ways, means and consequences of community research
DESCRIPTION
Ways, means and consequences of community research. Ellie Brodie, Researcher, NCVO. Fleur Bragalia, Researcher, Salvation Army Ceri Davies, Development Manager, Community University Partnership Programme (Cupp), University of Brighton 11 th November 2011 ARVAC AGM and Annual Conference. - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Ways, means and consequences of community
researchEllie Brodie, Researcher, NCVO. Fleur Bragalia, Researcher, Salvation ArmyCeri Davies, Development Manager, Community University Partnership Programme (Cupp), University of Brighton
11th November 2011ARVAC AGM and Annual Conference
OverviewIntroductionsWhat is community research to you? Examples of community research Exercise: benefits and drawbacks of
different approachesDiscussion: consequences of community
research
What is community
research to you?
Ways and means: three models
The ‘traditional’ modelFinding out about community groups and
activity using professional researchers
The ‘co-production’ modelFacilitating a research process that draws on
and values local knowledge
The ‘empowerment’ model Community identify the problem and are trained
to do research themselves
1. The ‘traditional’ modelWhat?
The Northern Rock Foundation, Third Sector Trends Study: Mapping Under the Radar Organisations
http://www.nr-foundation.org.uk/thirdsectortrends/
Why? Generating an evidence base to inform policy and practice
How? Using existing data Conducting their own surveys Secondary analysis of the Labour Force and Citizenship
surveys Consequences?
Greater numbers of UTR than OTR organisations: demonstrates ‘community capacity’
2. The ‘co-production’ model (1) What?
Pathways through Participation: partnership project between NCVO, IVR and Involve (ongoing).
www.pathwaysthroughparticipation.org.uk Why?
To explore how and why people get involved and stay involved in their communities.
How? Range of methods: literature review, stakeholder interviews,
mapping workshops, life history interviews, participatory workshops.
Co-production: Mapping workshops with residents and community groups
Consequences? Facilitated snowball sampling, built relationships Increased participants knowledge of area
The co-production model (2) What?
Taking Account: A Social and Economic Audit of the Community & Voluntary Sector in Brighton (2008)
Why? To evidence the social and economic impact of the sector in
Brighton. How?
Cross sector steering group of 8 (+ paid secondments) Co-designed research questionnaire Co-analysed results and developed the project report
Consequences? Key working links across sectors established in relation to the
topic Best practice methodology Robust evidence for the VCS in future strategy and resourcing
The empowerment model (1) What?
‘Talking Pictures’ –collecting oral histories from older people related to their earlier experiences of Brighton’s Duke of York cinema
Why? To capture the changing nature of cinema going and its social
meaning over the last 100 years through older people’s stories for collection and preservation.
How? Collection of oral histories (trained community members and
moving image students) Consequences?
volunteers with research skills able to be applied in different settings
Case study resources for university degrees Inclusion of older people Increased capacity in Queenspark books
The empowerment model (2)Voluntary Action Islington (VAI) developed and
piloted a new research model.3 research clusters of 3 local community groups.Each with a research questionEach cluster supported by a research mentor – who
supported the group to participate in research and a bespoke training programme on how to do research.
Colloborative approach.ARVAC, Voluntary Action Islington, City Parachial,
LVSC, Giovanna Speciale and Islington Central Library
The empowerment model (2 cont)Each cluster produced a research report reporting their
own primary research findings. “No recourse to advice, An Islington community research project
– What are the effects on individuals and community advice organisation when advice is refused” – Improving Reach. “Bereavement and Homelessness: Coping and struggling with loss” – CARIS, “A research report by Islington Local Involvement Network on the experiences of patients leaving hospital” – LINK Islington,
All were written in conjunction with VAI and ARVAC.
Reports influenced PCTs (featured in JSNAs), Islington Council, other third sector providers and internal practices.
What do you think are the pros and cons of the different
approaches?
Consequences of community research
What have been the consequences of
community research you have been
involved with?
What can we do to make community
research more consequential?
