Schneider, B. (2012). Participatory Action Research, Mental Health Service User Research, and the Hearing (our) Voices Projects. International Journal of Qualitative Methods.
Note: All pull quotes below are from this paper. The additional comments and questions are my own, unless otherwise attributed
Participatory Action Research (PAR) in mental health service-user research is a valid and empowering philosophy of engagement and knowledge-making.
Provides a rich historical / theoretical framework for PAR and relates that clearly to the “Hearing (our) Voices” projects’ various research practices and outcomes.
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework:
- PAR comes out of Marxist and Frierian approaches to knowledge -making
- Questions and examines power structures, positions typically marginalized or oppressed voices at the centre of the research
- Posionality matters, knowledge-making is never neutral
This is a literature review and case study of the 8-year “Hearing (Our) Voices” project.
- Using the PAR approach, Hearing (Our) Voices was able to build knowledge and make (advocate for) practical changes to the ways participants are treated in the health system.
- The validity of PAR findings can be challenged, especially from a quantitative POV. Author, Barbara Schneider used Bradbury and Reason’s Criteria for assessing the quality and validity (six questions) and demonstrated the findings met the criteria.
My Notes With Quotes:
Observation: there’s a strong link between the ideals of this model and the ethos of digital accessibility.
To-Do: read this source. Consider the six questions as a guide for knowing when the research is done, (i.e. when all criteria have been satisfied.)
Observation: who decides what is included and excluded from literacy and digital literacy education? Where are voices of people who use assistive technologies in those decisions. What if they could feed in? We read and write in more than one way! Isn’t it important to know the many ways people CAN read and write with technology?
Observation: Natural and historical fit for my research area.
Observation: these may be the overarching goals for this type of research but seeing if participants come to a matching and mutually satisfactory set of goals would be an important step in the process. This can’t go without saying or be assumed.