Abstract
While any of the action methods overviewed so far can be considered appropriate for conducting advocacy research, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Action research as social justice research becomes advocacy when the project extends beyond data collection and analysis to answer research questions that also change the current status of conditions impacting teaching, learning, and working. Here, ethics are of the utmost importance, and reciprocity between researcher and participants is emphasized through dialogically based research methods to avoid exploitation. This chapter addresses strategies and avenues for using action research as a path for change and advocacy, drawing upon Augusto Boal’s participatory theater strategies for difficult dialogues, in that a focus on ethics involves mutually educative dialogue, reciprocal reflexivity, and intersubjectivity (Alexander & Mohanty, 2010; Boal, 1985, 1992; Brouwer, Mulder, Nigten, & Martz, 2005; Butler, 2005; Dill & Zambrana, 2009; Fischer, 2010; Lykes & Coquillon, 2006).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Acuff, J. B. (2011). Looking through kaleidoscope: Prisms of self and LGBTQ youth identity. Visual Culture & Gender, 6, 49–59.
Alexander, M. J., & Mohanty, C. (2010). Cartographies of knowledge and power: Transnational feminism as radical praxis. In A. L. Swarr & R. Nagar (Eds.), Critical transnational feminist praxis (pp. 23–45). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Boal, A. (1985). Theatre of the oppressed (C. A. & M.-O. Leal McBride, Trans.). New York, NY: Theatre Communications Group. (Original work Teatro del oprimido y otras poéticas. New York, NY: Urizen Books, 1979)
Boal, A. (1992). Games for actors and non-actors (A. Jackson, Trans.). New York, NY: Routledge.
Brouwer, J., Mulder, A., Nigten, A., & Martz, L. (2005). Understanding interactive practice as research. Science as Culture, 15(10), 85–88.
Buskens, I., & Webb, A. (Eds.). (2009). African women & ICTs: Investigating technology, gender and empowerment. New York, NY: Zed Books.
Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. New York, NY: Routledge.
Butler, J. (2005). Giving an account of oneself. New York, NY: Fordham University Press.
Chatterton, P., Fuller, D., & Routledge, P. (2007). Relating action to activism: Theoretical and methodological reflections. In S. Kindon, R. Pain, & M. Kesby (Eds.), Participatory action research approaches and methods: Connecting people, participation and place (pp. 216–222). New York, NY: Routledge.
Chick, N., & Hassel, H. (2009). “Don’t hate me because I’m virtual”: Feminist pedagogy in the online classroom. Feminist Teacher, 19(3), 195–215.
Dewey, J. (1997). How we think. Mineloa, NY: Dover.
Dill, T. B., & Zambrana, R. (2009). Emerging intersections: Race, class and gender in theory, policy and practice. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Eisenhauer, J. (2010). “Bipolar makes me a bad mother”: Performative dialogue about representations of motherhood. Visual Culture & Gender, 6, 28–34.
Fischer, C. (2010). Consciousness and conscience: Feminism, pragmatism and the potential for radical change. Studies in Social Justice, 4(1), 67–85.
Greeno, J. G. (2006). Authoritative, accountable positioning and connected, general knowing: Progressive themes in understanding transfer. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 539–550.
GRACE Network. (2009). Transforming our gendered world through research-informed action. Retrieved from http://www.grace-network.net.
Keifer-Boyd, K. (2010). restage <deep breadth> activist art/disruptive technologies. Journal of Social Theory in Art Education, 30, 38–48.
Keifer-Boyd, K. (2011). African women & ICTs: Investigating technology, gender and empowerment [Book review]. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 12(1), 212–217.
Keifer-Boyd, K. (2012). Feminist Web 2.0 pedagogy: Collaborations that sustain difference. In C. Bitzer, S. Collingwood, A. Quintana, & C. Smith (Eds.), Feminist cyberspaces: Pedagogies in transition (pp. 251–272). Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Krumer-Nevo, M. (2009). From voice to knowledge: Participatory action research, inclusive debate and feminism. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 22(3), 279–295.
Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy within the postmodern. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Lather, P. (2004). Critical inquiry in qualitative research: Feminist and poststructural perspectives; science “after truth.” In K. deMarrais & S. D. Lapan (Eds.), Foundations for research: Methods of inquiry in education and the social sciences (pp. 203–216). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Lorde, A. (1984). Sister outsider: Essays and speeches. Trumansburg, NY: Crossing Press.
Lykes, M. B., & Coquillon, E. (2006). Participatory and action research and feminisms: Towards transformative praxis. In S. Hesse-Biber (Ed.), Handbook of feminist research: Theory and praxis (pp. 297–326). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Naples, N. A. (2003). Feminism and method: Ethnography, discourse analysis, and activist research. New York, NY: Routledge.
Paatela-Nieminen, M. (2008). Intertextual method for art education applied in Japanese paper theatre: A study on discovering intercultural differences. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 27(1), 91–104.
Parameswaran, R. (2008). Reading the visual, tracking the global: Postcolonial feminist methodology and the chameleon codes of resistance. In N. K. Denzin, Y. S. Lincoln & L. Tuhiwai Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indige¬nous methodologies (pp. 407–428). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Philbin, M. (Ed.). (1985). The ribbon: A celebration of life. Ashville, NC: Larks Book.
Picher, M.-C. (2007). Democratic process and the Theater of the Oppressed. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 116, 79–88.
Picher, M.-C. (n.d.). The Theater of the Oppressed Laboratory. Retrieved from http://www.toplab.org.
Reed, C. (2011). Art and homosexuality: A history of ideas. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Schoen, S. (2007). Action research: A developmental model of professional social¬ization. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 80(5), 211–216.
Weir, A. (2008). Global feminism and transformative identity politics. Hypatia, 23(4), 110–133.
Recommended Readings
Agnello, M. F. (2007). Public understanding to political voice: Action research and generative curricular practices in issues and reform. Social Studies, 98(5), 217–224.
Blair, K., Gajjala, R., & Tulley, C. (Eds.). (2009). Webbing cyberfeminist practice: Communities, pedagogies, and social action (pp. 1–19). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Butler, J. (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of “sex.” New York, NY: Routledge.
Butler, J., & Spivak, G. C. (2007). Who sings the nation-state? Language, politics, belonging. London: Seagull Books.
Butler, J., & Weed, E. (2011). The question of gender: Joan W. Scott’s critical feminism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
Campbell, A., & Groundwater-Smith, S. (2007). An ethical approach to practitioner research. New York, NY: Routledge.
Collins, S. (2004). Ecology and ethics in participatory collaborative action research: An argument for the authentic participation of students in educational research. Educational Action Research, 12(3), 347–362.
Cranton, P. (2002). Teaching for transformation. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 93, 63–71.
Glenny, G. (2005). The ethics of intervention. Support for Learning, 20(1), 12–16.
Goodnough, K. (2008). Dealing with messiness and uncertainty in practitioner research: The nature of participatory action research. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(2), 431–458.
He, M. F., & Phillon, J. (Eds.). (2008). Personal~passionate~participatory inquiry into social justice in education. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
Hollingsworth, S. (Ed.). (1997). International action research: A casebook for educational reform. New York, NY: Falmer.
Knight, W. B. (2007). Entangled social realities: Race, class, and gender; a triple threat to the academic achievement of black females. Visual Culture & Gender, 2, 24–38.
Knight, W. B. (2011). StoryCorps interview. Retrieved from http://wpsu.org/radio/single_entry/LL-3570/storycorps.
Lal, J. (1999). Situating locations: The politics of self, identity, & other in living and writing the text. In S. Hesse-Biber, C. Gilmartin, & R. Lydenberg (Eds.), Feminist approaches to theory and methodology: An interdisciplinary reader (pp. 100–125). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Richardson, L., & St. Pierre, E. (2005). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 959–978). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Social Justice Research, journal published by Springer, Vol. 1 (1987)-Vol. 24 (2011). Retrieved from http://www.springerlink.com/content/0885-7466.
Spry, T. (2009). Bodies of/as evidence in autoethnography. International Review of Qualitative Research, 1(4), 603–610.
Young, I. M. (2003). Lived body versus gender: Reflections on social structure and subjectivity. In R. N. Fiore & H. L. Nelson (Eds.), Recognition, responsibility, and rights: Feminist ethics and social theory (pp. 3–18). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2012 Sheri R. Klein
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Keifer-Boyd, K. (2012). Critique, Advocacy, and Dissemination: I’ve Got the Data and the Findings, Now What?. In: Klein, S.R. (eds) Action Research Methods. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137046635_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137046635_10
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-29560-9
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-04663-5
eBook Packages: Palgrave Education CollectionEducation (R0)