Conference Agenda

Participatory research has a strong reputation in education research, particularly when it explores the experiences of marginalised children, young people, and/or adults (Mohindra et al 2011; Conrad & Campbell 2013). Its use is often justified because it reduces, even removes, the distance between researcher and participant (Rafferty 2094), allowing the research to reflect their voices and describe their experiences in their own words. It also potentially enables such research partners to be involved in all aspects of the research, allowing it to fulfil an emancipatory purpose (Hall 1975; Barton & Hayhoe 2022) and aligning it with action research (Sharp & Balogh 2021). However, strong reputations often obscure problems and discourage debate and this symposium was prompted by a number of issues associated with using participatory approaches in education research, which it is designed to highlight and explore, drawing on relevant research undertaken in 3 different European contexts. These issues are presented here as provocations.

The first provocation is methodological. While participatory data collection is often as open and wide as possible, analysis can often remain at the level of content analysis or summarising what research partners have said. This captures an interesting ethical shift, which has led in some cases to under-theorised research analysis creating research findings which are both superficial and paradoxically too distant from what research partners actually said. This may mean that participatory approaches deny important insights.

The second provocation relates to the researcher’s positionality. Researchers are funded both to undertake research and to use this research to improve the institutions or services they are examining. This can prevent them thinking objectively and result in them being influenced by the objectives of the institution or the funder, especially if there is pressure to share research partners’ perspectives (Lewin & Shaw 2021) or conversely suppress their views to ‘protect’ partners from their consequences.

The final provocation relates to communication and dissemination. Research findings which remain at the level of quotation or summary are easier to communicate. Producing findings which use more theoretical analytical approaches may be controversial because they foreground the importance of interpretation and oppose participatory purism, as well as risking bringing taboos and “unthinkables” into participatory dialogue.

The symposium’s presentations bring together critical theory and empirical research to explore these provocations, guided by the following research questions:

• How did the research reported here draw on participatory approaches?
• To what extent did issues around methodology, positionality and dissemination affect how the research was conducted and analysed?
• How were these issues addressed?

This paper primarily addresses aspects which have been little discussed so far in qualitative participatory research. The contribution is primarily theoretically-focused, contextualised using the findings from three research studies. The first used observations as well as interviews with four detainees and three staff members in a penal institution, analysed using depth-hermeneutics (Langer et al., 2021). In the second, a five-day photovoice workshop was conducted with 15 refugee language learners and analysed using content analysis (Obens 2023). In the meta-analysis, six qualitative studies on Pupil Referral Units in England were re-analysed in relation their implications for related policy changes introduced in Germany (Zimmermann, 2023). In the qualitative research community, it is almost "state of the art" to refer to the individuals and groups being researched as "partners". This often blurs the boundaries between research perspectives and activism. While studies may include a large number of participants, the methodological approach is often limited to content analysis and similar approaches. Therefore, the paper uses data from the research projects indicated to address three central questions, which reflect the provocations of the symposium abstract: 1. Does this powerful paradigm of participation, which seems to be ethically valuable, possibly also conceal researchers' fear of results that are uncomfortable and difficult to communicate (Devereux 1967)? 2. Is the apparent distinction from the scientific mainstream (understood as quantitative-empirical), which is often emphasised in educational research projects, really just another form of neoliberal research? Terms such as "relevance", "impact" or "value" typically signify this supposed research responsibility (Henwood & Lang 2005). The inclusion of (often “marginalised”) participants in research projects may actually legitimise educational measures that are individual-centred and conceal social distortions. Shouldn't research be much more resolute in opening up spaces in which more radical criticism is possible? 3. In view of this, what place is there for critical theory which uncovers taboos in the individual and social unconscious? Relevant, more psychoanalytic research methods, such as depth hermeneutics, offer ways of illuminating this "dark side of the moon" and identifying changes to the education system. However, it is precisely those perspectives that are highly anxiety-provoking, as they bring into focus those parts of individual and group experience that have been repressed from professional and institutional self-images (Lorenzer 2000). There are neither clear nor simple answers to those questions. However, they suggest that critical and open discussion of participatory research is urgently needed.

Devereux, G. (1967) From Anxiety to Method in the Behavioral Sciences. The Hague: Mouton. Henwood, Karen; Lang, Iain (2005): Qualitative Social Science in the UK: A Reflexive Commentary on the “State of the Art”. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(3): The State of the Art of Qualitative Research in Europe. DOI: 10.17169/fqs-6.3.16. Langer, J., Link, P.-C., Fickler-Stang, U., Zimmermann, D. (2021): Perspektiven von Bediensteten des Jugendstrafvollzugs auf pädagogische Beziehung - tiefenhermeneutische Einsichten aus einer qualitativ-empirischen Studie. ESE. Emotionale und Soziale Entwicklung in der Pädagogik der Erziehungshilfe und bei Verhaltensstörungen 3, 14–28. Lorenzer, Alfred (2000) Sprachzerstörung und Rekonstruktion. Vorarbeiten zu einer Metatheorie der Psychoanalyse. 5. Aufl. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp (Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft, 31). Obens, K. (2023). Vom (Adels-)titel und der dreifachen Sprachlosigkeit – Eine tiefen-hermeneutische Interpretation eines Deutsch-als-Zweitsprache-Unterrichts für Menschen mit Behinderungs-, Flucht- und Traumaerfahrungen. Psychosozial 45(2) (issue 168), in print. Zimmermann, D. (2023). Die Beschulung psychosozial erheblich beeinträchtigter Kinder und Jugendlicher in Kleinklassen. Praxeologische Desiderata und empirische Antworten aus dem englischen Diskurs. Vierteljahreszeitschrift für Heilpädagogik und ihre Nachbargebiete, submitted.

Recent EU analysis (EU 2022) found that in 2021 over one-fifth of the EU population living in households with dependent children was at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Estimates suggest at least 15 million children and young people in Europe have special educational needs. Increasingly in recent years, children and young people affected by these issues have been categorised under the crude description “vulnerable”. This paper discusses some of the findings from research which explored the experiences of vulnerable young people and their families using participatory approaches. It was undertaken in 2021 in a large city in England with high levels of poverty and deprivation. The paper explores how schools, teachers and other professionals can best work with young people to help them overcome the disadvantages they face and examines the methodological challenges of undertaking funded research using participatory approaches, especially during the pandemic. The theoretical framework for the research drew on strengths-based and co-constructed research approaches (Boyle et al, 2010; O’Neill, 2003), alongside critical examinations of social mobility (Todd, 2021) and the discourse around aspirations (Appadurai 2004). Its guiding research questions were: • What are the hopes and expectations of vulnerable young people and families facing disadvantage? • What support have they had both to achieve their hopes and overcome the barriers they face? • What implications do their experiences have for education and social policy and practice? Funded by local government, the research used a participatory approach and was conducted online in 2021 due to pandemic restrictions. It involved 13 young people and their families who had been supported by, or had sought the support of, social services. The approach developed in-depth narratives of their experiences, drawing on interviews, photographs and retrospective reconstructions of key events in their lives, determined by the participants themselves and their families. Data were analysed using the theoretical framework already outlined and the paper will discuss the difficulties of conducting, and analysing, this kind of participatory research. The paper concludes that shifting the discourse away from aspirations and mobilities, which draw too readily on negative, deficit models, towards exploring young people’s capacities, capabilities and experiences would help them better realise their goals. It also suggests that to do this, we should be prepared to acknowledge the “messiness” of social research (Law 2004); listen to young people more effectively; and find better ways to negotiate representing their views with funders.

Appadurai, A. (2004) The capacity to aspire: Culture and the terms of recognition, in Rao, V. and Walton, M. (eds.) Culture and Public Action. Stamford: Stamford University Press, 59-84. Boyle, D., Slay, J., and Stephens, L. (2010) Public services inside out: Putting co-production into practice. London: NESTA. Eurostat (2022) Children at risk of poverty or social exclusion. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Living_conditions_in_Europe. Law, J. (2004). After Method: Mess in Social Science Research. Abingdon: Routledge. O'Neil, D. (2003) Clients as researchers: The benefits of strengths-based research, in Munford, R. and Sanders, J. (eds.) Making a Difference in Families: Research that Creates Change. Sydney, Australia: Allen & Unwin, 113-129. Todd, S. (2021) Snakes and Ladders: The Great British Social Mobility Myth. London: Vintage.

significantly during the pandemic (Raccanello et al., 2022) and that these problems are likely to worsen in the long term (Kauhanen et al., 2022). These findings highlight the need for evidence-based prevention programs to promote mental health in this age group. Since adolescents often have an affinity and preference for digital technologies, prevention programs increasingly are offered as digital tools. Well-tailored digital interventions are likely to increase engagement and to promote the transfer of specific skills or strategies into the daily lives of young people (Lucas-Thompson et al., 2019). Adolescents can use these programs independent of time and place, and they can be designed to be adaptive and self-directed. Their efficacy has also been noted for addressing mental health problems such as anxiety and depressive symptoms (Sevilla-Llewellyn-Jones et al. (2018). However, young people often criticize these programs for being insufficiently tailored to their needs/interests (Wright et al., in press), which may be due to a disparity between the data collected and reported, identified in symposium provocation 1. This paper presents a project developing a programme to promote mental health literacy and well-being among students aged 12-15. In an iterative, participatory process, an innovative, adaptive, and accessible digital prevention programme is being developed with 240 students from three European countries, addressing topics such as anxiety, depression, resilience, and mindfulness. It takes into account the diversity of the students in terms of their social and cultural background, support needs, gender identity and sexual orientation. The aim is to expand the range of previous/existing prevention programs and to develop a program that addresses students’ needs and diversity and motivates them to take action regarding their own wellbeing. To ensure that the design and content is relevant, attractive and engaging for the students, two participatory workshops in 2023 will be conducted with students from secondary schools in Austria, Poland and Slovenia, followed by a pilot study in 2024. The conceptualization, implementation, and initial findings of the participatory workshops with representatives of the target group will be presented, focusing on the accuracy of the concept and design of the programme’s initial phase. This will include feedback results from the students on their needs, preferences and requirements regarding program design program design, as well as teacher feedback on strategies to improve the viability of the program in the school setting.

Kauhanen, L., Wan Mohd Yunus, W. M. A., Lempinen, L., Peltonen, K., Gyllenberg, D., Mishina, K., Gilbert, S., Bastola, K., Brown, J. S. L., & Sourander, A. (2022). A systematic review of the mental health changes of children and young people before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-022-02060-0. Lucas-Thompson, R. G., Broderick, P. C., Coatsworth, J. D., & Smyth, J. M. (2019). New Avenues for Promoting Mindfulness in Adolescence using mHealth. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28(1), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-018-1256-4 Raccanello, D., Rocca, E., Vicentini, G., & Brondino, M. (2022). Eighteen Months of COVID-19 Pandemic Through the Lenses of Self or Others: A Meta-Analysis on Children and Adolescents' Mental Health. Child and Youth Care Forum, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10566-022-09706-9 Sevilla-Llewellyn-Jones, J., Santesteban-Echarri, O., Pryor, I., McGorry, P., & Alvarez-Jimenez, M. (2018). Web-Based Mindfulness Interventions for Mental Health Treatment: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. JMIR Mental Health, 5(3), e10278. https://doi.org/10.2196/10278 Wright, M., Reitegger, F., Cela, H., Papst, A., & Gasteiger-Klicpera, B. (in press). Interventions With Digital Tools for Mental Health Promotion Among 11-18 Year Olds: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Youth and Adolescence.