Devising Strategies: Study of Issues in Anthropological Research as Faced by Graduate Students

Research in anthropology is mandatory for any graduate student. It requires fieldwork in the community. This makes anthropology a vibrant and thrilling discipline. However, the graduate students in Pakistani universities are not well versed with research and particularly with fieldwork-based research in social sciences. Although the courses taught prior to fieldwork in one way or the other attempt to train the graduate students for practical fieldwork it still is not enough if a student does not put enough effort at the preparatory or synopsis stage. The advisor role of the supervisor is also very significant during this phase. This paper brings forth only five of many challenges and problems of research and fieldwork faced by Pakistani graduate students. This paper echoes the experiences of fieldwork and anthropological research by the graduate students of anthropology in Pakistan. The major challenge identified in the preparatory phase was a selection of the research topic. The rest of the challenges are of the fieldwork, starting with the choice of ‘locale’ and willingness or reluctance of interlocutors, and leading to language and translation challenges to write the accurate findings of the research and later present the research to a larger audience. Methodology as a recurrent challenge for graduate students of anthropology is a serious concern that is reported in this paper. This paper is based on the responses from 101 graduate students of anthropology at Quaid-i-Azam University, collected during 2009-2020 in the form of written assignments.

Following the science? Views from scientists on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in five European countries

IntroductionIn order to tackle the pandemic, governments have established various types of advisory boards to provide evidence and recommendations to policy makers. Scientists working on these boards have faced many challenges, including working under significant time constraints to produce ‘evidence’ as quickly as possible. However, their voices are still largely missing in the discussion. This study explores the views and experiences of scientists working on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the aim to learn lessons for future pandemic management and preparedness.MethodsWe conducted online video or telephone semi-structured interviews between December 2020 and April 2021 with 21 scientists with an official government advisory role during the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium, the Netherlands, UK, Sweden and Germany. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed and analysed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis techniques.ResultsScientists viewed the initial focus on biomedically oriented work during the pandemic as somewhat one-dimensional, but also highlighted difficulties of working in an interdisciplinary way. They found it difficult at times to ensure that the evidence is understood and taken on board by governments. They found themselves taking on new roles, the boundaries of which were not clearly defined. Consequently, they were often perceived and treated as a public figure.ConclusionScientists working on advisory boards in European countries faced similar challenges, highlighting key lessons to be learnt. Future pandemic preparedness efforts should focus on building interdisciplinary collaboration through development of scientists’ skills and appropriate infrastructure; ensuring transparency in how boards operate; defining and protecting the boundaries of the scientific advisor role; and supporting scientists to inform the public in the fight against disinformation, while dealing with potential hostile reactions.

Following the science? Views from scientists on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in five European countries

Objectives: To explore the views and experiences of scientists working on government advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic, with the aim to learn lessons for future pandemic management and preparedness. Design: Explorative qualitative interview study. Participants: Twenty one scientists with an official government advisory role during the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium, the Netherlands, UK, Sweden or Germany. Methods: Online video or telephone semi-structured interviews took place between December 2020 and April 2021. They were audio recorded and transcribed, and analyzed using a combination of inductive and deductive thematic analysis techniques. Results: Scientists found working on the advisory boards during the COVID-19 pandemic to be a rewarding experience. However, they identified numerous challenges including learning to work in an interdisciplinary way, ensuring that evidence is understood and taken on board by governments, and dealing with media and public reactions. Scientists found themselves taking on new roles, the boundaries of which were not clearly defined. Consequently, they received substantial media attention and were often perceived and treated as a public figure. Conclusions: Scientists working on advisory boards in European countries faced similar challenges, highlighting key lessons to be learnt. Future pandemic preparedness efforts should focus on building interdisciplinary collaboration within advisory boards; ensuring transparency in how boards operate; defining and protecting boundaries of the scientific advisor role; and supporting scientists to inform the public in the fight against disinformation, whilst dealing with potential hostile reactions.

An action researcher in an advisor’s hat: A short reflection on lessons the OECD has learned from undertaking action research in the realm of policy and politics

Action research has enormous potential for policymakers, and those who advise them, to work in more iterative, reflective, and collaborative ways. For complex systems facing wicked problems, any approach that gets it closer to framing a problem well and drawing upon diverse forms of knowledge to bring about change, is good. Advisors who do action research in policymaking or political settings should be sensitive to the fact that this methodology may confound expectations regarding the ‘traditional’ advisor role. As such, some careful navigation of this approach (and what it means for the relationship and perception policymakers may have with those they engage to advise them) is required. This opinion piece shares lessons from an advisor working in the OECD’s innovation team, which embraced the action research methodology to reflect on and design innovative policy interventions with public sector policymakers. Action researchers who are using this methodology to produce policy advice may be more successful in auguring, and better navigating, new kinds of relationships with government if they heed the following lessons: frame the value of action research with decision makers, diversify your data and follow the story, and prime practitioners to participate.

Pursuing PERMA in a Pandemic: Reflections on a Socially-Distanced Advising Session

Drawing on transcribed excerpts, this reflection describes an online advising session conducted by the author, a full-time EFL lecturer and developing language learning advisor, with a language learner attending a private Japanese university. This follows from a previous advising session conducted prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and explores the impact of the pandemic on the learner’s reported motivation. The advisor engages with the advisee to identify obstacles to motivation and other essential elements of overall well-being and is required to adapt after recognizing that a prepared advising tool is poorly suited to the advisee’s needs. Together, the pair identifies an opportunity to create positive associations between language learning and the advisee’s gaming hobby. The author experiences a greater sense of authenticity in the advisor role after considering the needs of his advisee via his existing research interest in positive psychology.

Knowing (them) is Half the Battle: Binding Learning and Life Through Linking and Metaphor in Language Advising

In this short reflective paper, taking a narrative approach I explore my development as a trainee advisor within one practice advising session. In particular, I focus on my utilization of two advising strategies (metaphor and metaview/linking) through the examination of transcribed excerpts of our dialogue. In addition to reflecting on my performance in the advisor role, I discuss how integrating these strategies with information from a learner’s personal history may lead to opportunities for deep reflection, perspective switching, and rapport building between advisor and advisee.

The hidden price of free advice: Negotiating the paradoxes of public sector business advising

Business advisors working in publicly funded enterprise agencies encounter a range of tensions as part of their everyday work. These tensions subtly shape how they provide advice and can lead to variability in how enterprise policy is delivered on the ground. We explore the competing demands facing advisors by inductively analysing advice-giving practices in public sector enterprise agencies. We find three overarching drivers of advisor role tension, including institutional demands, client demands and intrinsic demands; additionally, a further seven discrete work tactics advisors deploy to navigate these tensions are analysed. From our findings, we develop a theoretical model that advances a dynamic understanding of public sector business advice. We conclude by reflecting on the structural issues with public sector advising that might constrain the efficacy of advisors.

Can a virtual on-line nation-wide mentorship-matching process meet the need?

In Homer’s 8th century BC Greek epic poem “Odyssey”, Odysseus, upon leaving town to do battle for an extended period, could not have done better than to leave his son, Telemachus, in the care of a trusted friend, Mentor. Thus, “mentorship” can be seen as a key process, whereby a more experienced individual takes on an advisor role for a less-experienced colleague.

How the Other Half Thinks

This chapter integrates research on advice interactions, motivations for advising, and the psychological consequences of serving in an advisor role to develop a more comprehensive perspective on the psychology of advising. By connecting this work, which spans various methodologies and theoretical foundations, it advances current thinking on advice giving in two primary ways. First, in examining the diversity of motivations for advice giving, it extends the set of advice-exchange outcomes to be considered beyond those previously emphasized. Second, it highlights previously unexplored aspects of the advisor role that are likely to impact the advice-giving experience. The chapter concludes by providing recommendations for advisors and identifying areas ripe for future research to illuminate the advisor side of the advice-exchange process.