Care and Risk in the Contact Zones: Exploring Adult and Youth Researcher Relationships in an Intergenerational Research Group

• In Event: Risks of Care: Examining the Implications of Relational Dynamics in Youth Participatory Action Research Projects

Abstract

Objectives
Over the last four years, university faculty and high school youth have been working to document the impact of a literacy curriculum, and change how the curriculum gets enacted by classroom teachers in their school. In the curriculum, Poetry Inside Out (PIO), students translate poems from around the world, from their original language (e.g., Spanish, Chinese, etc.) into English. In this paper, we present an analysis of a “telling case” of the risks of sustaining caring relationships with my collaborating youth researchers.

Theoretical Frameworks
To explore the challenges and opportunities in conducting inquiry within an intergenerational research group, we rely on the concept of contact zones. Contact zones are “spaces where cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other, often in contexts of highly asymmetrical relations of power" (Pratt, 1991, p.2). We conceptualize the research group as a contact zone where different knowledges, values, and subjectivities of differently-positioned researchers collide, and relationships have to be sustained across forms of difference.

Methods, Techniques and Modes of Inquiry
In addition to YPAR epistemology and methodology (Cammarota & Fine, 2010), we also draw on practitioner inquiry methodologies, where youth investigate their practices as students, formulating questions about literacy and learning, designing and carrying out inquiries, and telling others about it (Goswami & Stillman, 1987). The youth-researchers collected data while participating in PIO, including audio-recording themselves and their classmates while translating poems and discussing translations; interviewing their classmates; and collecting their classmates’ writing.

Data Sources
The data for this paper come primarily from weekly, after-school meetings attended by us (university researchers) and collaborators (six 12th graders). To construct a richer and more nuanced narrative, we also draw on excerpts from our fieldnotes and researcher’s journal, as well as text messages between us and youth.

Results
To highlight the risks of care involved in researching with youth, we present an analysis of a story where a youth researcher stopped attending meetings, stopped responding to the group’s attempts to connect with her, and informed us, the day before a conference trip, that she would not be joining us. Eventually we discovered from her friends that she had missed the meetings and conference because she was trying to find a prom dress. Although this story is an instance where we did not navigate the contact zone successfully with our youth collaborator, we argue that it raises important questions about trust and power, and serves as an opportunity for everyone, youth and adults, to interrogate our assumptions about why we engage in research, for whom, and with what responsibilities.

Significance
AERA asks researchers to consider the connections between knowledge generation and the “voices” of youth in communities and schools. This paper takes as its premise that while the voices of youth are critical to knowledge generation, our connections and relationships with them are fraught with complexities. This paper contributes to efforts to interrogate and theorize the tensions and risks associated with engaging in collaborative, socially just research.

Authors

• Jie Park, Clark University

• Sarah Michaels, Clark University