In this article, we discuss how co-research – two researchers working together at each stage of the research process – can be used to analyse narratives created from qualitative interviews (drawing on Brown and Gilligan’s Listening Guide). We argue that co-research affords a richness and depth of analysis and propagates multiple, layered interpretations through a process of co-reflection. To illustrate our approach, we present an analysis of two case studies from the ‘From Adversity to University’ project, a longitudinal qualitative study evaluating the effectiveness of a bridging module as a way into higher education for students who have been affected by homelessness in England. We co-reflect on how our participants, our relationship with our participants and our relationship with each other as researchers has changed over time. We conclude that a co-researcher approach to analysing narratives is textually and emotionally enriching, as the co-constructed multiple interpretations transform not just the analysis of the text but also the relationship between researchers and their participants in new and unexpected ways.
This paper explores how the blended use of a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) can impact on student learning in a specific module within a small university in the UK. Students studying a module about crisis situations faced by children in different parts of the world were asked to contribute to online forums as part of their learning. 47 students participated in the study. Student questionnaires, Moodle reports and student assessment grades were analysed to explore the benefits of online forums. In line with previous research, online forums were found to be popular with students and multiple perceived benefits were identified, such as flexibility, greater sense of community and enhanced higher learning skills. Analysis of student assessment grades suggest that online forums may also enhance student performance, however, a larger scale longitudinal study is necessary to determine this more clearly. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of viewing VLEs as a communication, collaboration and knowledge focused medium with the potential to enhance higher learning skills through the use of interactive online activities such as forums.
Poverty in early childhood is pervasive, affecting every aspect of children’s lives. Under current government policies child poverty in the UK is predicted to rise to 40 per cent by 2022. Dominant discourses of poverty have historically focussed on an over‐arching discourse of moral responsibility, essentially relating to notions of deserving and underserving poor. This paper examines how government policy continues to significantly impact on young children and families on low incomes in early childhood and how stigmatised discourses about welfare, work are pervasive. It is argued that discourses of redistribution and children’s rights deserve greater recognition if poverty is to be addressed.
This case draws on the author's doctoral studies about practitioners' narratives of poverty in the early years. The case discusses how focus groups provide a useful way of exploring early years practitioners' (EY practitioners) understandings of child poverty. The research was based in two Sure Start Children Centres with onsite Nursery Schools and Daycare provision in the South of England. Overall forty EY practitioners took part in six focus groups. A 'secret box' and newspaper article were used to help stimulate discussion and address issues of power within the groups. A narrative approach was chosen to analyse the focus groups based on Riessman's (2008) dialogic/performance analytical approach. Lessons learnt included: using innovative strategies to help facilitate focus groups; allowing sufficient time to analyse data; and the developmental nature of the analysis process. It is concluded that
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.