Katarzyna Kärkkäinen and Sonya Sahradyan
Migration research raises important ethical and methodological questions—especially when working with vulnerable participant groups. Central to these concerns are issues of power and the researcher’s responsibility. Reflexivity—the practice of critically examining our own role, assumptions, and influence throughout the research process—is essential in this context. This is particularly true in participatory and arts-based research, which have gained recognition as promising approaches in migration studies. These methods invite co-creative inquiry, but they also challenge researchers to reconsider their positionality and the boundaries of their role. The process of self-reflection can be disorienting—even anxiety-inducing—but it often leads to deeper insights into both the phenomenon under study and the research process itself.
Reflexive practice may feel especially uncomfortable for those who are accustomed to maintaining control over the research process. In collaborative arts initiatives, such control is not only elusive, but it may also have the opposite of the desired effect. Letting go of control can open space for more authentic engagement and shared meaning-making.
This reflection stems from participatory team ethnography with adult migrants in two different educational settings and critical reflection between the researchers involved. These conversations have been instrumental in deepening our understanding of what it means to research with rather than on migrant communities.
Exploring Workplace Learning and (Non)Belonging Through Collaborative Arts
We explored migrant students’ learning experiences in workplace settings, particularly within the social and health care sector within vocational education context. The research involves sustained collaboration with migrant students, vocational teachers, and workplace supervisors and employs a range of co-creative and arts-based activities to enrich data collection and engage participants meaningfully. One of our art research workshops involved collaborative drawing to explore practices that support learning in workplace environments. This theme was identified from earlier observations and conversations with migrant students, teachers, and workplace supervisors, and was identified as central to the students’ lived experiences.
Figure 1. Drawing co-created by Al, Am, Helena and Jan
A second workshop involved organising multilingual workshops with local residents of Jyväskylä representing diverse backgrounds, to engage in conversations about belonging and non-belonging across various communities—including workplaces—through creative and artistic methods. This session, devoted to the collaborative co-creation of a collage, served as a powerful medium for participants to express and explore their experiences, perspectives, and emotions related to different communities and inclusion.
Figure 2. Collage co-created by participants
Both workshops were followed by rich discussions, allowing participants to reflect more deeply on the topics of learning, belonging, and communities.
Co-creating Meanings, Doubts and Discoveries
While engaging participants in co-creative practices, migrant perspectives were placed at the center of the process. Yet, as facilitators, we had to acknowledge that we entered the workshops with our own assumptions and expectations. For both of us, facilitating the workshops became a journey of encountering and revisiting our expectations, uncertainties, and preconceptions—not only as facilitators but also as researchers experienced in co-creative inquiry and migration research. Katarzyna personally felt quite anxious about how the workshop would unfold. Would anyone show up? Would the activity be dismissed as childish by young adults and adults who have more serious things to do than drawing?
I was slightly nervous about how the workshop will go, if the students will draw and enjoy it, and if they will not be tired after waiting for a long time for other students. Eventually, we moved to the other building. On the way there, we met the last student too. To my surprise, students started quite quickly organize themselves: choosing the table that they want to work, gluing the paper to the table. After a short explanation of what we will do, everybody started drawing. […] I was surprised that everybody very quickly started to paint and draw. Am painting a tree, Jan something green, Helena something blue and Al drawing a tree. (Field Notes)
Similarly to Katarzyna’s own experience, Sonya was surprised by the level of commitment shown by participants in her workshop. Everyone made the necessary arrangements to attend, and they actively engaged in both the discussions and the collage-making process. Before each workshop and workshop session we carried similar concerns. These worries, however, turned out to be unfounded.
Letting the Process Lead
At times we also had some expectations about how things should unfold, which topics participants might raise, whether these topics might be sensitive for them, and even some preconceptions about them as people. In Katarzyna’s workshop, participants chose to draw on a single sheet of paper but did so individually, which differed from what was expected from collaborative drawing. Instead of touching upon a wide range of themes, all four participants of the workshop focused on different aspects of the workplace atmosphere. Sonya also experienced similar disappointments. It came as a surprise to her that some participants were commenting briefly, writing one word or phrase on the hand and not necessarily raising the issues that she expected. However, we both noticed that in the discussion part, participants were active and discussed the topic in depth, raising insights that we never thought about, leading us to realize that it is important to trust the process. We noticed how much we were driven by the expectation of achieving a clear and content-rich outcome. Drawing or participation in the workshops for relaxation certainly disappointed us, as facilitators. However, over time, we started to see the value in drawing or participation even when done for fun. Gradually, the discussions in both workshops evolved into deeper conversations, often centered on diversity of experiences. This helped us realise that co-creative inquiry is not about controlling outcomes —it is about creating a space for participants’ voices to be heard and unexpected insights to emerge.
Further Challenging of Assumptions
We both discovered that we also had some presumptions about who might be interested in engaging in co-creative activities, and we worried that some participants might not have enough drawing and collage creating experiences and therefore might refuse to continue with the activity. To our surprise, all participants engaged fully and showed interest in drawing and creating a collage. In fact, the participant Katarzyna had been most concerned about seemed to genuinely enjoy drawing, creating a beautiful composition of trees. Similarly, other participants of the workshop were surprised by his drawing and curious about his artistic skills. Eventually, he smiled and reflected that he loves drawing and dreams of spending his retirement doing just that. In Sonya’s workshop it turned out that some participants had experience in creating collages and were eager to help others with the activity. Our worries about participants not having prior experiences and not engaging were completely unfounded. These cases made us reflect on how easily unconscious biases can sneak into our thinking—even when we believed we were being open and inclusive. These critical encounters with our assumptions reminded us of the importance of remaining open and being critical about our own biases, both as a researcher and facilitator.
Seeing Participants in a New Light
The drawing and collage creating activity allowed participants to show sides of themselves that might otherwise remain hidden from others and themselves alike. They weren’t just “migrant students” or “refugees”—they were artists, storytellers, experts on workplace learning and belonging, and individuals with dreams, talents, and meaningful experiences. These unrevealed identities and experiences came as a surprise to us, as facilitators, but also to some participants who were similarly astonished by their creative skills and stories that they could produce on topics discussed during both workshops. However, though we, the researchers, are usually knowledgeable and aware of broader discussions on reflexivity and researcher’s positionalities, knowing theory does not guarantee entering the field without any presumption and being fully open to participants’ insights, identities and experiences. We carry expectations about how people will behave, what they will say, and even what kind of knowledge will be co-produced. However, in participatory, arts-based research, we have to let go of some of that control. That’s not always easy.
To Conclude – So What?
It became obvious to us that, as researchers, we must acknowledge the existence of unavoidable power dynamics and unconscious presumptions that may subtly shape our thinking and interactions in the field. Engaging in critical reflection on who we are—and how our values, knowledge, experiences, and beliefs influence different stages of the research process and co-creating knowledge—can make us more sensitive to the meanings presented by participants, thereby enhancing the trustworthiness and credibility of the research. While engaging in collaborative arts-based research with vulnerable groups, reflexivity is not merely a methodological tool but an ethical imperative—one that demands humility, openness, and a willingness to be transformed by the research encounter.
References
Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475
Cutcliffe, J. R. (2003-01). Reconsidering Reflexivity: Introducing the Case for Intellectual Entrepreneurship. Qualitative Health Research, 13(1), 136-148. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732302239416
Faulkner, S. L., Kaunert, C. A., Kluch, Y., Koc, E. S., & Trotter, S. P. (2016). Using Arts-Based Research Exercises to Foster Reflexivity in Qualitative Research. LEARNing Landscapes, 9(2), 197-212. https://doi.org/10.36510/learnland.v9i2.771
Lietz, C. A., Langer, C. L., & Furman, R. (2006). Establishing trustworthiness in qualitative
research in social work. Qualitative Social Work, 5(4), 441–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325006070288
Moralli, M. (2024). Arts-based methods in migration research. A methodological analysis on participatory visual methods and their transformative potentials and limits in studying Human mobility. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 23, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069241254008
Watt, D. (2007). On becoming a qualitative researcher: The value of reflexivity. The Qualitative Report, 12(1), 82–101. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol12/iss1/5/
Katarzyna Kärkkäinen, PhD (Education), works as a postdoctoral researcher in the Finnish Institute for Educational Research at the University of Jyväskylä as responsible researcher and Co-PI of EU Horizon FEWL project—Enhancing Research on the Integration of Formal Educational Programmes and Workplace Learning (2023-2025). More information about FEWL project: FEWL-project
Sonya Sahradyan, PhD (Applied Linguistics), works as a postdoctoral researcher in the Finnish Institute for Educational Research at the University of Jyväskylä. Her current research focuses on migrant participation in elections in Finland. She was also involved in the Crossing Borders project funded by the Academy of Finland (2017-2021), leading the Communities of Belonging workshop in collaboration with a youth work and community coordinator at the Multicultural Centre Gloria. More information about the Crossing Borders project: Crossing Borders
