FB1 Sozial- und Bildungswissenschaften
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (4) (entfernen)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- ja (4)
Schlagworte
- Berufsausbildung (2)
- Bildungsbarriere (2)
- Flüchtling (1)
- Forschungsmethode (1)
- Gruppeninterview (1)
- Interview (1)
- Jugendlicher Flüchtling (1)
- Ländlicher Raum (1)
- Migration (1)
- Norm <Ethik> (1)
This article serves as an introduction to the FQS special issue 'Participatory Qualitative Research'. In recent years there has been a resurgence of interest in participatory research strategies. The articles in this special issue come from different disciplines. Against the background of concrete empirical research projects, they address numerous conceptual considerations and methodological approaches. After reading the contributions, and engaging with the authors' arguments, the authors were prompted to focus in particular on those areas in which further work needs to be done. They include, on the one hand, fundamental principles of participatory research, such as democratic-theory considerations, the concept of 'safe space', participation issues, and ethical questions. And, on the other hand, the authors focus an practical research considerations regarding the rote and tasks of the various participants; specific methodological approaches; and quality criteria - understood here in the sense of arguments justifying a participatory approach. The authors' aim is to stimulate a broad discussion that does not focus only on participatory research in the narrower sense. Because participatory methodology poses certain knowledge- and research-related questions in a radical way, it has the potential to draw attention to hitherto neglected areas in qualitative methodology and to stimulate their further development.
Germany has become the most important destination country for young refugees in Europe (Destatis, 2021). Vocational education and training can make an important contribution to overcome educational barriers and gain participation in society (Will & Hohmut, 2020). Since 2015, rural regions have faced new challenges in establishing effective support systems for young apprentices with forced migration experience (Ohliger et al., 2017). The participatory LaeneAs research project seeks to identify educational barriers and to promote successful educational pathways for young refugees in vocational training. In four distinct rural areas in Germany, stakeholders in formal, non-formal, and informal learning environments and young refugees will be brought together in real-world laboratories. The authors aim to open space for a co-constructive knowledge production process between scientific and political stakeholders, educational practitioners, and refugee youth. Real-world laboratories are a socio-spatial methodology that combines research and a sustainable capacity building process. The lifeworld expertise will be used for a contextual condition analysis of structural, societal, and individual barriers to education as well as for practice transfer. Building on the discussion of the current state of research and the identification of significant gaps in the practice and research landscape, this essay will focus on the critical discussion of the methodological implementation of the study.
Introduction: As a result of the large-scale arrivals of refugees and migrants, Germany is facing the challenge of providing inclusive education pathways not at least for a successful integration into the labor market. In our research project laeneAs (Ländliche Bildugnsumwelten junger Geflüchteter in der beruflichen Ausbildung/The Rural Educational Environments of Young Refugees in Vocational Training), we focus on educational barriers and good practices within the vocational education and training system (VET) for refugees in rural counties. In particular, racism and discrimination are significant barriers to refugee participation in society and education. Our contribution addresses the following research question: How is educational inclusion discussed and defined in and through real-world labs among stakeholders in four rural districts: social workers, educators, policymakers, administration, and young refugees?
Methods: We initiated real-world labs as a space for collaborative research, reflection, and development to promote inclusive pathways for young refugees in vocational education and training in four research sites. We used futures labs as a method to identify key challenges and develop action plans as an activating method with stakeholders and refugee trainees. Our data consisted of audio recordings of group discussions in the real-world future labs, which were analyzed using deductive content analysis.
Results: The analysis identified the following areas as important barriers to education and for practice transformation: (1) infrastructural and cultural barriers; (2) day-to-day problems in vocational schools and companies (3) restrictive immigration policies and regulations.
Discussion: Educational barriers are imbedded in a contradictory immigration regime with reciprocal effects so that refugee trainees have difficulties in completing their education and further their social inclusion. On the other side of this contradictory immigration regime, social work and social networks provide fundamental support in obtaining a vocational qualification.
This paper addresses the emerging methodological debate about citizen social science from the perspective of participatory research methods. The paper introduces the research forum as a horizontal and safe communicative space moderated by academic researchers that enables co-researcher participation across all phases of co-creational research projects. It is argued that in co-creational citizen social science, such a communicative space requires conceptualisation in order for it to foster citizens’ engagement in the knowledge production that deals with their specific social lifeworlds. In the research forum, the potential that the social sciences bring to citizen science—methodological reflection and the theoretical interpretation and contextualisation of data—can flourish in a collaborative process. Based on the expertise in co-created research in multigenerational co-housing projects, the paper reflects on practical experiences with the research forum in terms of four central dimensions: (1) opening up spaces for social encounters; (2) establishing communicative practice; (3) initiating a process of social self-understanding; (4) engaging in (counter-)public discourses. Finally, the paper closes with a summary of potential and challenges that the research forum provides as a methodological foundation for co-creation in citizen social science projects.