Building bridges between the research world and the practical world: A Win-Win solution!

Building bridges between THE RESEARCH WORLD AND THE PRACTICAL WORLD:

A Win-Win solution!

By Julie Bérubé //teacher at l’Université du Québec en Outaouais

I am a professor at the Université du Québec en Outaouais (Gatineau), which means that my main duties are teaching and research. If the tasks that fall under the heading of teaching are quite clear to most people, the same cannot be said for research. The caricatured image of the researcher in his laboratory inhabits the imagination of some people. Laboratory research is a relevant form of research, but there are many others.

My research projects focus on cultural environments where I study, for example, the identity tensions experienced by artists between monetary and creative imperatives. I also study issues of equity, diversity and inclusion in cultural settings. The impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic on the cultural community have also been of interest to me over the past two years. I cannot study these topics without understanding the experiences of the people who work in these settings. I need to speak with the people involved in these environments; they feed my thinking. Without their active participation, my role as a researcher is meaningless.

WHAT IS PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH?

My approach as a researcher is part of the participatory action research trend1. Over the past decade, there has been a growing interest in more inclusive research, where participants are no longer just the object of study, but a stakeholder in the entire research process2. Collaborative or participatory action research aims to bring together researchers and practitioners in order to create a space for the co-construction of knowledge where theoretical and practical knowledge are embedded3. One of the objectives of participatory research, i.e., joint projects between organizations and academia, is: "to enable the production of new knowledge, tools and methods to develop the best possible knowledge or strategies for various aspects of intervention, action, program delivery and policy development"4. The co-construction of knowledge implies that the researcher does not dictate the research, but that it is built jointly between the research world and the practical world. Audoux and Gillet5 present three keys to determine whether research is action participatory. Firstly, in a traditional research process (regardless of the methodological approach), participants are usually involved in the data collection process. They are therefore not involved in the development of the research. With participatory action research, participants are involved from the very beginning, i.e., at the very moment of determining the theme of the research, and they will be involved at every stage. Secondly, Audoux and Gillet6 talk about the purpose of the research. They explain that action research has a transformative purpose in order to be relevant to the reality of organizations. A transformative aim implies a desire to bring about real change in a specific sector or organization or in society in general. This could mean, for example, reviewing a policy or creating programs adapted to specific clienteles. For example, if the populations targeted by a policy are involved in the entire research process, the new policy should better reflect their needs. For example, a program such as a grant program for artists will bring visible change to the cultural community by being better adapted to the artists affected by the grant program. Audoux and Gillet7 point out that participatory action research may or may not have this transformative aim. For his part, Plenchette8 insists on the transformative effects of participatory action research. Thirdly, Audoux and Gillet9 evoke the form and method of collaboration in collaborative research: the idea is to create a space for the co-construction of knowledge that brings together the theoretical and practical worlds. Once again, this space implies that the participants are involved in each stage of the research.

1 Although I advocate participatory action research, my projects do not all take this approach at the same level. For some projects, the participation of the practical community is present from the beginning to the end and for others, the practical community is only involved at certain key moments of the research process. 2 Tremblay, D.-G., & Demers, G. (2018). Les recherches partenariales/collaboratives : Peut-on simultanément théoriser et agir ? Recherches sociographiques, 59 (1-2), 99-120. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7202/1051427ar 3 Audoux, C., & Gillet, A. (2015). Recherches participatives, collaboratives, recherches-actions. Mais de quoi parle-t-on ? In Les recherches-actions collaboratives (pp. 44-47). Presses de l’EHESP. https://doi.org/10.3917/ehesp.lesch.2015.01.0044 4 Tremblay, D.-G., & Demers, G. (2018). Les recherches partenariales/collaboratives : Peut-on simultanément théoriser et agir ? Recherches sociographiques, 59 (1-2), citation p.102. https://doi.org/ https://doi.org/10.7202/1051427ar 5 Audoux, C., & Gillet, A. (2015). Recherches participatives, collaboratives, recherches-actions. Mais de quoi parle-t-on ? In Les recherches-actions collaboratives (pp. 44-47). Presses de l’EHESP. https://doi.org/10.3917/ehesp.lesch.2015.01.0044 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid. 8 Plenchette, M. (2020). La pratique de la recherche participative et ses effets transformateurs. Les Politiques Sociales, 1-2 (1), 77-89. https://doi.org/10.3917/lps.201.0077 9 Audoux, C., & Gillet, A. (2015). Recherches participatives, collaboratives, recherches-actions. Mais de quoi parle-t-on ? In Les recherches-actions collaboratives (pp. 44-47). Presses de l’EHESP. https://doi.org/10.3917/ehesp.lesch.2015.01.0044

HERE IS AN EXAMPLE

I led a research project on the effects of the Covid-19 pandemic on the cultural community in Outaouais. This research was developed with a local cultural organization that participated in the discussions from the beginning. Together with the research team, these participants established the methodological approach and the data collection tools. It was decided to conduct focus groups as the first step, and we developed a guide for leading the discussions. The results of this first data collection allowed us to develop, again in partnership with the cultural organization, an interview guide for semi-structured interviews. The results of the research were discussed and reviewed with the partner organization. This participatory approach allowed us to better understand the reality and issues of the cultural community.

BENEFITS AND CHALLENGES OF PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH

Can such research be called scientific? Yes, it can! The role of the researcher in this process is to ensure that it is scientific. The participation of the practical community ensures a true representation of the reality of the situation. At the end of this type of research project, the results contribute to improving a situation or to better understanding these environments. Ultimately, the research must have a positive impact on society and the active participation of the practical community helps to achieve this objective. One of these positive impacts is that participants who do not come from academic backgrounds generally feel that participatory action research responds better to their needs and makes it possible to sketch out solutions that are better adapted to their realities10. Obertelli11 presents a real example of collaborative action research in the construction sector. The research focused on the occupational risks incurred by masons in order to improve prevention. Different professional groups participated in the research, including prevention consultants, occupational physicians and masons. The results of the research were presented to different professional groups where concrete solutions to reduce the occupational risks of masons were outlined. Thus, participatory action research can produce both academic knowledge to be shared in scientific papers or articles, and practical knowledge to be shared at conferences for various audiences or in research reports. However, participatory action research also brings challenges; Tremblay & Demers12 identify some of them. Firstly, researchers can sometimes struggle to reconcile the expectations of partners and participants with those of the academic world. Secondly, the reality of practical settings can bring challenges, such as assignments that sometimes change rapidly and can compromise the smooth running of the project. Tremblay and Demers13 also report that the involvement of participants is sometimes limited. Finally, there are also tensions and negotiations between the practical and academic communities. These challenges are real and it is important to take them into consideration when developing a participatory action research project. Ultimately, communication between researchers and participants makes it possible to address many of them and to have rich research projects that will have a real impact on the practical world.

The research must have a positive impact on society and the active participation of the practical community helps to achieve this objective.

10 Tremblay, D.-G., & Demers, G. (2018). Les recherches partenariales/collaboratives : Peut-on simultanément théoriser et agir ? Recherches sociographiques, 59 (1-2), 99-120. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7202/1051427ar 11 Obertelli, P. (2015). Chapitre 7. Une recherche-action collaborative dans les métiers de gros œuvre du bâtiment. In Les recherches-actions collaboratives (pp. 66-74). Presses de l’EHESP. https://doi.org/10.3917/ehesp.lesch.2015.01.0066 12 Tremblay, D.-G., & Demers, G. (2018). Les recherches partenariales/collaboratives : Peut-on simultanément théoriser et agir ? Recherches sociographiques, 59 (1-2), 99-120. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.7202/1051427ar 13 Ibid.