What makes a good self-advocacy project? The added value of co-production

Armstrong, Alan; Cansdale, Mal; Collis, Anne; Collis, Bryan; Rice, Sarah; Walmsley, Jan

doi:10.1080/09687599.2019.1613960

Cited by 22 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The research used a qualitative, co-production design, an inclusive approach that is increasingly adopted within disability studies, e.g. , Armstrong et al (2019). We specifically used the photographic method based on the work and ethos of PhotoVoice, a charity that promotes the participatory and ethical use of photography for positive social change .…”

Section: Methodology/research Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

A public inconvenience: better toilets for inclusive travel

Mathews

Marshall

Wilkinson

2021

Disability & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This coproduced study drew on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities to inform a Human Rights-based design. Using photographic images and reflective diaries, twelve participant co-researchers investigated the quality of public toilets when travelling in Scotland for people with dementia and other physical and cognitive impairments. Data were analysed using constant comparison and critically reflexive, group enquiry to produce contextualised evidence of toilet utility from the user perspective.Essential themes revealed major challenges associated with toilet accessibility, usability and design, emphasising the distressing sensory experience of the user when confronted with an inadequate or inaccessible toilet. Substantial overlap in needs was demonstrated but a few unique requirements aligned with specific disabilities were recorded for attention. Our findings highlight two key issues: 1) existing Standards are often unmet; 2) current Standards require review and endorsement by people who represent the full range of access needs.

show abstract

Section: Methodology/research Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

A public inconvenience: better toilets for inclusive travel

Mathews

Marshall

Wilkinson

2021

Disability & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The Research Excellence Framework (2015) report used the term co-production to describe this key feature of high quality CtP research but did not define it further. Armstrong et al (2019Armstrong et al ( , pp. 1299Armstrong et al ( -1300 defined co-produced research as " .…”

Section: Conceptualising Collaboration: Knowledge Co-constructionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Digital stories for transition: co-constructing an evidence base in the early years with autistic children, families and practitioners

Parsons

Kovshoff

Ivil³

2020

Educational Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns have been raised about the quality of practice-focused research in education generally and in early years education specifically. Chris Pascal and Tony Bertram argue that a shift in worldview is needed to improve the robustness and overall quality of participatory research in the early years and proposed a "praxeological framework" for research comprising praxis, power, values, and methodology. This paper provides an example of how this praxeological framework was applied within an existing research-practice partnership focusing on autism education in the early years. We used a "non-orthodox" Digital Storytelling methodology to coconstruct knowledge between researchers, practitioners, children and families about educational transitions. Our co-construction of knowledge involved the embodied knowledge of children and the exemplary (practical) knowledge of families and practitioners, leading to new insights into educational practices. In adopting a knowledge co-creation approach from the start, we established a powerful pathway to impact through which our research is already making a difference to practice. We propose that pathway to impact is an important element that could be made more explicit within a praxeological framing of research.

show abstract

“…Within community ID services, co-production approaches are highly relevant given the disenfranchised nature of the population and high levels of family involvement in care (Ham and Davies, 2018; Roberts et al , 2012). In these settings, co-production is evident in service development (Doherty et al , 2018), staff training (Billon, et al , 2016), research domains (Armstrong et al , 2019) and care planning (Ham and Davies, 2018). Yet, co-production is less evident in inpatient forensic services, where detained individuals experience significant restrictions on their liberties and involvement in decision-making.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing co-production approaches to dynamic risk assessments in a forensic intellectual disability population: outcomes of a clinical pilot

Morris

Webb

Stewart

et al. 2021

JIDOB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose A co-produced clinical practice that aims to improve outcomes through a partnership with service users is becoming increasingly important in intellectual disability (ICD) services, yet these approaches are under-evaluated in forensic settings. This study aims to explore and compare the feasibility of two approaches to co-production in the completion of dynamic risk assessments and management plans in a secure setting. Design/methodology/approach A convenience sample of adults admitted to a secure specialist forensic ICD service (N = 54) completed the short dynamic risk scale (SDRS) and drafted risk management plans under one of two conditions. In the first condition, participants rated the SDRS and risk management plan first, separately from the multidisciplinary team (MDT). In the second condition, participants and MDTs rated the SDRS and risk management plan together. Findings In total, 35 (65%) participants rated their risk assessments and 25 (47%) completed their risk management plans. Participants who rated their risk assessments separately from the MDT were significantly more likely to complete the SDRS (p = 0.025) and draft their risk management plans (p = 0.003). When rated separately, MDT scorers recorded significantly higher total SDRS scores compared to participants (p = 0.009). A series of Mann-Whitney U tests revealed significant differences between MDT and participant ratings on questions that required greater skills in abstraction and social reasoning, as well as sexual behaviour and self-harm. Originality/value Detained participants with an intellectual disabilities will engage in their dynamic risk assessment and management plan processes. The study demonstrates the impact of different co-production methodologies on engagement and highlights areas for future research pertaining to co-production.

show abstract

What makes a good self-advocacy project? The added value of co-production

Cited by 22 publications

References 30 publications

A public inconvenience: better toilets for inclusive travel

A public inconvenience: better toilets for inclusive travel

Digital stories for transition: co-constructing an evidence base in the early years with autistic children, families and practitioners

Comparing co-production approaches to dynamic risk assessments in a forensic intellectual disability population: outcomes of a clinical pilot

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About