I think this is excellent as children will have a different 'world view' and perception (and therefore interpretation) of what they experience. Combined with academic critical expertise, I believe that a fuller 'picture', gathering of data and analysis of data may be achieved. Have you written a paper? I think an issue that may be raised here is, "Is it ethical?" My response,"Is it ethical not to give the peer group a voice regardless of age or ability?" Look forward to seeing more comments.

I think this is excellent as children will have a different 'world view' and perception (and therefore interpretation) of what they experience. Combined with academic critical expertise, I believe that a fuller 'picture', gathering of data and analysis of data may be achieved. Have you written a paper? I think an issue that may be raised here is, "Is it ethical?" My response,"Is it ethical not to give the peer group a voice regardless of age or ability?" Look forward to seeing more comments.

I like this idea and it seems like an innovative idea. I agree with Ms. MacNamara - you should write a paper on this. Also, I think the data collected from this perspective is probably very valuable.

I have to agree that ethics should be considered. I also think viewing the children as key-informants rather than researchers is best.

Thank you all for the interesting and helpful responses made so far. We are in the process of writing up currently, both in papers as an ethnographic monograph. Ethics and ethical positions were central in asking this question, as there are so many issues that arise here - some pointed to by Larisa - but some also raise other interesting questions. For instance, as ethnographers and qualitative researchers with a predilection towards transformatory and participatory approaches, I am not as sure about the terminology which privileges received positions of power in the research process. The question of special education is important, but perhaps observing our work and being part of it for years has given an education but not, of course, a qualification. This is something I would also like to explore in the ensuing write-ups.

Thank you again - all answers much appreciated.

Hi Jonathan, in terms of defining whether the young people are key-informants or researchers is down to the taught and applied research skills that these young people have. I think your question of special education is an important one.

Some thoughts - door-to-door survey collectors (in Australia and UK) are often given the title 'Researcher' to lend credibility when they knock on the door. Some of these people have no research qualification or experience, other than collecting data for these surveys. On a couple of occasions I found that I was being 'shepherded' into a particular response (which I did not do). Whether they followed ethics procedures or understood research methods is unknown. So - from very basic level, how would this differ from a young person with no experience collecting data?

If, however, the young person has been involved in science from a young age (I started at 7 years old with basic research methods) and critical thinking skills, would this person then be granted title 'researcher' regardless of age or tertiary qualification? Many schools have introduced critical thinking skills, ethics and research skills from the age of 9 as they have to do projects on the environment, society, geography and the natural sciences.

Here is a link from a Unilever study with young people - the comment that I found pertinent on the page is:

"Nope, the kids in this video don't have all the answers. But imagine what they could do with their passion and creativity if they were provided the right tools."

What could they do if they were provided with the right tools, support and guidance :-)

http://www.upworthy.com/leave-it-to-some-little-kids-to-come-up-with-creative-fixes-for-huge-problems-no-big-deal

Children can be good key informants. But their participation in research may alter their own worldview. If the same or similar research is conducted after a year or two in the same community, the same children might provide different information which they provided in a previous study. They do help us in research, but our research also affects their knowledge and attitude. Though we in no way intend to harm children, but our activities do affect them. Ethical questions do arise at this point, but I am also looking for satisfactory responses how to minimize unintended impacts of research involving children.

The involvement of young children in research not directly but as someone who just accompanies you will give that extra edge to the research component.This is the experience of one of my PhD students who had to take her ten year old daughter ( not by choice) to visit the sample families in her research on consumer durables.

The child came out with her observation and some interesting details strengthening the research angle.

As an anthropologist I can say "definitely yes" within certain limits. For an overview see the Reggio-Inspired Network discussion of Children as Researchers at http://www.mnreggio.org/?page_id=129

I have some questions about it myself - after all consider that we give children special protections as research subjects - what does this mean for them as researchers? I'm unsure but it gives me pause to welcome children into the research community with a completely open mind.

One does have to be sure that the children understand what is said, and that in their attempts to share what they have seen or been told they don't change the meaning. In the same vein children shouldn't be used as interpreters except in emergencies - they may know the words but not the full extent of the meaning and therefor misinterpret the meaning.

Hello Faye - very good points. Perhaps some of the reasons for affording special protections to children whether as researchers or research subjects? Seems to me that we need to think very hard before simply accepting and using (" using" - now there's a nice operative word for you!) children as researchers.

Some academics argue you have to 'train' children to be researchers others disagree.

Some children's rights organisations have a different approach to 'training' see Investing in children:

https://sites.google.com/site/investinginchildrencic/home

Have a look at these links for discussions of children as researchers and ethics of research with children and young people:

International charter

http://childethics.com/charter/

http://www.barnardos.org.uk/involving_young_people_in_research_pdf.pdf

Centre for Children and Young People. (2005).

Researching with children: Code of ethical practice

ccyp.scu.edu.au/download.php?doc_id=388&site_id=27

http://www.barnardos.org.uk/resources/research_and_publications/ethics-social-research-and-consulting-with-children-and-young-people/publication-view.jsp?pid=PUB-1158

http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/research/briefings/ethical-research-factsheet_wda97712.html

this book edited by myself and colleagues may be of interest:

Researching with Children and Young People

http://www.uk.sagepub.com/booksProdDesc.nav?prodId=Book229420

I have some ethical concerns as well of having children as researchers. They can, of course, be a part of our research activities in the field; yes, as key informants.  In some ways, children's candidness can be very useful. 

I recently completed an eight months anthropological fieldwork amongst 26 children between the ages of 10-13 years as part of my PhD field research. Huge ethical barriers still exist having children as researchers. However, during my research children questioned ethical procedures and challenged me as the main researcher to work around the ethical concerns. In conclusion, the more we welcome children into research the better for us to experience how we can overcome these ethical concerns.  

Thanks all and thanks Rosa - I have heard such challenges from participants before and wonder if our retreat into ethical protocols, within the sector, represents an imposition of researcher power rather than protecting participants from harm.

Hi Jonathan

Several thoughts

1) We recently concluded a major study for UNICEF in India with adolescents in 6 states. Though we had adult investigators, we were constantly wowed with the observations of our 10-19 year-olds - down to a comment from one of the community kids that I had a dandruff problem :) I think the children will provide an alternate refreshing dimension to your findings.

2) But I would also toss in a caveat not to make dinner time all about, "Tell me what you saw today."

3) I recall one public health presentation where the researcher was using photovoice and had involved his daughter in the field during the participatory data collection. The young one had very definite views. Led me to wonder - What would be the impact of someone from an "advanced" community going to someone from a "backward" community and asking questions. When my niece from the US visits, I have to prepare my nephew in India to handle what may be insensitive questions from the young lady. This is in a family context. What happens in the research context?

What a good conversation, I've enjoyed reading all the comments.  Thanks Jonathan for inspiring our collective thinking on the topic of children and research.  My thoughts run along a slightly different line - when children produce or generate data [I use these terms with adults too because for me it describes the creation/construction of data rather than implying data are simply out there waiting to be 'collected'] how is this different - or is it -from what adults do?  How can we be reflexive about such a question in a way that helps us to think about our analysis, interpretation and representations?

Thanks Brenda and everyone - great thoughts and great conversation!

I agree - great discussion that reflects the local/global change in status of children and young people (those under 18) as fuller participants in the range of activities that concern them. Many of you would also know of Mary Kellett's work in this regard, but here's a story from our neck of the woods. Here in Canada - at least at this institution in southern Ontario - this conversation has previously ignited a firestorm especially with our Research Ethics Board mired in 20th cenbtury political and theoretical constructs of incompetent and vulnerable children ala Stanley Millgram thinking. With the psychologization - is that a good word yet? - of children as research objects and a continued lack of understanding of how even small children in pre-school can meaningfully participate and co-construct research findings, the main concern seems to be that any co-researchers under the age of 18 are being 'coerced' and only benefit the academic's CV. It's also very clearly an issue of power but that's another conversation. As a rights-based researcher and publisher I attempted to co-publish a chapter/paper with 4 fourteen year olds a few years back and we couldn't do so unless their parents gave signed permission - a stance I vehemently disagreed with at the time. My colleague/research partner here in the same dept. was less adamant and after obtaining those signtures, published with them as co-authors rather than 14 year-olds from whom we gathered data/stories in order to share as muchy of the power we have as researchers with those we 'research'. Here's a link to the journal and the particular paper by Shannon A. Moore entitled 'Constructing Critical Citizenship With Young People..." 

http://journals.uvic.ca/index.php/ijcyfs/issue/view/473

Once again, great international exchange of views/ideas on this strand and through this portal. Now how do we get under-18s engaged ;-)