This research is part of a broader project entitled Innovation Networks for Educational and Social Inclusion. Co-laboratory of Inclusive Participation (Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness EDU2015-68617-C4-3-R; see: https://inclusionlab.unican.es). Within the framework of this project we present a meta-analysis of one of the micro research projects which aimed to improve and promote the voice of a group of women who form part of a cultural association, the duration of which was one year. Through a feminist participatory process a mixed research group was created which consisted of academics (university teachers) and activists (women who form part of the association) with the objective of carrying out research in order to denounce a relevant social problem and pave the way for social change.

It has been demonstrated that participatory research is a significant tool in helping different groups and people gain agency in inquiry processes, increasing their opportunities for influencing decision-making processes that affect their lives both as individuals and as a community. It is research in which there is no longer a centre occupied by a social researcher who assumes the role of expert and tells groups and communities what to do, rather it revolves around a network of relationships, joint decision-making and deliberative proposals in which researchers and participants discuss how to improve their lives and those of their communities. From this perspective, this research is focused on social improvement and is regarded as a flexible work tool that allows redefining the object and method for emancipatory purposes (Brydon-Miller, Maguire and McIntryre, 2004; Kemmis and McTaggart, 2013; Parrilla, Susinos, Gallego-Vega and Martínez, 2017). The “object” of research is now recognised as a participant subject, a co-constructor of knowledge and the “method” used is aimed at gaining in-depth knowledge about how the protagonists experience their worlds and how to improve them.

Feminist research or research with a gender perspective has a diverse, broad focus which is difficult to classify, given that its body of knowledge has been seen to grow exponentially in all areas of knowledge and methodological approaches. Nevertheless, in all these works a common concern can be identified: the discussion surrounding who the knowledge generated in research belongs to, where and how this is obtained and for what purposes (Jones and Barron, 2007; Olesen, 2013), taking into account the androcentrism that has been dominant in knowledge creation processes coupled with the fact that in the past the experiences and lives of women have been forgotten or even misinterpreted. In this regard, our research is defined as feminist since it recognises that each participant must think and try to improve the world around them based on their experience as women, reclaiming a feminist genealogy that allows them to value the ethics of care, for things and people. 

Within this general framework, a work team consisting of two academics from the University of Cantabria (Spain) began their research by contacting a cultural association in a well-known working class neighbourhood in the city where the university is located (Santander). The following research questions were used to guide the entire work process:

• What is it that interests me, disturbs me and worries me about my life and the life of the association and how can I improve or transform it?
• What issues in my personal life, social life and that of the association do I want to investigate, denounce?
• How can this research relate to the daily activity of the association, how can all the associates be involved in this research? How can other people and external groups be invited to participate in our research? 

Our feminist and participatory research method is clearly inspired by critical ethnography (Foley and Valenzuela, 2012) by taking into account what people do, how they interact with the world and with other people, what they say and what they value as well as the discourses through which they understand and interpret their world. The critical dimension is made visible, on the one hand, by its concern for how power works, both during the development of the research itself (adopting a reflective attitude), and in societies, groups and communities in general and on the other hand, by adopting an attitude committed to social change, since it does not deal only with describing and understanding but rather transforming (Grenz, 2014). As demonstrated by Kemmis and McTaggart (2013), participatory research is based on three main principles: 1) The shared ownership of research projects, 2) The analysis of community based social problems and 3) The focus on community action. It is understood that the inquiry process has a social and educational dimension, given that it proposes research methods that open a social process of collaborative learning. Within this general framework, these are some of the basic principles that have shaped our research method: 1. Both researchers and the researched are understood to be agents of social change, thus breaking the researcher-researched dependence. 2. Throughout the investigation the objectives and main questions of the research have been demonstrated, discussed and negotiated. For example, why research, for what purpose and for whom? 3. The project has been organised in four main phases: 1) Deliberation: what do I want to investigate/change/denounce/know in-depth?; 2) Planning: How am I going to do it?; 3) Development: implementation of the planned project, focusing our attention on unforeseen changes and on the learning process and 4) Assessment: joint narration of the project, its achievements, possible improvements and learning. 4. Various techniques for constructing data have been used which utilise diverse languages: oral, written, fixed images, moving images, etc. (Ball and Smith, 2011). At the same time, work spaces that combine individual work with small and large group work have been organised, with the aim of encouraging all voices while also respecting silences, which are viewed here as a form of participation (Arnot, 2006).

In line with the findings of other participatory research projects that work with social groups which mobilise social change, the deliberative phase of the investigation has been crucial and within it, the process of creating the research group. Creating identity and group cohesion means recognising our individualities, what unites us and what we want to build together (Ormazabal y Gorostidi, 2017). Our project demonstrates the value of deliberative democracy in the process of creating knowledge. In this regard, our work highlights the importance of giving participants the opportunity to be included in the decision-making process and allowing them to influence the final results of the project, it is a move away from formats that do not involve redistribution processes and the recognition of participants’ voices (Young, 2000). As in the field of participatory and feminist research, in our work care has been a transversal value that has become visible in various dimensions of the project which are significantly linked to each other: in the conception of the research project, in its development, in the attention to singularities, taking care of different rhythms, as well as in the field of the political and cultural objectives of the association, respecting its mission and vision of reality. Finally, all the participants involved in this research have gained agency, they have empowered themselves in the triple sense that Rowlands (2005) recognises when he links the protagonists’ processes of interaction in their contexts: 1) The personal dimension, through the acquisition of trust to undo the effects of “internalised oppression”, 2) The social dimension, in relation to the ability to negotiate and influence their different relationships and 3) Collective space, in relation to the political and mobilising condition, highlighting the impact that it has had on political structures and collective action.

Arnot, M. (2006). Gender Voices in the Classroom. In C. Skelton, B. Frances and L. Smulyan (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Gender and Education (pp. 407-421). London, Sage. Ball, M. and Smith, G. (2011). Ethnomethodology and the visual: practices of looking, visualization, and embodied action. In E. Margolis and L. Pauwels (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Visual Research Methods (pp. 392-413). London, Sage. Brydon-Miller, M., Maguire, P. and McIntryre, A. (2004). Conclusion. In M. Brydon-Miller, P. Maguire and A. McIntryre A. (Eds.) Traveling Companions. Feminism, Teaching, and Action Research (pp. 179-186). London, Praeger. Foley, D. and Valenzuela, A. (2012). Etnografía crítica. La política de la colaboración. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (Coords.). Manual de investigación cualitativa. Vol. II. Paradigmas y perspectivas en disputa (pp. 79-110). Barcelona, Gedisa. Grenz, S. (2014). Power in Feminist Research Processes. In M. Evans, C. Hemmings, M. Henry, H. Johnstone, S. Madhok, A. Plomien and S. Wearing (Eds.). The Sage Handbook of Feminist Theory (pp. 61-74). London, Sage. Jones, L. and Barron, I. (2007). Research and Gender. London, Continuum. Kemmis, S. and McTaggart, R. (2013). La investigación-acción participativa. La acción comunicativa y la esfera pública. In N. K. Denzin y S. L. Yvonna (Coords.) (2013). Manual de investigación cualitativa. Volumen III. Las estrategias de investigación cualitativa (pp. 361-439).Barcelona, Gedisa, McIntyre, A. and Brinton, M. (2004). Weaving Words and Pictures in/through Feminist Participatory Action Research. In M. Brydon-Miller, P. Maguire and A. McIntryre A. (Eds.) Traveling Companions. Feminism, Teaching, and Action Research (pp. 57-77). London, Praeger. Olesen, V. (2013). Feminist Qualitative Research: in the Millennium’s First Decade Challenges and Contours. In N. K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (Coords.) (2013). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Third Edition. Part II. Paradigms and perspectives in contention (pp. 235-278). London, Sage. Ormazabal, A. and Gorostidi, I. (2017). Orientaciones para trabajar la asimetría de poder en la participación social y política. Una mirada a los modelos de militancia en Euskal Herria. In J. Martínez-Palacio (Coord.). Participar desde los feminismos. Ausencias, expulsiones y resistencias (pp. 235-259). Barcelona, Icaria. Parrilla, A., Susinos, T., Gallego-Vega, C. and Martínez, B. (2017). Revisando críticamente cómo investigamos en educación inclusiva: cuatro proyectos con un enfoque educativo y social. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 89 (31.2), 145-156. Rowlands, J. (2005). El empoderamiento a examen. Comunidad virtual de gobernabilidad y liderazgo. Available from: http://acmcb.es/files/425-8232-DOCUMENT/comunidadvirtual.pdf Young, I. M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Oxfor, Oxford University Press.