Negotiating power, positionality and ethics

Through undertaking qualitative research, both the research and the researcher shape that which is studied, and representations are always fundamentally partial (DeLyser 2009). Undeniably, as has been explored above, my position as a young, white, female, British PhD student, my interactions with participants and our own subjectivities contributed to the research process (Skelton 2001). My presence in young people’s outdoor education programmes will have ultimately influenced their experiences, and the knowledge produced through the data collection is inherently linked to personal and situational characteristics (Limb & Dwyer 2001). Consequently, the fieldwork required a continual self-awareness, critical reflection and a sensitive approach.

The research project was granted approval by the Loughborough University Ethics Committee. The focus here was on ensuring that both young people and their guardians were clear about the intentions of the study and had formally consented to partake in the research. The research was overt, and consent was sought before both the ethnography and interviews. As already highlighted (Section 3.4.4), this was often challenging as the participants were recruited and the information disseminated through their schools. Morrow (1998) draws attention to the fact that school-based research can sit uneasily with notions of informed consent. Holt (2004) also

points out that it is difficult for a child to truly consent in a situation whereby they usually comply with adults wishes. Schools dealt with the consent process in different ways, and as a researcher I was guided by the lead teacher as the gatekeeper. Letters were provided for parents about the project, with the option to withdraw their child. Similarly, letters were provided for the young people, with assent forms11. The project was often introduced to the young people by their teachers before I had met them face-to-face and explained the project to them verbally. It is fair to say, especially in the case of Woodland Academy where for many parents English was their second language, that consent often seemed to be based on a commitment to the school, rather than an informed desire to participate in the research.

It was often unclear whether the decision to take part was made by the individual, or influenced by teachers. Given this, although technically the young people had already consented to take part, at the beginning of the interview process I verbally recounted the participant information, reiterated their anonymity in the study, data confidentiality and right to withdraw. The schools have been anonymised in the research, and all participants given pseudonyms.

In addition to negotiating issues of informed consent, working with children and young people requires a conscious effort to conduct research in an empowering way (Holt 2004). Historically, research has been conducted on children, and there is now a concerted effort to avoid this pitfall and represent their views as accurately as possible (Valentine & Holloway 2000). By using methods which engaged and involved participants (see sections 3.5.5 and 3.5.6) the study sought to produce qualitative research which captured their diverse voices. In a Western context, children often have experiences which are culturally very different to adults (Pimlott- Wilson 2012) and it is necessary to provide a platform for these differences to be understood. As a caveat, Holt (2004) reminds us of the importance of focusing on the similarities and differences, rather than essentialising the adult/child dichotomy (Holt 2004). Involving young people in the research process helped to recognise how adult-child relations are “punctuated by connection” as well as disconnections (Woodyer 2008: 353), and provide balance in the fieldwork process.

As alluded to already (Section 3.5.4), embodiment is key to the research process, and is implicated in everything we say, think, feel and do. As Davidson (2001) asserts, in qualitative research the researcher’s positionality is intertwined with the data collection process, and it is

11 _{An assent form is used in cases where an individual is not competent to give legally valid} informed consent to participant in research (e.g. a child or cognitively impaired person).

important to be aware of the potential biases and subjectivities introduced into the interpretation of the data. For Dowling (2010: 35), “subjectivity involves the insertion of personal opinions and characteristics into research practice”. For myself, it was critical to be aware of the role of my own experiences and perspectives in my interpretation of events. This was made most clear to me when working with Woodland Academy, who represented a majority Asian community (Table 2). One girl described how her daily routine was the same, “we go to school, we go to

mosque for two hours, then we have a few hours at home with family and then go to bed”. This

did not match my own memories of being at school and I distinctly remember struggling to relate to these young people. This is clearly a consequence of positionality, and serves to highlight the importance of understanding ourselves as researchers as only ‘partially knowing’ (Holt 2004). On a personal level, this made me more acutely aware of my own subjectivities. Finally, and in contrast to highlighting my relative position of power throughout the research process, I wish to draw attention again to Moser’s (2008) discussion of researcher’s personalities (see also section 3.5.2). As Wilkinson (2016) suggests, researcher personality is capable of shaping both the research process and the final outcome, especially when acknowledging that “personalities respond to other personalities in different ways” (Hoogendoorn & Visser 2012: 264). In this instance, I discuss my emotional capacity to conduct a relatively intense social research project. Despite feeling competent in my ability to develop positive relations with research participants, and coming across as sociable and personable, I still found fieldwork an emotionally demanding experience. I consider myself introverted by nature, and I found it challenging being on my own in an unfamiliar environment – I certainly felt a pressure to ‘perform’ a particularly interested and engaging version of myself. Fieldwork is (emotionally) tiring, and there were many occasions when I did not want to speak to anyone, or ‘critically reflect’ on what was going on around me – I just wanted to stay in my room and take some time out. To this end, I did not always ask questions when I should, or take a moment to ‘chat’ with participants when the opportunity presented itself. Being an ‘outsider’ (neither an OBT employee or a young person) was hard work, although as I have discussed above (section 3.5.4), as the fieldwork progressed I began to feel much more settled in the OBT environment. As Moser (2008) suggests, researchers should have an understanding of their emotional abilities, and it is necessary to be reflexive about how individual personalities affect fieldwork. In this final reflection, I have highlighted the ways in which fieldwork was an ‘uncomfortable’ experience at times, and in which I occasionally reached an emotional ‘limit’. To acknowledge this is to further understand the impact of personality on the research process and outcomes.

3.8. Conclusion

This chapter has outlined and critically explored the methods of data collection and analysis used to address the research aims and objectives of this project. It argues that the use of a combination of qualitative techniques, including participatory methods, helps to mitigate against some of the difficulties when conducting empirical research with young people and on outdoor education. Despite this, the chapter has also highlighted some of the challenges during the data collection process, and that even with careful planning and ethical considerations, research with young people presents issues of access, power relations and positionality. Furthermore, it draws attention to the embodied process of qualitative research, how these complexities contribute to the research process and interpretation of data, and the ways in which we as researchers must be mindful of our performances and subjectivities in the field.

The forthcoming chapters (4,5,6, and 7) present the empirical findings generated from the methods outlined in this chapter. All the methods address all of the research questions, and the four empirical chapters draw on data from both OBT staff and the young people in a series of thematic discussions regarding people, place and process. As stated in Chapter 1, these are interlinked, but Chapter 4 begins by focusing on place through an exploration of the physical spaces of the OBT.