Participatory PhD Network by NCCPE

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:28:16 UTC

I like the idea of co-analysis involving lived experience by sharing the quantitative analysis findings with them and checking these findings reflect their lived expereince, as well as asking them to check for any researcher assumptions that may be inaccurate when reporting the findings. Also asking them how they would like the findings to be shared and what they think the most helpful recommendations should be for practice and future research.

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:28:32 UTC

Asking community advisory group to share feedback on themes as part of inductive TA or IPA for qualitative semi-structured interviews and use of Photovoice-like method
-Who might need to be involved and when?

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:28:43 UTC

External trainers for analytic approach so positionality can be equal across all individuals
• Making sure timely training so knowledge is not lost
• Other placement students to help with organization of data, transcribing, facilitating focus groups, meetings, admin
-What support or boundaries do you need?

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:32:30 UTC

Supervisors for direction of PhD to remind us of timelines and commitments
• Knowing when we have enough data, saturation, not tipping over because one new idea came into play

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:32:52 UTC

My research is looking at prison healthcare. I’m considering the use of a participatory approach, but I have some concerns. In particular, I’m wondering whether involving participants in this way could unintentionally contribute to stigmatisation, especially given the prison context. I’m also unsure about the best way to approach acknowledging contributions from those involved in participatory elements of the research.

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:33:10 UTC

I have been fortunate enough to have access to a small amount of funding to pay lived expereince experts to advise on my study at different stages. I think it would be great if this kind of support was built into research proposals from the very beginning and that it was almost assumed as essential to participatory research

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:33:18 UTC

I'm hoping to do thematic co-analysis - working with the advisory panel to discuss codes, cluster them and interpret themes.

I would like to do this with the advisory panel after I’ve done an initial coding and then also at the end to validate themes.

What support or boundaries do you need? That is the big question. I would like support on how to do this within a framework of a PhD when I am expected to be the sole creator of new knowledge. I would like some training tools, in order to explain to the advisory panel what a thematic analysis is and how it works. Guidance on how to do this collaboratively. For boundaries – I currently feel I don’t know what my boundaries need to be and reflections from others on this would help me.

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:33:31 UTC

Easy read/visual results and analysis that the SEND community can access and take part in.

Menti Quiz results

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:34:26 UTC

Case Study from Slide

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:35:21 UTC

Case Study from Slide

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:35:30 UTC

Slides

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:35:47 UTC

Creating Living Knowledge Report

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:36:16 UTC

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:36:34 UTC

Jess Carr - engaged research thesis

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:36:55 UTC

Partnership Working Tutorial

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:39:45 UTC

Partnership purpose cards

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:49:07 UTC

Navigating Power dynamics

nccpeenquiries1 — 2026-04-01 14:49:26 UTC