The difference that place makes to methodology: uncovering the ‘lived space’ of young people's spatial practices

Anderson, Jonathan Mark; Jones, Katie

doi:10.1080/14733280903024456

Cited by 97 publications

(68 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They were able to communicate what mattered and was real to them (Mistry, Bignante, & Berardi, 2016;Pinter & Zandian, 2012) and merge academic goals with their own interests (Nind, 2011). Similarly, Anderson and Jones (2009) also observed that the material environment in which research is conducted shapes children's voices. It shapes what they are willing to share.…”

Section: Merging the Roles Of Being A Participant Researcher And Plamentioning

confidence: 87%

Advocating for a More Relational and Dynamic Model of Participation for Child Researchers

Ergler

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Primary school children participating as researchers has become a moral obligation to meet the goal of children's participation rights. Yet, critical voices rarely question the ethical and practical implications of turning young children into mini-clones of adult researchers. While enabling and constraining aspects of participatory methods and inherent power issues per se are widely discussed, adult researchers still seem to struggle to critically engage with celebratory accounts of children as researchers. In particular, the practical obligations, ethical challenges and tensions that impact on primary school children's research experiences, are underexplored. Findings from two projects on play, which engaged children as active researchers, suggest that more attention needs to be paid to the messy realities of becoming and being a child researcher. In particular, researchers should be more attuned to children's capabilities and the ethical hurdles for child and adult researchers. This article argues therefore for a more dynamic, meaningful and realistic model of participation, that speaks to the messy realities of becoming and being a child-researcher. In other words, the article questions the dominant orthodoxy of children as researchers as the 'gold standard' of participatory research with children.

show abstract

Section: Merging the Roles Of Being A Participant Researcher And Plamentioning

confidence: 87%

Advocating for a More Relational and Dynamic Model of Participation for Child Researchers

Ergler

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As the story of the research project has demonstrated, some important limitations were created by institutional gatekeeping and adultism -a concern that has been highlighted by other youth geographers (Barker & Weller, 2003;Anderson & Jones, 2009). For example, in their investigation of the space that research makes, Barker and Weller (2003, p. 223) found that, despite their efforts to 'place children at the centre of research', their research had largely empowered other adults who controlled the spaces where the research was conducted.…”

Section: Reflections On Researching In a Queer And Trans* Youth Commumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As spaces of LGBTQ community support for queer and trans* youth, such sites have a variety of specific characteristics that distinguish them from other support and community spaces. In this section, we examine P10 as a space of research and the micro-geographies surrounding the process described above (see Elwood & Martin, 2000;Barker & Weller, 2003;Sin, 2003;Anderson & Jones, 2009). We elaborate on the specific characteristics of out-of-school LGBTQ youth groups and examine the limitations and possibilities that such sites can create for research.…”

Section: Reflections On Researching In a Queer And Trans* Youth Commumentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, at the centre of all of these dynamics also lies the significance of the actual research space when working with youth (see Barker & Weller, 2003;Anderson & Jones, 2009). Exploring the space that research makes, Barker and Weller (2003) have argued that the specific power relations between adult researchers and children require close attention.…”

Section: Where Are Queer and Trans* Youth? A Gap In Geographic Knowlementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Space for Queer and Trans Youth? Reflections on Community-Based Research in Montreal

Montigny

Podmore

2014

Global Studies of Childhood

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article focuses on the process of conducting community-based geographic research with queer and trans* youth. It is based on a research project that investigated the spatial experiences of adolescents between 14 and 18 years of age who attended Project 10, an out-of-school LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) community support organization for youth in Montreal, Canada. The authors examine the ways in which working within this community space shaped the research process and how it functioned as a site of critical geographic inquiry. The article highlights the process of gaining access to this population, the methodological particularities of working with queer and trans* youth support groups and, finally, how conducting research in an LGBTQ community space facilitated the research process. The objective is to reflect on the possibilities and limitations of this site in terms of conducting geographic research that considers the lives of queer and trans* adolescents.

show abstract

“…LaFrance et al (2012) assert that a place-conscious methodology should be informed by core values that honour place and relate to a community's lived experiences and spiritual expressions, and that honouring a sense of place requires evaluation to fit within the contours of the location, including history and contemporary realities. Anderson and Jones (2009) argue that place can be harnessed to enrich the research encounter and that the influence of place has often been overlooked. Holton & Riley (2014) contend that narratives "in place" can help evaluators to get into "less easily storied places" (pp.…”

Section: Place-conscious Evaluationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating "place" in evaluation design and practice

Dignan¹

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To feel a sense of place is a fundamental human need and in order to understand people's experiences, it is critical to understand their place. This is particularly important in the rural, bicultural communities of Aotearoa New Zealand, many of which have not been well served by research and evaluation. Place consciousness is not a new concept in evaluation theory, particularly as an aspect of cultural and contextual responsiveness. However, the concept of place is not easily defined or well articulated in relation to evaluation theory and practice. This article reflects on the findings of the author's 2014 literature review, which focused on the concept of place and its implications for evaluation design. The author promotes a place-conscious approach to evaluation that recognises and honours features of the places where people live their lives. A place-conscious evaluation requires evaluators to consciously assess the implications of place and pay explicit attention to place-connected knowledge. It provides a foundation for evaluators to work collaboratively with communities to enhance evaluative thinking and develop more meaningful, relevant, and useful evaluation insights as a basis for positive action.

show abstract

The difference that place makes to methodology: uncovering the ‘lived space’ of young people's spatial practices

Cited by 97 publications

References 42 publications

Advocating for a More Relational and Dynamic Model of Participation for Child Researchers

Advocating for a More Relational and Dynamic Model of Participation for Child Researchers

Space for Queer and Trans Youth? Reflections on Community-Based Research in Montreal

Navigating "place" in evaluation design and practice

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About