English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Community-university research partnerships (CURPs) can be mutually beneficial but not all manage to co-create knowledge. Though much has been written on conditions for and obstacles to success, less is known about specific factors that may help. This paper adds to emerging literature on this issue by examining how two CURPs, using different community-based research approaches in divergent contexts, found ways to address challenges and co-create knowledge. The Canadian partnership sought to foster knowledge sharing on parenting children with disabilities among researchers, practitioners, community groups and members. The rural Kenyan CURP tested usefulness of a traditional gathering space for fostering intergenerational “sex-talk”, hoping to enhance communication between community stakeholders and make accessing health services more acceptable. After presenting main features of both, we identify factors that helped each succeed in its unique context then explore factors that cut across the two. Three common facilitating factors emerged: early and ongoing partner involvement, presence of a safe climate, and knowledge translation for diverse users. Two of these have received scant attention to date, suggesting some implications for practice. As we cannot assume community partners feel safe sharing, researchers need to identify potential barriers and design strategies to reduce them. We also need to explore, document, and share innovative ways to make knowledge accessible for diverse users. Finally, as flexibility and creativity were key to success of both CURPs, these aspects should be emphasized in teaching community researchers. Further work could document innovations and evaluate their effectiveness in helping co-creation of knowledge happen. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: Alice Home University of Ottawa, CA

Facilitating Co-Creation of Knowledge in Two Community-University Research Partnerships