Review The Article Below Keller J G Miller C Lasdulce C Wo

Review The Article Belowkeller J G Miller C Lasdulce C Wo

Review The Article Below: Keller, J. G., Miller, C., LasDulce, C., & Wohrle, R. G. (2021). Using a community-based participatory research model to encourage parental involvement in their children’s schools. Children & Schools, 43(3), 149–158. The article takes a participatory action approach. The text lists 7 criteria for participatory action research. How does the project described in the article you selected meet these 7 criteria? Social phenomena are influenced by macro-level social influences. Social structures and dynamics are contextualized by history. Theory and practice are simultaneously engaged. Dialogue between the subject and the object is transformed into a single subject–subject. Research and action become a single process. Community and researcher produce knowledge together for social transformation. Research results should be immediately applied to a concrete state of affairs.

Paper For Above instruction

The article by Keller et al. (2021) investigates the utilization of a community-based participatory research (CBPR) model to enhance parental involvement in schools, highlighting its alignment with the seven criteria for participatory action research (PAR). These criteria underscore the importance of integrating social context, fostering dialogue, merging research and action, and ensuring immediate application of findings for social transformation. This essay examines how the project presented in the article meets each of these seven criteria comprehensively.

Firstly, the influence of macro-level social phenomena is evident in the project’s acknowledgment of broader societal and systemic factors affecting parental involvement. Keller et al. (2021) recognize that social structures, cultural norms, and historical contexts shape parental engagement in education. They contextualize their approach within the societal challenges faced by marginalized communities, such as socioeconomic disparities and institutional barriers. The project responds to these macro influences by designing interventions that are sensitive to the community’s unique social realities, ensuring that the research is grounded in the larger social framework that influences individual behaviors.

Secondly, regarding the contextualization of social structures and dynamics by history, the project demonstrates this criterion by considering the historical patterns of parental participation within the specific community. Keller et al. (2021) discuss previous attempts at parental engagement and the historical mistrust or disengagement stemming from past policies or experiences. This historical consciousness informs the research design, allowing the community and researchers to address longstanding issues and build on prior efforts. Such an approach ensures a nuanced understanding of the social dynamics at play, respecting the community’s historical context.

Thirdly, theory and practice are engaged simultaneously in the project. Keller et al. (2021) employ theoretical frameworks from community development and social capital theories but integrate these directly into practical interventions such as parental workshops, school meetings, and collaborative decision-making processes. The project exemplifies a cyclical process where theoretical insights guide concrete actions, and practical experiences, in turn, refine theoretical understanding. This dynamic interplay ensures that theory and practice are not separate but mutually reinforcing components of the research process.

Fourthly, dialogue between the subject and the object is transformed into a single subject–subject relationship. The project fosters mutual dialogue between parents (subjects) and researchers (objects of study) through participatory workshops, focus groups, and ongoing communication channels. Keller et al. (2021) emphasize that this dialogue is bidirectional, empowering parents to voice their perspectives and collaboratively develop strategies. As a result, the traditional researcher-subject hierarchy dissolves, creating a partnership grounded in mutual respect and shared authority, embodying the subject–subject relationship.

Fifthly, research and action become inseparable. The project exemplifies this criterion by engaging parents directly in identifying issues and implementing solutions. The participatory methodology ensures that research activities are not merely observational but serve as mechanisms for social change. Keller et al. (2021) describe how action planning sessions and community-led initiatives are integral to the research process, making it a continuous cycle where findings inform immediate interventions, thereby blurring the lines between inquiry and action.

Sixthly, knowledge production occurs collaboratively between the community and researchers for social transformation. The project employs shared decision-making processes, co-creation of educational materials, and community meetings to generate knowledge collectively. Keller et al. (2021) highlight that such collaboration enhances the relevance and applicability of findings, ensuring that knowledge is not extracted unilaterally but created jointly to foster social change. This reciprocity ensures that the community’s lived experiences influence research outcomes directly.

Finally, the research results are immediately applied to concrete circumstances. The project’s design emphasizes quick translation of findings into practice. Keller et al. (2021) describe how the interventions, once developed through community input, were swiftly implemented within the schools, leading to tangible improvements in parental involvement, student engagement, and school climate. This immediate application illustrates the project's alignment with the criterion of praxis, emphasizing that research should generate actionable outcomes for real-world impact.

In conclusion, Keller et al.’s (2021) project exemplifies a comprehensive application of the seven criteria for participatory action research. By integrating macro social influences, understanding historical context, engaging in reciprocal dialogue, coupling research with direct action, collaborating on knowledge production, and ensuring immediate application, the project embodies the essence of PAR. Such an approach not only advances academic understanding but also fosters meaningful social change, especially within marginalized communities facing complex social challenges.

References

Keller, J. G., Miller, C., LasDulce, C., & Wohrle, R. G. (2021). Using a community-based participatory research model to encourage parental involvement in their children’s schools. Children & Schools, 43(3), 149–158.

Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zed Books.

Israel, B. A., Eng, E., Schulz, A. J., & Parker, E. A. (2013). Methods in community-based participatory research for health. Jossey-Bass.

Minkler, M., & Wallerstein, N. (2008). Community-based participatory research for health: From process to outcomes. John Wiley & Sons.

Cargo, M., & Mercer, S. L. (2008). The value and challenges of participatory research: Strengthening its implementation. Annual Review of Public Health, 29, 325–350.

Flicker, S., Reise, K., Savan, B., & Guta, A. (2015). Ethical dilemmas in community-based participatory research: A review of the literature. American Journal of Public Health, 105(6), e75–e83.

Wallerstein, N., & Duran, B. (2010). Community-based participatory research contributions to intervention research: The intersection of science and practice to improve health equity. American Journal of Public Health, 100(S1), S40–S46.

Simonsen, B., & Nami, M. (2017). Participatory approach and social change: Principles and practices. Journal of Community Psychology, 45(2), 153–167.

Brydon-Miller, M., Greenwood, D., & Maguire, P. (2003). Why action research? Harvard Educational Review, 73(2), 179–188.

Miller, T. L. (2000). Researching life stories and narrative analysis. Sage Publications.