|COMM-ORG Papers 2004||
Barri E. Tinkler
|Chapter 1 Introduction
The Response of Higher Education
|Chapter 2 Literature Review|
The Civic Mission of Higher Education
Foundations of Community-Based Research
What is Community-Based Research?
Criticisms and Concerns
|Chapter 3 Research Methods
Types of Case Studies
Methodology of Community-Based Research
Participants and Setting
Analysis of Contrasting Cases
Limitations of This Study
Chapter 4 The Coalition for Schools |
Lack of Consideration
Views About Data
Was This CBR?
Implications for the Field of CBR
Chapter 5 Communities in Transition
Roles and Responsibilities
Views About Data
Was This CBR?
Implications for the Field of CBR
Chapter 6 Cross-Case Analysis and Interpretation|
Continuum of CBR
Issues Arising From Collaboration in CBR
Factors That Facilitate or Hinder Collaboration
Benefits of CBR
Conceptual Model of CBR
Implications of this Study
Recommendations for Further Research
Appendix A: List of Meetings and Interviews
Appendix B: Interview Protocols
Appendix C: Document From First Case Study
Appendix D: Documents From Second Case Study
Table 1: Two Models of CBR
Table 2: Contrasting Cases of CBR
Figure 1: Four Constructs of CBR
Figure 2: Continuum of CBR
Figure 3: Conceptual Model of CBR
First and foremost, I would like to thank my husband Alan Tinkler for his tireless support throughout this process. Through dialogue, he helped me to develop and solidify my findings, and he assisted in developing the conceptual model that I present in this dissertation. He also provided continuous, important editorial advice starting with the proposal and working through the final product. Alan, my family (parents, siblings, nieces, and nephews), and coworkers (Anna Parish-Carmean and Christy Moroye) also provided moral support and continued encouragement as I worked through this process. I would not have made it to this point without all of their support.
I would also like to thank my advisor and dissertation chair, Dr. Nicholas Cutforth. Dr. Cutforth introduced me to community-based research, and I thank him for helping me to find a research venue that is meaningful for me. His passion for this work is contagious. I also thank him for his kindness, support, and consistent thoughtful and timely feedback. His encouragement throughout this process helped me to stick with this project at times when I was wavering.
One of my committee members, Dr. Gary Lichtenstein, also played a significant role as I worked through both of the community-based research projects described in this study. I appreciate the extensive expertise that Dr. Lichtenstein made available to me throughout this work, and I appreciate the contributions that he provided to my thinking about the field of CBR. I would also like to thank another committee member, Dr. Jennifer Whitcomb, for both her support as a colleague and as a friend, as well as her advice in relation to case study design. Her expertise was important in helping determine the structure of my dissertation.
My other committee members also played important roles in this process. Dr. Bruce Uhrmacher assisted in helping me define the topic of my research and in developing my research questions. Dr. Ginger Maloney provided important feedback during both the proposal process and with the final dissertation in challenging me to examine the subjectivities that I carried into this work. Her feedback was important in encouraging me to explore these issues with greater depth. I would also like to thank Dr. Jean East for chairing my oral defense. She added thoughtful contributions to the discussion.
There were several people who provided important information as I was conducting my CBR work. I would like to thank Dr. Randy Stoecker for his advice as well as for the important contributions his writing has had in influencing my views about CBR. There were a number of other people who played important roles in providing information as I completed each CBR project, including: Ethan Hemming, Mike Kromrey, Matt Sura, Luis Ibanez, and Carol Dawson. I would also like to thank my community partners in both CBR projects for their willingness to pursue this work and for allowing me to study my work with them.
Barri Tinkler is an assistant professor in the Department of Secondary Education at Towson University in Towson, Maryland. She has completed a number of community-based research projects, many of which focus on working with immigrant populations. Her research interests include: community-based research, minority parent involvement, and case methods in teacher education.
Traditionally, academic researchers have not involved underserved communities when dealing with and researching difficult social problems. Many universities are now feeling pressure to find ways to work closely with local, disadvantaged communities. Community-based research (CBR) is a new movement in higher education that combines practices from other participatory research models as well as service-learning. CBR requires researchers to work closely with the community to determine a research agenda and to carry out the research to affect change. The goal is to empower disenfranchised and marginalized groups.
The purpose of this study is to explore the process of conducting community-based research from the researcher's perspective. This process study presents contrasting cases of two CBR experiences. One collaboration was conducted with a non-profit educationally oriented organization in a large western city; the other, with community members who provide services to the growing immigrant population in a small, mountain town. The considered issues in both collaborations centered around access to the community, power, communication, shifting research plans, timelines, scope, and the required range of knowledge. There were factors that facilitated or hindered these collaborations-shared goals, defining roles and responsibilities, trust, views about research, rapport, and hidden or fluctuating agendas. Despite these factors, the community benefited from the research process, as did I. The community gained research skills, useful research results, and access to resources. While I gained a sense of purpose, a feeling of engagement, and an expanded knowledge base in relation to research and other peoples.
Based on the findings, I developed a conceptual model organized around the four categories of community, collaboration, knowledge creation, and change. The model presents a way to consider how to increase the value of CBR. In this model, the form of CBR that has the greatest value is radical CBR. Radical CBR requires that the researcher work with grassroots community organizations, share all decision making with community partners, involve community partners in all aspects of the research process, and seek to create change that challenges existing power structures. The model also demonstrates how to add value to more mainstream versions of CBR.