Perfil del formador de formadores en el PADEP/D

Prior to commencing data collection for Study 3 (participatory workshops with young people aged 16-25 years old), additional ethical considerations were examined, such as collaboration, young learners, power, confidentiality, anonymity, authorship, ownership, voice, and benefits (Luis Banegas & Villacañas De Castro, 2015). Overviews of the approaches taken to address these ethical considerations are given in Table 10.

Table 9: Ethical considerations in Study 3

Ethical Issue Actions taken

Collaboration To ensure that the participatory research process was meaningful to both the researchers and young people, all participants were informed that their participation was voluntary and could be withdrawn at any time (Luis Banegas & Villacañas De Castro, 2015). The researcher paid attention to “how participation is enacted” instead of “how much participation is

achieved” (Nind, 2014, p.57). All young participants were informed that there were no “rights or wrongs” and that their participation in the workshop

should not be viewed as an assessment. It was agreed that any of the elements of the workshop could be adjusted during the session. Informed

Consent

Whilst all young participants in the study were classified as adults and aged over 16, it was essential to acknowledge some of the possible challenges when working with adolescents. The process of consent was considered not as a one-off decision, but as a continual process through the research process. Consent forms were shared with youth groups facilitators, who then shared them with young people, and (when necessary) with their parents/guardians. In the context of young people participating in this study, competence to consent was based on an observation of three competencies (Valentine, 2018):

 The young person’s understanding of the information provided by the researcher;

 The young person’s ability to make a choice in their best interest;  The young person’s autonomy to make voluntary choices.

To ensure that consent was informed, information about the study was provided in the form of a presentation (Appendix 4), a booklet including information about the study and a consent from (Appendix 5), and

researcher’s website address (Appendix 6a and 6b). Additionally, all young participants were provided with an opportunity to discuss their concerns related to the consent form, its purpose, and how their personal data would be used and stored.

Power The ethical dilemmas of power in participatory research were considered and addressed during all stages of workshop planning and implementation. To diffuse possible power-imbalances between the research and the study participants, young people were encouraged to interrogate the researcher’s

work (link to researcher’s website was provided) and ask any questions about her research during the session. The researcher used an accessible and informal language and practiced “methodological self-consciousness” by becoming aware of “[possible] unearned privileges as well as taken-for- granted privileges accompanying our positions and roles” (Charmaz, 2018, p.34). Young participants were viewed as experts of their own evaluation experiences from the workshop’s outset, likewise “the emancipatory effect was concentrated on the “participant” (Löfman, Pelkonen, & Pietilä, 2004). The researcher critically examined her power while collecting data and during its analysis. The researcher aimed to ensure that young people’s views were central to the research workshop by summing up their input at the end of the session.

Ownership To ensure meaningful participation and collaboration, the researcher worked to “generate the awareness of acting together in pursuit of a common goal” (Löfman et al., 2004, p. 338). The goal was a better understanding of young people’s evaluation needs and experiences. In this youth participatory action research project, young people were viewed as autonomous agents of change (Cammarota & Fine, 2008), who not only critically engaged with the subject of this study, but also co-created their own evaluation solutions. Whilst the analysis of the workshop was owned and authored by the

researcher, the materials and solutions during the workshop were co-owned by young people. Thus, the evaluation solutions co-created during the workshop were designed to be practically incorporated in their youth organisations.

Voice Scholars (Hadfield & Haw, 2001) have argued that the notion of “voice” has become “increasingly fashionable”, particularly in the context of research with/on young people. To ensure that young people’s voices were

meaningfully represented, the researcher critically examined her

assumptions about young people and the process of “listening to the ‘voice’ of young people” prior to entering into the field (Hadfield & Haw, 2001). The researcher aimed to “tune in” and “adjust her listening” to empower young people to guide the discussion and openly share their views (Nind, 2014, p.22). During each workshop, collected information was summarised and reviewed to ensure the validity of the researcher’s understanding. Careful and critical analysis of young people’s input into the project was conducted.

Benefits The possible benefits of participation in the study were outlined in the research information shared with young people and youth organisations prior to the workshop (Appendixes 5, 6 and 7). During the workshop, young people were provided with opportunities to:

1. learn about evaluation tools and their use in the digital youth context; 2. co-create their own evaluation solutions (which could later be used in their

youth organisations);

3. voice their opinions about their evaluation experiences;

4. contribute to the improvement of youth project evaluations in Scotland. Suitability The following points were implemented to support sustainable learning

1. young people were encouraged to implement their evaluation solutions in their youth organisations;

2. published analysis of the study was shared with youth organisations in accessible forms (blog post and presentation);

3. while co-examining the outcomes of this project, a dedicated event was organised for young people, youth workers, and youth organisations from Scotland. The aim of the event was to co-analyse the outcomes of the project, co-design solutions, and propose a way forward. The event was scheduled to take place at Edinburgh Napier University in May 2019.