In the early days the Ontario group talked about "program-based" research
and were definitely interested in issues of control:
Toronto practitioner position paper (from 1989),
not just about doing research but definitely about control - claiming
knowledge about questions, and appropriate processes, and wanting control
over the money!
For research to be practical and applicable, it must respond to the
questions that people with expertise in literacy work are asking, and it
must present answers in a form that literacy workers can use. It must be
sensitive to the learner-centred approach of community literacy. It must
draw on the experience of literacy workers in facilitating analysis and
discussion, as well as reading and writing, by literacy learners. In our
view, this means that it must be directed from within literacy programs,
rather than being imposed from outside.
Therefore, a substantial part of any funding for research should be
allocated to programs. Rather than contracting professional researchers
to come into programs to do their research, programs themselves should
direct the research from the beginning. This would mean relevant research
questions, and answers in the form of usable materials. It would also mean
the involvement of learners as active participants in the research rather
than as passive objects of study. (Alkenbrack et al. 1989)
That statement was in the first document put out by the Ontario-wide group
(although mainly at that point Ottawa/Toronto group) - exploring Community Based
Literacy Research (Horsman, 1989)
Tension of value of insider knowledge versus outsider knowledge
Del Jones - "both the participant in the parade and the bystander each
see things that the other misses" (quoted in Albert & D'Amico-Samuels
)
value of insider - but possible limit tends to be questioning from within
the frame value of distance - can ask new questions, questions from outside
the frame, but possible limit can not seem useful eg. Kathleen Rockhill's
(eg.1987a, 1987b, 1993) may not seem immediately useful by programs, would
not be done by insider, but it is crucial research because it challenges
the frame, so it should have broad impact on practice...
In "Exploring Community-Based Research" collection (I put it together
with help from the rest of the group) - we explicitly positioned program-based
research as part of alternative paradigms for research, approaches "own"
research, and critiques of who gets access, whose knowledge counts:
- focussed on participatory research,
- and action research
- and we took the definition:
"systematic collection and analysis of
information on a particular topic for the purpose of informing political
action and social change" (Barnsley and Ellis, 1987)
- stress choice of research approach, not just question of methodology,
but also of political choice -
"pr is not a method but a political approach
of involving the exploited and the poor in the analysis of their own reality"
research process "involve the community in the entire research project"
(Hall, Gillette & Tandon, 1982) - pr - an educational process which
leads to action...
- Research method will reflect "whose side on" no research neutral...
(Maguire, 1987)
|