Negotiating a third space for participatory research with people with learning disabilities: an examination of boundaries and spatial practices

Abstract

The focus of this article is participatory research with and by people with learning disabilities. Drawing on discussions that took place across a series of seminars, we use the concepts of space and boundaries to examine the development of a shared new spatial practice through creative responses to a number of challenges. We examine the boundaries that exist between participatory and non-participatory research; the boundaries that exist between different stakeholders of participatory research; and the boundaries that exist between participatory research with people with learning disabilities and participatory research with other groups. With a particular focus on participatory data analysis and participatory research with people with high support needs, we identify a number of ways in boundaries are being crossed. We argue that the pushing of new boundaries opens up both new and messy spaces and that both are important for the development of participatory research methods.

Contributing to Inclusive Research Policy and Practice: A Synthesis of Four Inclusive (Health) Research Projects

“…The results of this study are transferrable to inclusive research using similar methods (i.e., advisory boards and co‐researchers). Likewise, the results of this study might overlap with participatory research with other groups (Nind, ); however, when the aim is to share learning in groups, a shared language should be in place (Seale, Nind, Tilley, & Chapman, ).…”

The added value of inclusive research

“…These include “co‐researchers,” “participant researchers.” In the absence of an agreed term, the authors have opted to use the term “co‐researchers” when referring to researchers with intellectual disabilities because the authors believe that both they and academic researchers with whom they may work have distinctive roles in the research and because “co” suggests an equal but different contribution and has the implication of “collaborative.” However, the authors also recognize that some writers see this distinction as inequitable. For example, in a seminar dedicated to identifying common ground between participatory research with people with intellectual disabilities and participatory research conducted with other groups, Toby Brandon and Caroline Kemp argued against the term preferring to use “researcher” for all in that, “you are either a researcher or you are not” (Seale, Nind, Tilley, & Chapman, , p. 488).…”

Espacios para jugar, para aprender. Espacios para relacionarse. Una experiencia de voz del alumnado en la escuela infantil (0-3 años)

“…A las técnicas utilizadas tradicionalmente en la investigación cualitativa se han incorporado, dada la peculiaridad de los niños y niñas participantes, otras que aumentan la presencia y visibilidad de los participantes y permiten escuchar la voz de todos los sujetos implicados (Barker & Weller, 2003;Clark & Moss, 2005) enfatizando modos de comunicación distintos a la palabra escrita (Clark, 2007). Así encontramos: (1) la entrevista semiestructurada (Fontana & Frey, 1994) para la que se diseñó un guion previo que estructura la entrevista pero deja espacios para incorporar nuevos temas (Hammersley & Atkinson, 1994;Kvale, 2011); (2) la observación participante de momentos claves (Flick, 2004), (3) el análisis de documentos legales y/o producidos en el contexto de la investigación por los sujetos; (4) seminarios de trabajo recogidos en el diario de campo (Seale, Nind, Tilley & Chapman, 2015); (5) medios visuales (fotografías); (6) estrategias mediadas (Ceballos-López, Susinos-Rada & Saiz-Linares, 2016) y (7) cuestionarios diseñados ad hoc (Flick, 2004).…”