1 / 22

Mapping community regeneration projects in Newport

Mapping community regeneration projects in Newport. Oliver Hewer (Centre for Community and Lifelong Learning, University of Wales, Newport) Barry Rennocks (abs.) (Community Development Department, Newport City Council). One road in, many roads out: education as a catalyst for regeneration

fritzi
Download Presentation

Mapping community regeneration projects in Newport

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mapping community regeneration projects in Newport Oliver Hewer (Centre for Community and Lifelong Learning, University of Wales, Newport) Barry Rennocks (abs.) (Community Development Department, Newport City Council) One road in, many roads out: education as a catalyst for regeneration Conference, University of Limerick, 3rd June 2010

  2. Project overview • Collaboration between UWN and NCC • working with Communities First • Initial surveys – baseline data • ‘thematic plans’ to base work on • Monitoring projects through attendance, completion etc.

  3. Project overview

  4. Following on Two aspects of the project • GIS mapping project (mainly NCC) • Social research (mainly UWN)

  5. Social research - aims • Review survey information and thematic plans • Recruit community volunteers • Gather and review relevant info from other service providers • Identify areas for further empirical research • Qualitative information; community-led • What the monitoring forms aren’t telling us; ongoing • Analyse data and implement into thematic plans • Community volunteers will carry on & feed back

  6. Considerations Participatory research – problems What you can and can’t do with data – expectations Data protection

  7. Considerations ‘…applied research and evaluations that do not use [Random Controlled Trials] or strong quasi-experimental designs do not make it through the evidence screens or meet credible evidence standards’ (Donaldson 2009: 13) “All social research involves compromise in method and an almost certain dissatisfaction with results” Ham (1999: 281) “What we trade off in rigour and generalizability… we gain in relevance.” (Stahl and Shdaimah 2008: 1615)

  8. Background Community development Social justice Self-determination Working and learning together Sustainable communities Participation Reflective practice (PAULO 2004)

  9. Background CD increasingly turned to by governments (traditionally a ‘grass roots’ operation) Evidence based policy Commissioned research We are… used to, and at least the professoriate at least is more comfortable with, the idea that authoritative knowledge about society is propagated within the groves of academe. So whilst everyone can lay claim to a capacity for self-reflection and mutual understanding, it is only certain branches of social science that profess to operate such processes formally and with any certainty. (Pawson 2006: 1)

  10. Background Community-university partnerships Action research Participatory action research (PAR) Community-based research (CBR) Community-based participatory research (CBPR) Participatory, democratic, ethnographic, qualitative

  11. Background Political nature of community development work Commissioned research vs. academic freedom

  12. Previous research Commissioned by LA Communities of c.1800 and c.8500 residents Basis for planning future work and influencing service providers Community-led piece of research

  13. Previous research ‘Hard’ data (to influence service providers) Quantitative survey Generalisable = scientific, positivist research Ownership = with community

  14. Previous research Unscientific, non-generalisable Other service providers not swayed Importance of being honest with results vs. Providing the service requested

  15. Previous research As a piece of research: Transparency and honesty in data Well-designed and tested questionnaire Project plans based on views of a selection of the community But not generalisable

  16. Previous research As a community development process: Developed community networks across a number of issues Time spent with community (‘engagement’) Use of volunteers

  17. Previous research Different data collection methods More negotiation with community Stronger network of willing volunteers Partnership agencies what did they want?

  18. References Donaldson, S.I. (2009) ‘Introduction’ to Donaldson, S.I., Christie, C. and Mark, M. eds What counts as credible evidence in applied research and evaluation practice? London: SAGE Ham, V (1999) ‘Tracking the truth or selling one’s soul? Reflections on a piece of commissioned research’ British Journal of Educational Studies 47, 3, pp275-282 PAULO (2004) National Occupational Standards for Community Development Work. Lifelong Learning UK. Available at http://www.lluk.org/3126.htm [accessed 12 Oct 2009] Pawson, R (2006) Evidence-based policy – a realist perspective. London: SAGE Stahl, R. and Shdaimah, C. (2008) ‘Collaboration between community advocates and academic researchers: scientific advocacy or political research?’ British Journal of Social Work 38, pp1610-1629

  19. Comments? Thank you for your time! oliver.hewer@newport.ac.uk

More Related