SUBTITLE:  Collaborative, responsible and ethical research

DATE:  Thursday 8 October 2009

FACILITATOR:  Camillo Villa (k@camilovilla.com)

GROUP discussion and group photo can be viewed here.

CONTEXT

1. This tutorial session is meant to provide some basic insights into key methods and tools from both qualitative and quantitative approaches.
2. Combining different teaching techniques this tutorial will be an opportunity to explore different ways to approach research problems related to ICTs.
3. It aims to be a space for knowledge sharing benefiting from the experience that all participants bring.
4. This tutorial aims to provide a basic training on research related matters to enhance the research skills of the participants.
5. At the end of the session it is expected that participants would have stronger skills to design research projects, to choose the appropriate methods and techniques and to use ICTs to support their research activities.
6. Additionally, it will provide experiences and concepts to assume research from a more ethical and responsible perspective.

LESSONS LEARNED

1.  Know the different knowledge types (see slideshow, slide 9 of 20 here).  Within the first four knowledge types below, projects can move among the four areas:

• Descriptive:  looking into previous research, those pioneering in new knowledge will likely stay in descriptive
• Explanatory:  Why it happened?
• Predictive:  able to compare countries, predict possible outcomes
• Prescriptive:  what could / should be done.  This is where many of our project stand (action research).
• Evaluative – which and where are the consequences.  Evaluation can likely lead to more research questions. 

2.  Understand when to use qualitative vs quantitative research (see slideshow, slides 10 and 11 of 20 here)

• Note that most of the Acacia projects are attempting to look at both methods.
• Quantitative approach to research can be seen as a global approach or a country approach. 
• Quantitative approach is the use of statistics to get a general idea of certain research issues.
• Quantitative research analysis can be outsourced. 
• Qualitative approach is a more indepth look into a context or situation. 
• Qualitative research is more costly as it is costly to meet with people for longer durations, there is the time-consuming transcription and the research to review and analyse the data. 

3.  Explore your paradigm (see slideshow, slide 12 to 14 of 20 here http://www.slideshare.net/Acacia09/acacia-forum-research-methodology)

    •    In situated research, do you stand as a research or an activist?
    •    Are you able to adopt another approach which is different from your own? 
    •    In paradigms, there are some who concentrate their efforts in following the core of the paradigm while many sit outside on the periphery. 

CASE STUDIES

Projects ACA2K and PICTURE Africa share lessons from their own experiences in operationalizing their research:

• Some respondents did not want to give information as they were unsure of the intent.  The team’s lesson was that they found better response when it was linked to policy change.
• It was helpful to talk to contacts that one already had.
• One team took nearly 3-4 months in trying to understand the gender questions within their research.  Yet at the session, the researcher was able to express his own impression of the patriarchal society on access to learning materials.
• PICTURE Africa’s Kenya team had difficult gaining entry into households during the 2007 elections.  Timing was an issue as researchers found more need to explain their research, dispel suspicions and avoid conflict of political perception

Projects GRACE and e-FEZ share lessons from their own experiences in operationalizing their research:

• In action research there is a need to be completely committed to the research.  
• Researchers need to be responsible. 
• There is a need to implement trust within research. 
• It was found occasionally that there is a perception that research is associated with controlling the population and to continue impoverishment. 
• Building trust is important to promote research in an African context. 
• There is a need to frame research questions well. 

BEST PRACTICE TO SUCCESSFUL RESEARCH

1. Be creative and use art as a way of releasing creativity for research
2. Identify the practical implications are of networked societies on research.
3. Challenge the research problem with different knowledge types.  Your description can be built on existing knowledge which has had a limited perspective.  Thus there can already be prejudice within existing research which one must be aware. 
4. Challenge your paradigm.  Ensure that your small or modest contribution to research needs can make a difference in knowledge. 
5. Explore the implications of a networked society on African identity, privacy, empowerment and collaborative efforts.  The following challenges arose from the discussion:

• ‘Digital colonization’.  Currently African researchers are having information imposed onto us and this is occurring in a period of history when we head towards a network society. Such a pace is being imposed on us.  Researchers are also not checking the information that is being used within the networked society.  Can adoption of globalization be destructive and miss much of the rich indigenous knowledge that exists in Africa?  There is a need to continue to share and research the local context of development to the rest of the world.
• African researchers should ensure that initiatives reflect their values and beliefs.  Researchers need to project themselves and produce more local research that should be made available to the networked society.  Viewed under current circumstances, there is little future for the African perspective within research.
• The risk of paradigm shift:   One research quotes Khalil Gibran:  “And I have found both freedom of loneliness and the safety from being understood, for those who understand us enslave something in us.”  A researcher can risk being isolated or misunderstood if he/she attempts to research in his/her own paradigm.  In the African context, the current global framework is not interested in an African ‘paradigm’.   The question is:  can African researchers identify where they stand in research from an African perspective?
• Framing questions:  we need to be vigilant when framing questions as well as seeing how others frame questions.  There is a need to identify the right questions. When questions are provoked, a researcher is responsible to take action.  This is our ability to take part in research as well as part of our academic responsibilities. 
• Word choice in research:  The choice of words is important in research.  For example, surveillance can be worded as “border control, or population management”. 
• Coherency:  the need to test coherency, however today, there is no time to test coherence or consistencies
• Knowledge Ownership:  In a networked society, is the available information correct?  Are we giving away African information?  Is the knowledge being used without our knowing? 
• The negative perception of ICT4D research:  There is much fear in investigating ICT4D research.  For example, there are the implications on interpersonal relationships.  Will we have broken families that do not speak to each other and lost values as a result of the usage of technology?  Are we fully aware of such consequences as we step into the networked society?   Are TVs an instrument of mind control?  How do we extract the useful information from the vast amount of information available without getting lost? One participant states, ICT4D means being part of globalization.  We are at risk in attracting negative development results.  But the solution is to learn and master ICT4D and then counter these negative networks. 
• Overcoming gender bias in ICT:  “is it really open source if the majority of the developers are men?”  Gender research in Africa remains an important issue to address in a world that still sees increase of gender inequality. For example, there is still an increase of female genital mutilation worldwide.
• Intellectual confidence:  Historically, Darwin proposed a theory and the church objected, not because of the 7 days issue, but because of the idea that if there was evolution, then there would be no fall, and thus no redemption.  To the church, redemption equated to its power.  In hindsight, what if the church didn’t object, and there was that window of change?  What if, at that moment, there could have been the counter thought in society?   Unfortunately, at that historical moment, there was not enough intellectual confidence to challenge the objections.   As researchers, we help to build knowledge construction; we are those with the capacity to frame the questions for our research.  Today do we have enough intellectual confidence to challenges availed to us in a globalized, networked society?
• Partnerships and risk:  An example of a researcher who works with a topical issue and tries to maintain research objectivity.  However, when working with government or an activity community, it can be problematic in creating alliances.  You can be used in a political game.  Thus, awareness as researchers to work with these certain parties but not too closely. 

OUTPUTS

1. Possibility to use the acaciaforum.net website to consolidate knowledge from the tutorial and possibly develop a peer-to-peer network on methodology in Africa.
2. Building a community on the “how” or how research is conducted (methodology and research practice)
3. The group photo can be viewed here.

RESOURCES / REFERENCES

1. On the last slide of Camilo’s powerpoint, he shares various weblinks to assist with research and methodology.  These links are mainly on how one can improve shared documents, shared references and online surveys. 
2. The rationale in reviewing these tools and accessing these collaborative tools is to help improve your research.  
3. Awareness of these new and innovative tools is important to reduce discrepancy of access to tools as well as ensure all our researchers know the “short cuts.” 
4. Connectivity can be an issue in Africa, thus we also investigate “offline” options of such tools. 

Other weblink tools that were mentioned by various participants include:
-    http://www.KM4dev.org
-    http://www.addthis.com
-    Zotero – http://www.zotero.org/ open source research management tool, which works with open office.
-    IDRC also offers RefWorks for free to all active IDRC partners – fund recipients.  Please ask your Program or Research Officer for further details.
-    http://www.surveymonkey.com and googledocs survey through excel is a great tool.  You can also make it the language of your choice.
-    Google search if you only want PDF files:  you can type “keyword” + .pdf
Resource for Creativity:

-    Mindmapping at http://www.buzanworld.com
Recommended Readings:
BELL, S. J. (2006) Search Alternatives and Beyond. Educause Quarterly, 3, 11-15.
FLICK, U. (2002) Qualitative research ± state of the artQualitative research ± state of the art. Social Science Information, 4, 5-24.
GRANT, L. & BUFORD MAY, R. A. (1999) The Promises and Perils of Ethnography in the New Millennium: Lessons from Teaching. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 29, 549-560.
MEYER, C. B. (2001) A Case in Case Study Methodology. Field Methods, 13, 329-352.
RYAN, G. W. & BERNARD, H. R. (2003) Techniques to Identify Themes. Field Methods, 15, 85-109.
SHARTS-HOPKO, N. C. (2001) Focus Group Methodology: When and Why? JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATION OF NURSES IN AIDS CARE, 12, 89-91.
VERSCHUREN, P. & DOOREWARD, H. (1999) Designing a Research Project., Utrecht. , Lemma.

Research, ICT4D, methodology

Last updated 128 days ago by The African Commons Project