Movement Building

2001

This brings us to the sensitive area of political positioning in participatory research and planning. The practice of PRA is never neutral. Outcomes generate ideas and expectations, which agencies and individuals may be unable to meet (Gosling, Schreckenberg, this issue). Choices need to be made and sides taken, raising ethical and political dilemmas. If consensus is sought, whose interests are served and whose voices are heard (Pottier and Orone, Richards, this issue)? Local political structures may, in themselves, prove to be the biggest obstacle for the empowerment of marginalised groups (Mosse, this issue). And when choices are made to work with the less powerful, what repercussions might this involve (Shah and Kaul Shah, de Koning, Appleton, this issue)? Are practitioners equipped to deal with some of the conflicts that PRA may expose or provoke (Shah and Kaul Shah, Appleton, Schreckenberg this issue)?

Journal of International Development, 2000

These three books "hereafter Who Chan`es\ Whose Voice and The Myth# all originate in workshops held at the IDS\ Sussex\ and were written by {development professionals| for _eldworkers\ practitioners and policy makers with an interest in PRA 0 approaches and methods[ The books contain a series of short pieces\ some re~ective\ some arising out of case studies\ and some describing issues raised in workshop sessions[ They are a diverse\ complex and sometimes contradictory set of writings\ to which it is imposs! ible to do justice in a piece of this length[ They will be of use to development professionals engaged in the _eld\ and in the _rst part of this review I will explore some of the important issues raised at this level[ In the second part I will raise some wider issues relating to PRA more generally[ Robert Chambers suggests that PRA has three dimensions] it is a mindset\ a phil! osophy and a repertoire of methods 1 "Who Chan`es\ p[ xiv#[ PRA began in a small Correspondence to] Philippa Bevan\ 70 Kingston Road\ Oxford\ OX1 5RJ\ UK[ E!mail] pipbevanÝcompuserve[com 0 Mostly translated as Participatory Rural Appraisal\ but sometimes as Participatory Re~ection and Action[ 1 Mapping\ ranking\ scoring\ interviewing etc 641 P[ Bevan

Journal of International Development, 1996

2002

strengthening community feeling and mutual trust. Participatory planning methods using participatory rural appraisal (PRA) are currently being tested in selected villages in Germany as an instrument to enhance stakeholder participation in communal planning. Practitioners and academics in Germany advocating PLA approaches for community development often stress that people, especially in rural areas, feel alienated from and are tired of politics. They state that PLA approaches could generate a positive momentum among local people to address their needs, while the formal institutions of local governance often would not be able to do so any more. However, such assumptions need to be carefully verified in the field, before PLA becomes promoted on a larger scale for community development in the industrialised societies with functioning democratic institutions. This article assesses the experiences of a one-week participatory assessment and planning workshop ’Planning for the Future‘ in Mü...

2004

Muslim World, 2008

Alteration of religion is inevitable because lifestyles change and differ. However, every time needs are realized, the idea of new arrangements come more from the anti-religious side than the PRA or professional theologians. They can easily interfere with the area of religion. These non-professional approaches create discomfort in society. 13. Necdet Subaßı, Ara Dönem Din Politikaları, (Küre, 3stanbul 2005). The effects of modernism on religion and related issues not only multiply informational problems but also increase sensitivities in social life. Laic and secular people wanted to see religion in the limits of themselves. Thus, religion is redefined and brought to the broad space of redefined worship place and morals.

2001

quality, these differences are increasingly important to understand.

Peabody Journal of Education, 2016

My first research assistant experience in 1969 was with Carol Weiss, as she began her long career thinking about how research influences policy, and my first scholarly project, which began shortly afterward, looked at how brokering agents increased access to and use of research by educational practitioners. My early mentors wrote extensively about the deficiencies of educational research as an applied field, and I am currently affiliated with an IES-funded center, Research4Schools, which is exploring how knowledge is reflected in practice. Between these career bookends, I have studied how different countries have organized dissemination systems to foster research use as well as examined knowledge production, both in and outside of universities. I have concluded that research (or something like it) can have something to say to practice and should be reflected

2002

PRA training has become a ‘fad’ in Nepal. There are many supposed PRA trainers organising PRA training for donor projects, International NGOs, NGOs and less frequently, for government offices. Recently the PANDA team (a district level network in Dhankuta) carried out an evaluation of the use of PRA in local NGOs in Dhankuta (Gibbon et al. 1998). They found that many of the participants who had received training in PRA had used their new skills in their individual lives, but very few were using them within their organisations. I feel certain that this finding would be replicated elsewhere and therefore decided to consider why so few people who have received training are actually utilising it.