The aim is to explore the use of different participatory methods developed in three research projects related to educational change processes in schools. In line with Deleuze, “only those directly concerned can speak in a practical way on their own behalf” (Foucault & Deleuze, 1977: 209), the purpose of working with participatory methods is to involve students and teachers perspectives in both, the research and the process of educational change.

Applying these very methods during this workshop aims to facilitate a dialogue about the risks the researcher needs to engage with. The singularities of these methods not only compels the researcher to navigate from his/her role with others, being also facilitator or practitioner, but as well, to get involved with the participants in the process of generating data that redefines the research process itself. As Chadderton (2011) explores, “it could be argued that she [sic] does not collect data as much as generate it through her own involvement”.

We share an understanding of research as a tool linked to processes of change that consider the perspectives and needs of the actors involved. As such, the evidence being produced through our involvement is not only considered part of the research but part of the process of change within the research context. Building upon this shared mindset, we propose a dialogue that explores the displacements that our role and positioning underwent or is undergoing in this process of participating and being involved in the process of generating evidence with the participants.

We intend to explore this matter building up from the experience of the three following projects being carried out in different schools. (1) In Spain, a participatory and collaborative action research (Bergold & Thomas, 2010; 2012) where the students and teachers are researching their own educational process, being part of the research design itself.  All this with the aim of generating a more open culture towards research at the centre that will result in educational practices more inclusive and democratic (Lenz, 2012). (2) In England, a research on critical pedagogies applied in the classroom, reflecting on inclusive practices. Methodologically it explored with applying elements of Theatre of the Oppressed (Boal, 1979) as a critical, creative as well as spatial research method for participatory reflection with the classroom community. Intending to “construct alternative ground rules for communication” (Ellsworth, 1989: 317), the research process aimed to engage with the plurality of power in the classroom, including the role of the researcher. (3) In Colombia, a research project that aims to analyze critically the impact that the introduction of digital technologies had on the pedagogical practices in a project-based school. In this introduction, participatory video (White, 2003) was used as an approach to work with teachers and students, seeking to generate a change pertinent to their needs and interests.

Some of the questions that arise from the three projects:  Where do we stand as researchers when the students and teachers are researching their own educational process? When are we researchers and when facilitators of researching tools? Where are the limits of the participation of students and teachers? Are there any limits? How do we manage the process of writing? Who is the author of the research? What name is going to be on papers and/or books? Is it sustainable for the researcher career this kind of research in an academic world full of “fast-research”?

In line with the research projects framework, we propose a participatory workshop to explore the theoretical and practical concerns through the use of the following methods: Participatory Research: The aim of every participatory approach (action research, participatory learning research, co-operative inquiry…) is to change social realities based on insights into everyday practices that are obtained by participation on the research (Bergold & Thomas, 2012). The fundamental principles of participatory research should be democracy as a precondition (Gotsch et al., 2012), using spaces that favour and do not preclude communication (Dentith et al., 2012), and define the community that participates in the research in different degrees. Theatre of the Oppressed: The participatory theatre practice Theatre of the Oppressed, based on critical pedagogies (Freire 1993 [1970]), offers a space for collective, critical reflection and intervention. The knowledge production within a Theatre of the Oppressed workshop happens through affective sharing of experience. It is a way of knowing through the body (hooks, 1994), through the practice, collectively with the participants. It is an active reflection that simultaneously shows and remakes or changes what it looks at, “it opens the possibility for alternative performativities and alternative ways of being” (Madison and Hamera 2005, p.xviii). As such, it offers a participatory form of engaging with and observing the shifting power dynamics in the space researched, including the researcher/facilitator. Participatory video: The use of participatory video (PV) as a method is in line with the growing interest of social researchers in using methodologies that offer communities greater agency in research and decision-making processes (Mitchell et al, 2008). However, the approaches and application can vary widely. In this research, PV is used as an approach to work with teachers and students in order to open spaces for learning and communication (High et al., 2012), seeking to generate a change pertinent to their needs and interests. It also explores the emergence of spaces that enable the production of non-planned student-generated evidence. Spaces stemming from the establishment of a particular relationship between the students and the digital devices native to the researcher.

This workshop aims to explore practically and reflect on ways on the use of participatory research methods as a tool to engage in a dialogue with the voices of the participants in school research. Voices that are often silenced from (self)imposed power hierarchies. Through little practical exercises in small groups and a brief theoretical explanation of our positioning, we invite the workshop participants to embody a different role in and a different attitude towards research. The transience of our times and the current urgency of "fast-research" is sometimes causing researcher isolation, as often little time is left for dialogue with the actors he/she studies, notwithstanding to involve them in the process. Here, we will explore the complexity and importance of our positioning as researchers. Different visions will be shared to support the idea that we need more reflective, slow and rigorous research frameworks and processes that consider essential the real/true participation of those we are investigating. And we will reflect upon the necessary risk that we take as researchers when using such methods. It’s important to notice the international dimension of this reflexion since the three different research processes were or are being carried out in three very different contexts, but with a shared idea. We are investigating WITH others, seeking to make our research stronger by deconstructing our position as researchers and thinking about our power position. To conclude, we understand this workshop as a way of exploring new ways of conveying the "knowledge produced" in our research. In an academic world that is increasingly committed to quantification and to a vertical and hierarchical position of the researcher, who does not have time to stop, our proposal raises a necessary reflection from different visions of research that have placed the participants in a central position.

Bergold, J. & Thomas, S. (2010). Partizipative Forschung. In Günter Mey & Katja Mruck (Eds.), Handbuch Qualitative Forschung in der Psychologie (pp.333-344). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag. Bergold, J. & Thomas, S. (2012). Participatory Research Methods: A Methodological Approach in Motion. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(1), Art.30. Boal, A., 1979. Theatre of the Oppressed, trans. Charles A. and Maria-Odilia Leal McBride. New York: Theatre Communications Group.(Originally published in Spanish as Teatro de Oprimido, Ediciones de la Flor, Buenos Aires, 1974). Chadderton, C. (2011) Not capturing voices? In Czerniawski, G. & Kidd, W. (eds.) The student voice handbook: Bridging the academic/ practitioner divide. Bingley: Emerald, 73-85 Ellsworth, E. (1989) Why doesn't this feel empowering? Working through the repressive myths of critical pedagogy. Harvard educational review, 59(3), pp.297-325. Foucault, M. & Deleuze, G. (1977). Intellectuals and Power. In Language, Counter-Memory, Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews, edited by D. F. Bouchard. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. Freire, P. (1993) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. 1970. New York: Continuum Gallagher, K., 2007. Theatre of urban: Youth and schooling in dangerous times. University of Toronto Press. High, C., Singh, N., Petheram, L., Nemes, G. (2012) Defining participatory video from practice. In: Milne, E-J., Mitchell, C., de Lange N, (ed.), Handbook of Participatory Video, pp. 35-48. Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press Hooks, b. (1994) Teaching to transgress. Routledge: New York Lenz, S. (2012). Investigación participativa en Argentina: tres experiencias del campo educativo en el contexto de la restitución de la democracia. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 13(1) Madison, D.S. and Hamera, J., 2005. Performance studies at the intersections. The Sage handbook of performance studies, pp.xi-xxv. Mitchell, C., Milne, E-J, de Lange, N. (2012) Introduction. In Milne, E-J., Mitchell, C., de Lange N, (ed.) Handbook of Participatory Video, pp. 1 - 19. Lanham, Maryland: AltaMira Press White, S. (2003) Participatory video: A process that Transforms the Self and the Other. In White, S. (ed) Participatory Video. Images that Transform and Empower, p. 63 - 101. SAGE: London.