Change ◽  
Action Research ◽  
Problem Solving ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Current Practice ◽  
Social Conflict ◽  
Central Element ◽  
Social Intervention ◽  
Research Technique

AbstractEarly proponents of the problem-solving workshop cast it as a method of research to study the phenomenon of social conflict, not only as a method of practice. As a research technique, problem-solving workshops can serve as both a forum for applying and testing concepts and models about conflict, and as a laboratory for inductive theorizing based on information provided by participants. Workshops can also be useful for identifying the typical barriers that hamper effective negotiation and for proposing ways to overcome these resistances. As a form of action research, workshops constitute a social intervention and serve as the central element in a program of activities directed toward social change through conflict resolution. Unfortunately, both the potential of workshops as a research method and the need for evaluating them as interventions are inadequately addressed by current practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document