Making a difference: Linking research and action in practice, pedagogy, and policy for social justice: Introduction

Abstract

The origins and chronology of linking research and action are complex and cannot be attributed to any single discipline or any part of the world. People within and outside academe have linked research and action. In this introductory article, we begin by briefly tracing the methodological background to linking research and action, focusing particularly on action research, participatory research, and feminist research in order to situate the research presented in this monograph issue of Current Sociology. We then provide an outline of the articles that showcase through specific case studies how sociologists link research and practice in diverse contexts including health, culture, education, labor, migration, violence against women, and polling. We end by commenting that linking research and action has important implications for knowledge creation, distribution, shifting power relations for achieving social change, and, ultimately, challenging social structures for social justice.

A Catalyst toward Sustainability? Exploring Social Learning and Social Differentiation Approaches with the Agricultural Poor

“…Moreover, assessments of vulnerability extend into the social sphere where demographic or socially differentiated markers of communities and groups (e.g., socioeconomic status, gender, age, ethnicity) are known to increase sensitivity to climate impacts (e.g., the poor residing in hazard-prone areas) due to a compromised capacity to adapt (e.g., poverty) [25]. Among rural smallholder farmers, socio-cultural marginalization among the poor, women, the young and the elderly and the ethnic or indigenous, limits these socially differentiated groups in their ability to access knowledge, technology and power, further limiting their capacity to adapt [27]. For instance, women's limited access to resources, their restricted rights, limited mobility and reduced authority in the community are likely to be exacerbated under climate change [28][29][30][31].…”

Integration of ethnic minorities during group-work for vocational teachers-in-training in health studies

“…We approached this case study with an interpretive rather than positivist epistemological perspective, so the information gathered is not assumed to be independent of the time, place, and persons involved. 30 Furthermore, while we compared our impressions from recent years of teaching the same course, without a formal control group external validity is weak. On the other hand, this anecdotal case study, undertaken by seasoned practitioners and informed by previous research, could be a useful example for teachers seeking greater cultural greater inclusion in their classrooms.…”

“…On the other hand, this anecdotal case study, undertaken by seasoned practitioners and informed by previous research, could be a useful example for teachers seeking greater cultural greater inclusion in their classrooms. 30 …”

Rigour in Methods and Evaluation for Community Engagement

“…Even so, it is important to rec-ognize the other evaluative frameworks that might also be incorporated into CFICE at the macro level of evaluative analysis. Above all, it is important to allow a unity among macro evaluative frameworks to develop organically for CFICE, in whatever terminological language best typifies that process, whether it be transformative learning (Vogelgesang, 2009), theory of change (Weiss, 1995;Funnell and Rogers, 2011;Rogers, 2008;Sullivan et al, 2002;LynchCerullo and Cooney, 2011) action research (Abraham and Purkayastha, 2012;Pettit, 2012;Brydon-Miller and Greenwood, 2003) developmental evaluation (Gamble, 2010;Patton, 2011) or combinations thereof (Hargreaves and Podem, 2012;Cook, 2006). Many of these have been applied within a specific service learning framework in Canada (Nelson and Stroink, 2010) while others have emerged from community based practice or engagement in extension departments at land grant universities in the USA (Chaskin, 2009;Stoecker, 2009;University of Wisconsin, 2012 Furthermore, in addition to these frameworks which might be regarded as competing schools of thought in evaluation, there are theoretical hybrids which can easily coexist or be incorporated into theory of change evaluations, such as complexity theory (Dyson and Todd, 2012;Whitmore et al, 2011: 157;Snowden and Boone, 2007: 4;Ramalingham et al, 2008;Patton, 2011;Saunders et al, 2005).…”