Talk:Participatory action research

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Participatory action research, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Intro paragraph

Can the lead paragraph be brought down to size? Perhaps create an "About" section after the lead, and stick the brunt of the info from the current lead there? See Wikipedia:Lead section for more. - Freechild 15:45, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

The lede definitely needs some work. Right now it doesn't meet the basic formatting rules specified in WP:LEDE. Iknowyourider (t c) 19:54, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger talk

I switched the direction of the possible merge. As someone who hass practiced Participatory action research for years, let me tell you that no one publishes or even talks about cooperative inquiry. PAR is the correct title for this type of research.

There's a much more developed article under Participatory Action Research (upper case A, upper case R). I'm not sure how to merge them.... Anyone?

Oh, I think I got it. Oev21 00:45, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

HI I just wanted to let you know that the link on the page on Participatory action research PRA to Robert Chambers is not the Robert Chambers that is mentioned. The Robert Chambers mention on the PAR site is not dead and is a completely different person as he was not dead in 1983 and the other died in 1871, Please someone get it right. cheers Richard

Particpatory Action Research [from the perspective of one; I hope] appears to me to move beyond the cooperative and into the dailectic of a leader. In PAR someone or some group had to have had the idea to start the process. You offer something. The justifying strategies and methodologies to engage the community to whom the action is addressed, all seem well-intentioned and necessary; though, as always, the final sense of complete justification is rarely achieved - otherwise, how was it action. Thank you. Michael Ryan, Ottawa

[edit] Cooperative inquiry merge

Merge. Seems to be enough overlap and the Cooperative inquiry article could always be recreated with more information and source material. --Ronz 20:13, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Do not merge. There is a concrete body of academic research and social practice that clearly designates the unique identity and relevance of participatory action research. That body of research and social practice is not directly related to any evidence supporting cooperative inquiry. The differentiation of the two is made by established established precident and should not be decided within the Wikipedia community.

Do NOT merge; keep a unique section. I have studied Cooperative Inquiry and PAR on the masters and doctoral level and they are not the same. Two criteria come to mind:

1. PAR uses critical theory as its root and this is a less inclusive research paradigm than the unique paradigm proposed by Heron as the participatory inquiry paradigm. The Participatory Research Paradigm Heron writes of is inclusive of critical theory and more: Heron and Reason use an "umbrella" for all of the positivist and post positivist paradigms as per Denizen, Lincoln, Guba, Heron and Reason in various publications. PAR came earlier and while I need to review the work of Chambers, PAR was and I believe is, based on critical theory primarily.

2. In it's purest use CI (Cooperative Inquiry) is a spiritual inquiry. While CI has political, psychological and philosophical intentions (if I am rembering them correctly) and it is similar to PAR in what most basically to shift power relations, the main power is to inquiry together into the sacredness of existence.

CI isn't used much in its purest form in education especially in the US. I believe making this value of spiritual inquiry a clear intent would need to be done very carefully (sensitively goes without saying) given the controversies surrounding religion and the challenging of patriarchy which Heron's work intends.

Do NOT merge CI with PAR.

Thanks, Npeden in Monterey, CA

Don't do it! Co-Op Inq is at best a specific application of PAR, but within the interested psychological research community they are definitely considered to be separate methodologies. Link by all means - but don't merge.