Arts-led, youth-driven methodology and social impact: “making what we need” in times of crisis

References

• Anderson, M., Cameron, D., & Sutton, P. (2012). Participation and creation in these brave new worlds: Technology and innovation as part of the landscape. Research in Drama Education. The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 17(4), 469–476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Auslander, P. (2012). Digital liveness: A historico-philosophical perspective. PAJ: A Journal of Performance and Art, 34(3), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1162/PAJJ_a_00106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blenkinsop, S., & Scott, C. (2017). Becoming teacher/tree and bringing the natural world to students: An educational examination of the influence of the other‐than‐human world and the Great Actor on Martin Buber’s concept of the I/Thou. Educational Theory, 67(4), 453–469. https://doi.org/10.1111/edth.12258
   Google Scholar
• Boler, M. (2014). Teaching for hope: The ethics of shattering world views. In V. Bozalek, B. Leibowitz, R. Carolissen, & M. Boler (Eds.), Discerning critical hope in educational practices (pp. 26–39). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Buber, M. B., & Smith, R. (1923/2013). I and Thou. eBookIt.com.
   Google Scholar
• Chung, E. (2020). Affective reflexivity: Encounters of affects in the material labor of fieldwork. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 33(3), 372–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2019.1676480
   Google Scholar
• Collier, D. R., & Perry, M. (2021). Imagining research together and working across divides: Arts-informed research about young people’s (post) digital lives. Qualitative Research, 0(0), 146879412110100–146879412110120. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941211010029
   Google Scholar
• Davis, S. (2012). Liveness, mediation and immediacy – innovative technology use in process and performance. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 17(4), 501–516.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. (2003). Performance ethnography: Critical pedagogy and the politics of culture. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Elias, A. J., & Moraru, C. (2015). The planetary turn: Relationality and geoaesthetics in the twenty-first century. Northwestern University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Facer, K. (2019). Storytelling in troubled times: What is the role for educators in the deep crises of the 21st century? Literacy (Oxford, England), 53(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12176
   Google Scholar
• Feigenbaum, A., & Alamalhodaei, A. (2020). The data storytelling workbook. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher, K. (2014). Why theatre matters: Urban youth, engagement, and a pedagogy of the real. University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher, K. (2018). Love, time, reflexivity, and the methodological imaginary. In K. Gallagher (Ed.), The methodological dilemma revisited: Creative, critical and collaborative approaches to qualitative research for a new era (pp. 91–110). Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315149325
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher, K., & Wessels, A. (2011). Emergent pedagogy and affect in collaborative research: A metho-pedagogical paradigm. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 19(2), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2011.582260
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher, K., Cardwell, N., & Rodricks, D. J. (2018). An ecology of care: Relationships and responsibility through the constitutive and creative acts of oral history theatre-making in local communities shouldering global crises. In A. Harris, P. Thomson, & K. Snepvangers (Eds.), Creativity education: Policies, partnerships and ecologies (pp. 307–329). Palgrave-Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Govier, T. (1992). Trust, distrust, and feminist theory. Hypatia, 7(1), 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.1992.tb00695.x
   Google Scholar
• Gumbrecht, H. U. (2004). Production of presence: What meaning cannot convey. Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. (2016). Make what you need. In K. Gallagher & B. Freeman (Eds.), In defence of theatre: Aesthetic practices and social interventions (pp. 35–48). University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Heddon, D., & Mackey, S. (2012). Environmentalism, performance and applications: uncertainties and emancipations. Research in Drama Education. The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 17(2), 163–192.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hendricks, V., & Vestergaard, M. (2019). Reality lost: Markets of attention, misinformation and manipulation. Springer Open.
   Google Scholar
• Hurley, E. (2010). Theatre & feeling. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, M., & Stanley, G. (2010). Collaborative action research: A democratic undertaking or a web of collusion and compliance? International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 33(2), 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2010.484549
   Google Scholar
• Kushnir, A. (2020). A new hearing: Representation and relationship in the making of Towards Youth: A Play on Radical Hope. In K. Gallagher, D. Rodricks, & K. Jacobson (Eds.), Global youth citizenry and radical hope: Enacting community-engaged research through performative methodologies (pp. 245–265). Springer Singapore Pte. Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Lather, P. (2006). Paradigm proliferation as a good thing to think with: Teaching research in education as a wild profusion. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(1), 35–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390500450144
   Google Scholar
• Lather, P. (2008). Getting lost: Critiquing across difference as methodological practice. In K. Gallagher (Ed.), The methodological dilemma: Creative, critical, and collaborative approaches to qualitative research (pp. 219–231). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lury, C., & Wakeford, N. (2012). Inventive methods: The happening of the social. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Massumi, B. (2015). Politics of affect. Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Muhonen, R., Benneworth, P., & Olmos-Peñuela, J. (2019). From productive interactions to impact pathways: Understanding the key dimensions in developing SSH research societal impact. Research Evaluation, 29(1), 34–47. https://doi.org/10.3990/4.2589-9716.2018.02
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neimanis, A., Åsberg, C., & Hedrén, J. (2015). Four problems, four directions for environmental humanities: Toward critical posthumanities for the Anthropocene. Ethics & the Environment, 20(1), 67–91. https://doi.org/10.2979/ethicsenviro.20.1.67
   Google Scholar
• Odell, J. (2019). How to do nothing: Resisting the attention economy. Melville House.
   Google Scholar
• Ojala, M. (2018). Eco-anxiety. RSA Journal, 164(4), 10–15. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26798430
   Google Scholar
• Peters, S. (2019). Verbatim theatre and a dramaturgy of belonging. Australasian Drama Studies, 74, 39–63.
   Google Scholar
• Reason, M., & Lindelof, A. M. (Eds.). (2016). Experiencing liveness in contemporary performance: interdisciplinary perspectives (1st ed.). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Shiva, V. (2020). Reclaiming the commons: Biodiversity, indigenous knowledge, and the rights of mother earth. Synergistic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Simpson, L. B. (2014). Land as Pedagogy: Nishnaabeg intelligence and rebellious transformation. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 3(3), 1–25.
   Google Scholar
• Solkinson, D., & Chi, K. (2017). Permaculture design: Core curriculum notes. www.permaculturedesgn.ca
   Google Scholar
• Spaapen, J., & van Drooge, L. (2011). Introducing ‘productive interactions’ in social impact assessment. Research Evaluation, 20(3), 211–218. https://doi.org/10.3152/095820211X12941371876742
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• St. Pierre, E. A. (2013). The posts continue: Becoming. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 646–657. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2013.788754
   Google Scholar
• Tarr, J., Gonzalez-Polledo, E., & Cornish, F. (2018). On liveness: Using arts workshops as a research method. Qualitative Research, 18(1), 36–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794117694219
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, H. (2009). Performance affects: Applied theatre and the end of effect. Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• van Manen, M. (1983). Invitation to phenomenology and pedagogy. Phenomenology and Pedagogy, 1(1), i–ii. https://doi.org/10.29173/pandp14869
   Google Scholar
• Zembylas, M. (2007). Risks and pleasures: A Deleuzo-Guattarian pedagogy of desire in education. British Educational Research Journal, 33(3), 331–347. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701243602
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar