Episodes
-
Join us for this inspiring and thought-provoking discussion. Adam and Joe sit down with three members of the Restorative Community Solutions (RCS) team based in San Francisco: Earl Simms (executive director), Kezia "Zia" Martinis (community engagement lead) and Couper Orona (community engagement operations). RCS is a nonprofit founded in 2022, led by a group of dedicated professionals with a deep history of direct service, dedicated to “support[ing] those experiencing the transition back into society from institutional settings, homelessness, prison, jails, and treatment facilities” through peer support.
[00:02:27] We first learn about each guest and how their life experiences inform their work as well as [00:05:16] learn more about Restorative Community Solutions’s (RCS) mandate. [00:08:35] Adam asks our guests to describe the challenges of doing peer support in a non-profit context. Zia discusses the challenges of representation of all community voices. Earl talks about dynamics of contracting with government agencies in San Francisco with extractive approaches and the risks of policy violence—when policy makers are “10, 000 feet above the problem” they can’t “see the nuances and the different intricacies that are happening on the ground.” Couper ties it back to the importance of a trauma-responsive peer support approach.
Our hosts ask the team to reflect on their work through the angle of action research. They discuss the importance first of bringing that qualitative part that humanizes and works toward accountability, [00:20:02] “mak[ing] sure that people’s solutions are grounded in reality.” RCS’s action research question asks, “What is one thing that San Francisco can do to change your life?” [00:23:34] Earl reflects on how participatory action research came into the methodology of their work, and they describe how co-researchers co-create survey questions, help with focus groups, use different tools to synthesize data, and then formulate recommendations to different organizations. [00:28:47] As Couper argues, there needs to be “more guts” in city government and the way things are done because “there's so much uncaring… so much distance between folks.” [00:30:51] Earl discusses balancing different hats and [00:32:20] Zia emphasizes the importance of paying people a living wage and giving folks the agency to vote on policies that directly affect them: “The stipend that I received was more than I had pretty much made in my lifetime” and “I never knew three years ago that I'd be voting on a commission where I have a say in allocating all that proxy money.” [00:35:48] Adam asks the RCS guests “Where can you take this movement? How can you get involved with policy in such a way where your day to day grind is going to be what gets it there?”
Jump into this episode to benefit from the nuances of their important insights and the rich variety of concrete examples they share from their research experiences.
[00:52:10] Finally the team plugs a few things which we cite below. [00:54:26] RCS is looking for volunteers, “anybody that wants to be boots on the ground or has any kind of compassion towards this work we've done to help support that.” They are looking for lawyers, as well as any students. Just reach out to them! Or, as Couper throws in [00:54:49], “if you have a million dollars laying around or something, that'd be great.”
Thanks Earl, Zia and Couper for sharing your work with us.
You can subscribe to our podcast on most major podcast distribution platforms, including Spotify and Apple Podcasts. Thanks for tuning in to this episode of the Action Research Podcast, created by Adam Stieglitz, Joe Levitan, Shikha De Walker, Cory Legasic, and Vanessa Gold.
How have you found yourself in the world of action research? Want to be...
-
Guess what? It’s summer, July 2024, and the team is distracted doing summer things. So we are taking a little break this month before we sit down and get back into recording conversations with our upcoming guests for the episodes ahead. We also realized that we are in our fourth season, and we can now do what seasoned podcasters do: look back and share with you one of our team’s favorite past episodes.
With more than 30 episodes under our belt, this episode stands out to us from our first season that we recorded back on November 5th, 2020, during the height of the pandemic lockdown. And summer is a great time for reflection. With that, we give you, once again, Adam and Joe in Season 1 Episode 6’s discussion on “Reflexivity in Action Research with Dr. Lisa Starr”.
Thanks for tuning in, and now, onto our hosts.
—---------------------------------------
In this episode reprise, Adam and Joe have a conversation with Dr. Lisa Starr about the role of reflexivity in action research. To understand this complex topic, they discuss two chapters Lisa wrote using reflexive and autoethnographic methods. It just so happens (or was it more than a coincidence?) that Adam is working on the chapter in his dissertation in which he reflexively discusses his positionality, so he asks Lisa to share her expertise (12:34) on how to approach reflexivity in Action Research (15:51). Later in the episode, Joe asks Lisa about the frameworks to reflexively understand one's identity in her chapters (25:11).
If you are interested in the chapters mentioned in our podcast citations are below:
Starr, L.J. & Mitchell C. (2020, accepted for Publication). Traveling in Circles Along Roads Less Traveled in Awe of Open Spaces. In Mitchell, C, Giritli Nygren, K, Moletsane, R. (eds.) Where am I in the Picture? Researcher Positionality in Rural Studies. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press
Starr, L.J. (2019). Locating who (I am) in what (I) do: An autoethnography encounter with relational curriculum. In T. Strong-Wilson, C. Ehret, D. Lewkowich & S. Chang Kredl (Eds.), Making/Unmaking Curriculum through Provoking Curriculum Encounters (pp. 103-115). William Pinar/Routledge for the Studies in Curriculum Theory series. New York, NY: Routledge.
-
Missing episodes?
-
In this episode, Adam and Cory co-host while Joe joins as our guest alongside Dr. Catherine Potvin. We learn about Catherine’s career as a biologist working on climate issues in solidarity with Indigenous communities. Together, Catherine and Joe explore their collaboration doing action research in both culturally grounded health care and education.
First, [2:50] Catherine and Joe center relationship-building with the Emberá community at the heart of their collaborations in Panama: it’s about persistence and long time presence. [5:02] Catherine shares an overview of her history working with Indigenous communities along with the deep shifts and re-orientations in her career: [6:24] “I realized I had everything wrong, like completely everything wrong. [...] I understood that if you want to keep the forest, you need to care for the people.”
Adam and Cory ask [7:50] about the contexts that inform the focus on reforestation and community empowerment and [11:27] the role of social scientists in working alongside biologists in these collaborations. [12:02] Dr. Potvin talks about the notion of reflexivity as “a total social science thing” and the importance of researchers positioning themselves in the work they do. She also talks about how important it has been to look at reforestation from an economics and training perspective, what Joe calls “learning for capacity building”. Their collaboration also helped support [16:20] a community-based collective decision-making process, and Joe names a few examples of its outcomes.
At this point, Joe [19:56] spends some time walking us through an understanding of culturally-grounded education and healthcare: It’s a “phenomenological pragmatist perspective” that asks [20:53] “How do we start from who we are and our experience, and then identify what matters to us?” Potvin [23:02] shares a few anecdotes from her experiences over the years of learning to approach climate science from a more culturally grounded approach, and some of the colonial systemic barriers that students and community members face.
Adam’s last big question [29:45] asks our guests: “To what extent are you identifying or acknowledging economic empowerment for the communities that you're working with in Panama as a way to conserve and preserve the community's Indigenous lifestyles and knowledge?” Potvin discusses [33:37] the need to “find a number of different economical pathways for women, for men, for youth, for elders that will allow them to live a decent life.” Joe brings the reality of “using resources from outside of the community, but also thinking about how to do that in a way that's circular and self-directed.” They both offer examples of projects from recent years.
Wrapping up, Cory and Adam share some takeaways and use the final moments to congratulate (and challenge) Potvin’s upcoming retirement. To which she responds, and we wanted to quote at length…
“You know, in ecology, when a tree falls, that's where the diversity of a forest gets recreated, right? Because there's all these new trees that will take the space of the old big tree, because the old big tree sucks up a lot of resources. And when it disappears, it creates opportunity for new trees, more adapted to the new reality to grow. So I think I see retirement that way, it's supporting and creating opportunities to go further than where I've been.”
Thank you both for sharing your work with us, and congratulations Dr. Potvin on your retirement!.
You can subscribe to our podcast on most major podcast distribution platforms, including Spotify and Apple Podcasts. Thanks for tuning in to this episode of the Action Research Podcast, created by Adam Stieglitz, Joe Levitan, Shikha Diwakar, Cory Legassic, and Vanessa Gold.
How have you found yourself in the world of action research? Want to be interviewed or share one of your projects? Get in touch with...
-
Adam and Joe sit down with Dr. Lisa Levinger, an educator with over 30 years of experience at all instructional levels. She also completed her PhD at Northeastern University in May of 2023 doing action research around poverty-induced trauma (PIT) and literacy. She is currently acting as the Dean of Literacy at a Diversity by Design charter school in Queens, New York.
To start, Adam and Joe spend some time getting to know Lisa [02:38] in our lightning round. We learn about a hidden talent, her connection to Adam, her recipe for good action research, and some quick advice for emerging grad action researchers.
Next [07:42], Adam and Joe dive into learning about poverty-induced trauma and how Lisa approaches literacy and action research: the contexts, the challenges and the insights. A key question that drives her work [13:37] is, “How do I teach teachers about poverty-induced trauma?” She describes what collaboration and co-creation looked like during the height of Covid and walks us through the shifts and iterative cycles [16:14] of her research. Levinger’s research focuses on helping teachers grapple with important questions that emerged in the action research process [16:47]:
How do I think about poverty-induced trauma when I'm doing lesson plans? How do I select books that mirror the stories of the students in front of me? How do I plan for what I call pit stops—moments of reflection that ask, what's happening right now in your body? Have you ever felt this way before?Adam [17:35] asks Lisa to outline in more detail her action research design process. She describes the methods in each cycle [18:29] as “an iterative process just like an onion that kept getting peeled away [...] and at the same time, there were all these beautiful layers that just kept being added…” Lisa elaborates her TallTales framework [19:40]—Trauma Aware Literacy Lessons, Teaching and Learning for Equity and Success—and [21:15] how she brought this work into her position as Dean. She follows up by sharing [22:56] the two major findings from this ongoing work: (1) how important it is to engage teachers in learning about PIT, and (2) how to define the TallTale framework specifications.
Finally, Joe [27:20] asks Lisa about the role of reflection and positionality in her research. She offers more advice: “If you're not in the kind of program that's asking you to reflect on your positionality for every course, just grab a journal and do it yourself, and think about who am I in this space, and what am I bringing to this story, and who are the people I'm selecting.” Lisa also circles back to earlier advice on how to keep the momentum going in your research and writing. She has the help of her [30:38] doctoral divas who cheerlead and check in on each other.
Thanks Dr. Levinger for sharing your work with us.
You can subscribe to our podcast on most major podcast distribution platforms, including Spotify and Apple Podcasts. Thanks for tuning in to this episode of the Action Research Podcast, created by Adam Stieglitz, Joe Levitan, Shikha Diwakar, Cory Legassic, and Vanessa Gold.
How have you found yourself in the world of action research? Want to be interviewed or share one of your projects? Get in touch with us.
Here are citations related to this discussion:
Levinger, L. (2023). For Teachers by Teachers: Cocreating a Literacy Framework with Educators to Serve Students with Poverty-Induced Trauma (Doctoral dissertation, Northeastern University).
-
Adam and Joe sit down with Dr. Joseph Winberry to talk about information sciences and community-based participatory action research (CBPAR). Dr. Winberry is an Assistant Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Information and Library Science. Much of his teaching and research revolves around critical librarianship, information marginalization, and older adults.
Jumping into our lightning round, [00:45] Dr. Winberry walks us through the choices and experiences that led him to the crossroads of studying CBPAR and older adults.[04:33] Winberry tells us about the important work around “information marginalization” (Gibson & Martin, 2019) that guides his research and [07:22] what action research looks like more broadly in his context.
At this point, our hosts dig in deeper into his dissertation study: a CBPAR project with LGBT older adults that was [09:02] “led by the community and addressing issues that they believe are important.” First, [09:11] he shares insights on what is critical to success in an action research investigation: time, relationships and flexibility. [10:35] He then offers advice to graduate students who are considering action research as their methodology for their thesis or dissertation.
Joe asks Winberry to [12:54] tell us more about what brought him to community-based participatory action research, specifically. We get to hear about how his experience with community organizing and his role at the Office on Aging informed his passion for information sciences and action-oriented research. [20:02] Winberry shares some of the key scholars that shaped his work, and we share some of those references below. [21:33] Like many action research researcher-practitioners, Winberry also [21:30] faced some pushback about doing action research as part of a dissertation and walks us through his responses to those challenges.
Any listeners interested in CBPAR will want to listen [23:29] to Winberry describe the methods and steps of his CBPAR process. The work led to the development of [25:33] a strategic plan, a series of community consultations to validate that plan, and then the establishment of a committee to follow up on that plan—called the Aging Rainbow Coalition or ARC. [31:19] Winberry spends some time sharing how he handled the hurdles of working with the Institutional Review Boards (IRB) for ethics approval and the important role of informal data collection.
As a final discussion, our hosts prompt Winberry to talk about [33:01] positionality and reflexivity in CBPAR. For Winberry, “how I approached the study and how it ultimately looked” was absolutely shaped by his background. What are Winberry’s parting words of encouragement to future action researchers? “Don't be afraid to take risks and don't be afraid to engage the community.” And more.
Thanks Dr. Winberry for reaching out to us and sharing your work.
How have you found yourself in the world of action research? Want to be interviewed or share one of your projects? Get in touch with us.
Here are citations related to this discussion:
Bharat Mehra. Mehra, B. (2021). Social justice design and implementation: Innovative pedagogies to transform LIS education. Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, 62(4), 460-476.
Kitzie, V. L., Wagner, T. L., & Vera, A. N. (2020, March). “In the beginning, it was little whispers… now, we’re almost a roar”: Conceptualizing a model for community and self in LGBTQ+ health information practices. In International Conference on Information (pp. 15-31). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
Winberry, J. (2018). Shades of Silver. The International Journal of...
-
In the exciting second part of our discussion on YPAR and arts-based methods, new grad student co-hosts Shikha and Cory continue their conversation with Dr Kristen Goessling, Dr Dana Wright, Dr Amanda Wager and Dr. Marit Dewhurst, researchers and editors of Engaging youth in critical arts pedagogies and creative research for social justice: Opportunities and challenges of arts-based work and research with young people that came out in 2021. First, in our lightning round, we continue learning about our guests as we ask them about their pet peeves in collaboration–which are quite funny and enlightening! [1:15]. We also talk about an outline of common stages or phases in a YPAR project [2:16]. Some highlights include a discussion on relationship building as a design process [6:40] and building group dynamics [9:20] through participatory arts-based methods, like mapping and collage. In their projects, we can really see “PAR as a verb” in terms of supporting adults who work with young people as “PAR-ing” [11:48].
Throughout, our guests emphasize the pedagogical dimensions of YPAR because YPAR insists on sharing and learning skills together and democratizing knowledge production. For example, Amanda draws on theatre-based activities like the ”hot seat” to rehearse data collection methods like interviewing. YPAR challenges adultism with its “misconceptions about young people” and pushes adults to take youth seriously [15:25]. At its heart, “PAR is essentially doing two research projects at once: You are engaging in a process that you are studying because you are studying the praxis and so that you can hone it, refine it, and make it more effective; and you are studying the subject at hand” [18:48]. While navigating these layers, our YPAR guests explore navigating power dynamics [20:35] and participants shifting energies and motivations with and among youth [24:09].
Finally, [31:57] our guests offer advice to novice YPAR researchers on how to push the bar on meaningful participation in working with youth. They each share some encouragement and remind us that, ultimately, “anyone [who] has any designs on working with young people should be prepared that [young people] are the smartest people in the room and they will know if you are authentic or if you are trustworthy […] so it's best to bring your authentic self” [39:37].
Here is the citation for their book on YPAR and arts-based methods:
Goessling, K. P., Wright, D. E., Wager, A. C., & Dewhurst, Marit. (2021). Engaging youth in critical arts pedagogies and creative research for social justice opportunities and challenges of arts-based work and research with young people. Routledge; WorldCat.org. http://public.eblib.com/choice/PublicFullRecord.aspx?p=6469802
Here are the YPAR handbooks mentioned in our conversation
Community Futures, Community Lore: Learn to use youth participatory action research (YPAR), community mapping, public data and cultural organizing to generate solutions for our collective future.
Berkeley YPAR hub: This hub features expansive curriculum and resources to enrich YPAR projects.
Here are other publications by our guests:
Goessling, K. P., Wright, D., Wager, A. C., & Dewhurst, M. (2020). A critical mixtape for the movement: Reflecting on creative and critical youth practices in research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 33(1), 1-7.
Goessling, K. P., Wright, D. E., Wager, A. C., & Dewhurst, M. (2021)....
-
In the first episode led by our new co-hosts(!) Cory and Shikha sit down with Dr Kristen Goessling, Dr Dana Wright, Dr Amanda Wager, and Dr. Marit Dewhurst, researchers and editors of Engaging youth in critical arts pedagogies and creative research for social justice: Opportunities and challenges of arts-based work and research with young people, which came out in 2021. This special two-part series begins with our lightning round to get to know our guests. They give us lots of interesting soundbites for defining Youth Participatory Action Research (YPAR)!
Highlights from our discussions in PART 1 include: common assumptions about art-based research rigor and subjectivity; the continuum of arts-based methods; the importance of power-sharing, building trust and centering youth perspectives. The guests emphasize process over product, democratizing research through art, tapping different ways of knowing, and art as freedom for imagination and social change. The heart of their work involves further examining subjective dimensions of research, assessing arts-based methods, and implementing creative techniques to build relationships and share power with youth researchers. It was super interesting, and as co-hosts we learned a lot, so tune in!
Our guests have a lot of important ideas to share, so after listening to this episode, join us in our next episode “Part 2 with Dana, Kristen, Amanda and Marit” where we dig into more of the “what and why” of YPAR.
Here is the citation for their book on YPAR and arts-based methods:
Goessling, K. P., Wright, D. E., Wager, A. C., & Dewhurst, Marit. (2021). Engaging youth in critical arts pedagogies and creative research for social justice opportunities and challenges of arts-based work and research with young people. Routledge; WorldCat.org. http://public.eblib.com/choice/PublicFullRecord.aspx?p=6469802
-
Welcome to Season 4 of the Action Research Podcast. In this launch episode for Season 4, we find out what the team has been up to during their fall pause. (Hint, it was some time to consider new goals and orientations for our podcast, and bring in more voices!)
Join Joe and Adam who welcome Shikha and Cory to the table as new co-hosts alongside their roles as producers. Now that Adam is exploring life after completing a PhD, Shikha and Cory take on the role of grad students helping ask the questions.[2:06] In this episode, we get to know a bit more about them, and then they turn the tables on Joe and Adam by putting them into the hot seat with questions.
During this conversation, the 4 co-host discuss the role of podcasting in the world of action research. For example, one of the issues with academic publications is that they are well polished descriptions of research designs. While that leads to valuable discussion and analysis, it may not always offer the information that budding researchers and practitioners need and want. So, through this podcast we have the opportunity to lean into the messiness of action research that makes each of our guests relatable and the opportunity to dig into the stories of what doesn’t always make it into published findings. [12:27] As an example, Shikha and Cory also ask Joe and Adam to describe how they have responded to emerging messiness in their own work–a discussion with surprises!
[24:40] Tune in for this and more as Adam and Joe also offer some advice on what they have learned about hosting a podcast. [26:20] Then, listen to the team share what to expect in the rest of the season and, most importantly, we hope you take our invitation at the end to get involved with our team.
How have you found yourself in the world of action research? Want to be interviewed or share one of your projects? Get in touch with us at [email protected].
-
In this episode, our team of hosts and producers debrief Season 3 of the Action Research Podcast. (2:33) Co-producers Shikha and Cory introduce themselves as students in different stages of their PhD work while working on this podcast and (5:09) discuss lessons from the podcast influencing their research—especially when it comes to the productive messiness of the AR process. (9:47) Adam and Joe reflect on the evolution of the podcast since Season 1 and the various formats the team has been developing. From basic introductions to key concepts, to guest hosts sharing the nuanced details of diverse AR projects, to the struggles of developing “Voices from the Field” segments, the podcast is an emerging process much like AR. Adam looks forward to “creating more formats and pushing the limits of how an academic podcast can be considered empirical work.” Joe talks about the importance of students working on air and behind the scenes “so that our podcast stays relevant.” (16:10) Shikha reflects on how important discussions on the podcast, such as the importance of relationship building in AR, are mirroring developing conversations in the field. (17:09) The debrief turns to a discussion of the role of podcasts in literature reviews and ways that podcasts can be recognized as legitimate academic media. In a “publish or perish type environment,” Joe discusses a “hierarchy of knowledge,” the gold standard of double-blind peer-viewed articles and the potential role of podcasts in contributing to much needed procedural knowledge. [22:55] “Podcasts are an excellent space for thinking through method, and [they] add to the pantheon of what it means to engage in knowledge construction.” So for Season 4, building on Season 3’s theme of communication and action research, with an eye to increase engagement with podcast audiences, [29:27] Cory and Shikha suggest bringing on more students as guest hosts to engage with practitioners and scholars in the field, to dig in deeper to the messiness of AR cycles.
A shout out to Vanessa Gold who was missing in this conversation, but whose hard work and insights have been invaluable to the growth of the podcast. Vanessa also set the bar for being a great student-host in Season 2 Episode 3 “Student Voice and Action Research with Marc I. Brasof”.
-
In this episode, our team follows up with Dr. Danny Burns and Dr. Marina Apgar who first joined us in Episode 4 to discuss systemic action research. Danny Burns is a Professorial Research Fellow at the Institute for Development Studies (IDS) a think tank affiliated with the University of Sussex in England. He has directed more than 25 action research projects and programmes. His work focuses on participatory learning for social change with a strong emphasis on systems thinking and complexity. Marina Apgar is Research Fellow in the Participation, Inclusion and Social Change cluster at IDS. She is a human ecologist with 20 years experience working in the research-practice divide with marginalized communities in international development supporting learning and change in complex systems.
[02:38] Marina reminds listeners about their large-scale system-changing project called Child Labour: Action-Research-Innovation in South and South-Eastern Asia [CLARISSA]. Started in 2016, CLARISSA has a team of more than 150 members. In this episode, [06:13] Joe asks our guests to update on developments and any changes in light of shifts in pandemic policies. Danny and Marina describe in further depth the first phase of their work with children in the worst forms of child labor. They share experience of the team working with stakeholders in the adult entertainment sector in Nepal and leather supply chain in Bangladesh (such as the employers of the children, business owners, parents and guardians). For Marina and Danny, action research can be an implementation modality that can help co-researchers respond to complex problems such as these. Our guests describe some of the ways the project went about understanding issues based on the lived experience of the children—starting with an extensive life story collection and analysis project. Through this process “the children actually themselves do a causal analysis of their experience, building a systemic picture of the issue of child labor. And then they decide what the intervention points are in the system.” [09:44] Danny describes children’s involvement in mapping the streets and identifying where the businesses were, through a process called A Day in the Life. This work provided an important “evidential base” because it allowed them to challenge a lot of assumptions which proved to be critical to the starting point of 13 action research groups. In fact, [17:45] this process evidenced “ how children actually reflecting on an issue from their own experience can create a different narrative.” [20:19] Reflecting on procedural knowledge, Marina discusses how the work in this first phase is also providing evidence for other important and central questions in this program: How is trust built? How does participation work, and how can it be sustained? [25:57] Danny offers some thoughts on safeguarding and relevance, and [29:29] Marina reflects on the evolution of expected outputs in the process of this research. [32:37] Danny picks up on these points and talks about policy work, in the context of generalizable vs transferable knowledge. [35:17] Marina is thankful that “even in the evaluation community, we're moving much more to transferability as being a core criteria. And action research, like a lot of qualitative and case-based kind of methods, is really well placed to do that.” Towards the end of the podcast, [37:19] Danny and Marina reflect on the need for a participatory management to go with any large-scale participatory process.
After some discussion among the podcast team, we were curious to follow up on some of the ethics approval process and finer details in some of the methods used in the Clarissa project. We look forward to continuing our discussion with Danny and Marina, and we encourage you to keep an eye on...
-
Part 2 of this two part episode concludes the conversation between Adam, Joe and our guest Alfredo about the “what?” and “why?” of research in action research. Dr Alfredo Ortiz Aragón is an Action-Researcher and Associate Professor in the PhD Program at the Dreeben School of Education at the University of the Incarnate Word in San Antonio, Texas, and co-author of Action Research (Fifth Edition) with Ernie Stringer.
In the last episode, Part 1, the conversation turned toward the ways theories bridge research and practice. In this episode, Part 2, Adam, Joe and Alfredo pick up the conversation by reflecting on the place of writing and reading in their own projects. We jump back in here with Adam who’s reflecting on the audience of action research. Adam recently finished his dissertation and is thinking about his work outside of the context of PhD research. [03:03] Alfredo looks at how theorizing in some of his projects helps him appreciate the influence of storytelling and story-based knowledge outside of publishing research. [06:09] Joe situates the work of research and the role of theorizing in the contexts of procedural and declarative knowledge and begins making the case for the value of action research in generating procedural knowledge. [08:23] Alfredo agrees and, through reflecting on his experience editing journals and sharing more projects he’s worked on, see this orientation toward procedural knowledge as an area of growth for action research: “Honoring people's expert knowledge, but turning it into a form that other people can see the expertise in it.” At this point, [13:33] Adam questions the role of the literature review in action research. [16:12] Alfredo makes the familiar case that literature reviews can be useful to action research projects, but argues that literature, and theories, should be at the service of the problems in “the real world,” and not the other way around. [20:04] Joe backs this up with his experiences doing action research with teachers in Peru. But… when do practitioners have time to do lit reviews? [23:50] Perhaps the controversial part of this episode, Joe and Alfredo explore division of labor, roles, and the suggestion that academics can provide a “knowledge service,” where “we come in, and help to document more of local practitioner knowledge, community knowledge literally as a service.” Wrapping up, [30:14] Alfredo insists that action research does really challenge dominant notions of research: “Research is working with people on the ground, hearing their stories, creating avenues for that processing, finding ways to turn them into creative visual form, turning stories into evidence… spending time with people.”
If you are interested in Alfredo’s work here are a few citations and links:
Stringer, E. T., & Aragón, A. O. (2021). Action research (Fifth edition). Sage publications.
Community-engaged participatory action research (PAR): Rewriting the script for equitable healthcare https://www.partners4healthequity.com/resource-library/community-engaged-participatory-action-research-par-rewriting-script-equitable
**If you have your own questions about Action Research or want to share any feedback, contact us at [email protected].**
-
In this episode, Adam and Joe speak again with Adam’s close friend, professor, and mentor, Dr Alfredo Ortiz Aragón, an Action-Researcher and Associate Professor in the PhD Program at the Dreeben School of Education at the University of the Incarnate Word in San Antonio, Texas, and co-author of Action Research (Fifth Edition) with Ernie Stringer.
This episode explores the “what?” and “why?” of research in action research. Adam, Joe and Alfredo all went into their PhDs already working as practitioners and the conversation steers first toward the specific impact of their PhDs on their practice. Adam [7:15] thinks about the process and impact of his literature review on his work and Alfredo [9:20] reflects on how his PhD process opened his eyes to new ways of thinking about practice. Listen to Alfredo elaborate on the PhD as a period of discovering “meaningful methodology” and “amazing theories” (e.g., soft systems theory) that would energize his work and speak directly to frustrations he was having with “linear ways of thinking” in the field.
The conversation turns toward the ways theories bridge research and practice. Joe [15:45] picks up on research’s ability to help practitioners “draw the curtains back” and help us see things more clearly. But it’s not “a one-way street,” since the practitioner-researcher contributes back to developing theories. Alfredo [18:15] offers some tough love by challenging doctoral students who might use theories uncritically to validate their work rather than engage with them dynamically as tools in tension with other theories in their projects. He gives us an example of how the dynamic tension between soft system theory and complexity theory enriched his own work: “Those two theories don't like each other, but I needed both of them to be able to explain how the things that I was doing were helping or not.” Here, Joe [21:05] echoes Alfredo’s argument by drawing insights from an article he wrote “The Danger of a Single Theory” on his work with youth in a student voice project.
To close Part 1 of this conversation, Adam [22:35] asks Alfredo if he is still working with theories from his dissertation. Alfredo uses his work in The Community Health and Wellbeing Project and The Breastfeeding Women Project to bring back into focus the role of stakeholders in action research: “Whether or not you're bringing in a formal theoretical framework or not, we are treating people's experiences as a source of knowledge and evidence, and trying to get them involved in doing so. That is only happening because I learned something about action research.”
We have more to say, so join us in our next episode “Part 2 with Alfredo” where we dig into more of the “what and why” of research in action research.
If you are interested in Joe’s article or Aldredo’s (with Ernie Stringer) book on Action Research, the citations are below:
Levitan, J. A. S. (2018). The danger of a single theory: Understanding students’ voices and social justice in the Peruvian Andes. Teachers College Record, 120(2). WorldCat.org.
Stringer, E. T., & Aragón, A. O. (2021). Action research (Fifth edition). Sage publications
**If you have your own questions
about Action Research or want to share any feedback, contact us at
-
To our listeners! Here is a quick update on the podcast. The ArPod team have been busy with exciting projects running across globe. We can’t wait to share an update soon with upcoming exciting episodes. Stay tune!
-
If you haven’t listened to episodes one and two of the series, find the links below!
We are excited to bring the third installment of this exciting mini-series that brings you “behind the scenes” of action research projects to demonstrate what action research looks like, in action. In this episode, Adam catches Joe up on what has been happening in Café Orígenes, and there are some exciting updates! Throughout the episode Adam and Joe dive deep into how issues of communication, democracy, and finances intersect and impact a project, with some tips for other action researchers out there from lessons learned. Tune-in to learn more!
Episode 2
https://the-action-research-pod.captivate.fm/episode/voices-from-the-field-cafe-origenes-part-2
Episode 1
https://the-action-research-pod.captivate.fm/episode/introducing-a-new-segment-voices-from-the-field-cafe-origenes
-
In this episode, we welcome two guests, Patricia Canto and
Miren Larrea, who recently published a paper together titled “Rethinking the Communication of Action Research: Can we Make it Dialogic?” Adam and Joe bring you an enriching conversation with the authors.
Patricia Canto is a researcher at Orkestra-Basque Institute of Competitiveness. She holds a PhD in Social Sciences from University of Deusto. She investigates the role that communication plays in articulating academic knowledge in territorial development processes and international knowledge networks. Her research areas include the social impact of research, scholarly publishing and communication, and universities’ role in regional socioeconomic development.
Miren Larrea is a senior researcher at Orkestra. She began her professional career as a research assistant at the University of Deusto, where she wrote her doctoral thesis on the local production systems of the Basque Country. After a decade dedicated to teaching and research, she worked for six years at a local development agency, where she combined her experience as a regional development professional with her work as a university researcher.
The episode starts with a “Lightning Round”, asking questions like, What is AR? What is the most important component of Action Research? What is a major consideration when communicating AR? What distinguishes AR from other forms of research? (4:15). Later in the episode, our guests share the story behind the collaboration that led to the article (6:46), along with discussion about some important themes highlighted in the paper such as: how do you hold true to AR principles like dialogue in the communication of your research findings (10:23)? Why do linear formats in AR communication reduce its potential to transform society (11:39)? How do we make action research dialogic and inclusive with all the stakeholders involved (21:01)? Tune in to listen!
Links
https://dgroups.org/groups/perfadt
References
Canto-Farachala, P., & Larrea, M. (2022). Rethinking the communication of action research: Can we make it dialogic? Action Research, 20(2), 199–218
**If you have your own questions about Action Research or want to share any feedback, contact us at [email protected].**
-
Welcome back to Part 2 of the episode; Ethical Relationship Building in Action Research with Joe. In this episode, we are continuing our conversation from last season on ethical relationship building based on an article that Joe published. If you haven’t heard that one, it is episode 10 of season 2.
It’s great when friends of the podcast engage with our conversations, and in this episode, our good friend Alfredo Ortiz Aragon sent us some great insights about thinking through some of the implications of the ideas in the first episode and trying to find different ways to contextualize some points. Joe, Vanessa, & Adam start the conversation with responding to Ortiz’s comments (2:13). They then carefully articulate their thoughts on themes such as role of emotions in research (8:11), how emotions can manifest in the field (11:25), how relationship building through reflexivity is both internal and external process (22:57), and how we can build ethical relationships while navigating the complexities in the AR process (29:01). Tune in to listen to this wholesome episode with our trio Joe, Vanessa and Adam.
References
Levitan, J.(2019). Ethical Relationship Building in Action Research: Getting Out ofWestern Norms to Foster Equitable Collaboration. The Canadian Journal of ActionResearch. 21 (1), 11-29.
Levitan, J., & Johnson, K. M. (2020). Salir adelante: Collaboratively developing culturally grounded curriculum with marginalized communities. American Journal of Education, 126(2), 195-230.
Levitan, J. (2018). The danger of a single theory: Understanding students’ voices and social justice in the Peruvian Andes. Teachers College Record, 120(2), 1-36.
**If you have your own questions about Action Research or want to share any feedback, contact us on Twitter@The_ARpod or write to us at [email protected].**
-
In this special episode, the AR Pod team discusses an amazing new book by our very own Joe Levitan and friend of the Podcast, Marc Brasof. The book, Student Voice Research: Theory, Methods, and Innovations from the Field, discusses the “how” of useful and quality student voice research to make schools better places to learn. The book has a lot of overlaps with Action Research. This firsthand conversation by the editors of the book delves into why not only the theoretical understanding of student voice research is important but also practical knowledge from the field.
Joe, Adam and Marc, bring highlights about the process of this collaboration, how this book came into existence, and some comments about the field. The book is not just relevant for students but also practitioners in action research who would like to include youth in change processes and research. Many of these paradigms, methodologies, or ways of thinking about information and decision-making need more of procedural knowledge which this book offers.
Alright, no more spoilers, listen to the episode to know more about the book from editors themselves!
Also, a special shout out to Vanessa Gold, co-producer of this podcast, who co-authored one of the chapters in this book!
Here’s the link to the book:
https://www.amazon.com/Student-Voice-Research-Methods-Innovations/dp/0807767131
**If you have your own questions about Action Research or want to share any feedback, contact us on Twitter@The_ARpod or write to us at [email protected].**
-
In this special, first episode of season 3, Joe interviews our very own, newly "minted," *Dr.* Adam Stieglitz! The co-hosts discuss his Action Research dissertation and his experiences as a PhD student. Tune in to learn about the ups, downs, and adventures of Dr. Stieglitz!
References
Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2014). The action research dissertation: A guide for students and faculty. Sage publications.
Coghlan, D., & Brydon-Miller, M. (Eds.). (2014). The SAGE encyclopedia of action research. SAGE.
Cousins, J. B., & Chouinard, J. A. (2012). Participatory evaluation up close: An integration of research based knowledge. Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Coghlan, D. (2019). Doing action research in your own organization. London: SAGE.
Stringer, E. T., & Aragón, A. O. (2020). Action research. Sage publications.
**If you have your own questions about Action Research or want to share any feedback, contact us on Twitter@The_ARpod or write to us at [email protected].**
-
Welcome to our last episode of season two where the host becomes the guest!
For this season finale, we put Joe on the hot seat to discuss his amazing article published in 2019 on Ethical Relationship Building in Action Research. Vanessa, Shikha, and Cory, the production team of the podcast (and Joe’s supervisees), take this opportunity to ask Joe some hard-hitting questions. The discussion opens with the lightning round (2:14): What is ethical relationship building? Why is ethical relationship building in action research important? What’s the number one thing researchers can do to support ethical relationship building in their work? What’s theoretical orthodoxy? Why is interrogating theoretical orthodoxy important in Action Research?
Later in the episode, we start to dig deeper into Joe’s responses to the lightning round questions. We ask: what are the major turns in the relationship building in the AR process? (5:22), how might Action Researchers build an ethical relationship with the diversity within a community? (15:10) how might an Action Researcher create a meaningful space for communicating difficult emotions? (20:29)? Tune in to listen more!
Then, stay tuned for Season 3 of the Action Research Podcast coming out in September 2022! You will hear more about building ethical relationships in action research (Part 2 of this series), and hear more voices from the field!
References
Levitan, J. (2019). Ethical Relationship Building in Action Research: Getting Out of Western Norms to Foster Equitable Collaboration. The Canadian Journal of Action Research. 21 (1), 11-29.
Levitan, J., & Johnson, K. M. (2020). Salir adelante: Collaboratively developing culturally grounded curriculum with marginalized communities. American Journal of Education, 126(2), 195-230.
Levitan, J. (2018). The danger of a single theory: Understanding students’ voices and social justice in the Peruvian Andes. Teachers College Record, 120(2), 1-36.
**If you have your own questions about Action Research or want to share any feedback, contact us on Twitter@The_ARpod or write to us at [email protected].**
-
This episode brings you stories of action research from one of the most renowned authors in the field, Ernest T Stringer. He is the author of Action Research (Sage, 2007), Action Research in Education (Pearson, 2008), Action Research in Health (with Bill Genat; Pearson, 2004), and Action Research in Human Services (with Rosalie Dwyer; Pearson, 2005). Starting his career as a primary teacher and school principal, Ernie was a lecturer in education at the Curtin University of Technology in Australia. From the mid-1980s, based at Curtin’s Centre for Aboriginal Studies, he worked collaboratively with Aboriginal staff and community people to develop a wide variety of innovative and highly successful education and community development programs and services.
This episode consists of a rich discussion around the story of Ernie Stringer and how he got involved with action research (3:33), as well as two of his more recent projects: the Breakfast Club, and the center for Aboriginal studies at Curtin University (13:02). The group then moves on to and the road ahead for action research (38:28). Later in the lightning round segment, Joe and Adam raised our all-time favorite questions around the what, how, and why of the action research (43:30). Tune in to listen to the full episode!
References
Stringer, E. T., & Aragón, A. O. (2020). Action research. Sage publications. 5th
ed.
Stringer, E. T. (2014). Action research (4th edition). SAGE.
Stringer, E. T. (2007). Action research (3rd edition). Sage Publications.
Stringer, E. T. (2008). Action research in education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
**If you have your own questions about Action Research or want to share any feedback, contact us on Twitter@The_ARpod or write to us at [email protected].**
- Show more
