Students as Researchers: rationale and critique

Atweh, Bill; Burton, Leone

doi:10.1080/0141192950210502

Cited by 38 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Atweh and Burton 1995). Beyond one remark that 'Research takes a lot of time' (Ana, Class B PCR, Evaluation meeting), however, the PCRs in this project did not choose to comment on this during our PMI evaluation session.…”

Section: Pupil Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It has been argued that 'insider' research, conducted from the social and cultural standpoint of the participant (Fielding 2004), provides access to data that may otherwise have been inaccessible. This may be because research participants are able to communicate more openly with their peers than with 'outsiders' (Atweh and Burton 1995;Schwartz 1988), because they can relate to and empathize better with participants of a similar age and background to themselves (Mitra 2001), or in the case of data collection methods such as participant observation, because the presence of a peer is less disruptive than that of an adult outsider (Leitch et al 2007). …”

Section: Rationales and Advantages Of Participatory Pupil Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cautionary observations on the value of pupil research In spite of the arguments in support of participatory research in schools, the literature provides warnings that such initiatives should be approached with caution and realism (Atweh and Burton 1995;Fielding 2004Fielding , 2007Grundy 1998;Mannion 2007). According to Leitch et al, researching with pupils brings challenges that may be encountered at a number of different moments in the research process and that can only partially be predicted (Leitch et al 2007).…”

Section: Rationales and Advantages Of Participatory Pupil Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Aspirations and assumptions: a researcher's account of pupil involvement in school-based research

Mearns

Coyle

Graaff

2014

International Journal of Research & Method in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes a research project conducted in collaboration with 10 'pupil co-researchers' (PCRs) and their classes in a secondary school in the Netherlands. The main research tools employed were online and face-to-face group discussions, in which PCRs contributed as consultants, co-designers and assistants. The research proved a learning experience for both the adults and the young people involved and led to the collection of insightful qualitative data. Working collaboratively with pupils, however, presented a number of challenges. Ethical issues such as consent, inclusion and the pressure placed on pupils, and logistical challenges such as the availability of time and resources, were particularly prominent. Perhaps the most valuable challenge, however, was the opportunity that this research presented to the adult researcher to reflect upon the role played by her own assumptions when working with young people.Keywords: students as researchers; inclusive research; bilingual education Introduction Inclusive research with young people in schools has its ups and its downs, its advocates and its critics. This contribution gives a personal account of one example of inclusive research, which involved working together with pupils in the design and implementation of online and face-to-face discussions with their classmates. We subsequently used the qualitative data we obtained through these means to inform the design of a motivation questionnaire, which I administered to pupils at five different schools in a later, non-participatory phase of my doctoral research. The methods and processes of the collaborative phase of this research are described in some detail, as are some of the challenges encountered and the resulting considerations for future work of this kind.We have chosen to write this account in the first person in order to reflect the personal nature of collaborative research. This project afforded an opportunity not only for data collection and for pupil learning, but also for researcher growth. The challenges involved in attempting to share the control over this research with a group of young people, and in balancing assumptions with their input, led to the investment of a significant amount of energy and personal reflection. We believe that this story is therefore better told from a subjective and possibly a more 'human' perspective. This paper is written largely with the singular 'I', not to belittle the contribution and considerable

show abstract

Section: Pupil Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rationales and Advantages Of Participatory Pupil Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Rationales and Advantages Of Participatory Pupil Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Aspirations and assumptions: a researcher's account of pupil involvement in school-based research

Mearns

Coyle

Graaff

2014

International Journal of Research & Method in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Spivak, 1987, p. 107)" (Orner, 1992, p. 87). This is exactly the caution against temporary tokenism that sanctions ultimate exclusion that several theorists of student voice raise (Atweh & Burton, 1995;Fielding, 2004a and2004b;Holdsworth, 2000;Lodge, 2005;Thomson & Gunter, 2005). Maher answers, indeed: "To simply encourage the expression of everyone's experiences, or voices, is in fact to encourage the more privileged voices, and often to contain the marginalized voices within the terms set by the most privileged (Maher and Tetreault 1997)" (Maher, 2001, p. 20).…”

Section: Voicementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed, as Fielding (2004a) reminds us, drawing on Lincoln: "'Traditional epistemologies and methods grounded in white androcentric concerns, and rooted in values which are understood to be inimical to the interest of the silenced, will fail to capture the voices needed'" (p. 299). And finally, proponents and practitioners of student voice work argue that we must beware of the potential for tokenism, manipulation, and practices not matching rhetoric that characterize some student voice efforts (Atweh & Burton, 1995;Fielding, 2004a and2004b;Holdsworth, 2000;Lodge, 2005;Thomson & Gunter, 2005).…”

Section: Voicementioning

confidence: 99%