Policy research and the voices of women

【作者(必填)】Nichols-Casebolt, Ann; Spakes, Patricia

【文题(必填)】Policy research and the voices of women

【年份(必填)】Social Work Research, Vol 19(1), Mar 1995, 49-55

【全文链接或数据库名称(选填)】http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10140999

POLICY RESEARCH AND THE VOICES OF WOMEN

POLICY RESEARCH AND THE VOICES OF WOMEN
内容
WOMEN'S TOWNHALL RESEARCH PROJECT
RESEARCH PROJECT DESIGN
Stage 1: Qualitative Methods
Stage 2: Quantitative Methods
TRIANGULATION OF QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE METHODS
CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
.  听 暂停 正在加载 .  美国口音 英国口音 澳大利亚口音  慢速阅读 中速阅读 快速阅读 下载 MP3 帮助 . . .
It has been argued that even in areas where women are the most directly affected by policy decisions, their views and experiences are often not elicited and that even when women are included in policy research, the outcomes reflect the (male) researcher's individual biases and preconceived assumptions. The heavy reliance on quantitative methods and structured questionnaires often obscures multiple perspectives and the diversity among research subjects. Using an example of a women's town hall research project, this article discusses how the diverse "voices" of women can be incorporated in an analysis of policy issues. It illustrates how qualitative and quantitative research methods can be integrated to identify and understand policy issues. Using focus groups of women across the state of Arizona and traditional quantitative state and national data, this research approach provided women a voice and allowed women's perspectives on the issue of families in crisis to be heard. Although time and resource constraints are often seen as barriers to using qualitative methods, the example presented in this article suggests one strategy for implementing such an approach.

Key words: family policy; policy research; qualitative methods; quantitative methods; women

It has been argued that policy research has been dominated by a male view of the world (Miller, 1990). Even in areas where women are the most directly affected by policy decisions (for example, welfare reform), their views and experiences are often not elicited. Men, because they constitute the largest number of social scientists, have most typically decided what research should be done and how it should be done (Riger, 1992): "Frequently, mainstream social science and biology have provided welfare departments, manufacturers, advertisers, psychiatrists, the medical establishment and judicial system with answers to questions that puzzle these men in these institutions, rather than to the questions women need answered in order to participate more fully, and have their interests addressed, in policy decisions" (Harding, 1989, p. 28).

There is also concern that even when women are included in policy research, the outcomes reflect the (male) researcher's individual biases and preconceived assumptions. The heavy reliance on quantitative methods and structured questionnaires often obscures multiple perspectives and the diversity among research subjects. There is a growing recognition that an individual's reality. is shaped by the context in which he or she experiences events and that context varies significantly by gender, socioeconomic status, and race. (For a discussion of this issue see, for example, Hartman, 1992; Riger, 1992; Tyson, 1992). Thus, critics of "traditional" policy research have argued for the use of less-structured qualitative research methods that employ more open-ended questions and allow subjects to articulate their own assumptions.

Although a qualitative approach can provide insights and depth that often cannot be obtained from quantitative information, most practitioners and researchers also recognize the usefulness of quantitative data for addressing policy issues and advocating for change. For example, most agree that statistical documentation of poverty trends was instrumental in identifying the "feminization" of poverty (Gottlieb & Bombyk, 1987). Even early social workers in Hull House saw the necessity of using quantitative data in their advocacy efforts (Reinharz, 1992).

As researchers begin to understand and appreciate the strengths in both qualitative and quantitative methods, there appears to be a growing recognition that the use of multiple research methods is the most effective way to expand social work's knowledge (Allen-Meares & Lane, 1990; Hartman, 1990; Miller, 1990). Although social work has witnessed numerous debates related to the use of qualitative versus quantitative research approaches (for example, Davis, 1985; Ivanoff, Robinson, & Blythe, 1987; Mullen, 1985; Scott, 1990; Tyson, 1992; Witkin, 1991), it has been argued that "the real issue facing social work is how to integrate these two perspectives effectively into a unified approach" (Allen-Meares & Lane, 1990).

Unfortunately, there is very little information in the social work literature that can guide researchers and practitioners in how to integrate qualitative and quantitative methods in the study of policy issues. This article begins to address this gap by illustrating how qualitative research techniques can be used in conjunction with quantitative methods to identify and understand policy issues from a variety of perspectives. It presents an example of a women's town hall research project in which the voices of diverse groups of women were incorporated in an analysis of family policy issues.

WOMEN'S TOWNHALL RESEARCH PROJECT
Each year in Arizona a three-day Women's Townhall is convened by the Phoenix Soroptimist organization. The purpose of the town hall meeting is to bring together a diverse group of women from around the state to address an issue of central concern to policymakers. The topic chosen for the 1993 Women's Townhall was "families in crisis." The outcome of the meeting is a set of policy strategies and recommendations that are forwarded to policymakers, advocacy groups, lobbyists, and legislators.

In an effort to make the town hall meeting as productive as possible, before the meeting all participants receive a research document that presents detailed background information on the major policy issues pertaining to the selected topic. A research committee oversees a competitive grant process to select a researcher to produce the background document. The authors of this article were selected to produce this document.

We approached the submission of the research document with several overriding questions. The most critical was how to narrow the topic, "families in crisis," to a manageable list of problem areas, given the multitude of concerns that might be included. Next, we questioned the assumptions that we might bring to the study of this issue. For example, do we believe that families are actually in a state of "crisis," and if they are, that today's crises are somehow worse than or different from crises faced by families in the past? And equally critical in terms of policy development, how would we define the term "family"? We also wanted to consider how race, class, and gender affect the way in which families experience and cope with crises.

It was clear that any attempt to provide a priori definitions of the terms and research topics for the project would necessarily impose our own opinions, value judgments, and priorities and would not necessarily reflect the views of women different from ourselves. Thus, we decided that the women of Arizona would be asked to provide their understanding of the issues. Their answers would provide the basis for the development of a research document that would more adequately express the views of the women in the state.

RESEARCH PROJECT DESIGN
The design of the research plan started from the premise that a qualitative research approach was the preferred method for hearing the diverse voices of the women. More exploratory and open-ended questions would allow the women themselves to generate the range of definitions and potential topics for study. Arid more important, this approach could be used to clarify the meanings of the issues from the perspectives of the participants. Although committed to using qualitative techniques, we were confronted by several competing concerns that often prevent policy analysts from pursuing the use of qualitative research methods. First, we needed to ensure that we presented some information that was representative of the diverse population in the state. Second, the town hall research committee required that the background document provide information on trends over time and comparisons with national data. And finally, the data needed to be presented in such a way that generalizations would assist in the development of policy recommendations. Over-tiding the entire project, of course, were constraints on time and money. The final draft of the research document had to be completed in less than one year with a minimal budget.

cll9981 发表于 2012-7-27 22:02
POLICY RESEARCH AND THE VOICES OF WOMEN
内容
WOMEN'S TOWNHALL RESEARCH PROJECT

能不能帮我找个PDF的啊，这个没有参考文献啊

应该去外院问问

附件里面有

REFERENCES
Allen-Meares, P., & Lane, B. A. (1990). Social work practice: Integrating qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques. Social Work, 35, 452 -- 458.

Davis, L. V. (1985). Female and male voices in social work. Social Work, 30, 106-113.

Dobelstein, A. W. (1990). Social welfare policy and analysis. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

Donovan, R., Jaffe, N., & Pirie, V. M. (1987). Unemployment among low-income women: An exploratory study. Social Work, 32, 301-305.

Elam, S. M, Rose, L. C., & Gallup, A.M. (1992). The 24th annual Gallup/Phi Kappa poll of the public's attitudes toward the public schools. Kappan, 74(1), 41-53.

Garvin, C. (1987). Contemporary group work. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Gottlieb, N., & Bombyk, M. (1987). Strategies for strengthening feminist research. Affilia, 2(2), 23-35.

Harding. S. (1989). Is there a feminist method? In N. Tuana (Ed.), Feminism and science (pp. 18-32). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Hartman, A. (1990). Many ways of knowing [Editorial]. Social Work, 35, 3-4.

Hartman, A. (1992). In search of subjugated knowledge. Social Work, 37, 483-484.

Ivanoff, A, Robinson, E.A.R., & Blythe, B. J. (1987). Empirical clinical practice from a feminist perspective. Social Work, 32, 417-423.

Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Miller, D.C. (1990). Women and social welfare: A feminist analysis. New York: Praeger.

Morgan, D. L. (1993). Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Ms. Foundation for Women and Center for Policy Alternatives. (1992). Women's voices: A joint project. New York: Ms. Foundation for Women.

Mullen, E. J. (1985). Methodological dilemmas in social work research. Social Work Research & Abstracts, 21(4), 12-20.

Opie, A. (1992). Qualitative research, appropriation of the "other" and empowerment. Feminist Review, 40, 52-69.

Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. New York: Oxford University Press.

Riger, S. (1992). Epistemological debates, feminist voices: Science, social values, and the study of women. American Psychologist, 47, 730-740.

Scott, D. (1990). Practice wisdom: The neglected source of practice research. Social Work, 35, 564-568.

Tyson, K. (1992). A new approach to relevant scientific research for practitioners: The heuristic paradigm. Social Work, 37, 541-553.

Van De Ven, A., & Delbecq, A. (1971). Nominal versus interacting group processes for committee decision-making effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 9, 203-212.

Witkin, S. L. (1991). Empirical clinical practice: A critical analysis. Social Work. 36, 158-163.

Original manuscript received October 20, 1993 Final revision received April 18, 1994 Accepted June 20, 1994

cll9981 发表于 2012-7-27 22:06
附件里面有

谢谢~

EBSCO里面没有PDF格式的，只有网页格式，我给你存为WORD格式了，里面有参考文献。

zx5558 发表于 2012-7-27 22:04
应该去外院问问

跟外院有多大关系啊？