Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning Fall 2000, pp. 85-96

Community-Based Research as Pedagogy Kerry J. Strand Hood College

This paper focuses on the value of community-based research (CBR) as a pedagogical strategy for cours- es in social science research in an effort to show how service-learning can enrich discipline-based learn- ing. Community-based research introduces an experiential component that helps students acquire research skills and makes research more appealing and accessible to students, especially those who prefer “con- nected” modes of knowing. But the more distinctive value of CBR is that it engages students with some important epistemological debates surrounding the production of knowledge in the social sciences by mod- eling alternatives to conventional assumptions about why we do social research, how best to study humans and society, and who should control the research process and the knowledge that is produced.

Recently, advocates and practitioners of service- research in two substantial ways. The first is that learning have proposed that we explore ways of CBR is done with rather than on the community. describing and promoting it so as to broaden its Instead of treating communities as “laboratories” appeal to the higher education community. Edward and community members as convenient samples, as Zlotkowski (1995) and others (e.g., Lenk, 1997) is more typical in conventional research, CBR holds suggest that one way to do this is to make clear how as a central tenet the involvement of community the pedagogical value of service-learning lies not members in every stage of the research process, only in its capacity for reinforcing moral and civic from identifying the research question to formulat- values, but also in its potential for enriching more ing action proposals that derive from the research traditional, discipline-based learning. Our general results. In practice, and for different reasons, com- failure to make clear how and why service-learning munity members’ actual involvement in the research can serve the pedagogical needs of our discipline- may be somewhat limited. However, the goal of based courses might help to explain why “so many CBR is to carry out a project that meets some com- faculty members have adopted a posture of general munity need as it is defined by that community—not approval but personal indifference” (Zlotkowski, by the researcher or other “experts”—and, on a 1995:16) toward service-learning in the academy. broader scale, to democratize the production and I aim to contribute to the ongoing dialogue about control of knowledge. This is achieved by recogniz- how and why to incorporate service-learning into ing the legitimacy of the knowledge and world views discipline-based courses by demonstrating how of powerless people and by sharing authority wher- some important pedagogical goals of my basic and ever possible in every stage of the research process advanced undergraduate courses in social science (Ansley & Gaventa, 1997;. Stoecker & Bonacich, research methods are achieved by means of one kind 1992). of service-learning—community-based research The second essential difference between CBR and (CBR). First I will briefly explain what CBR is and traditional academic research is that an explicit goal describe how I incorporate it into my teaching. Then of CBR—indeed, the central purpose for doing such I will explain how the acquisition of practical research—is to contribute in some way to improving research skills, as well as an understanding of epis- the lives of those living in the community. In other temological issues surrounding knowledge produc- words, CBR has a critical action component such tion in the social sciences, are greatly enhanced by that the knowledge produced has the potential to students’ experience of doing research with and for bring about some positive social change. Typically, the community. CBR practitioners work in the interest of social, eco- Community-Based Research nomic or environmental justice and their communi- ty consists of the powerless and oppressed, or those Community-based research involves collaboration working on their behalf. Community-based between trained researchers and community mem- research, carried out to help the community acquire bers in the design and implementation of research some information that they see as important to their projects aimed at meeting community-identified ongoing work, is typically (though not always) one needs. CBR differs from traditional academic part of the community’s larger action agenda. This

85 Strand social change goal of CBR even more dramatically teen years, for the social research methods courses distinguishes it from conventional academic offered at the small women’s liberal arts college research, whose purpose is “understanding for its where I teach. The first level research course, “The own sake,” or to test hypotheses and develop theory Philosophy and Methods of Social Research,” is a in a discipline, and whose rationales are rarely cast sociology course that is designed to meet the in explicit political and ideological terms (Hall, research requirement for majors in sociology, social 1992; Murphy, Scammell & Sclove, 1997; Porpora, work, law and society, and political science. 1999; Stoecker & Bonacich, 1992). Students from other fields, including psychology Community-based research has a rich history and and education, also occasionally enroll in the course diverse roots. In Latin America, Paulo Freire (1970), on an elective basis. The beginning research meth- Orlando Fals-Borda (1984) and other activist educa- ods course enrolls about 30 students each fall, about tors and researchers used what they called “partici- half of whom go on to take a course in basic statis- patory research” as an organizing and transformative tics. Both the basic research course and statistics are strategy for the disenfranchised. Participatory prerequisites for the advanced-level Practicum in research emerged in the 1960s and 1970s in Europe Social Research, a two-semester course in which and North America during an era of challenge to the students work on collaborative research projects dominant positivist paradigm, as critiques posed with agencies and organizations in the community. important questions about the purposes of research, The year long advanced course is required of sociol- the role of values, the distinction between researcher ogy majors, but also enrolls students from a variety and researched, and the relationship of knowledge of majors who elect a minor in social science creation to social power (Green et al., 1997; Hall, research. 1992). In the United States, different versions of Although the advanced-level practicum is the “action-oriented” research-participatory action “centerpiece” of my CBR teaching, students in the research (PAR), action research, empowerment basic research methods course have the option of research-evolved somewhat independently in meeting the course’s independent research require- response to dissatisfaction with the inability of tradi- ment with a smaller-scale CBR project. Students tional social science methods to inform policy and from both the basic and advanced courses have com- practice and lead to social action (Small, 1995). pleted over a half dozen projects in the two years Academics engaged in CBR argue eloquently for its that I have used CBR in my teaching. Following are contributions to forging critical partnerships short descriptions of the student projects to which I between colleges and universities and the communi- will refer: ties in which they are located. For too long, they An Assessment of Child Care Needs of Low- maintain, universities have neglected their civic mis- Income Mothers, a project undertaken by five sion, and CBR is an effective way to share resources advanced-level students with the Department of in a common effort to produce relevant information Social Services. This research involved focus and identify solutions to pressing community and groups, followed by semi-structured interviews with societal problems (Nyden, Figert, Shibley, & about 65 mothers of children under 12. The purpose Burrows, 1997; Porpora, 1999). was to ascertain the unmet child care needs of Although scholars and activists inside and outside women in light of recent concerns about the impact the academy have long engaged in various forms of of welfare reform; and to help the D.S.S. action-oriented research with communities, CBR’s Business/Child Care Liaison work with local busi- iteration as a form of service-learning in higher edu- nesses to better meet the child care needs of area cation is a relatively recent one. As a result, little has workers. been written detailing the “how to’s” and distinctive An Exploration of Reasons for the Low challenges of involving students—especially under- Participation Rates of African-American Women in graduates—in this kind of experiential education Breast Cancer Screening Programs, undertaken by (for an excellent recent exception, see McNicoll, five advanced-level students with the Breast and 1999). And although a fair amount has been written Cervical Cancer Unit of the local Health about the benefits of CBR for communities and their Department. Respondents were identified through university partners (e.g., Stoecker & Bonacich, pastors and health care liaisons at local churches 1992; Nyden, Figert, Shibley, & Burrows, 1997), lit- with sizable African-American memberships. tle attention has been given to how and why involv- Women participated in focus groups and completed ing students in CBR can also be a highly effective self-administered questionnaires about behavior and teaching strategy, particularly in courses in social attitudes connected with breast cancer and mammo- science research. grams with the aim of finding out why Black women I have held major responsibility, over the past fif- in the county seem to utilize free mammography

86 Community-Based Research as Pedagogy screening in lower numbers than White women in based research projects are one form of this very the area, and how the Health Department might common experiential teaching strategy. increase their participation in these programs. A second aim of undergraduate social research Needs Assessment of the Hispanic Community. courses is somewhat less common but, I would Two students in the basic research methods course, argue, equally important: to help students under- both of them non-Hispanic but fluent in Spanish, stand social research not just as a collection of meth- worked with the recently-formed Hispanic Concerns ods and strategies, but also as the way that knowl- Committee on a multi-method study to find out about edge about the social world is produced. I do this the characteristics and needs of the small but growing partly by means of assigned readings and classroom Spanish-speaking community in the county. lecture and discussion that critically examine the Programs and Services for Incarcerated and epistemological assumptions underlying different Previously-Incarcerated Women Struggling with modes of research design and data collection. My Alcohol and Drug Problems. This study involved goal is not only to enable students to make informed lengthy interviews with current and past female choices about appropriate research methods to use inmates of the local Adult Detention Center to find for different kinds of research questions and purpos- out what programs and services are available to es, but also to help them acquire a larger and critical them to help them deal with substance use problems. understanding of different research paradigms, The study was initiated with Church Women United, including alternatives to the one that dominates in a local grass roots ecumenical organization involved Western social science and social thought. To do in issues relating to poverty and justice which is this is to invite students to participate in a vigorous seeking to establish a “safe and sober home” for and ongoing intellectual debate that features some of women and their children. the most fundamental assumptions about knowledge Explaining the High Injury Rate Among 18-24 production in the social sciences. I also see this as a year-old Bicyclists and Pedestrians in the County. means to empower students by helping them to see Three students in the basic course conducted short themselves as researchers—potential participants in interviews, mostly in area malls, with young adults the production of social scientific knowledge. with the purpose of finding out what accounts for the Community-based research can be an enormously effective strategy to achieve these pedagogical ends exceptionally high injury rate of young adult pedes- because it “models” alternatives to conventional trians, and bicyclists in the county. This study was social science. conducted in cooperation with the county’s Task Force on Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety so that they Teaching Methodology through CBR might know what measures to take to combat the high injury rate. The benefits of involving students in CBR for are the same as those accruing to any sort of experiential Social Research Methods: work in some important respects. That is, when stu- Course Content and Learning Goals dents must actually do what they have read about-in this case, select a sample, develop a questionnaire, The content of social research courses falls into conduct an interview, take field notes, identify ethi- two general categories: the methodological and the cal issues, analyze data they have collected-they are epistemological. The first refers to what is the most inclined to approach their work with extra amounts widespread objective of courses in social research of care and enthusiasm. They also learn better than methods: that is, helping students acquire a basic if their learning is classroom- and textbook-bound, appreciation for and understanding of the research where their only responsibility is to absorb informa- methods that social scientists use to study social life. tion long enough to regurgitate it on an exam. This Here we hope that students will become informed bit of wisdom appears over and over in the work of consumers and critics of extant research, but also researchers and theorists on learning: that the most acquire a working knowledge of research design and effective learning takes place through “combinations techniques of data collection and analysis. To this of thought and action, reflection and practice, theo- end, many instructors of undergraduate social ry and application” (Jacoby, 1996, 6-7; see also research courses supplement textbook and class- Kolb, 1984). Judging from the popular practice of room learning with an experiential component that requiring that students design and complete a requires students to design and carry out a small research project on their own, we can infer that most research project of their own. This way they acquire instructors of social research methods share this firsthand experience in every aspect of the research widespread recognition of the benefits of hands-on process, from formulating a viable research question learning. to analyzing and presenting results. Community- Students doing community-based research have

87 Strand an added benefit—their learning is also invigorated the community or having to request permission to by real accountability and a heightened sense of pur- undertake research from the college Institutional pose. They are doing the research and writing the Review Board or from people in the community who final report not for the professor, but rather for and must answer to litigation-fearful bureaucracies. And (ideally) with the community partners—and some- they also have occasion to see how politics can times for others who they hope will be inspired or impinge on the research process at every stage. pressured to take action on their findings. And their Students often must negotiate project parameters research has a purpose—improving a program, with two or more conflicting parties—e.g., a com- exposing an injustice, documenting a need—beyond munity task force whose research goals are slightly simply demonstrating their mastery of course mate- different from those of an equally-committed social rial. Time and time again, I’ve been taken aback by service provider—and in other ways they discover the energy and creativity with which students have the importance of qualities such as diplomacy, per- undertaken their CBR work. I see this as attributable severance, and flexibility in seeing a project through to their desire to “make good” on their commitment from beginning to end. In one case, the political and to people that they have come to know in the com- ethical challenges of community-based research munity, the greater autonomy associated with learn- came together when a community partner—a social ing off-campus, and the recognition that comes with service professional committed to child care having completed a meaningful project for someone issues—asked to be present in a seemingly “neutral” other than the professor and for a purpose other than setting where students were pre-testing an interview a good grade. All of this makes CBR highly moti- schedule about child care needs to a small group of vating in ways that conventional classroom instruc- low income mothers at a local community college. tion simply is not. Only when the interviews were underway did the By way of example, often the first data collection students realize that the women were very uncom- stage of my students’ research projects have fortable answering questions about their situations involved focus groups, unstructured group inter- in the presence of a person from the agency that views held with a half dozen or so members of the deems them eligible or ineligible for government community with whom the students will be work- aid. This incident led the student researchers to re- ing. Focus groups are useful both because they help think much about their research plan and taught the students come to know the community better and them more than any chapter or lecture on research because these meetings serve a “sensitizing” func- ethics could have. tion. That is, they provide insights, about things such The collaborative nature of community-based as the language that participants use to think and talk research also gives it special pedagogical value, as about a topic, that inform subsequent stages of the students have many opportunities to learn both from research, including the development of survey each other and from community partners with whom instruments and strategies for sampling and data col- they work. Students often have different strengths lection (see Lynch, 1993). So far in my experience, and characteristics that, taken together, help them the students have taken on the task of organizing and carry out a project with much greater success than if running these focus groups with great aplomb, they were working alone. For example, students despite having virtually no training in focus group with good social skills might take on more phone research, which is barely mentioned in their text and calling, interviewing, and public presentation with which I also had no experience. In every responsibilities, while students who are most com- instance—focus groups with service providers, with fortable with computers and quantification might African-American church women, with low-income assume greater responsibility for numerical data single mothers—the students devoured whatever entry and analysis. Better questionnaires are devel- books or articles they could get their hands on, orga- oped when students work with each other and with nized participants, developed questions, facilitated community members who—sometimes to the stu- dialogue, and transcribed and interpreted data with dents’ mild surprise—provide valuable suggestions remarkable success and with a minimum of guid- about the research instrument based on their own ance from me. In every case, their efforts produced knowledge about the language, worldviews, and sit- rich data that proved invaluable to the respective uations of the respondents as well as the policies and research project. programs in the community (what CBR practition- Community-based research enhances learning ers call “local knowledge”). This sort of collabora- about other dimensions of research methods as well. tive work that draws on the strengths and competen- The ethical concerns and dilemmas that are dis- cies of different members of a “team,” of course, cussed in their textbook truly come to life when stu- models the way that most research and other kinds dents are asking questions of vulnerable people in of projects are done in the “real world”—another

88 Community-Based Research as Pedagogy benefit of this approach. Becker, 1995). Finally, students engaged in CBR learn that social In contrast, connected knowing emphasizes intu- research is seldom as linear, systematic, and subject ition, creativity, experience, induction, context, and to the researcher’s control as textbook discussions relativism. Connected knowers rely more readily on would have us believe. Research in the real world personal experience and empathy than on imperson- invariably brings with it the unexpected, unpre- al, authoritative reason in their quest for understand- dictable, and uncontrollable. Although unanticipated ing, and they perform and thrive in learning contexts problems in the research process might mean that a that utilize hands-on experiences, collaborative project must be abandoned, more typically, students- rather than competitive learning, an emphasis on perhaps with the help of the professor and commu- practical applications and real understanding, and nity members-must re-think and re-design some work in groups. Connected knowers are inclined to aspect of their original research plan. My students find conventionally-taught courses in areas like sci- have had to change course because of a variety of ence and mathematics particularly unappealing, “glitches” of the sort that seem to be common in intimidating, and even inaccessible as knowledge is CBR: a community contact who failed to produce presented as abstract, linear, disconnected from their the groups of respondents that she promised; the dis- own experience, and at best remotely relevant to mal failure of a sampling strategy that relied on human—including their own—goals and interests. tables in front of area supermarkets (where, it turns Belenky and her colleagues maintain that neither out, people who will stop to buy Girl Scout cookies of these two types of procedural knowledge is inher- will not do so to answer a short questionnaire); bad ently superior and that, in fact, people need to devel- weather; and irresponsibility of a key member of the op as both connected and separate knowers before research team. Every instance imparted valuable they can reach the last stage in their model, “con- lessons about doing social research. structed knowing,” in which the rational and emotive dimensions can be integrated and the knower can CBR and “Connected Knowing” appreciate the complexity of knowledge formed Some of the distinctive pedagogical value of CBR from various perspectives (Becker, 1995, p. 168). has to do with its compatibility with certain pre- Because of this, service-learning advocates maintain ferred modes of learning that our students are likely that the emphasis of service-learning on connected to bring to social science research classes. This com- knowing makes it a much-needed counterpoint to patibility is suggested both by the service-learning the separate mode of knowing that predominates in literature and by recent research that looks at con- the traditional academic community (McEwen, nections among “ways of knowing,” teaching strate- 1996). gies, and student achievement in mathematics and This fit with connected knowing seems to charac- 1 science. terize community-based research, as well. Students Drawing on the work of Belenky, Clinchy, work with one another and with community partners Goldberger, & Tarule (1986), educators have recent- to design projects that arise out of real community ly argued that the conventional approaches that pre- needs. Action-oriented researchers tend to focus on dominate in formal education favor “separate know- “ill-structured” problems: ones that do not have ing” over “connected knowing.” Both are forms of well-defined or reliable methods of determining “procedural knowledge,” procedures that people use either the problem or its solution (Small, 1999). for making meaning. Separate knowing stresses Because their community partners and research par- things like logic, abstraction, rationality, certainty, ticipants are likely to be very different from them- deduction, absolute truth, formality, power, and con- selves, students must develop empathy with their trol. Separate knowers are those who are most com- community partners so that they are able to “see the fortable adopting an impersonal stance toward the world” through their eyes as well as take into object of knowing and relying on reasoned proce- account a variety of perspectives. And because the dures for making meaning. They are more likely to goal of their research is to benefit the community thrive in classes where lecture, individual effort, and its members, students focus on the interests, competition, and abstract learning are the norms and feelings, and goals of the research participants rather where feelings and personal beliefs are rigorously than simply on results or outcomes. Students are excluded in favor of highly codified and elaborated also working together toward a mutual goal, not ways of organizing knowledge. Some researchers competing with one another for a good grade— and educators have suggested that conventional which, again, favors connected knowers, who prefer strategies for teaching mathematics and science cooperation to competition. Their research is shaped greatly favor separate knowers, who are more likely and informed, at every stage, by interactions with to be male than connected knowers (Boaler, 1997; real people and they are likely, at least to some

89 Strand extent, to be using the kinds of interpretive research that CBR is even more valuable as a means to bring methods that most appeal to connected knowers. to life questions of epistemology surrounding the And even when the research uses conventional, practice and meaning of social research. More than quantitative approaches—typically survey—stu- just a collection of techniques, social research is also dents are developing questions collaboratively with a process for producing knowledge about the social community members who have a stake in the infor- world—a process that is shaped by particular inter- mation they yield. They are interviewing people in ests and points of view that, in turn, reflect wider whose lives and social worlds they are truly interest- social arrangements, including prevailing hierar- ed. And they are compiling, interpreting, and pre- chies of power and prestige. Recent historical, soci- senting data imbued with meaning far beyond mere ological, and feminist analyses of science have numbers and with potential to bring about needed raised provocative questions with far-reaching social changes consistent with the students’ own val- implications for social science methodology—ques- ues. While some of these ends might be achieved by tions about the nature of objectivity, the construction means of independent research projects in more con- of facts, and the biases and values that shape scien- ventional research courses, they are trademarks of tific interpretations, agendas, investigative tools, community-based research. applications, and the rules governing who is and is The fit of CBR with connected knowing makes it not allowed into the world of science (see e.g., an effective strategy in another respect as well. Their Laslett, Kohlstedt, Longino, & Hammonds, 1996; bias toward separate knowers means that conven- Ross, 1996). Although clearly there are limits to how tional teaching strategies in mathematics and science much we can include in a course in social research courses implicitly favor males, which may be help- methods, it seems irresponsible not to engage our ing to drive girls and young women away from sci- students with at least some of the questions that ence and math fields. Although this might suggest these “critical science studies” pose: For what pur- that CBR is of particular value to those who are poses do we produce social scientific knowledge? teaching research methods to women (including Who controls the production of knowledge and who those of us teaching at women’s colleges), I think it owns—or ought to own—the knowledge that is pro- has relevance to everyone teaching social science duced? What are some consequences of that con- research. Most of us are keenly aware that, despite trol? Is value-free science possible, or even desir- our best efforts, our research methods courses are able? Whose interests are served by conventional widely feared rites of passage for college students research paradigms and approaches? How might the majoring in fields such as sociology, psychology, research enterprise be democratized? How can we social work, criminal justice, and politics. Many best know about human behavior? What are the students, of both genders, who are reasonably com- strengths and limitations of different research meth- fortable learning about welfare policy, deviant ods for acquiring valid information about social life? behavior, child abuse, and Marx’ theory of surplus How are research findings shaped by the values, value become immobilized when the course content worldviews, and interest of researchers and research turns to the language and logic of science: variables, participants? hypotheses, probability samples, control groups, The Positivist Paradigm2 bivariate tables and the like. If we assume, as I believe we can, that many of our students—male and Since the middle of the previous century, social female—share many characteristics of connected scientific inquiry has been dominated by a positivis- knowers, then we can begin to understand why tic paradigm whose methods and logic are modeled involving these students in community-based on the natural and physical sciences. This model pre- research can help counteract the dislike and discom- supposes much about the social world and about fort they feel in our research classes. This is not to how social science research might best study it. suggest that we should avoid teaching conventional Positivism assumes that the purpose of social social science methods in conventional ways, but research is to discover and document what are rather that students’ learning of quantitative as well assumed to be universal laws of human behavior. as qualitative methods is enhanced by the chance to The goal of social science research is to describe and apply their newly-acquired research skills in mean- explain the social world—not to change it. Social ingful settings. scientists do research to build theory: to contribute in Teaching Epistemology using CBR some way to the “store” of knowledge—universal probabilistic laws—about human behavior and Community-based research, I have argued, is a social life. They do this by systematically and empir- very useful way to teach the methodology of social ically testing hypotheses that are deduced from more research. Now I turn to my second point, which is general theories that constitute knowledge in each

90 Community-Based Research as Pedagogy discipline. measure of stature over the past few decades: inter- Researchers in the positivist tradition use what are pretive social science and critical social science. currently the most common methods in social Each raises provocative questions about the purpose, research—mainly survey and experiments, but also conduct and control of social science research, and other methods (e.g., content analysis) where system- each poses challenges to the dominant research par- atic observations yield patterns that are expressed in adigm in the social sciences. the form of numbers. They rely on precise quantita- Interpretive social science—which includes such tive measures and statistical models to explain, and theoretical orientations as symbolic interactionism, make predictions about, humans and the social constructionism, hermeneutics, phenomenology, world. The laws that such analysis yields are and ethnomethodology—sees social reality not as expressed in the form of probability statements, external to and imposed upon people, but rather as which both explain what exists and predict what will something that humans construct as they interact occur in the future. This approach is predicated on a with one another. Within the interpretive paradigm, view of human beings as rational, self-interested then, social research most appropriately involves actors who are largely shaped by external forces; “...the systematic analysis of socially meaningful and systematic observations of their behavior, rather action through the direct detailed observation of than any aspect of their internal, subjective reality, is people in natural settings in order to arrive at under- the appropriate stuff of social analysis. standings and interpretations of how people create Conventional social science also makes a number and maintain their social worlds (Neuman, 2000, p. of related and important assumptions about the 71). Interpretive social scientists use qualitative researcher, who is assumed to be objective, research methods—field research, participant obser- detached, neutral and disinterested, i.e., able to vation—in order to understand how humans, in achieve distance from the object of the research and interaction with one another, create meaning in willing to suspend her or his own values in the inter- everyday life. est of exerting no undue influence on any aspect of The positivist/interpretive debate is a longstand- the research process. The notion of “value-freedom” ing and acrimonious one, and the interpretive para- is critical to positivism, and the researcher has prime digm offers a compelling critique of the central responsibility to ensure that research is objective and tenets of positivism. From this perspective, social free of human biases and values. To that end, the reality does not consist of observable “facts,” but can strategies and instruments of quantitative research be understood only as embedded in meaning and are designed to achieve unbiased results, and they accessible by means of Verstehen, or empathetic must be administered by a trained and objective understanding: accessing people’s subjective, inner researcher to ensure that the results reflect accurate- reality. Moreover, the interpretive approach argues ly the social reality being studied. that research cannot be value-free, as values are cen- Because researchers are the trained experts, they tral to all human action. Consequently, the also are seen as the sole possessors of knowledge researcher’s values, experiences, and personal points about the research process and should, therefore, of view are as much a part of the research process as have total control of its design and implementation. those of the people studied, and they should be dis- The researcher should also be the sole gatekeeper cussed and acknowledged. Interpretive approaches of knowledge so that “the decision about whether, emphasize deep understanding rather than generaliz- to whom, and how research findings should be dis- ability, a sensitivity to context and connectedness, seminated rests entirely with the researcher” bias toward the point of view of the people studied (Small, p. 1995, 18). By implication, the major over that of the researcher, data in the form of words beneficiaries of the research are the scientific com- over numbers, and the inadequacy of research strate- munity generally (as research contributes to the gies borrowed from the natural and physical sci- knowledge base of a discipline) and the researcher, ences to understand much beyond the most superfi- who receives recognition, and perhaps other pro- cial aspects of human behavior. While this approach fessional benefits, as a result of her or his contribu- has fallen far short of displacing positivism, it has tion to scientific understanding. forced critical appraisal of some of the central tenets The Interpretive and Critical Alternatives and assumptions underlying conventional social sci- entific inquiry. The central premises of a positivistic paradigm The other alternative to conventional research, have gone largely unchallenged for much of the his- critical social science, has its roots in Marxism and tory of social science in the United States. However, takes as its focus issues of power and inequality. In two alternative approaches to understanding the contrast to the critique of positivism that comes from social world have slowly gained more than a small the interpretive approach, critical researchers are

91 Strand less concerned with questions of how to do social nor even seem to be aware of the precepts underly- research than with questions of why to do it and who ing their research practices, and it is still the case is entitled to shape and control the research process. that positivism is widely taught as what science is The purpose of all social inquiry, they argue, should (Neuman, 2000, p. 69), with little or no attention to not simply be to describe the world, but to change it. alternatives. This deference by default to what Most research approaches grounded in critical social Addelson (1991) calls the “cognitive authority” of science share an ideological commitment to obtain- conventional science is, she maintains, bad for our ing and using knowledge to bring about more equal disciplines and for scientific research generally. social relations by empowering oppressed groups. Community-based research, an alternative way of And in response to the charge that overtly politicized doing and thinking about social research, is an espe- research goals make “science” impossible, critical cially effective strategy to bring alive for students researchers argue that, in fact, no knowledge is neu- the questions that are central to this debate: Why tral. The supposedly neutral “facts” to which posi- should we do social research? How we can best tivists lay claim—along with the whole of the insti- know about humans and society? and Who should tution of science—also serve ideological purposes in participate in the production of knowledge? their justification of existing social and cultural Why Should We Do Social Research? arrangements: “The belief that knowledge is merely technical, having no ideological function, is refuted The purpose of doing social research, according to by the ways in which science has played handmaid- the dominant social science research paradigm, is en to social values, providing an aura of scientific understanding for its own sake: describing the authority to prejudicial beliefs about social groups world, rather than acting on it, and contributing to and giving credibility to certain social policies” the development of theory, not bringing about social (Riger, 1992, p. 730). change. When we fail to challenge this kind of A number of action-oriented research approach- thinking, we essentially communicate to our stu- es—or what Small (1995) calls “postpositivist para- dents that social science research, while it might be digms”—derive from critical social science, includ- the most reliable means we have for learning about ing feminist research, participatory action research, the social world, nonetheless has little to offer in the and empowerment research in psychology. While way of finding answers to really important questions there are slight differences among them, they share or shedding light on solutions to pressing social some important features (Green, 1997; Neuman, problems. Community-based research poses direct 2000; Small, 1995): challenges to these assumptions about the purpose • An action-orientation so that the value of of social science research. As a result, students may, research findings rests on their potential to be for the first time, come to see research as having the used to help bring about social change, potential to alleviate problems they have studied in their social science classes—racism, sexism, family • The need to use research methods that are not violence, poverty, educational inequality, or prob- exploitive but are sensitive to the special char- lems faced by groups such as people with disabilities acteristics of the people and situations under or the aged—as well as more delineated problems investigation, such as the kind that my students have addressed: • A recognition of the value and legitimacy of the availability of affordable child care, the adequa- experiential knowledge of the research partic- cy of programs and services for groups such as ipants, female addicts and non-English speakers, and access • Shared power and control of decision-making to health care for women of color. When students are throughout the research process rather than able to apply their newly acquired research skills to domination of the process by researchers, problems that are of real concern to them and to oth- ers (and get academic credit for it), they acquire a • The collective ownership of knowledge pro- broader—and surely more positive—view of what duced by research, which belongs as much to social science is and what it can do. the research participants as to the researcher. Because community-based research is change-ori- Although interpretive and critical social science ented, researchers go a step further and identify and approaches have held their own at the margins of analyze links between their scholarly inquiry and social science theory, they have been largely unsuc- social action. My students, as the final step in their cessful at making much of a dent in the hegemony research project, must formulate policy-related sug- of positivistic social science research, particularly gestions from their results. For example, students in the United States. Here most social scientists who assessed the child care needs of low-income who work in the positivist tradition rarely question women recommended, in a public forum and in the

92 Community-Based Research as Pedagogy presence of a high-level social services administra- abandon accepted research practices. . .If the tor, that local welfare reform policies were seriously research is done well, it should point the orga- flawed as long as they failed to provide child care nization and community toward more effective benefits to low-income mothers enrolled in college. alternatives to current strategies. . . Thus, Students who completed a study of African- objectivity in collaborative research does not American women’s knowledge about breast cancer mean consciously ignoring how the research might be used to a particular end, such as boldly suggested that the Health Department’s initial improving the quality of AIDS/HIV prevention assumption—that race was the variable shaping dif- education, increasing public acceptance of ferent attitudes and determining differential utiliza- group homes for delinquent youth, or improv- tion of screening programs—was misguided, as they ing race relations in a community. Objectivity found that working-class and middle-class Black means exposing collaborative research to as women had rather extensive knowledge about breast much of the critical standards of social science cancer. Even when research results are not very research as possible. (1997, pp. 8-10) meaningful, or when recommendations are limited or unrealistic, the process of connecting research Or, as one of my students said about community- outcomes to social action powerfully illustrates to based research, “It really makes you think.” students that social science research can, indeed, How Should We Do Social Research? have relevance to people’s lives. Those students whose study results were largely limited to the find- Experimental design, structured interviews, self- ing that young adults didn’t know the traffic laws administered questionnaires—research methods that governing bicycles knew they were not changing the count, measure, and produce numerical data that world when they suggested the need for a radio- yield probability statements and statistical pat- based public education campaign about bicycle and terns—have long defined social science methodolo- pedestrian safety. However, they did acquire a new gy. Interpretive and feminist social scientists have appreciation for the potential of social science been the loudest voices in opposition to the superi- research to affect some, albeit small, improvement ority claims of quantitative research methods. in the life of a community. Interpretive theorists argue that quantitative methods So entrenched is the disconnection of research and produce simplistic and superficial data and ignore action in modern scientific thinking that we are led the role of values in the research process. Feminists to believe that any research with a social change add that quantification creates distance and even an goal—achieving social justice, uncovering exploitive relationship between researcher and inequities, improving social services—is suspect, researched, denies agency and voice to research sub- invariably lacking rigor and unlikely to give suffi- jects, and embodies the masculine values of autono- cient attention to issues of bias and validity. my, separation, distance and control. Respondents However, students involved in community-based are reduced to variables and numbers, and the research can’t help but question the faulty notion researcher assumes all the power—to shape ques- that action-oriented research is not, or cannot be, rig- tions, to structure responses, to interpret thoughts orous and objective. My students come to their col- and feelings and behaviors—thus denying any voice laborative community-based projects having com- to the people being studied (Mason, 1997; Riger, pleted basic courses in research methods and statis- 1992). tics. They are knowledgeable about research proto- Despite these criticisms, these same feminist crit- cols and sensitive to the myriad ways that bias can ics and others partial to qualitative approaches influence outcomes at every stage of the research. acknowledge that quantitative approaches have And they soon realize that the same standards and some value in social science research and that the accepted research practices that they have learned best-designed projects are often those that combine are not at all abandoned when the research is done different methods (Jayaratne & Stewart, 1993; with and for the community. Instead, they realize Reinharz, 1992). I think this is especially true in early in the process that community members expect community-based research, where quantitative data research that is rigorous and of high quality. This is is often more effective than qualitative at demon- not surprising; communities want results, after all, strating the scope of a problem or otherwise reveal- that are credible and persuasive. Nyden, Figert, ing overall patterns that are more reliable than indi- Shibley, & Burrows, (1997) make the same point: vidual cases as a basis for action or policy (Reinharz, Research is only useful to a community if it is p. 80). Moreover, we would be naïve to ignore the accurate and provides information that is an power of numbers to persuade—not a small consid- honest representation of the issues being stud- eration when research is aimed at influencing public ied. Quality collaborative research does not policy decisions.

93 Strand Consequently, my students doing community- develop some facility in using the computer to com- based research almost always utilize some conven- pile and analyze survey data along with other tional quantitative methods in their research—usu- research skills, such as taking and transcribing field ally structured self-administered questionnaires or notes, observing, developing research instruments, interview schedules. However, most employ some and writing and presenting results. qualitative methods as well. We have found that Who Should Do Social Research? techniques such as focus groups, intensive inter- views, and other more loosely-structured modes of Conventional social science assumes that trained communicating with community members are researchers ought to assume total control over the essential to the goals of community-based design and conduct of research, and that they should research, as they narrow the distance between the be the ones to control access to whatever knowledge researcher and the researched, give real “voice” to the research produces. In this regard, undergraduate participants, and allow access to some of the sub- students involvement in community-based research jective understandings and local knowledge that implicitly challenges this conventional thinking; stu- are critical to analysis. In fact, when students take dents who are themselves powerless especially on research projects with the community, they usu- when they are female, as my students are, participate ally end up with multi-method research designs, as full partners in the community-based research. As which help them to see both the value of triangula- a feminist instructor at an institution dedicated to the tion and the distinctive strengths and weaknesses of education of women, I consider this form of empow- diverse research techniques. erment to be one of the major pedagogical benefits Working in groups, with each other and commu- of community-based research. nity members, simplifies for my students’ to use of My students reveal their feelings of efficacy and both qualitative and quantitative methods in their enthusiasm for research in different ways. A few stu- research. Some projects involve focus groups fol- dents become so energized by small projects that lowed by more structured survey design, where the they expand them into larger-scale independent focus group allows students to get acquainted with study projects in the subsequent semester. Others members of the community, to receive input or feed- volunteer with organizations that they come to know back about questionnaire items, to develop mutual through community-based research projects. And trust, to solicit suggestions about sampling and more than one student has confessed that she was access to other community members, and to recruit “sure she wasn’t going to like social research” until people to help with the data-gathering. We also have she became involved in her CBR project. Although found other ways to create multi-method research it is too soon to know how many students will go on designs. In the study of women struggling with drug to careers as activists or action researchers, I am and alcohol problems, students conducted half-hour inspired by reactions from students such as the one interviews that were both qualitative and quantita- who completed a small project for the local food tive in nature. That is, a number of open-ended ques- bank, then sent me the following note: tions about the women’s experiences with programs I have been trying to contact a few agencies to and services in the community were followed by a work on a research project for the summer. . page of short and structured questions, designed to .My dream research project would be an exam- gather demographic data (number of children, resi- ination of the conditions faced by African- dence, age, and so on) for the purpose of describing Americans in the areas of housing, education, the characteristics of the population that needed to and the economy and organizations that are be better served. The needs assessment of the area fighting to correct any problems. It would be a Latino population involved a range of methods uti- “State of Black Pittsburgh” Report. I want to lizing different languages—English or Spanish— really get into this stuff. I am not sure if this is depending on the respondents. These included a something that is feasible for the summer. I am focus group with area service providers, a long trying to plan a very interesting project that structured interview schedule for Latinos in the will be useful for the city and to me. I want to build my research skills and design an extraor- community, and participant observation on the part dinary project. I need some advice... of one student, a Spanish-speaker who worked throughout the study in an area restaurant alongside This student went on to complete a summer-long a number of Latino men from the community. CBR project, working with staff and clients of a A secondary pedagogical benefit of using both recently-established community center in a quantitative and qualitative methods, of course, is depressed area not far from where she grew up—not that students gain experience in each. In my case, her “dream project,” but one step toward what I that includes the important aim of getting students to expect will be a notable career in social justice-ori-

94 Community-Based Research as Pedagogy ented activism. burden on what in the end is a pedagogy. Maybe a In other ways, community-based research models good and important one, but a pedagogy just the non-conventional thinking about the role of the same” (1999, p. 120). If we wish to encourage researcher and the social relations that govern the more faculty members to take on the challenges research process. One is that the prestige hierarchies and extra work associated with service-learning, that define relations in conventional science are then I believe we must make clear the ways that it largely irrelevant to research involving undergradu- supports our pedagogical goals and enhances our ates and the community. Students are usually teaching effectiveness. For a great many of us at younger than community members, and many other small liberal arts colleges, teaching is the most status differentials—such as social class, education, important work that we do. And if our purpose in gender, and ethnicity—are absent or, in some cases, teaching is to help develop students’ capacities and somewhat blurred. Moreover, the local knowledge dispositions for leading meaningful lives and to of community members carries considerable weight contribute to making the world better after they for students, who usually come into the project rela- graduate, then incorporating community-based tively uninformed and without any sort of profes- research into research methods courses is a very sional or intellectual agenda. I also identify or create good way to help achieve those aims. opportunities for my students—often with their community partners—to present their research find- Notes ings in public forums. This sort of recognition underscores for them the value of their efforts and Much of my community-based research work with publicly identifies them as social researchers and students has been made possible by the generous support of the Bonner Foundation and Learn and Serve equal collaborators in the research process. America’s Higher Education Program. Thanks also to Community-based research means a different, Nick Cutforth, Ted Wagenaar, Sam Marullo and an more democratic research model in which people anonymous reviewer for their helpful comments. participate in key deliberations and decisions about 1 research that has the potential to affect their lives. Community-based research may fit even better with the last stage of knowing—“constructed knowing”—as it When undergraduate students are the trained combines the best of relationship-based knowledge and researchers, it is a model that stands in particularly rigorous research principles—an idea suggested by an stark contrast to the rigid prestige and authority hier- astute anonymous reviewer. archies that characterize conventional scientific 2 The brief discussions that outline major features of research, in which research is largely the “business positivistic and interpretive social science research draw of experts trained in specialized domains of knowl- heavily on Neuman (2000, Chapter 4). He notes that edge” (Gaventa & Ansley, 1997). As such, it is a these are idealized, simplified models that are distilled pedagogical strategy that helps to empower the stu- from more complex arguments that can be traced to early dents we teach—as well as the community members social theorists and philosophers including Weber, with whom we work. Dilthey, Comte, Durkheim, and Mill. For some more recent elaborations of the positivistic versus interpretive Conclusion approaches, see Ritzer (1975), Giddens (1976), Turner (1985), Berger & Luckman (1967), and Wilson (1970). Although I focus here almost exclusively on the pedagogical value of community-based research References for undergraduate students, I do not mean to sug- gest that what students gain from this experience is Addelson, K. (1991). The man of professional wisdom. In either the only, or even the most important, reason M. Fonow & J. Cook, Beyond methodology: Feminist for getting involved in it. Nor should that be the scholarship as lived research (pp. 16-34). Bloomington IN: Indiana University Press. only criterion for measuring its value. On the con- trary, I agree with service-learning advocates, such Ansley, F., & Gaventa, J. (1997). Researching for democ- racy and democratizing research. Change, 29, 46-53. as Harkavy (1996, cited in Leeds, 1999), who argue that service-learning ought to be about the Becker, J. (1995). Women’s ways of knowing in mathe- matics. In P. Rogers & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Equity in math- needs of communities rather than primarily about ematics education: Influences of feminism and culture the benefits to our students or our institutions, and (pp. 163-174). London: The Falmer Press. that we should do more to ensure that our students’ Belenky, M., Clinchy, B., Goldberger, N., & Tarule, J. service-learning efforts are truly beneficial to the (1986). Women’s ways of knowing: The development of communities where they work. self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books. At the same time, as Leeds points out, to expect Berger, P. & Luckman, T. (1967). The social construction any sort of service-learning to affect meaningful of reality: A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. social change is “placing a large bet and a large Garden City, NY: Anchor.

95 Strand Boaler, J. (1997). Reclaiming school mathematics: The McEwen, M. (1996). Enhancing student learning and girls fight back. Gender and Education, 9, 285-306. development through service-learning. In B. Jacoby & Associates (Eds.), Service-learning in higher education: Chapman, O. (1993). Women’s voice and the learning of Concepts and practices (53-91). San Francisco: Jossey- mathematics. Journal of Gender Studies, 2, 206-21. Bass. Fals-Borda, O. (1984). Participatory action research. McNicoll, P. (1999). Issues in teaching participatory Development: Seeds of change, 2, 18-20. action research. Journal of Social Work Education, 35, 51-63. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Trans. M. Murphy, D., Scammell, M., & Sclove, R. (1997). Doing Bergman Ramos. New York: Continuum. community-based research: A reader. Amherst, MA: Giddens, A. (1976), New rules of sociological method: The Loka Institute. Positivist critique of interpretative sociologies. New Neuman, L. (2000). Social research methods: Quantitative York: Basic Books. and qualitative approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Green, L., George, M., Daniel, M., Frankish, C., Herbert, Nyden, P., Figert, A., Shibley, M., & Burrows, D. (1997). C., Bowie, W., & O’Neil, M. (1997). Background on University-community collaborative research: Adding participatory research. In D. Murphy, M. Scammell & R. chairs at the research table. In P. Nyden, A. Figert, M. Sclove (Eds.), Doing community-based research: A Shibley & D. Burrows (Eds.), Building community: Social science in action reader (pp. 53-66). Amherst, MA: The Loka Institute. (pp. 3-13). Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge. Hall, B. (1992). From margins to center? The development Porpora, D. (1999). Action research: The highest stage of and purpose of participatory research. American service-learning? In J. Ostrow, G. Hesser, & S. Enos Sociologist, 23, 15-29. (Eds.), Cultivating the sociological imagination: Concepts and models for service-learning (pp. 121- Harkavy, I. (1996). Service learning as a vehicle for revi- 133). Washington D.C.: American Association for talization of education institutions and urban communi- Higher Education. ties. Paper presented to Education Directorate Minicon- vention on Urban Initiatives: In Partnership with Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. Education. American Psychological Association Annual New York: Oxford University Press. Meeting, Toronto. Riger, S. (1992). Epistemological debates, feminist voices. American Psychologist, 47, 730-40. Jacoby, B. (1996). Service-learning in today’s higher edu- cation. In B. Jacoby & Associates (Eds.), Service -learn- Ritzer, G. (1975). Sociology: A multiple paradigm science. ing in higher education: Concepts and practices (pp. 3- Boston: Allyn & Bacon. 25). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ross, A. (Ed.). (1996). Science wars. Durham NC: Duke University Press. Jayaratne, T., & A. Stewart. (1991). Quantitative and qual- itative methods in the social sciences:Current feminist Small, S. (1995). Action-oriented research: Models and issues and practical strategies. In M. Fonow & J. Cook methods. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 941- (Eds.), Beyond methodology: Feminist scholarship as 56. lived research (pp. 85-106). Bloomington IN: Indiana Stoecker, R. & E. Bonacich (1992). Why participatory University Press. research? Guest editors’ introduction. American Sociologist, 23, 5-15. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning. Englewood Cliffs, Turner, J. (1985). In defense of positivism. Sociological NJ: Prentice Hall. Theory, 3, 24 -30. Laslett, B., Kohlstedt, S., Longino, H., & Hammonds, E. Wilson, T. (1970). Normative and interpretive paradigms in (Eds.). (1996). Gender and scientific authority. sociology. In J. Douglas (Ed.), Understanding everyday Chicago: University of Chicago. life (pp. 57-79). Chicago: Aldine. Leeds, J. (1996). Rationales for service-learning: A critical Zlotkowski, E. (1995). Does service-learning have a examination. Michigan Journal of Community Service future? Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 6, 112-122. Learning, 2, 123-33. Lenk, M. (1997). Discipline-specific knowledge in service- Author learning: A strategic alliance amongst universities, pro- fessional associations and non-profit organizations. KERRY J. STRAND is a professor of sociology at Michigan Journal of Community Service and Learning, Hood College in Frederick, MD, where she teaches 4, 104-108. courses in research methods and social problems and also directs the Center for Community Lynch, J. (1993). Community participation in community Research. Her current research looks at the effects of needs assessments. Journal of Applied Sociology, 10, pedagogical reform in mathematics on the math- 125-135. related attitudes and persistence of college women. Mason, S. (1997). Social work research: Is there a feminist She is also involved in a collaborative project to pro- method? Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 12, duce a guide to community-based research in higher 10-33. education.

96