Abstract
This article explores the findings from a multi-method study of a community-university research alliance (Assets Coming Together for Youth) that brings together multidisciplinary academics, graduate student research assistants, community stakeholders and youth research interns. The project undertook evaluative and reflexive research to better understand how these different partnership group members experienced the collaborative process. The article draws on focus group discussions with the four stakeholder groups, in-depth interviews with youth research interns and an online partnership assessment survey of partnership group members. Data highlight people’s ambivalence toward the partnership process. Despite a shared desire to collaborate, it is difficult to maintain a process that mobilises the outcomes of collaboration for the mutual benefit of all stakeholders. In this article, we explore three key factors that shape people’s perspectives on the partnership process: historical and institutional relations; structures for communicating across difference; and opportunities for learning. A close examination of these three factors suggests that ongoing opportunities for communication about, and learning from, people’s ambivalence (that is, uncertainty or hesitation) supports a positive and productive partnership process. Keywords: Community-academic research, collaboration, process, equity, learning, youth
Highlights
This article describes findings from an evaluation of a multisectoral research initiative called Assets Coming Together for Youth (ACT for Youth), a community-academic research alliance that brings together multi-disciplinary academics, graduate student research assistants, community stakeholders and youth research interns
In a review of the community-based research (CBR) and communitybased participatory research (CBPR) literature conducted by the Research Triangle Park (2004), the authors suggest that CB(P)R is distinguished by a collaborative research approach that includes structures for participation by communities, organisations and researchers
Principles of Productive Community-Academic Collaborations Notions of reciprocity and inclusivity are vital to communityacademic research partnerships (Campbell & Lassiter 2010; Carlton et al 2009; Eckerle-Curwood et al 2011; Flicker & Savan 2006; Israel et al 1998; Pearce, Pearson & Cameron 2007; Vazquez Jacobus, Baskett & Bechstein 2011)
Summary
This article describes findings from an evaluation of a multisectoral research initiative called Assets Coming Together for Youth (ACT for Youth), a community-academic research alliance that brings together multi-disciplinary academics, graduate student research assistants, community stakeholders and youth research interns. Midway through this five-year project, the alliance’s Evaluation Working Group undertook a number of reflexive research exercises to better understand how these different partnership group members experienced the collaborative process. From an evaluative point of view, we assessed whether participants felt they had sufficient opportunity to bring their perspectives or knowledge to bear on project implementation and whether the collaborative process reflected the project’s social justice – or equity – standpoint. Terms like co-researchers, co-development, co-creation and knowledge exchange are used to signal the centrality of the reciprocal partnership in community-university collaborations
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and Engagement
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
