Challenging the empowerment expectation: Learning, alienation and design possibilities in community-university research

IF 0.9 Q3 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement Pub Date : 2017-06-22 DOI:10.5130/IJCRE.V10I1.5151
Joe Curnow
{"title":"Challenging the empowerment expectation: Learning, alienation and design possibilities in community-university research","authors":"Joe Curnow","doi":"10.5130/IJCRE.V10I1.5151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As community-university partnerships have become mainstream, researchers have argued that these approaches have the potential to be transformative, supporting community learning and creating capacity for community development. While this remains the dominant narrative of community research, some researchers have questioned the impacts of community research on frontline community, or peer, researchers who represent partnerships in their communities. These studies complicate the narrative, suggesting that learning and capacity building are not straightforward processes. While on the whole community-university partnerships tend to be empowering for community researchers, research is needed to understand the experiences of community researchers for whom this is not the case. My research examines a Toronto-based community-university participatory action research partnership, asking what community researchers learnt through their participation. I argue that, while community researchers learnt a great deal from their participation, the overall impact was not empowerment, but alienation. They did have their knowledge of community validated, and they built research skills, developed grievances through their conversations with neighbours and interrogated the links between grievances, all of which were important aspects of their participation. However, through the process they developed, or entrenched, a sense of powerlessness and dependence on the university researchers to take up their cause politically. This contradicts the aspirations of community-university partnership models, especially participatory action research, and raises questions about the inevitability of empowering social action stemming from these research projects. I argue that the disempowerment that the community researchers reported points to the need for community research to be embedded within existing social action organisations and infrastructure to provide clearer pathways to action because, without this, peer researchers may become overwhelmed by the scope of the grievances in their neighbourhoods and withdraw from, rather than embrace, the need for collective social action.","PeriodicalId":53967,"journal":{"name":"Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement","volume":"87 1","pages":"229–48-229–48"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gateways-International Journal of Community Research and Engagement","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5130/IJCRE.V10I1.5151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

As community-university partnerships have become mainstream, researchers have argued that these approaches have the potential to be transformative, supporting community learning and creating capacity for community development. While this remains the dominant narrative of community research, some researchers have questioned the impacts of community research on frontline community, or peer, researchers who represent partnerships in their communities. These studies complicate the narrative, suggesting that learning and capacity building are not straightforward processes. While on the whole community-university partnerships tend to be empowering for community researchers, research is needed to understand the experiences of community researchers for whom this is not the case. My research examines a Toronto-based community-university participatory action research partnership, asking what community researchers learnt through their participation. I argue that, while community researchers learnt a great deal from their participation, the overall impact was not empowerment, but alienation. They did have their knowledge of community validated, and they built research skills, developed grievances through their conversations with neighbours and interrogated the links between grievances, all of which were important aspects of their participation. However, through the process they developed, or entrenched, a sense of powerlessness and dependence on the university researchers to take up their cause politically. This contradicts the aspirations of community-university partnership models, especially participatory action research, and raises questions about the inevitability of empowering social action stemming from these research projects. I argue that the disempowerment that the community researchers reported points to the need for community research to be embedded within existing social action organisations and infrastructure to provide clearer pathways to action because, without this, peer researchers may become overwhelmed by the scope of the grievances in their neighbourhoods and withdraw from, rather than embrace, the need for collective social action.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
挑战授权期望:社区大学研究中的学习、疏离和设计可能性
随着社区大学伙伴关系成为主流,研究人员认为这些方法具有变革性的潜力,可以支持社区学习并为社区发展创造能力。虽然这仍然是社区研究的主要叙述,但一些研究人员质疑社区研究对代表社区伙伴关系的一线社区或同行研究人员的影响。这些研究使叙述复杂化,表明学习和能力建设不是直截了当的过程。虽然总的来说,社区-大学的伙伴关系倾向于赋予社区研究人员权力,但需要进行研究,以了解社区研究人员的经验,他们的情况并非如此。我的研究考察了多伦多社区大学的参与性行动研究伙伴关系,询问社区研究人员通过他们的参与学到了什么。我认为,虽然社区研究人员从他们的参与中学到了很多东西,但总体影响不是赋权,而是疏离。他们的社区知识确实得到了验证,他们建立了研究技能,通过与邻居的对话产生了不满,并询问了不满之间的联系,这些都是他们参与的重要方面。然而,在这个过程中,他们形成了一种无力感,并依赖大学研究人员从政治上解决他们的问题。这与社区大学合作模式,特别是参与性行动研究的愿望相矛盾,并提出了关于授权这些研究项目产生的社会行动的必然性的问题。我认为,社区研究人员报告的权力剥夺指出,社区研究需要嵌入现有的社会行动组织和基础设施,以提供更清晰的行动途径,因为如果没有这一点,同行研究人员可能会被他们社区的不满范围所淹没,从而退出而不是接受集体社会行动的需要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
28.60%
发文量
5
审稿时长
34 weeks
期刊最新文献
Stroke Community Rehabilitation Centre (SCORE): A community transformation program Oral health education for school children and capacity building of local community health workers in cleft care: An experience of student-led community service in a West Java village Voice, Choice and Power: Using co-production to develop a community engagement strategy for an ethnically diverse community Gardening education in early childhood: Important factors supporting the success of implementing it Re-imagining the research article: Social-semiotic signposts and the potential for radical co-presence in the scholarly literature
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1