In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

139 Appendix: Behind the Scenes Reflections on Field Research in Action THIS PROJECT WAS BORN out of mutual interest. When we met, at that time as a new assistant professor of social work (Laura) and a dual degree graduate student in public policy and social work (Ben), we discovered a shared concern for the lives of young people, particularly related to their experiences in institutional settings. Our own direct practice experiences—some frustrating, others affirming—left us wanting a more complete understanding of facilities such as Wildwood House, examining them as subcultures with tremendous potential to influence young people’s lives. Due to a sequence of fortuitous events, we put our minds together to launch this project, and after some time to ruminate on the findings, compiled the sum of our experiences and insights into this book. In this appendix we describe how we initiated the project, collected data, and made sense of the many layers of findings. We also reflect on the some of the challenges and ethical dilemmas we encountered in doing collaborative fieldwork in an institutional setting. It is our hope that this appendix will offer transparency in the research process as well as guidance for scholars and students engaged in or planning field research projects. Getting Started Gaining access as a researcher to any correctional facility, particularly those housing court-supervised youth, is no simple task. We were fortunate to be introduced to Wildwood House by a senior faculty colleague who had a working relationship with the facility director, Mr. Kowalski, who believed in the value of research to inform and improve practice. While at first we assumed that he would endorse only a more evaluative or quantitative type of study, we were pleasantly surprised that he was open to a loosely conceptualized (and for that matter, more intrusive) qualitative project. We presented Mr. Kowalski with our initial research aims and he proceeded to seek buy-in for the study from the head of Unit C, Mr. Lund, and the staff psychologist. Once the study was approved by external reviewers (for seed funding) and the university’s institutional review board (for ethical considerations ), we began the process of introducing ourselves and the project to the staff and residents of Unit C. Our first encounter with this larger audience was during a Unit C staff retreat. About a week prior to this retreat, Mr. Lund and the staff psychologist had taken us on a facility orientation tour and explained to us, among other aspects of facility life, the critical importance of bonding with the staff and earning their trust. As such, our initial meeting with the staff felt critical and anxiety-laden. In preparation for this meeting, we constructed a one-page description of the study that included our basic research goals and the methods we planned to use, along with a bit about our own professional and scholarly backgrounds. We included this last piece of information based on our prior experiences of juvenile corrections staff being wary of outsiders, particularly researchers, coming in to assess or observe their work. During this initial meeting, we wanted to position ourselves to the staff as both insiders and outsiders; clearly, we did not currently work in the system and were therefore likely to be seen as outsiders. Still, we both had practice experience with youth residential treatment and correctional institutions that we hoped would grant us some credibility in the eyes of the staff. After Mr. Lund introduced us to the staff, we delivered a brief presentation about our study and then invited the group to ask questions. Most of the staff appeared to be disinterested in the information, except for a few who inquired about the time burden of the study (for them and the residents), our planned frequency and duration of visits, and whether or not we were going to offer the staff ongoing feedback about our findings. As we left the retreat, we noted that although it hadn’t been a particularly easy afternoon, it had been an important first step in building trust and rapport with the staff— which we knew was critical to our acceptance into their workspace and the effectiveness of the project overall. About two weeks following this retreat, we coordinated a date and time with Mr. Lund to introduce the project to the residents. Given our direct practice backgrounds, we both felt fairly confident in our abilities to connect with the youth, but we were still oddly anxious. Our first meeting...

Share