How to Develop Children as Researchers: A Step-by-Step Guide to
                    Teaching the Research Process

Kellett, Mary

doi:10.4135/9781446212288

Cited by 119 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It is interesting to note, however, that Kellett's (2005) major work on child-led research does not involve 'innovative' methods of data collection, but focuses on training children and young people to use more traditional methods (Wiles et al 2013). Furthermore, as Cole (2009) observes in her account of an attempt to use Wikis to support learning, engagement in interactive online content is for many people a passive undertaking, and barriers of time-pressure, self-confidence and technical accessibility can prevent participants from taking on a more active role.…”

Section: Logistical Challengesmentioning

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

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: Logistical Challengesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Bland and Atweh 2007;Gunter and Thomson 2007;Kellett 2005). Rather than encouraging the PCRs to take full ownership of the research design and tools, I influenced them with my own suggestions, which were based on previous examples of participatory research.…”

Section: Reflection: Running Risksmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

“…In comparison, and in discussing how to teach children about research and research skills, Kellett (2005b) proposes three key principles of research -be sceptical, be systematic and be ethical -as those that qualify an inquiry to be scholarly. This conceptualisation of research does not define who evaluates it, as the concept of 'scientific' inquiry does, nor does it offer any specific criteria by which the investigator can be evaluated as having been 'sufficiently' sceptical, systematic and ethical.…”

Section: Is Children's Research 'Research'?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, while some researchers still suggest that children's involvement in research should be supported for reasons to do with their current participation and not for any future or pedagogical benefits (see Davis, 2009), others are more equivocal and also allude to the educational benefits of them conducting research (e.g. Bucknall, 2012;Kellett, 2005b).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Participation or pedagogy? Ambiguities and tensions surrounding the facilitation of children as researchers

Kim

2016

Childhood

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ambiguities and tensions can arise when children are facilitated to act as 'primary researchers' concerning whether this is primarily to support their 'participation' in knowledge production and, with the knowledge produced, in relevant decision-making processes or whether it is mainly for any educational benefits. This paper considers these ambiguities and tensions theoretically and by using evidence from a study where English primary school children were supported to conduct their own research projects. It concludes that, while the boundaries between children's research as participation and pedagogy can be ambiguous, it should not be promoted for its potential educational benefits alone.

show abstract

“…Although there is less of an evidence base in relation to children and young people's involvement in research compared with the involvement of adults, the case for this involvement has been explored in a number of publications. 57,61,62 Research that actively involves children and young people should lead to research, and ultimately services, that better reflect their priorities and concerns 63,64 and enhance the opportunity for optimal health outcomes. 65 However, the voices of children and young people who are less frequently heard, for example users of mental health services 66,67 and looked-after children, 59 are often absent from the literature on children and young people's involvement in health and social care research.…”

Section: Involving Young People In Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Youth social behaviour and network therapy (Y-SBNT): adaptation of a family and social network intervention for young people who misuse alcohol and drugs – a randomised controlled feasibility trial

Watson

Toner

Day

et al. 2017

Health Technol Assess

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundFamily interventions appear to be effective at treating young people’s substance misuse. However, implementation of family approaches in UK services is low. This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of recruiting young people to an intervention based on an adaptation of adult social behaviour and network therapy. It also sought to involve young people with experience of using substance misuse services in the research process.ObjectivesTo demonstrate the feasibility of recruiting young people to family and social network therapy and to explore ways in which young people with experience of using substance misuse services could be involved in a study of this nature.DesignA pragmatic, two-armed, randomised controlled open feasibility trial.SettingTwo UK-based treatment services for young people with substance use problems, with recruitment taking place from May to November 2014.ParticipantsYoung people aged 12–18 years, newly referred and accepted for structured interventions for drug and/or alcohol problems.InterventionsA remote, web-based computer randomisation system allocated young people to adapted youth social behaviour and network therapy (Y-SBNT) or treatment as usual (TAU). Y-SBNT participants were intended to receive up to six 50-minute sessions over a maximum of 12 weeks. TAU participants continued to receive usual care delivered by their service.Main outcome measuresFeasibility was measured by recruitment rates, retention in treatment and follow-up completion rates. The main clinical outcome was the proportion of days on which the main problem substance was used in the preceding 90-day period as captured by the Timeline Follow-Back interview at 3 and 12 months.ResultsIn total, 53 young people were randomised (Y-SBNT,n = 26; TAU,n = 27) against a target of 60 (88.3%). Forty-two young people attended at least one treatment session [Y-SBNT 22/26 (84.6%); TAU 20/27 (74.1%)]; follow-up rates were 77.4% at month 3 and 73.6% at month 12. Data for nine young people were missing at both months 3 and 12, so the main clinical outcome analysis was based on 24 young people (92.3%) in the Y-SBNT group and 20 young people (74.1%) in the TAU group. At month 12, the average proportion of days that the main problem substance was used in the preceding 90 days was higher in the Y-SBNT group than in the TAU group (0.54 vs. 0.41; adjusted mean difference 0.13, 95% confidence interval –0.12 to 0.39;p = 0.30). No adverse events were reported. Seventeen young people with experience of substance misuse services were actively involved throughout the study. They informed key elements of the intervention and research process, ensuring that the intervention was acceptable and relevant to our target groups; contributing to the design of key trial documents, ideas for a new model of public involvement and this report. Two parents were also involved.ConclusionsThe adapted intervention could be delivered in young people’s services, and qualitative interviews found that Y-SBNT was acceptable to young people, family members and staff. Engagement of family and network members proved difficult within the intervention and research aspects. The study proved the feasibility of this work in routine services but outcome measurement based on narrow substance use variables may be limited and may fail to capture other important changes in wider areas of functioning for young people. Validation of the EuroQol-5 Dimensions for young people aged 12–18 years should be considered and flexible models for involvement of young people in research are required to achieve inclusive representation throughout all aspects of the research process. Although recommendation of a full trial of the Y-SBNT intervention compared with TAU is not supported, this study can inform future intervention development and UK research within routine addiction services.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN93446265.FundingThis project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 21, No. 15. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

show abstract

How to Develop Children as Researchers: A Step-by-Step Guide to Teaching the Research Process

Cited by 119 publications

References 0 publications

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

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

Participation or pedagogy? Ambiguities and tensions surrounding the facilitation of children as researchers

Youth social behaviour and network therapy (Y-SBNT): adaptation of a family and social network intervention for young people who misuse alcohol and drugs – a randomised controlled feasibility trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About