Capítulo III. Marco teórico
3.3 Características de las políticas, los programas y los
3.3.1 Apuntes sobre la burocracia educativa
Historically, much research involving young people has treated them as objects of study and privileged adult interpretations of youth experiences, reinforcing power imbalances between young people and adults (Best, 2007). One way that youth researchers have attempted to circumvent these difficulties has been to “seek the replacement of research on young people, by research with young people” (Heath et al. 2009, p. 14) through the promotion of various forms of participatory research that allow young
people to actively co-construct knowledge by being able to tell their own stories in their own ways (Beals, 2012; Best, 2007; Grover, 2004). Recent examples include Wood’s (2011) investigation into New Zealand youths’ place-based perspectives on participation in society using café’-style focus groups and Photovoice with youth, and Chin’s (in Representing Youth, A. Best (Ed), 2007) participatory action research project collaborating with children as anthropologists, researching ethnographic knowledge in their own community.
Grover (2004) asserts that in order to overcome adult-centric interpretations and power dynamics inherent in research with youth, “it is essential to employ a methodology that allows youth to speak from, and be appreciated for, their own perspective” (p. 90). This can involve moving beyond traditional data collection methods such as formal one-on-one interviews and written questionnaires, toward including more youth- centred methods of data generation that are more responsive and accessible for youth, for example: small group semi-structured interviews, visual methods such as Photovoice, and electronic and social media based data generation methods (Cahill, 2007; Dempster et al., 2010; McNae, 2011; Wood, 2011).
The research at the centre of this thesis was an intentional partnership between the researcher and youth participants toward discovery of new knowledge. In that respect, the young people, the researcher, and the community organisation they were a part of during the leadership development programme, were engaged as co-constructors and co- owners of any new knowledge that their collaboration generated. Hence, this research aimed to demonstrate a commitment to enabling the experiences, perceptions and voices of young people to be seen,
acknowledged and heard through its methodology, and in doing so, developed a constructivist, participatory and youth-centred approach.
RESEARCH DESIGN
This research took place in Christchurch, New Zealand, two years after a major earthquake devastated much of the central city, taking with it many organisations and places youth relied upon for connection with one another, and with their communities. Christchurch was in a prolonged phase of rebuilding damaged infrastructure, redesigning the central city, and creating relationships to reinvigorate community connectedness. In response to the extraordinary physical and emotional circumstances facing youth in the city, this research was developed in collaboration with The White Elephant Trust, a community youth organisation in central Christchurch, founded on a strengths-based philosophy. This trust brings together youth from a range of backgrounds for a range of purposes, including: event management for youth, music production, care and protection at raves, CV workshops, and youth advocacy via the Otautahi Youth Council. The research design was an experiential youth development framework where participants actively reflected on their ideas of leadership, and their individual leadership identity before, during, and after the programme.
There are both challenges and opportunities that arise from collaborating with a community organisation to deliver programmes (Cole, 2010), but in terms of access to a diverse range of youth and opportunity to gather deep, rich data that reflects participant perspective, the community context is of significant value (Carver & Harper, 1999).
1) How does participation in a structured leadership development programme influence youth perceptions, understandings, and practices of leadership?
Sub-questions:
a) What are participant conceptions of leadership and themselves as leaders, prior to embarking on a leadership development course in a community context?
b) What is the influence of a community-based leadership development programme on how they perceive leadership?
c) What are participant perceptions regarding the teaching and learning of leadership?
PARTICIPANTS
The participants for the WE Lead leadership development programme were youth aged between 15-18 years old. Recruitment of participants for the programme took place over several weeks prior to its commencement and via several methods. The main method of advertisement was a Facebook post advertising the programme on the White Elephant Facebook page. Information was also disseminated via email to several schools in the local area. Some participants were previously associated with White Elephant, some with my school, and others were encouraged by friends or adults to participate and recruited that way. There were 15 programme participants initially and this settled down to a core group of 12, with nine self-nominating to be research participants.
At the first meeting of programme participants, the research project being conducted alongside the programme was described and all potential participants viewed a brief power-point presentation explaining what would be involved. It was made clear from the outset that programme
participants could choose not to be involved in the research and still participate in the programme. This information was reinforced through a written Participant Information Sheet (see Appendix A). The participants were encouraged to take away a consent form and information sheets for them and their parents if they were interested, before deciding whether they consented (see Appendix B). Nine returned consent forms and all of these participants were involved in data generation for the research. All participants who chose to take part in the research were over 16 and consistent with methodological thinking and practise within critical youth studies, I considered this to be an age where they were autonomous in terms of their power to give consent for participation (Best, 2007; Heath et al., 2009).
PARTICIPANT PROFILES
The group involved in this research were from a range of backgrounds and leadership experience. There were seven female and two male participants between the ages of 16-18. Two were Maori, one Asian, one South American, and five who identified as Pakeha. All but one research participant attended high school; six went to local urban schools, two attended semi-rural schools just out of the city (six different schools in total), and one had left school and was working/studying part-time. At the commencement of the WE Lead Winter Leadership Development Programme, every participant considered they had some previous or current leadership experience. Pseudonyms are used in the following section as participants are introduced:
Ariel – 17. Year 13 Pakeha student attending an urban co-ed school. Extensive leadership experience in multiple contexts included: White Elephant event organisation; Otautahi Youth Council; peer support leader; formal organiser.
B – 16. Year 11 Pakeha student attending a large rural co-ed school. Leadership experience with St John and a house leader at school.
Carebear – 16. Year 12 Filipino student attending a large city single sex school. Leadership experience included: a leadership camp at his previous school, and youth group.
Delilah – 17. Year 12 Maori student attending a large central city community college. Leadership experience in multiple contexts included: World Vision Organiser, Choir Leader, Amnesty Group at school; Youth Advisory Council for Megan Woods; Campaign for Marriage Equality. Hine – 17. Year 12 Maori student attending a rural co-ed school. Leadership experience included: Youth Leader at Youth Group; work in a retirement home.
Megan – 15. Year 11 Pakeha student attending a large central city community college. Leadership experience included: Youth group, and Sharp After School Programme Helper.
MilkyBar – 18. Part-time Chilean student at inner city tertiary institute (only participant who is not a secondary student). Lives independently and also works part-time. Leadership experience of organising a drama production. Proud – 17. Year 12 Pakeha student attending the deaf satellite unit at a large central city community college – partially mainstreamed. Boards at deaf school. Leadership experience included representing and working with the deaf community extensively: Youth Parliament; Board of Trustee Representative; Outward Bound; Sign Language Awareness.
Willow Rose – 17. Year 13 Pakeha student attending an urban co-ed school. Had extensive leadership experience in multiple contexts
including: Team Leader, Sergeant and National Cadet of the Year for St John
[a New Zealand charity organisation that serves local communities
by providing essential health-related services]; Learn to Swim tutor; house sub-group leader at school.As a group, these participants represented a diverse population with mixed abilities and differing needs. In terms of growing leadership effectiveness and building experiential learning opportunities that would be authentically challenging at an appropriate level for all the youth involved, the programme was designed to grow leadership effectiveness and build experiential learning opportunities that would be authentically challenging, and included some elements of co-construction with participants to negotiate content they felt would meet their needs as effectively as possible.