Update

The posts on Photovoice, GIS/GPS and decison support systems have all been updated with the workshop's analysis of the tool. Don't miss it...
Trish

Accessible reporting of participatory research

This workshop was run by Alun Morgan, lecturerin Health and Social Care at the Open University.

Accessible reporting This workshop focused on the need in participatory research to ensure that the outputs and reporting of any project activity is appropriate and understandable to the intended audience and project participants. Traditionally the reporting of research is often framed in formal academic language and reporting structures. However, when engaging with community groups and other stakeholders, such conceptual models may be confusing or appear distant and to discount or to exclude the participants’ contributions.  This workshop presented an example of the CHANGE organisation in Leeds in the UK, where young people with moderate learning difficulties (mental handicap) were engaged as researchers to examine the issue of the education and development of making personal and sexual relationships between young adults with learning disabilities. An example of an accessible report of this project in Leeds, which included the use of drama, was presented by the workshop leader, and workshop participants reflected on the issue of the relevance and opportunities for making the outcomes of participatory video research more accessible. The report can be accessed at: http://www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies/archiveuk/change/final%20report%20read%20copy.pdf  The Dabas workshop participants’ views were recorded as follows:
Affordances	Requirements	Notes
·         Strengthens validity of research findings – beyond respondent validation ·         Subverts institutions ‘holding’ power of knowledge ·         Allows for real participatory research ·         Simple and understandable way of clarifying information ·         Easily understandable feedback, allows trust and good relationships between researchers and locals ·         Dissemination of results to participants ·         Opportunity6 for participants to feedback re project results ·         Critical approach	·         Understanding of audience needs ·         Creativity ·         True empathy for the participants and the role of the research ·         Needing to know exactly who your audience is. ·         Need to make sure that you match the level and the audience otherwise you could offend. ·         Different outputs for different audiences ·         Important to find the appropriate difficulty level (understandable and not too simple for the stakeholders)	·         360-degree participation – missing link – feedback loop – even including participants in the design process. ·         Suggest getting feedback from participants re the accessibility of the report – pilot? ·         Build in feedback on how useful/good your feedback reporting was?! ·         Ethical dilemma of omission - professional/ ethical /boundaries. ·         You have to choose the target group carefully. ·         Needs to be designed from early in the process. ·

GIS and GPS - acronyms explained

On Wednesday morning, Agi (with Gustav interpreting) introduced us to Geographical Information Systems and Global Positioning Systems and the differences and potential synergies between them. GPS comprises basic data in the form of co-ordinates, to which secondary data (e.g. photos, text, video, music) can be attached. GIS is a data processing system that can be used as an analytical tool linking data to spatial dimensions. Layers of data from different sources can be brought together into the GIS system. The practical application of GIS is not difficult – smartphones with apps (such as mytracks) can be used to upload data (such as routes or points of interest) to online maps such as Google Maps or OpenStreetMaps. There is more to GIS/GPS than SatNav and community use of this technology is growing.

After Agi’s briefing we made a short film of her being interviewed about GIS and GPS to get us familiar with the equipment and roles in film-making, as preparation for making our own films later in the week.

In the afternoon we worked on recording and uploading GPS tracks. You can see our first effort in Dabas, with photos here.

One of the film teams later recorded the locations of Dabas' recycling bins on Open Streetmap, which you can find by searching for 'Dabas, Hungary' on the site.

The workshop's comments:

Tool Title: Participatory GIS
Description
Affordances	Requirements	Notes
·         Very visible results ·         Opens up areas to a wider audience ·         New skills for participants ·         Very good useful information in a second ·         Easy to transmit information eg cheap free ·         Community development ·         Maps are already there, it is easy to use it ·         Can combine and integrate other technologies ·         Own value discovering (community level) ·         Visual representation of spatial dimension ·         Visual representation of trends over time ·         Easy access for general public ·         Lots of possibilities for community use ·         Puts people on the maps ·         Alternative public sphere ·         Increased social capital & social involvement ·         Techno yoga ·         Allows the sharing of information to diverse audiences	·         Devices (GPS, maps, intranet etc). ·         Equipment – intranet ·         ICT Skills & smart phone ·         Smartphone ·         Multiple technical skills ·         Technology is today available and cheap ·         Mobile, computer, intranet ·         Information evaluation and control tools eg complications over conflicting issues and cases ·         Interested people ·         Reassurance re intrusions into people’s privacy ·         Hardware ·	·         Reminiscent of the “transect walk” ·         Useable tool ·         Much easier than you would think ·         GIS is easy! Don’t be afraid ·         Easy to work with but it takes too much time ·         We should have more people using it ·         Exciting and developing technologies ·         I am surprised by its simplicity and quite enthusiastic about it.
Resources/References

Photovoice workshop

On Tuesday afternoon Gyuri and Barbara introduced Photovoice, a participatory technique they are using with the Roma community in Hungary to capture how the community views certain issues and what they would like to change. It involves community photography and interviews with participants leading to actions and an exhibition of the work. I thought this a fun, creative way to generate content that uses the visual shorthand of a photographic image to capture different perspectives and overcome language and literacy difficulties. In the group discussion it was felt that, used strategically, the images could provoke an emotional response and be influential, but that interpretation might be an issue.        

We then took pictures of things we liked and didn't like so much about the camp. I took a picture of the Welcome sign hanging over the front door that Judith's team had made to represent the friendly and co-operative atmosphere. I also took a picture of the camp programme to represent that I didn't like feeling that I didn't know anything about the topics. Which of course is why I was there.

As we fed back our likes and dislikes from small groups Chris took the role of the power figure that might 'approve' the changes we sought, e.g. a bench was moved to outside the front door to accommodate sun worshippers (and the smokers). A picture paints a thousand words, indeed.

The workshop's analysis:

Photovoice
Description: Photovoice is a method that connects science with participation and social activism. It is usually made up of three steps. First, stakeholders make photos representing their opinions/views/feelings regarding research questions or goals outlined with the cooperation of researchers and stakeholders (research partners). Later on, group or individual interviews are conducted based on the photos. Third, after the cooperative scientific stages a commonly agreed action is carried out – for example, organising exhibitions from selected photos and texts in order to inform the wider public and/or political decision-makers about the results of the research. Our photovoice workshop in Dabas tried to introduce this method to the participants by following the aforementioned three steps.  First, we asked participants to make photos about two topics: (1) what they like in the participatory training we had earlier in the Dabas Camp, and (2) what they would change in connection with it. Second, we discussed these photos in small groups of three participants. Third, we gave feedback to the main organiser (“decision-maker”) Chris, based on the former photos and small group discussions.
Affordances	Requirements	Notes
Seeing things with someone else’s eyes. Different perspectives can be joined – it is a way of promoting diversity. Photos work for social learning (epistemic opjects) and strategic communication (boundary objects) Accessible to non-literate/linguistically excluded. Visual representation Immediate impact Emotive, open to interpretation. Allows people to be critical in a non-confrontational way. A means of generating knowledge collectively. Safe space for difference/conflicts. Captures a manageable number of items for discussion. Allows a deeper understanding about advantages/disadvantages, benefits/drawbacks. We can pin up our emotions and the things we think onto a picture. Achieving an emotional reaction. Opens space for manipulation. Creative visual ‘thinking’, funny, maing??	Clarity Openness to criticism Awareness of context Facilitation Kit preparation Understanding of symbolism/metaphor Camera Agreement on how images are to be used. Camera or smart phone. Space for outputs to be discussed and acted upon. People to take photos	1 camera per person? Will people who took the photos have copies of the pictures – electronic or hardcopy? Timescales With this method it is easier to start conversations with people. Easier to talk about it if there is a picture. Potential danger of overemphasisin minor issues. Excellent method but data should be triangulated where possible. Easily becoming biased towards effective photos. Marginalised communities – respecting values/norms – gender, age etc. The method could be used for evaluation (developments) Is mediated through the camera lense).
Resources/References:

           

Blog co-ordinator's update

Since I returned from Davas, it's been a whirlwind - I had a week to move to Milton Keynes (MK as we call it here) before starting my PhD at the Open University on 1 October. So, after last week's fulsome induction sessions I'm ready to catch up on populating this blog. Watch this space. 

Decision Support Systems

Dabas participatory techniques blog – Dragana's post 

Internet and online social media open new spaces for participation. Online participation, or eParticipation, presents a set of technology-facilitated participatory processes that enable interaction between the civil society sphere and the politics and administration sphere. The aim of merging online social networks that usually have many users with eParticipation is to address a lack of engagement that is usually recognised as one of the major drawbacks of participation.

Decision support systems (DSS) are used for managing the data required for providing informed and robust decisions by socio-economic and environmental modelling techniques and multiple-criteria decision methods. Web DSS may emerge as a new form of eParticipation.

We looked at a webDSS specifically developed to provide participation of farmers in deciding upon management options for water saving and climate change adaptation in the agricultural sector of the Vento region, Italy. The aim of the tool is to supply policy-makers with the necessary information to define how to direct investment priorities, with consideration of the preferences and expectations highlighted by farmers.

The exercise consisted of playing a part in the working version of the tool. It was followed by a discussion about pros&cons of the tool. Some of the comments addressed the use of multi criteria analysis, and a risk that the obtained results, although maybe presenting a rational choice, do not coincide with the participants’ expectations. 

The wrokshops's comments:

Online decision support based on multi-criteria analysis
Affordances	Requirements	Notes
·         Allows participants to take part cheaply ·         Mass engagement ·         In-depth consultation aingcross a wide area ·         Greater insights ·         Analytical possibilities ·         Positions the individual in relation to the whole ·         Helps people make sense of their opinions, based on a high level of information structuring ·         ???? in big politics	·         ICT skills ·         Coding skills ·         Expertise – statistical skills	·         Might only attract those of particular motivation ·         Can be ‘dangerous’ because it is a very sensible to axioms/applied methodology, manipulation etc ·         Could be used in all participatory projects. ·         Simple model or template would be great ·         Level of technical/intellectual ability to participants ·         Triangulation ·         Self-reflection emphasising the limits of the method

    

Participatory drama workshop

One of the first workshops early on was from Alun Morgan, based on a project he'd been involved in writing up as a case study for his social work module at the Open University.  The technique is used to open up difficult issues and makes use of drama.

Three groups each made a short drama and filmed it in the space of about 45 minutes:

Afterwards we made the following analysis of the technique:

Participatory drama
This workshop raised the possibility and illustrated the application of introducing drama into participatory video research processes. There may be occasions when the issue being studied is complex, emotionally charged, or maybe on occasions embarrassing. In such circumstances researchers may choose to encourage research participants (subjects?) to act-out and dramatise some elements of their story or dilemma. The process of choosing and ‘acting’ a role with others can potentially be less threatening to individuals, for whom ‘hiding’ in the role for a limited and structured period of time can be appropriate and protective, generating useful data for researchers that may be difficult to access by other more traditional research data collection methods: for example, through structured interviews. For this workshop the presenter used an illustrative example of young adults with a learning disability (mental handicap) in Leeds in the UK who were involved in researching, in association with researchers from Leeds University, the subject of making and sustaining personal and sexual relationships among learning disabled young adults. In this study, drama was used extensively to enable the young people to more effectively express their needs and view. This drama was captured on video and used a raw data for analysis in the research design. Workshop members in small groups simulated this drama process as a research tool, and created three illustrative dramatized video exercises: one of an anxious parent talking with their child’s teacher; another of a young person whose recent unemployment was very significantly affecting her life-opportunities; and a third of a parent with severe literacy problems having her problem exposed at her child’s school. Feedback by workshop members after completing this exercise and watching all of the video exercises was as follows:
Affordances	Requirements		Notes
·        Working with uncomfortable issues ·        Get under the skin of an issue ·        Authentic representation of real life ·        Access to emotional aspects ·        Participation/empowerment of people ·        Emancipatory – it allows a subject to be explored without confessions or personal consequences ·        Less powerful people act out issues of power and control ·        Effective communication – In a short time it can transfer a big message that would take much writing to be explained ·        To get a picture of a complex situation before analysing it from one aspect only ·        Explore areas that may be difficult to access ·        Activity for discussion ·        Facilitate further discussion after watching the video ·        Communicating a problem in a way it is easy to understand as it involves emotions ·        Makes very sensible issues ‘fun’ to discuss ·        Allows us to learn about attitudes towards issues		·        A properly skilled researcher ·        Facilitations ·        Debriefing – picking up of issues ·        Mutual respect/shared goals ·        Requires Trust ·        Consent from participants ·        A video camera ·        Some video editing skills ·        Some basic filming and acting skills ·        Video equipment ·        Facilitation/organisation ·        Narrative structure ·        Watchability ·        Understanding of audience ·        Trust ·        Camera ·        Time ·        Co-operative and open participants working at different hierarchical levels ·        Emotional risk ·        Share understanding of confidentiality/privacy -> use of data afterwards		·        Communication happens through narrative, spatial and emotional modes ·        Allows for the exploration of situations where empathy can be gained for the issue ·        Data analysis?  How? ·        Links to Forum Theatre, participatory drama (PADT?) ·        Can participants refuse to take part without being questioned? ·        To examine a situation to fill forms in relation with tenderers.
CHANGE website: http://www.changepeople.co.uk/ and the sub-link to the page including a film made by The Open University in the UK. http://www.changepeople.co.uk/showPage.php?id=9.