National Centre for Research Methods (NCRM)

Engaging new and alternative voices and ways of doing things

Duration: 9:20 1499 transcript words EN summary

Video summary

The video explores the core principles of knowledge equity work, emphasizing inclusivity, accessibility, and cultural sensitivity as essential factors for ensuring diverse voices are heard in the creation and application of knowledge. A central argument is that true representation requires more than just including marginalized groups; it demands actively seeking out their input to understand how policies feel from the perspective of those governed by them. The speaker highlights a common failure where policymakers, often drawn from elite institutions like Oxford or Cambridge, create rules without understanding the lived realities of people on council estates or facing homelessness because they avoid challenging ideas that might contradict their own comfortable worldviews. This lack of genuine engagement leads to policies that feel unfair and disconnected, reinforcing power struggles rather than resolving them through empathy and shared experience. Beyond policy formulation, the discussion shifts to the importance of giving agency to individuals who often feel voiceless or dehumanized by systemic structures. The speaker argues that making people feel they belong and are treated as worthy human beings is more significant than any specific policy change alone. This sentiment is illustrated through examples like Narcotics Anonymous meetings, where ex-addicts achieve remarkable success because the group members understand each other's struggles intimately. However, a critical distinction is drawn between understanding an issue intellectually versus actually living it; one cannot truly advise on what life is like in poverty or with limited housing without having that lived experience. Knowledge equity serves to break down these barriers by recognizing that embodied knowledge fundamentally changes how we theorize and understand complex issues such as disability, fragility of life, and death. The transcript further details practical methods for creating equitable spaces, particularly when working with disabled young people who may have shorter lifespans or different attention needs. Instead of relying on sterile, clinical interview rooms that enforce rigid conventions, the speaker advocates for authentic environments where participants can feel relaxed enough to fidget or let their minds wander without judgment. To build trust and dismantle hierarchical perceptions, the researcher shared personal anecdotes about their own dyslexic family and siblings throughout the conversation rather than just at the beginning. This approach transformed the dynamic from an evaluation into a two-way dialogue, showing that vulnerability is mutual and necessary for genuine connection. By sharing their own stories of struggle with school and confidence issues, the speaker validated the students' experiences, proving that direct engagement with those living through current challenges yields far better insights than traditional research methods.

Read the full video transcript

So I guess there's I mean I thought about this before when I noticed that question. So for me you know um you know when carrying out knowledge equity work um these factors include like inclusivity. So ensuring that there's a diverse range of voices and perspectives um are included in you know whether it's a you know creation dissemination application of knowledge um and that involves actively seeking out and incorporating input from peoples from those diverse and underrepresented groups. I'd say um accessibility in um making knowledge easily accessible and um readable to marginalized groups, negatively racialized peoples um you know depending on their backgrounds, their abilities and you know resources. Um cultural sensitivity is another important one. So being aware of cultural differences um and striving to create you know content and practices that are respectful and inclusive of various um you know cultural perspectives um I'd say representation >> when people write policies about how people going to be governed it is fundamental that the people that are going to be governed by that policy that their voice is running through that. Now that's not to say that they get to dictate what that policy says but that get but it enables the people who are writing them policies to understand how it feels to be on the other ending of them policies. It goes back to that power struggle. You know how many times do you hear that when people rise up they think that policy is unfair. It's because they've not had a say in it. They've not they've not had a chance to say well actually this is how it feels to be on the other end of that. And there's too many times the people in power have made them policies without even knowing and and the people that they consult are high level civil servants probably not being on the other end of it like like you know Oxford, Cambridge, all these kind of places like the same likeminded people, right? >> Yeah. >> Because that's what we do to feel safe. We don't want people to argue against our ideas if possible. Some of us encourage it like an open challenge but nine times out of 10 you want your ideas to stay I do like everyone does. So >> uh so I think that's a real importance of it and also I think it's about giving agency to people that feel like they have none and I think in this world if you can make someone feel like they belong to something or they are worthy or they're just being treated like a human being I think that outweighs anything else. I think to allow people to feel like that because when you're when you are dehumanized or you feel like you're voiceless or you don't feel like a human being, I know what that feels like and that's not a nice feeling. But I also know what it feels like to to to be given that type of stuff as well. And I know which way I would prefer to feel. So I wouldn't want to portray that on other people. So just on a human level, on an everyday human level, without any big policies being changed, without anything being changed, it the way that we've been doing it just doesn't work. And that's because you've not asked the people. >> Yeah. >> And and look what happens when you when you do. So look what happens with AA meetings >> and and narcotics and ominous. A lot of people that run in groups now are people that are ex addicts and they got really good results. >> Yeah. So I don't it it's like there's always like just a level. Yeah, you can get to that point, but actually you can't come into government and advise us what it's like to live on a council estate or what it's like to be on license when you get out with nowhere to live. It, you know, there's like glass kind of seeding kind of effect where >> you can see what the issue is. If you can get through to it, you can help with that issue. But actually, this this country is very good at keeping people in their place. And I think and I think what knowledge equity does, it helps to break that down. >> We've tried to do in our form projects primarily with disabled young people is about creating kind of spaces of equitable theory building. So we would say it's not just about including lived knowledge or lived experience. It's about a recognition or an acknowledgment that forms of lived and embodied knowledge fundamentally change the way we think or look at something. So like when in in our living life as a foolish project we were working with younger people living with shorter life lives or lifespans that when we come to talk about posthumanist theory or critical disability studies theory or um fragility life death etc. There's something and we would co we would say we were again like radically building theory with and co-authoring with disabled young people living shorter lives. Yeah, >> when you're actually living a life that's shorter, there's some, and again, it's really hard, maybe that's another point, is that there isn't quite the language to describe what that is and means. >> Um, there's some something fundamentally, and I don't want to denigrate it by saying raw or real or like there's something fundamentally illuminating, I guess, about bringing that knowledge to the table to think about theory with and for others. >> Yeah. like just not having to follow the same rigid conventions of this is the best place for an interview to take place. Um you know thinking more about I think as well for like for people who may have attention limited attention spans having a space that is not just devoid of um distractions if that makes sense. I think having a space where if they wanted to fidget, if they wanted their attention to wander, they can do and that's fine. And we're not sitting in a room that's just like white walls, very clinical. Um, you know, like the traditional kind of corporate spaces. I think having somewhere where they can feel more relaxed, if that makes sense. and and it doesn't have to be these clinical spaces which I think sometimes research encourages us to do. Um I think if we have more authentic spaces that are similar to real life, the more comfortable people are going to feel to be open. So working with the young people, I think they had a perception of me as a teacher to start with or an educational professional or a research professional. And so the start of the interview was really breaking down that conception and showing that I wasn't here to evaluate them. I wasn't here to test them. Um I was here to hear what their experiences were. And even though straight from the beginning I shared a little bit about me, I shared a little bit about um my personal experience, my family, the fact that um all of my siblings are also dyslexic as well. Um and sharing that where my passion came from from the interview. Um I shared with them as well that I think their voices um I I shared with them. And I was like, I think the best way for us to make change in policy or understand what's going on is to directly speak to people who are experiencing it at the moment. And I think you guys have the best insight into what it's like today at school being neurodeiverse, dyslexic. Um, so I said that at the beginning, but then I don't think that was enough to just blurt that out right at the beginning. So I continually throughout our conversation dropped in anecdotes from me, especially if they said something that spoke to an experience I had when I was at school. So I would affirm that during the interview. um or if they were struggling to think of an example, then I was more than happy to share examples from my life or from my siblings lives or um other friends that I I knew that were dyslexic. And I think that did really help. And I I had a student at the end that said to me because at the end I was like, "Thank you so much for talking to me. I appreciate it's really weird talking to someone you've only just met about these personal things, you know, confidence, um maybe negative experiences of school. And one a couple of students said, um, oh, it really helped that you shared, too. So, it was a two-way conversation. So, I wasn't there to just extract their really vulnerable moments of life.