Social Impact

How is Knowledge Produced, and What Impact Does it Have?

Depending on the issue at hand, various methods and approaches are appropriate in gathering information and dispersing it to make sure that it is accessible to their intended audience. My time academically has been spent unpacking how knowledge is produced through analyzing how it is gathered, by whom, and how it is distributed. Through showcasing individual ways in which topics are addressed and knowledge is obtained, I hope to provide people with different methods to engage in meaningful conversations.

In social science, how a researcher situates themselves is crucial. The knowledge gained from being a part of the community in which you are researching is invaluable, as it can give an entirely different perspective on things that would not come to the surface otherwise. Documenting the lived experiences of a community through the perspective of that community provides powerful insight into ways of thinking about issues that aren’t seen from an empirical overview. Interpretivist methods seek knowledge and research “from their own histories and lives: particular gender, race-ethnic, or other perspectives” (Schwartz-Shea, 2012). By dismissing this, results from a particular research question could often be misconstrued.

Centering Beneficiary Stories in Non-Profit Organization Communications

In my paper, Centering Beneficiary Stories in Non-Profit Organization Communications (located at the link above), I employ an interpretivist approach based on my positionality in the non-profit space. As the Communications Director for a major local non-profit organization (NPO), my expertise comes from being immersed in the NPO world and finding ways to amplify the voices of the community better. One noticeable trend amongst various NPOs is the tendency to send communications highlighting the organization and the charitable work that is being done. Coinciding, these communications speak to donors to talk about how their contribution matters, centering the gift-givers as opposed to the beneficiaries. This piece rethinks communication efforts for NPO and gives a roadmap for ways to decenter the NPO and put the beneficiary first, and to break apart the power structure that is often created when organizations center themselves.

Depending on the question at hand, a more objective approach is more suited to gathering information. A positivist framework is more closely aligned with quantitative data collection. Figures, statistics, etc., are looked at to determine the answer to a specific question or concern. Immersing oneself in a community isn’t necessarily the most effective approach to answering particular questions. Often, we see this style of data collection when looking at specific policies enacted. Dissecting policies subjectively allows researchers to look at specific and measurable outcomes. The important thing to note about positivist research is that it looks at facts and reproducible data.

Highlighting the Effects of Global Weather Change

In my paper Highlighting the Effects of Global Weather Change (located at the link above), I employ a positivist approach to addressing climate change because it is one of the most politicized issues discussed. To have a valid conversation with various groups, raw data and facts are necessary, especially when talking about policy and impact. By showcasing the realities of the effects, conversations with lawmakers can begin as to how to combat these realities better. An investigation into the Army Corps of Engineers revealed in 2007 that the cause of levee failures in the Katrina disaster was mostly due to “ignoring increases in threat levels, building levees lower than required by law and committing errors of construction oversight and risk assessment” (Morse, 2008). The environmental destruction caused by the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010, which killed 15 employees and caused insurmountable damage to the Gulf Coast, and the failed levees in New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina show the devastation that can happen to communities based on faulty environmental policies (Klein, 2019).

Many times, issues can be addressed and discussed through both approaches. Giving space and a voice to those in the communities that are impacted by a particular issue is extremely important in showing its impact on an everyday level. At the same time, it is also essential to speak to the policies and barriers put in place on a more empirical and subjective level to give a well-rounded picture of the issue.

Giving Voice to the Incarcerated

I utilize both approaches in my paper, Giving Voice to the Incarcerated (located at the link above). Though vastly different epistemologies, the two can work together, as I showcase on this page. While participating in an internship through ASU called Prison Pen Project, I had the opportunity to gain insight into the thoughts, emotions, and daily lives of a group of inmates in the New Mexico State Penitentiary through their writings. In this section, I try to exhibit the humanity of these inmates through their words while still respecting privacy (thus, no actual names or writings will be used.) While still trying to center the inmates' experiences and thoughts, I also reflect on the Prison Industrial Complex. Utilizing an interpretivist approach by highlighting my experiences with interactions with the individuals allows me to give the inmates a voice. It is also important in this page to employ a positivist approach, where I discuss various conditions and policies affecting these inmates.