Research as hope intervention: a visual participatory study with rural South African school children

• Main Author: Cherrington, Avivit Miriam
• Format: Others
• Language: English
• Published: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University 2016
• Subjects: Affective education > South Africa; Critical pedagogy > South Africa; Hope > Social aspects > South Africa
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/8350

There is a dearth of knowledge on rural South African children’s perspectives of hope, and how their hope can be nurtured, shaped, and strengthened. Guided by a qualitative approach, and located within a critical transformative paradigm, this study explores the following research question: How could visual participatory methodology as ‘research as intervention’ enable rural South African primary school children to explore their conceptualisations of hope, as well as strengthen their hope? To answer this question I pose two sub-questions: Firstly, what are rural primary school children’s conceptualisations of hope? Secondly, how could using visual participatory methodology to explore their hope also strengthen the children’s hope? Hope plays a key role in the lives of people, influencing decisions and behaviour, as well as coping skills and wellbeing. The socio-economic and cultural contexts in which rural South African children find themselves are critical in enabling hope and influencing their psychosocial wellbeing. While international hope research boasts a diversity of theories, there is scarce representation of such research from an African perspective. Unable to turn to an Afrocentric theory of hope this study is framed by two theories from the global-North: Scioli’s (2007) Integrative theory of hope which provides a description of the individual’s hope process, and Prilleltensky and Prilleltensky’s (2007) Framework of psychosocial wellbeing which provides a broader context in which to view this process. Over a period of a year I engaged with twelve purposively selected 9-13 year old Basotho children, beneficiaries of a children’s programme situated in a rural village in the QwaQwa region, Free State, South Africa, to explore their hope. Using visual participatory methodology, data was co-constructed through four visual data generating tools (collage-making, drawing, Mmogo-method®, and photovoice), as well as individual interviews, a group interview, and notes and photographs kept in my research journal. A qualitative thematic analysis was followed, and a literature control conducted to re-contextualise the findings. The results of this study are presented in themes. The first three themes, Hope is having a better life; Hope is community participation and togetherness; and Hope is weakened by others and by one’s environment, combine to represent hope as a multi-layered, multi-dimensional experience towards attaining a better life on a contextual, personal, relational, and collective level. These levels of hope are all inter-related, interdependent, and influenced by cultural factors and the children’s belief system (or worldview). I therefore conclude that, according to these rural South African school children, hope is an internal process of being that develops within the individual, with assistance from external resources, and then extends outwardly through hopeful beliefs, feelings, and behaviours to promote togetherness, care, and respect in one’s community. The last three themes, Strengthened personal hope; Enhanced relational hope; and Mobilised collective hope, show that using visual participatory methodology to engage the participants in an exploration of hope potentially strengthened, enhanced, and mobilised their hope across three inter-related and overlapping levels: Personal, Relational, and Collective. The participants expressed a growing understanding of their hoping process, increased sense of autonomy, and improved coping skills for strengthening their own hope. They also began to refer to themselves as Hope Champions - able to foster hope in others by behaving in a hopeful manner, teaching others about hope, and offering care and support. I therefore conclude that this shifting view of themselves as competent and valuable members of the community mobilised their collective level of hope as they began to formulate ideas of how they could be active citizens in their community, pursuing collective wellbeing for themselves and other members of the community so that everyone could live a better life. The findings have several implications for educational psychologists working with marginalised and vulnerable children’s hope, for fostering hope in school contexts, and for educational hope research with marginalised children in rural South African communities. While this study cannot presume to have achieved long-term social change, it does certainly lay the foundation for proposing that ‘research as intervention’ has promising potential as ‘research as hope-intervention’ in educational contexts. In responding to the research question, I argue that visual participatory research methodology, when focused on hope, is in and of itself a hope-enhancing intervention. Consequently, combining visual participatory methodology with hope-focused explorations enables ‘research as hope-intervention’, facilitating a strengthening of the participants’ hope, and resulting in meaningful personal transformation. I conclude that using ‘research as hope-intervention’ with rural South African children holds many possibilities for mobilising a ‘pedagogy of hope’.