Search

This paper synthesises a large dataset on how social research methods and practices have been adapted or designed for use within pandemic conditions and a climate of crisis and uncertainty. The data were generated through two rapid evidence reviews of the methodological literature and in dialogue with social researchers in online knowledge exchange workshops. The authors apply the concepts of crisis, uncertainty and sustainability to discuss the ways in which social researchers are able to conduct research and make it valid, trustworthy and ethical in times of great challenge for research. The paper provides a big picture of the challenges and the degree of maturity and sustainability of various methodological responses. The authors conclude that some methods are at a critical juncture in their development for times of crisis and uncertainty and that these merit particular attention for those involved in capacity-building for social research.

Social care provision across high-income countries has been transformed over the last ten years by personalisation – a policy agenda to give people with eligible support needs more choice and control over their support. Yet the ideological underpinnings of this transformation remain highly mutable, particularly in the context of reduced welfare provision that has unfolded in many nations advancing personalisation. How the policy has manifested itself has led to an expectation for people to self-build a life as individual consumers within a care market. This article draws on a study exploring how people with learning disabilities in England and Scotland are responding to the everyday realities of personalisation as it is enacted where they live and show the relationality inherent in their practices. We propose that the personalisation agenda as it currently stands (as an individualising movement involving an increasing responsibilisation of individuals and their families) ignores the inherently relational nature of care and support. We propose that social care policy needs to recognise the relational ways in which people build their lives and to advocate a redistribution of responsibility to reduce inequalities in the allocation of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

UK policy for adults with intellectual disabilities no longer supports state-provided building-based day care but promotes personalised care and support under individuals' control with choice of community-based opportunities. The research explored experiences of this new terrain and the informal learning involved. An initial scoping review was followed by interviews with key service providers in one urban and one rural area in England and one of each in Scotland. Next, ethnographic fieldwork with people with intellectual disabilities involved a flexible mix of observations, interviews, focus groups, and participant-generated visual data. Thematic analysis involved an iterative mix of deductive and inductive coding. Findings showed informal peer learning ranged from ad hoc to structurally supported. Though learning was often tacit, support was valued and agency developed. The availability of local supportive people and schemes and time spent in them to develop new skills and identities was vital to people self-building community lives. This research looked at the experiences of people with intellectual disabilities, as they and their friends and family respond to policy change bringing in more personalisation and individual choice. Often people with intellectual disabilities and those supporting them do not recognise their everyday learning. Learning outside schools/colleges gets little research attention. We looked at the learning involved in people managing their own daily lives in their communities. Staff and volunteers are helping people to learn from each other in organisations, and this can become more formal peer learning, peer mentoring and peer support programmes. Advocacy groups create a sense of belonging and shared purpose, encouraging peer learning through the sharing of knowledge, experiences and problem solving. When new projects start up or traditional day services change, the staff or volunteers may not involve people with intellectual disabilities in the planning. This means people with intellectual disabilities miss opportunities to learn. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]