Co-Construction of Knowledge
Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://knowledgedemocracydspace.com/handle/123456789/1081
Browse
4 results
Search Results
Item Knowledge as a commodity and participatory research( Prospects, UNESCO, 1979) Hall, Budd LWhat is knowledge? How is it formed? Who has the authority to “make” it? and who does it ultimately serve? These are the central questions Dr. Budd Hall raises in this article. He critiques the way traditional intellectuals such as scientists and scholars, often trained in elite universities and supported by international funding agencies, are institutionally positioned as the legitimate producers of knowledge. Embedded within particular class locations, this group often produces knowledge that serves its own class interests and maintains dominant social relations. In this process, organic intellectuals engaged in critical reflection and grassroots organising are sidelined as knowledge makers. Drawing on the works of Freire, Mao and others, Hall reflects on the role of intellectuals. He advances a systematic critique of survey research and outlines the guiding principles of participatory research. The article is a critical inquiry into the nature of knowledge within the new international order. It calls for moving beyond viewing knowledge as intellectual commodities such as papers and conferences and toward recognising and valuing local and indigenous knowledge systems, while developing more decentralised ways of legitimising people as producers of knowledge.Item Challenges in the co-construction of knowledge: A global study on strengthening structures for community university research partnerships(0000) Hall, Budd L; Tandon, Rajesh; Tremblay, Crystal; Singh, WafaWhat does it mean to institutionalise the co-construction of knowledge between universities and communities at a global level? This paper begins from the premise that knowledge democracy requires moving beyond expert driven models towards collaborative processes that recognise the knowledge generating capacities of each human being and of every community. Community university research partnerships are presented as a key pathway for this shift, as they create structures through which research questions, methods, processes and outcomes can be shaped jointly. Drawing on a global survey and national case studies across Europe, Africa, Asia and the Americas, the authors examine the histories, discourses and institutional forms that support or constrain such partnerships. This paper further analyses models such as Science Shops, centers of community-based research and national policy frameworks, while identifying tensions and practical challenges in embedding such work within universities. It highlights the importance of facilitative structures, supportive leadership, transnational networks and sustained institutional commitment. In doing so, it argues that institutionalising community-based research is not only a technical exercise but a political and ideological process that reshapes how universities understand knowledge, partnership and their responsibilities to society.Item Entry for new pergammon encyclopaedia of adult education: Social movement learning(0000) Hall, Budd L; Clover, Darlene E.Item Issues and experiences in participatory research in Asia(1979-06-25) Tandon, RajeshIn this paper Dr. Rajesh Tandon examines characteristics and issues of participatory research as practised across Asia during the late 1970s, drawing on meetings held in India and Thailand alongside field reports from researchers. Practitioners engaging with participatory research bring varied motivations, ranging from disillusioned social scientists seeking relevance beyond classical research paradigms to activists redirecting failed development strategies toward decentralized alternatives and educators treating research itself as a vehicle for social transformation. Rural settings dominate the Asian experience, reflecting both the scale of rural populations and the concentration of documented efforts in land, health, and adult education. The paper situates participatory research in close and often uncomfortable relation to social action, tracing the political consequences that follow from this link across varied Asian contexts. It also addresses the largely unorganized condition of underprivileged groups and the corresponding need to build organization alongside inquiry, along with the personal values and behavioural skills researchers need to genuinely facilitate participation rather than reproduce authoritarian patterns. The paper closes by treating these issues as unresolved questions for the ongoing evolution of participatory research in the region, rather than settled conclusions.
