Nathalie Muller Mirza
UniNe Université de Neuchâtel, Switzerland
June 29, 2006

Course name: Training in research for professionals

Institution: CIFOM (Centre interregional de formation des montagnes neuchâteloises)

Course Instructor(s): Nathalie Muller Mirza, in collaboration with Vittoria Cesari and Luca Bausch

Scope: This scenario describes, with a few modifications, past practices and experiences and will be implemented next year

No. of participants: 15-20

Target population: Adult trainers and responsible for training in health

Content area/Discipline: Training in scientific research on professional activities

Duration of the course: 2 years for the whole training and 5 days (+homework) for this course in particular

No. of instructional hours: 40 (+ homework)

Additional background information:

In the frame of a diploma in adult education (pedagogically lead by researchers from different Universities in French speaking areas of Switzerland), between 15 and 20 professionals from different working contexts (industries, high schools, health care…) following courses in a 2-years program. They all have a position in adult education yet but want to develop their skills in this field.

Besides developing knowledge on learning in adulthood, psychosocial processes in education settings, political issues and ICT, etc., one of the modules is oriented towards an introduction to scientific research. The Institute of Psychology of UniNe is in charge of this module.

Course description:

1. Presentation of the main steps of the research process and its issues by the course instructors through concrete examples and work groups;
2. For each participant, problematisation of an object of study (with the help of readings, group work, poster elaboration…);
3. Data gathering (individually) on the field;
4. Analysis (individually and in group) of the data collected;
5. Writing of a research report (individually) – feedback (by the instructor);
6. Collective discussion.

Narrative:

Together with the other participants, Philip, a responsible for training in a big local firm, participates to a first phase of the course where the main steps of the research process and the methodological tools used by a researcher are presented, mainly through concrete examples. Philip is thus invited to read cases and discuss their main features together with his colleagues in group sessions; and to read introductory books and articles on the topic, etc. All these materials are at disposal on the Moodle platform. He also takes part in other activities (role playing, discussions…), often in small groups.

In a second phase, Philip is asked to identify something in his own working context that surprises him and starts to formulate his own “research questions”. In this problematisation process, he is helped by one of the teachers (animator). He meets (in F2F or virtually) some of his colleagues and/or the whole group for discussion in order to improve his formulation; he becomes aware that the problems he faces in this process are shared by other participants. When the draft of his research project is ready he makes a poster, in which he presents to the group the context of his research work, his questions of departure, the observation he wants to do, the methodological tools he will use to gather and analyze the data, and the results he anticipates to get. The discussions help him to reconfigure his project if necessary.

The third phase is dedicated to the data collection and a forth one to analysis. This last step articulates individual and group works as data analysis and interpretation are also discussed in collective sessions with the aim of specific tools (software for qualitative data analysis, video annotation…).

The whole process is then written down in a report (individually) that is evaluated by the teacher who has helped him during his work.

In a final and reflexive phase, Philip and all the participants meet. From the readings of their reports and the identification of methodological problems faced in the research process, activities in small groups or in class, role playing, theoretical and methodological contributions are proposed.

Critical features/Requirements:

It would be interesting if the participants would have access to:

• a platform for communication and in which to store and comment texts and cases (till now “Moodle” is used by the participants);
• video and audio recording equipment;
• electronic support(s) to comment, analyse and share audio and video data;
• “simplified” qualitative data analysis software.

Rationale:

The idea at the basis of the course is that for professionals, in order to understand what are the contributions of research that can be expected, it is important to do research. But doing research implies a set of new knowledge and competencies to acquire that may sometimes come in contradiction with the ones get by the participants who are used to be trainers. In general, for instance the participants seem more familiar to propose and enact solutions to the problems they face rather taking time to gather data and reflect upon hypotheses (Cesari Lusso, Muller Mirza, 2001; Cesari Lusso, Muller Mirza & Bausch, 2005). This case raises thus the question not only of the relationship between theory and practice but also between two kinds of practices that can be experienced as difficult to articulate.

Research hypotheses:

The scenario as it is designed starts from the assumptions that 1) representations on “researchers” are quite negative in this population and it is thus important to work on them; 2) concrete experiences of doing research on “real questions” are important in order to foster knowledge in this domain; 3) exchanges of experiences (mediated by psychological tools) among professionals can help the process of knowledge building; 4) reflexive activities contribute to learning.

Open Issues:

Psychology of doing research for professionals.

Making of:

This scenario, in previous versions but in the same context and with the same kind of population, has been experienced twice. The sources we have at disposal are: “field notes”, research reports written by the participants, responses to questionnaires etc.

References:

Aumont, B. & Mesnier, P.-M. (1992). L’acte d’apprendre. Paris : Presses Universitaires de France.

Cesari Lusso, V. & Muller Mirza, N. (2001). Quelle est la place de l’expérience dans l’apprentissage à l’âge adulte? Qu’est-ce qui se construit? Qu’est-ce qui se co-construit? Qu’est-ce qui se déconstruit?. Quaderni dell’Istituto Comunicazione e Formazione, n° 2 (Lugano: Université de la Suisse Italienne), 2-11.

Cesari, V., Muller Mirza, N. & Bausch, L. (2005). La « posture chercheur » et la « posture réflexive » dans la formation d’adultes : quelle valeur ajoutée ? Quels enjeux identitaires ? Communication dans le cadre du congrès SSRE, Lugano, 21-23 septembre 2005.