Multidisciplinary Approaches to Educational Research

Case Studies from Europe and the Developing World

Sadaf Rizvi

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781136583858
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Research in Education

This book provides an original perspective on a range of controversial issues in educational and social research through case studies of multi-disciplinary and mixed-method research involving children, teachers, schools and communities in Europe and the developing world. These case studies from researchers "across continents" and "across disciplines" explore a range of interesting issues, including the relevance of research approaches to very different national settings, and to the kinds of questions being asked; the barriers of language and culture between researcher and researched; articulating the thinking and feelings of very young children; the challenges of dealing with "partiality" of data; issues of identity, subjectivity and reflexivity; and transferring research approaches from one national setting to the problems posed in another.

Part I

Research with Early Years and Primary School Children

1 Photography, School Spaces and School Lives

Using Visual Methods in Schools to Map the Geographies of Children and Youth

John Barker and Fiona Smith

BACKGROUND AND THE RESEARCH PROJECTS

The geographies of children and youth is a rapidly expanding sub-discipline in human geography. Geographers have played a key role in the development of the new social studies of childhood, an approach (although not without critique, see Horton and Kraftl, 2005; Vanderbeck, 2008), which has led to a radical reconceptualization of academic considerations regarding childhood (James et al., 1998; James & James, 2004). Childhood is seen as a social construction, historically and culturally specific, rather than a universal biological category (Pilcher & Wagg, 1996; Kennedy 1998; Matthews & Limb, 1999). Children are seen as beings in their own right, rather than simply adults in the making (James et al., 1998; Frones et al., 2000). Drawing upon parallel international political processes such as the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the new social studies of childhood sees children as competent social actors who can make sense of, and comment upon their everyday lives (Holloway & Valentine, 2000; Skelton, 2007). Furthermore, the new social studies of childhood recognizes that children do not form a homogenous group, but have a diverse range of experiences (Mayall, 1994; Brannen & O’Brien, 1995).

Children’s geographers offer three broad contributions to debates regarding children, childhood and youth, each of which offer theoretical, methodological and empirical insights into the importance of space in shaping and diversifying children and young people’s experiences, including a variety of educational contexts (Holloway & Valentine, 2000; Skelton, 2007). Firstly, children’s geographers have mapped the importance of place in differentiating, at a variety of spatial scales, the experiences of children and young people (Sibley, 1995; Philo, 2000; Matthews et al., 2000). At the global level, geographers have compared the wide ranging experiences of children from different countries and continents. For example, Katz, (1993, 2004) explored similarities and differences between and amongst young people in Sudan and New York. Variations in experiences of children from the developed and developing worlds are well documented, as large numbers of children in developing countries contribute daily to economic and non-economic household tasks (Punch, 2000), care for parents with HIV and AIDS (Evans & Becker, 2009), or may live and work on the streets (Robson & Ansell, 2000; Beazley, 2000; Cahill, 2004; Winton, 2005). Geographers have also begun to map the diversity of education provision, as well as differences in educational experiences, aspiration and achievement, across the globe (Robson & Ansell, 2000; Ansell, 2002; Collins & Coleman, 2008).

Secondly, children’s geographers have explored, across the world, children’s everyday spaces, including schools and nurseries (Fielding, 2000; Gallacher, 2005), intentional communities (Maxey, 2004) and the experiences of street children (Young & Barrett, 2001). Within the developed world, a clearly established trend toward institutionalized childhood spaces (such as schools, nurseries, creches and commercial playgrounds) increasingly separates children from adult worlds (Valentine & McKendrick, 1997; Smith & Barker, 2000; Kearns & Collins, 2003). Geographers have begun to map the everyday spaces associated with education, recognizing how different spaces within schools (such as classrooms, corridors, playgrounds) are configured and experienced in radically different ways (see Fielding, 2000; Thomson, 2005; Kraftl, 2006; Newman et al., 2006) as well as the importance of space in exploring education at primary, secondary and tertiary levels (Collins & Coleman, 2008; Smith, 2004; Thomas, 2009).

Thirdly, geographers have illustrated spatialised discourses about childhood and youth, as ideological assumptions clearly identify and code spaces as either more or less appropriate places for children to spend their time (Holloway & Valentine, 2000). Thomas (2009) explores the processes through which young people themselves construct spatialised discourses, segregating the territory of the school playground along racial and gendered grounds, highlighting the ways young people articulate struggles over territory in school.

Two research projects located within the discipline of children’s geographies form the basis of this chapter. The first project explored UK primary children’s travel to and from school (as further discussed in Barker, 2003; 2009). Across the UK and elsewhere, there is a growing trend for children to be driven to and from school and other places (Hillman et al., 1990; O’Brien et al., 2000; Mackett et al., 2004). These trends, and the government policies generated in response, demonstrate how educational policies and practices extend beyond the space and time of the school boundary to influence other aspects of everyday life (Edwards & Alldred, 1999; Smith & Barker, 2002; Kearns et al., 2003). The trend toward being driven to school is seen as problematic, contributing to a decline in levels of children’s independence, health and fitness and a corresponding increase in rates of obesity and a rise in traffic congestion (Jones & Bradshaw, 2000). In response, the UK government’s Safer Routes to School Programs encourages alternatives to car travel. Typically, each participating school develops a ‘School Travel Plan’ (hereafter STP) in partnership with headteachers, governors, parent volunteers and others. STPs typically focus upon (i) engineering, such as traffic calming and other measures to reduce accidents and discourage driving, (ii) education and training, to help children and parents improve their pedestrian skills and confidence, and (iii) initiatives to reduce dependence on cars for travelling to school, such as the walking bus, car sharing and cycle trains (Bradshaw, 1999). The research explored children’s views of travelling to school and their participation in the development of School Travel Plans.

The second project explored the use of schools outside of the formal school day. In the UK and elsewhere, a growing number of school-aged children attend childcare services, which provide care whilst their parents are employed, or engaged in other activities (see Cameron et al., 1999; Moss & Petrie, 2002). Although this takes different form in different societies (e.g., some European countries focus on play provision in community centers) the UK has focused on school based before, after school and holiday clubs (hereafter called out of school clubs) for 4–14 year olds (see Smith & Barker, 2000). Typically run in school halls or classrooms for a fee, out of school clubs often are run by a separate organization to the school (often a voluntary committee or registered charity) and staffed by playworkers (who may also be learning support assistants or mealtime assistants during the day). Out of school, clubs often have a distinct ethos from school (for example, children may be encouraged to call staff by their first name) and offer a program of play, recreation and care opportunities different from those children might experience during the formal school day. School-based out-of-school activities are the cornerstone of a variety of UK government strategies, including the National Childcare Strategy¹ and the Extended Schools program². Over the past 12 years, we have explored children’s views of these out-of-school care environments, considering how children spend their time “out of school, in school” (see Smith & Barker, 2000; 2002).

METHODOLOGY: DOING PHOTOGRAPHY

Both projects used photography as a central research method. There has been a rapid explosion in the use of photography with children and young people, across a wide variety of contexts, settings and disciplines (Einarsdottir, 2005; Clover, 2006; Cook & Hess, 2007). Although photography has long been used in social and geographical research (for example, Sanders, 2007 details the use of photography in geographical research in the early 1900s in travels across the world) children have, until recently, rarely been the subject of the lens. Colin Ward’s Child in the City (Ward, 1978) was one of the first texts (but certainly not the only, see also Walker & Adelman, 1975) to use photography to place children’s lives at the center of the picture. Photography with children and young people is now used across a number of disciplines, including sociology, anthropology, social policy, youth work, media studies, as well as human geography. It is also increasingly used by academics engaging in evaluation and policy research, and practitioners working with children and young people.

As well as a tool for teaching and learning (Jones, 1998; Plester et al., 2003; Sanders, 2007), photography is also useful in educational contexts to conduct research with children and young people to explore their experiences of school (Walker & Adelman, 1975). It can capture the ordinary and routine of children’s everyday lives both in schools (for example see Cook & Hess, 2007; Pike, 2008) as well as other spaces of childhood (Orellana, 1999; Punch, 2000; Kaplin et al., 2007).

Photography offers many advantages. It can implement methodologically much of the spirit of the new social studies of childhood, conceptualizing children and young people not as the object of the lens but as social actors taking an active role in the research process as photographers. This mirrors broader developments in media studies, which have critiqued traditional uses of photography in research which placed power in the hands of photographers and objectified research participants. In response, many diverse voices and social groups have been given the opportunity to document, analyze and make meaning of their own lives through photography (Clover, 2006). It is often championed for conveying “genuine” communication between child-participants and adult-researchers, placing children more firmly at the center of research process as subjects (Tunstall et al., 2004), although more recent discussions have identified limitations to this emancipatory intent (Gallacher & Gallagher, 2008).

Practically, photography is often more accessible to children and young people and easier to use than other methods. Many children (particularly in Western contexts) are already familiar with photography (Sharples et al., 2003). Indeed, endemic use of mobile phone based cameras and the popularity of websites such as Facebook highlight the competency with which many children and young people photograph and self-document their social lives and spaces. Even in parts of the world where children and young people may not have access to this technology, researchers have found they quickly become experts on photography (Young & Barrett, 2001; Kaplan et al., 2007). It is often appealing to children as it is task centered rather than talk centered (Hill, 1997; James et al., 1998; Gabhainn & Sixsmith, 2006; Evans & Becker, 2009). Since photography is often seen as fun and does not require verbal or written competency, it can engage children who might be reluctant to take part in verbal methods (Darbyshire et al., 2005). Moreover, as Lewis and Lindsay (2000) argue, photography can be more inclusive than verbal and written research methods for children experiencing learning difficulties and for those who find it difficult to articulate abstract concepts.

Photography places (at least some) power in the hands of research participants and gives them more responsibility (Pink 2001; Einarsdottir, 2005). Of particular importance for geographical research, it gives participants freedom and choice over the spaces and social action they choose to photograph (Evans & Becker, 2009). It also gives participants more autonomy than other methods, as it does not require the presence or mediation of researchers (Sharples et al., 2003). Therefore, photography is highly flexible in time and space, and can take research into other spaces, environments and times beyond those directly observable by adult researchers, turning what might be private spaces into public spaces for researchers to investigate (Gabhainn & Sixsmith, 2006). However, as we shortly discuss, this in itself may raise potential ethical issues and problems for research.

These benefits influenced the decision to use photography in our two research projects. The travel to school research was based in five primary schools in London and the South East of England. Twenty-five families (chosen to reflect a range of families from different socio-economic contexts and family types) participated in a range of in-depth, qualitative methods (including photographs, drawing and dairies). Children aged 4–11 were given a disposable camera for a week to photograph how they traveled to school (see Barker and Weller, 2003 for more discussion). At the end of the week, an in-depth individual interview with each child discussed the photographs (and other data collected). The out of school care research adopted a different format (see Smith and Barker, 1999, Barker and Smith, 2001 for more information). In twenty locations across England, researchers spent a week in an out of school club, using a range of qualitative methods. Each child took instant photographs of what they liked/ disliked or wanted to tell us about their experiences at clubs. Each photograph was glued to an A4 card and participants were asked to write (or the researcher would write) what they wanted to say about the picture. Children were then given the opportunity to color in or draw on the card.

Using photography in educational contexts presents unique ethical issues. In both projects, in addition to gaining informed consent from parents and children to participate, consent was sought to use the pictures which children had taken (we asked this both when initially seeking parental and participant consent and als...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Figures
• Tables
• Foreword
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction Multidisciplinary Approaches to Educational Research: Case Studies from Europe and the Developing World
• Research with Early Years and Primary School Children
• Research with Children and Young People in Secondary Schools
• Research with Teachers, Schools and Communities
• Contributors
• Index