Search results

"An Autoethnography of Becoming a Qualitative Researcher chronicles Trude Klevan's personal experiences of her doctoral journey, with Alec Grant as an external academic resource and friend, and her subsequent entry into the neoliberal higher education environment. It gives a personal and intimate view of what it's like to become an academic. This book is constructed as an extended dialogue which frequently utilizes email exchanges as data. Firmly grounded in the epistemic resource of friendship, it tells the story of the authors' symbiotic academic growth around their critical understanding and knowledge of qualitative inquiry, and the purposes of such knowledge. The tale told is of the unfolding of a close and mutually beneficial relationship, entangled within sometimes facilitative, sometimes problematic, environmental contexts. It uses these experiences to describe, explore and critically interrogate some underlying themes of the philosophies, politics, and practices of qualitative inquiry, and of higher education. Disrupting conventional academic norms through their work, friendship, and correspondence, Trude and Alec offer a critical and epistemological view of what it's like to become a qualitative researcher, and how we can do things differently in higher education. This book is suitable for all researchers and students, their supervisors, mentors and teachers, and academics of qualitative research and autoethnography, and those interested in critiques of higher education"--

In this paper, the first author autoethnographically describes, discusses and reflects on her process of becoming a researcher based on her PhD journey. She explores how the development of knowledge and her understandings of what counts as knowledge is entangled with her personal and professional development. The second and third authors join with her to explore and comment on the ways in which her doctoral topic knowledge and her process of becoming a researcher co-evolved. On this basis, all authors challenge and trouble what counts as qualitative knowledge and inquiry in contemporary academia and discuss the need for the provision of curiosity-nurturing and troubling environments.

Although literature exists on the methodological development of autoethnographers in the classroom context, little has been written about achieving such development in online networks of dispersed individuals, and the social psychological difficulties between senior members of such networks that might ensue. This conversational autoethnography developed after Alec Grant, the first author, angrily withdrew by email from the South Coast Autoethnography Network (SCAN). Since its inception in 2013, the hub, or centre of operating activity of SCAN has historically been mostly shared between a small number of academics working in, or associated with, Sussex University and the University of Brighton in the south coast of England. With around 65 participants, SCAN aims to facilitate the development of autoethnographers, with many of its members inexperienced in the approach to differing degrees. In their conversational exchange, the authors explore, respond to, and try to make sense of and resolve, the tensions that developed in the group before and after Alec's withdrawal from it. The authors believe that this article captures many of the interpersonal difficulties that might inevitably arise between senior members, in autoethnographic networks internationally. They therefore hope that it will serve as a useful resource for individual readers and network groups.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has severely affected the daily lives and well-being of children and families. During the lockdown of Norway in spring 2020, many families were socially isolated and left with little support from their networks. Children and young people had limited contact with teachers, peers and other positive social contacts. The lockdown also affected the daily running of the Norwegian child welfare services (CWS), which are obliged to provide help and support to children at risk and their families.
Aim: The aim of this study was to explore how leaders and staff in the CWS balanced their two-part mandate to protect children from harm, and to provide support and care during the first lockdown in Norway.
Design and method: The study has a qualitative approach with a descriptive and explorative design. Thirty-six CWS workers and nine leaders participated. Focus groups, dyadic and individual qualitative interviews were used for data collection. The data were analysed with a thematic analysis.
Findings: 1) 'Running the services during a pandemic' deals with the practical organization of staff and child welfare cases, and 2) 'The quality of child welfare work during lockdown' describes qualitative aspects of the child welfare work.
Conclusions: The study revealed the prioritization of acute cases and a reduction in CWS contact with children and families. CWS staff worried about whether at-risk children were receiving the help they were entitled to. The study shows how the crisis led to innovative approaches and teleworking solutions. The CWS had to decide how to organize and run the services in a way that ensured both acute assessments and the long-term aspects of the CWS mandate. Considering the strain the long-term pandemic has placed on children at risk, the further organization and running of the CWS is of great importance.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to explore how sharing stories of being a mental health professional and academic, based more broadly on serendipity and searching in life, can serve as means for bridging and developing cross-cultural understandings and collaborative work.Design/methodology/approachThis paper is a relational autoethnography based on face-to-face and written conversational dialogue between five mental health academics from the UK and Norway.FindingsThe very practice of writing this paper displays and serves the purpose of bridging people, cultures and understandings, at several levels, in the facilitation of new research and writing projects. Troubling traditional boundaries between "us" and "them, and the "knower" and the "known," the writing is theoretically underpinned by Friendship as Method, situated in a New Materialist context.Originality/valueThrough its conversational descriptions and explorations the paper shows how doing relational autoethnography can be purposeful in developing cross-cultural understandings and work at both professional and personal levels. It also demonstrates how autoethnography as relational practice can be useful in the sharing of this methodology between people who are more and less familiar with it.

Crisis resolution teams are a community-based service, targeting adults experiencing acute mental health crises. The rationale for the development of crisis resolution teams is both value and efficacy-based: crisis resolution teams should contribute to the humanizing of mental health services and to enhanced efficacy. This diversity in purpose appears to affect the practices of help that are offered by crisis resolution teams, which research has shown to vary greatly. A discursive approach recognizes that practices are shaped by external paradigms and structures, and clinicians' construction of professional identities and practices through their talk and meaning making. Thus, this study used a discursive psychological approach to identify discourses through which crisis resolution team clinicians talk about and understand helpful help in mental health crises. Focus group interviews with clinicians from eight crisis resolution teams revealed two broad and contradictory discourses: helpful help as something "made" with crisis resolution team workers as creators of collaborative and innovative practices, and helpful help as something "given" with the crisis resolution team workers as representatives of a predefined specialist mental health service culture. The contradictions between these discourses reflect the diverse rationale for the development of crisis resolution teams and the possible tensions and pressures under which crisis resolution team work is conducted. In this overall context, the study further critically examined the tensions between the discourse of constructing new practices, and existing practices constituted by the specialist mental health services' traditional discourse. Failing to constantly reflect upon and question these tensions in collaboration with service users, carers, and other services can impair creativity and the development of humanizing helpful help.

Mental health lived experience narratives are first-person accounts of people with experience of mental health problems. They have been published in journals, books and online, and used in healthcare interventions and anti-stigma campaigns. There are concerns about their potential misuse. A four-language systematic review was conducted of published literature characterizing uses and misuses of mental health lived experience narratives within healthcare and community settings. 6531 documents in four languages (English, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian) were screened and 78 documents from 11 countries were included. Twenty-seven uses were identified in five categories: political, societal, community, service level and individual. Eleven misuses were found, categorized as relating to the narrative (narratives may be co-opted, narratives may be used against the author, narratives may be used for different purpose than authorial intent, narratives may be reinterpreted by others, narratives may become patient porn, narratives may lack diversity), relating to the narrator (narrator may be subject to unethical editing practises, narrator may be subject to coercion, narrator may be harmed) and relating to the audience (audience may be triggered, audience may misunderstand). Four open questions were identified: does including a researcher's personal mental health narrative reduce the credibility of their research?: should the confidentiality of narrators be protected?; who should profit from narratives?; how reliable are narratives as evidence?).