从 "劳动力 "到 "变革推动者":对年轻人参与式研究的不同方法的解释性元民族志

Aline Muff, Aviv Cohen, Tanya Hoshovsky
{"title":"从 \"劳动力 \"到 \"变革推动者\":对年轻人参与式研究的不同方法的解释性元民族志","authors":"Aline Muff, Aviv Cohen, Tanya Hoshovsky","doi":"10.3102/00346543241255625","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A growing amount of educational research employs participatory methods in which young people actively gather and analyze data in collaboration with the investigators. Considering the diverse use of the label “participatory,” we examined participatory studies with young people to understand how researchers justify using this approach and conceptualize its purposes and goals, as well as these studies’ contributions to scholarship and youth’s civic learning. We conducted an interpretive meta-ethnography of 95 studies, identifying four distinct types of participatory studies with youth: technical, capacity building, justice-oriented, and transformative. We conclude that research that labels itself “participatory” but does not benefit the participants and their communities puts the approach’s credibility at risk. To challenge structural inequalities and power relations between participants and researchers, academic studies should better align with the transformative approach that has the potential to support youth in becoming agents of change by engaging them in self-directed civic learning and activism.","PeriodicalId":506584,"journal":{"name":"Review of Educational Research","volume":"4 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Being a Workforce to Agents of Change: An Interpretive Meta-ethnography of Different Approaches to Participatory Research With Young People\",\"authors\":\"Aline Muff, Aviv Cohen, Tanya Hoshovsky\",\"doi\":\"10.3102/00346543241255625\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A growing amount of educational research employs participatory methods in which young people actively gather and analyze data in collaboration with the investigators. Considering the diverse use of the label “participatory,” we examined participatory studies with young people to understand how researchers justify using this approach and conceptualize its purposes and goals, as well as these studies’ contributions to scholarship and youth’s civic learning. We conducted an interpretive meta-ethnography of 95 studies, identifying four distinct types of participatory studies with youth: technical, capacity building, justice-oriented, and transformative. We conclude that research that labels itself “participatory” but does not benefit the participants and their communities puts the approach’s credibility at risk. To challenge structural inequalities and power relations between participants and researchers, academic studies should better align with the transformative approach that has the potential to support youth in becoming agents of change by engaging them in self-directed civic learning and activism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":506584,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Educational Research\",\"volume\":\"4 2\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Educational Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241255625\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Educational Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543241255625","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

越来越多的教育研究采用参与式方法,让年轻人与研究人员一起积极收集和分析数据。考虑到 "参与式 "这一标签的使用多种多样,我们对青少年参与式研究进行了考察,以了解研究人员如何证明使用这种方法是合理的,如何将其目的和目标概念化,以及这些研究对学术研究和青少年公民学习的贡献。我们对 95 项研究进行了解释性元人种学研究,确定了四种不同类型的青年参与式研究:技术性研究、能力建设研究、以正义为导向的研究和变革性研究。我们的结论是,那些标榜自己是 "参与式 "研究,但却不能使参与者及其社区受益的研究,会使这种方法的可信度受到威胁。为了挑战参与者和研究者之间的结构性不平等和权力关系,学术研究应更好地与变革性方法保持一致,这种方法有可能通过让青年参与自主的公民学习和行动,支持他们成为变革的推动者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
From Being a Workforce to Agents of Change: An Interpretive Meta-ethnography of Different Approaches to Participatory Research With Young People
A growing amount of educational research employs participatory methods in which young people actively gather and analyze data in collaboration with the investigators. Considering the diverse use of the label “participatory,” we examined participatory studies with young people to understand how researchers justify using this approach and conceptualize its purposes and goals, as well as these studies’ contributions to scholarship and youth’s civic learning. We conducted an interpretive meta-ethnography of 95 studies, identifying four distinct types of participatory studies with youth: technical, capacity building, justice-oriented, and transformative. We conclude that research that labels itself “participatory” but does not benefit the participants and their communities puts the approach’s credibility at risk. To challenge structural inequalities and power relations between participants and researchers, academic studies should better align with the transformative approach that has the potential to support youth in becoming agents of change by engaging them in self-directed civic learning and activism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Does Chatting with Chatbots Improve Language Learning Performance? A Meta-Analysis of Chatbot-Assisted Language Learning From Being a Workforce to Agents of Change: An Interpretive Meta-ethnography of Different Approaches to Participatory Research With Young People Learning With Jigsaw: A Systematic Review Gathering All the Pieces of the Puzzle More Than 40 Years Later A Meta-Analysis of the Relation Between Syntactic Skills and Reading Comprehension: A Cross-Linguistic and Developmental Investigation Content and Quality of Comparative Tactical Game-Centered Approaches in Physical Education: A Systematic Review
×
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