Slide1 : Daniel T.L. Shek
Department of Social Work
The Chinese University of Hong Kong
The preparation of this presentation is financially supported by the Research Grants Council (CUHK4087/99H) Action and Participatory Research:
A Forgotten Research Orientation
In Hong Kong?
Attributes of the Participatory Paradigm Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. Heron, T., & Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry, 3, 274-294. : Attributes of the Participatory Paradigm Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. Heron, T., & Reason, P. (1997). A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qualitative Inquiry, 3, 274-294. Ontology: Participative reality – subjective-objective reality; participation forms the reality
Epistemology: Critical subjectivity in participatory transaction with the cosmos; experiential, propositional, practical and co-created knowledge
Methodology: Political participation in collaborative action inquiry, primacy of the practical
Nature of knowledge: Practical knowing; living knowledge; critical subjectivity
Knowledge accumulation: In communities of inquiry embedded in communities of practice
Goodness or quality criteria: Congruence of experiential, propositional and practical knowledge; leads to action to transform the world
Attributes of the Participatory Paradigm Denzin & Lincoln (2000); Heron & Reason (1997) : Attributes of the Participatory Paradigm Denzin & Lincoln (2000); Heron & Reason (1997) Values: Included; influence acknowledged
Training: Co-researchers are involved; facilitator requires emotional competence, democratic personality and skills
Voice: Mixed voices
Accommodation and commensurability: Incommensurable with positivistic paradigms; commensurable with constructivist, critical and liberationist approaches
Action: Intertwined with validity; inquiry not complete without action on the part of the participants
Control: Shared between researchers and co-researchers
Truth: Non-foundational
Relevance of philosophy of science in doing research?
Social Work Model of Action Research DePoy, E., Hartman, A., & Haslett, D. (1999). Critical action research: A model for social work knowing. Social Work, 44, 560-569. : Social Work Model of Action Research DePoy, E., Hartman, A., & Haslett, D. (1999). Critical action research: A model for social work knowing. Social Work, 44, 560-569.
Step 1: Recognize and articulate a social problem
Step 2: Convene a steering committee with all stakeholder groups
Step 3: Identify research scope and changes proposed by the S.C.
Step 4: Select a collaborative research Team
Step 5: Training lay researchers to design, conduct and use inquiry
Step 6: Design inquiry: research Qs, design & analytic strategies
Step 7: Conduct inquiry and analysis
Step 8: Report findings in accessible forms to all stakeholder groups
Step 9: Submit findings to social change planning and action
Step 10: Steering Committee identifies further areas for inquiry
Examples in the Social Welfare Literature : Examples in the Social Welfare Literature Altpeter, M., Schopler, J.H., Galinsky, M.J., & Pennell, J. (1999). Participatory research as social work practice: When is it viable? Journal of Progressive Human Services, 10, 31-53.
Alvarez, A.R., & Gutierrez, L.M. (2001). Choosing to do participatory research: An example and issues of fit to consider. Journal of Community Practice, 9, 1-20.
Bailey, S., Thoburn, J., & Wakeham, H. (2002). Using the ‘Look after children’ dimension to collect aggregate data on well-being. Child and Family Social Work, 7, 189-201.
Bischoff, U.M., & Reisch, M.S. (2000). Welfare reform and community-based organizations: Implications for policy, practice, and education. Journal of Community Practice, 8, 69-91.
Fetterman, D.M. (2001). Foundations of empowerment evaluation. Calif: Sage.
Examples in the Social Welfare Literature : Examples in the Social Welfare Literature Gellis, Z.D. (2001). Using a participatory research approach to mobilize immigrant minority family caregivers. Journal of Social Work Research and Evaluation, 2, 267-282.
Hicks, S. (1997). Participatory research: An approach for structural social workers. Journal of Progressive Human Services, 8, 63-78.
Kondrat, M.E., & Julia, M. (1998). Democratizing knowledge for human social development: Case studies in the use of participatory action research to enhance people’s choice and well-being. Social Development Issues, 20, 1-20.
McNicoll, P. (1999). Issues in teaching participatory action research. Journal of Social Work Education, 35, 51-62.
Penuel, W.R., & Freeman, T. (1997). Participatory action research in youth programming: A theory in use. Child and Youth Care Forum, 26, 175-185.
Examples in the Social Welfare Literature : Examples in the Social Welfare Literature Reese, D.J., Ahern, R.E., Nair, S., O’Faire, J.D., & Warren, C. (1999). Hospice access and use by African Americans: Assessing cultural and institutional barriers through participatory action research. Social Work, 44, 549-559.
Reisch, M., & Rivera, F. (1999). Ethical and racial conflicts in urban-based action research. Journal of Community Practice, 6, 49-62.
Safyer, A.W., Griffin, M.L., Colan, N.B., Alexander-Brydie, E., & Rome, J.Z. (1998). Methodological issues when developing prevention programs for low income, urban adolescents. Journal of Social Service Research, 23, 23-46.
Sarri, R.C., & Sarri, .M. (1992). Organizational and community change through participatory action research. Administration in Social Work, 16, 99-122.
Sohng, S.S.L. (1996). Participatory research and community organizing. Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 23, 79-99.
Examples in the Social Welfare Literature : Examples in the Social Welfare Literature WARNING: Wide range of meaning and practice related to action and participatory research with different languages used
Progressive Position (Park, 1993): research that puts “research capabilities in the hands of the deprived and disenfranchised people so that they can transform their lives for themselves” (p.1)
Participants involved in all stages of the project, including education, reflection, research and action
Researchers serve as experts (sharing research skills) and co-learners (benefits form the skills and knowledge of the participants)
Mid-Range Position: the views of the participants are respected and incorporated in the research; collaborate in the research process
Action Position: The participants may not be researchers, but the results generate some actions
Examples in the Social Welfare Literature : Examples in the Social Welfare Literature McNicoll, P. (1999). Issues in teaching participatory action research. Journal of Social Work Education, 35, 51-62. (Progressive Position)
60 students completed 14 projects on campus
A group of self-advocates not satisfied to be labeled mentally disabled. 3 participants surveyed the peers and organized exhibitions. Action: fight against the stereotypes affecting them
A study of problems of visually students impaired led to the formation of a self-help group
Students with different ethnicity discussed their mutual views and challenged the mass media to stop reporting misconceptions
Examples in the Social Welfare Literature : Examples in the Social Welfare Literature Reese, D.J., Ahern, R.E., Nair, S., O’Faire, J.D., & Warren, C. (1999). (Mid-Range Position)
Participatory action project to examine problems of African American access to and use of hospice
7 strategies: literature review; integration with social work education; collaboration with respondents; collaboration with practitioners; ongoing social action efforts; qualitative study; quantitative study
Qualitative interviews based on 6 African American priests: identify the major themes to develop a scale
Quantitative study based on 127 African Americans and European Americans: understand the problems and barriers
Results transformed to social action efforts in the community
Examples in the Social Welfare Literature : Examples in the Social Welfare Literature Yoshihama, M. (2002). Breaking the web of abuse and silence: Voices of battered women in Japan. Social Work, 47, 389-400. (Action Position)
Focus group research project with battered women in Japan
32 women participated (role of participants)
Resulted in the formation of first community-support group for battered women
Major collaboration at the end of the project (action initiation)
Current Status in Hong Kong Based on Shek, D.T.L., Lam, M.C., & Tsoi, K.W. (in press). Evidence-based social work practice in Hong Kong. In Thyer, B. and Kazi, M. (Eds.), International perspectives on evidence-based practice in social work. London: Venture Press. : Current Status in Hong Kong Based on Shek, D.T.L., Lam, M.C., & Tsoi, K.W. (in press). Evidence-based social work practice in Hong Kong. In Thyer, B. and Kazi, M. (Eds.), International perspectives on evidence-based practice in social work. London: Venture Press. Shek, Lam and Tsoi (in press) reviewed published books on social work intervention and evaluation (e.g., casebooks published by the Hong Kong Council of Social Service, Hong Kong Social Workers Association, local academics and NGOs) and articles in the Hong Kong Journal of Social Work.
Based on the review, the following conclusions can be drawn:
There are VERY FEW action research and participatory research studies and related research is MINIMALLY implemented in the social welfare settings in Hong Kong
The development of action research and participatory research is VERY PRIMITIVE in Hong Kong
Possible Contributing Factors : Possible Contributing Factors Public Obsession About the “Scientific” Mode of Understanding
Dominance of the traditional “scientific” methods in different helping professions (e.g., medicine and psychology)
Emphases of “objective”, “neutral” and “uncontaminated” understanding
Superiority of scientists and scientific understanding
“Scientists” know how to do evaluation. Laymen don’t.
Possible Contributing Factors : Possible Contributing Factors Elevated Status of “Professionals” Perceived by the Public
Cultural and societal respect for “learned scholars” and “professionals”
Obsessions about “qualifications” and “papers”
Professional knowledge is more superior than non-professional knowledge
“Professionals” know more than laymen
“Professionals” know how to do evaluation. Laymen don’t.
Possible Contributing Factors : Possible Contributing Factors Severe Lack of Academic and Professional Training in Social Work Education
Dominance of the positivistic models in social work education in Hong Kong (e.g., surveys)
Weak coverage on non-conventional modes of understanding and related research methods
Weak coverage on philosophies of science
Research training relatively weaker than other helping professionals
Possible reason: problematic issues confronting action and participatory research
Possible Contributing Factors : Possible Contributing Factors Severe Lack of Related Research and Expertise in the Field
General fear about research
General fear about philosophies of science
Dominance of research adopting survey research method
Very few qualitative research and few exemplars
Poor quality of qualitative research
Few agencies take the lead in related research
Possible Contributing Factors : Possible Contributing Factors Government’s Expectations about Research and Evaluation
Dominated by the “scientific” mode: objective outcome indicators, generalizability, “valid” and “objective” data
Dominated by the “professional” view: qualified professionals are more qualified for research and evaluation
Non-conventional research is at best supplementary in nature
Problematic issues confronting action and participatory research
Implications on funding and grant applications
What Can Be Done? : What Can Be Done? Public Education: Meaning of “scientific” and “professional”; alternative ways of understanding and doing research
Professional Education: Basic position: enhanced understanding; Focus of training: ranges from re-socialization to critical rationalism; recognizes the strengths and limitations of the related research and cultural relevance of the approach
Educating Government Officials: enhanced understanding; recognize the wide application of action and participatory research in Western contexts and their legitimate usage
Final Reflections : Final Reflections Participatory action research: Common argument - consistent with social workers’ commitment to social justice; connect local action to progressive social changes; strong linkage to progressive forms of contemporary social work
Reflection: What is (and should be) social work? Congruence between social work values, social work knowledge and social work research methods?
Gaventa (1993): Guerilla research
Reflection: What guerilla research can offer? Challenges based on the Joint Committee on Evaluation Standards
Reflection: Participation and collaboration are guarantees for good PAR? How are “biases” and “preoccupations” dealt with?
Final Reflections : Final Reflections Cross-cultural applicability: While there are examples in non-Western contexts, application in Asian contexts remains to be demonstrated.
Cross-cultural applicability: The “conflict thesis” hypothesis underlying PAR acceptable to Chinese (Chu & Carew, 1990; Healy, 2001)?
Chu, K.F., & Carew, R. (1990). Confucianism: Its relevance to social work with Chinese people. Australian Social Work, 43, 3-9.
Gaventa, J. (1993). The powerful, the powerless and the experts: Knowledge struggles in an information age. In P. Park (ed.), Voices of change: Participatory research in the Unites States and Canada (pp.21-40). Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Healy, K. (2001). Participatory action research and social work: A critical appraisal. International Social Work, 44, 93-105.