Involving Children and Young People in Research in Educational Settings

Chapter 7: Conclusion

Judith Loveridge

Each section of this report has examined many issues of involving children and young people in research conducted in different educational settings, covering a great deal of detail and specific information relevant to different contexts. This final section moves beyond the detail of the various sections and the exemplars in providing an overview of key overarching themes that characterise the most crucial issues in doing research with children and young people.

Sinclair (2004) asserts that “Participation in practice has moved a long way in the past decade but, as is often the case in new ventures, each step forward alerts us to how much more we need to learn and understand to be effective whether as researchers, practitioners or policy-makers” (p. 116). Gallacher and Gallagher (2008) argue that as the field matures and recognises its relative immaturity, there will inevitably be more critical and reflexive reflection about decisions made at different points during the research process where children and young people are involved. Researchers must engage reflexively with the issues and problems that arise in those contexts in which they are working. They must also consider how their own biography as a researcher and received ways of doing things influence the choices they make about research design, research questions, ways of gaining access and consent, ideas and expectations about participants, choices about data-collection methods and analyses and what evidence is included or excluded from reported findings.

The field has moved beyond an initial, overt enthusiasm about children and young people’s involvement as a panacea for what were considered to be problems in research with children and young people; today’s discussions of these issues represent a more considered and measured response as well as recognition that participant involvement can also introduce elements of risk and harm. We caution, however, that the issues raised in this document reside very much within a particular moment and context—these will be supplanted by others in the future. Interestingly, there is nothing in this report about the involvement of children and young people in research involving experimental designs or intervention studies. It should be emphasised, of course, that today’s ethical and informed consent protocols arose primarily from research traditions that are described as ‘quantitative’ and/or biomedical, designed to protect those involved in research from potential harm and to balance benefits with the inevitable possibility of harm that is present in any research endeavour. The relative absence of expanded discussions of these issues in some fields may be because additional complications are introduced by larger scale group designs; additional issues regarding conflicts of interest may also be inherent in educational intervention research just as is the case in biomedical intervention research. Whatever the reasons, the lack of emphasis on these issues in certain research traditions signals scope for further enhancement and enrichment of the concepts and processes for involving children and young people in research as the situation changes.

As researchers increasingly involve children and young people in research (rather than just talking as adults about how to do it), there is a growing willingness to be more open and transparent about what has actually happened in relation to different aspects of the research process. This is particularly so around gaining access and consent and methodologies used or modified during the research process. As we have noted throughout this report, processes around the analysis of data—particularly qualitative data—still remain largely invisible. These accounts and the exemplars show that actually doing research with children and young people involves a certain ‘messiness’. Gaining access to participants does not always proceed as envisaged, the measures or tools do not necessarily work in the ways that were anticipated, full data sets may not be obtained owing to school activities taking precedence or data getting lost, and so on—these are only some of the complications that can have an impact on the sources of evidence in research. The literature suggests that in light of this ‘messiness’, researchers must be attentive and responsive to what they observe, hear and apprehend throughout the research process; be willing to consult with children and young people and members of their communities, including being sensitive to cultural perspectives and values; and be prepared to be flexible and adaptable so as to offer children and young people ways of participating that respect individual and group differences. Being transparent and accountable about each aspect of the research process (which is not as tidy as text books about research sometimes suggest) and about the adaptations made, will benefit other researchers as they design research projects. This transparency can also engender respect and willingness in children and young people to be involved in ongoing and future research (Bishop, 2008; see also Secondary school mixed methods and Secondary school mixed methods action research exemplars).

Another theme common across all sections of the report is that involving children and young people in research requires substantial time and resources, more so than usually anticipated. Funding processes do not always take into consideration the time needed to build trust, to consult with and involve children and young people in meaningful ways, to work in culturally respectful ways, to develop and trial appropriate measures or tools, or the resources needed to support children and young people’s participation, including appropriate places in which to work. Ethical review processes also do not typically reflect timing issues, nor do they allow for the tensions arising from research approaches that require consulting with children and young people for their input before determining details of the research approach and gaining ethical approval.

After an initial burst of enthusiasm for including children and young people in all aspects of research, a more measured position is emerging that recognises that it may not be appropriate to involve children and young people in all aspects. Projects may be driven by agenda that are set by adults, agencies, and/or policy directives as well as by previous research findings. It is also possible that children and young people may be willing to participate but not be particularly interested in being involved in all aspects. Research involvement may also become a burden for children and young people (as well as for family members who are supporting them in the role). Fitzgerald and Graham (2008) reflect that their research with young people about participation has required them “to suspend our judgements about whether and to what extent young people want a ‘choice’ or ‘voice’ (or both)” (p. 67). Their findings and those of Badham (2004) indicate that young people are very keen to see evidence that their engagement in processes of consultation and decision-making has mattered and has not been tokenistic. Similarly, the research literature suggests that it is important to share research findings with participants to engender a sense that their contribution has been recognised and valued and has potentially been transformative. Fitzgerald and Graham found that young people did “not always want to participate as researchers, preferring instead an advocacy or advisory role providing feedback and ongoing consultation” (2008, p. 71). A number of researchers are pointing to the benefits of including children on advisory boards and to consult with them throughout the entire research process, including about effective dissemination of findings. As noted, ironically, constraints arising from limited funding and ethical review requirements may make it particularly challenging to incorporate the participation of children and young people in advisory roles into the design of research projects.

A related theme also emerging across the different sections of the report is the perceived benefits of intergenerational projects. In some of the literature in this area, the argument has been made (similar to early feminist arguments) that children and young people—not adults—should do research with children and young people. Nairn, Munro and Smith (2005) reflect on the importance of the age of the researcher and argue that there are benefits accruing from the involvement of both adults and young people working together in research. Fitzgerald and Graham (2008) also reflect positively on the combination of young people working with skilled adult research partners; they report that young people talked about “the importance of ‘discussion’ with adults, citing the opportunities that conversation opens up for affirming, challenging and developing them as people” (p. 68). Fielding (2004) reflects on different approaches to student voice and argues that “the importance for transformation is more likely to reside in arrangements, which require the active engagement of students and teachers working in partnership than in those that either exclude teachers or treat student voice as an instrument of teacher or state purpose” (p. 306). Mannion (2007) too argues for the need to reframe ‘listening to children’ and children’s participation so that the lived experience of children and adults is better reflected. He argues that the socio-spatial aspects of these processes and child/adult relations needed to be included in analyses: “We need to ‘go relational’ and ‘spatial’ if we are to ‘get real’ when researching lives of children because children’s lives are interdependent with the lives of adults” (p. 406).

The interdependence of children’s and young people’s lives with others has also been a recurring theme. They do not live as independent, isolated individuals but are embedded within or at least connected to the lives and relationships of their immediate and extended families, peers, other adults such as teachers, and their communities. The implications of this interconnectedness, and the multiple dimensions that may contribute to a child’s or young person’s sense of identity, must be incorporated into thinking about if, how, when and why to involve children and young people in research. Another consistent theme within the literature is that research should be of benefit to children and young people either directly or indirectly. Many findings of research are predicated, in fact, not on perceived benefits to the participants but on assumed future benefits to others and the wider society. Nevertheless, researchers may need to pay increased attention to how research can enable children and young people to learn more and how they may personally benefit from the process of being involved in research.

Gallacher and Gallagher (2008) reflect many of the points that have emerged in this report as part of methodological discussions. Concerned about the uncritical ways that participatory research techniques have been taken up and the claims that have been made about them, they suggest that it may be useful to think about participatory research as having methodological immaturity. Thus, it has potential and is in a state of becoming, not yet arrived. They argue that:

For us, what matters is not so much the methods used but the ways and the spirit in which they are used: the methodological attitude taken. Good research practice cannot be reduced to ingenious techniques, planned in advance and carefully applied. Research is inherently unpredictable: the best laid plans are liable to go awry. Methodological immaturity privileges open-ended process over predefined technique. (p.513)

Clearly it is an exciting moment to be engaged with involving children and young people in research. Time and reflexivity are of the essence to ensure that researchers can ethically navigate each phase and aspect of the research process in the contexts in which they are working.

References

Badham, B. (2004). Participation - for a change: Disabled young people lead the way. Children & Society, 18(2), 143-154.

Bishop, K. (11 November, 2008). Participating in research: What's it really like for kids? Paper presented at the Involving children and young people in research. Compendium of papers and reflections from a Think Tank.

Fielding, M. (2004). Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal, 30(2), 295-311.

Fitzgerald, R., & Graham, A. (11 November, 2008). ‘Young people big voice’: Reflections on the participation of children and young people in a university setting. Paper presented at the Involving children and young people in research. Compendium of papers and reflections from a Think Tank.

Gallacher, L. A., & Gallagher, M. (2008). Methodological immaturity in childhood research? Thinking through 'participatory methods'. Childhood, 15(4), 499-516.

Mannion, G. (2007). Going spatial, going relational: Why "listening to children" and children's participation needs reframing. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 28(3), 405-420.

Nairn, K., Munro, J., & Smith, A. B. (2005). A counter-narrative of a 'failed' interview. Qualitative Research, 5, 221-244.

Sinclair, R. (2004). Participation in practice: Making it meaningful, effective and sustainable. Children & Society, 18(2), 106-118.

Acknowledgement

Luanna Meyer for editing and reviewing this chapter.