A dichotomous hierarchy informed by colonization, imperialism and globalisation privileges the first world as the knower and relegates the third world to the position of the ‘’other’ who is a learner.

Chilisa, 2022

Key References/Readings

Khupe, C. & Keane, M. (2017). Towards an African Education Research Methodology: Decolonising New Knowledge. Educational Research for Social Change. 6. 25-37.

Chilisa, B. (2012). Indigenous research methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Chilisa, B., Major, T. & Khudu-Petersen, K. (2017). Community engagement with a postcolonial, African-based relational paradigm. Qualitative Research. 17. (3), 326-339.

Bangura, A. K. (2011). African-Centered Research Methodologies: From Ancient Times to the Present. San Diego: Cognella.

San Code of Ethics

ASWDNet ethics statement

Mugumbate J. and Mtetwa E. (2019). Reframing social work research for Africa’s consumers of research products: A guiding tool. African Journal of Social Work, 9(2), p. 52-58.

Chilisa, B., (2019), Decolonising research: An interview. The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work, (1), 12-17.

Chilisa, B., (2019), Indigenous research is a journey: The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work, (1), 12-17.

Chilisa, B., 2015, A synthesis paper on the Made in Africa evaluation concept, African Evaluation Association, Accra.

Chilisa, B., Major, T.E., Gaotlhobogwe, M. & Mokgolodi, H., 2016, ‘Decolonizing and indigenizing evaluation practice in Africa: Toward African relational evaluation approaches’, Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 30(3). https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.30.3.05

Dlakavu, A., Mathebula, J. & Mkhize, S., 2022, ‘Decolonising and indigenising evaluation practice in Africa: Roadmap for mainstreaming the Made in Africa Evaluation approach’, African Evaluation Journal 10(1), a620. https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v10i1.620

Mertens, D. M., Cram, F., & Chilisa, B. (Eds.). (2013). Indigenous pathways into social research: Voices of a new generation. Taylor & Francis Group.

Igwe, P. A., Madichie, N. O., & Rugara, D. G. (2022). Decolonising research approaches towards non-extractive research. Qualitative Market Research, 25(4), 453–468. https://doi.org/10.1108/QMR-11-2021-0135

Barnes, B. R. (2018). Decolonising research methodologies : opportunity and caution. South African Journal of Psychology, 48(3), 379–387. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081246318798294

Chilisa, B. (2017). Decolonising transdisciplinary research approaches: an African perspective for enhancing knowledge integration in sustainability science. Sustainability Science, 12(5), 813–827. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0461-1

Ndimande, B. S. (2012). Decolonizing Research in Postapartheid South Africa: The Politics of Methodology. Qualitative Inquiry, 18(3), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411431557

Alvares, C. A., & Shad Saleem Faruqui (Eds.). (2012). Decolonising the university : the emerging quest for non-eurocentric paradigms. Penerbit Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Keikelame, M. J., & Swartz, L. (2019). Decolonising research methodologies: lessons from a qualitative research project, Cape Town, South Africa. Global Health Action, 12(1), 1561175–1561175. https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2018.1561175

Reflections on Artistic Research as a Decolonising Strategy in Africa: the ARA2020 Conference. (n.d.). Journal for Artistic Research. https://doi.org/10.22501/jarnet.0047

Patterson, D., Woldeyes, M., Schuck, N., Henricson, E., Njuguna, N., & Oduor, M. (2022). Decolonising global health in Africa: research agendas in public health, law, and human rights. European Journal of Public Health, 32(Supplement_3). https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckac131.100

Fleschenberg, A., Kresse, K., & Castillo, R. C. (2023). Thinking with the South : Reframing Research Collaboration amid Decolonial Imperatives and Challenges. (1st ed.). Walter de Gruyter GmbH. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110780567

MacDonald, N. E., Bortolussi, R., & Kabakyenga, J. (2023). A long-term process for decolonizing and democratizing community-focused research: the case for MicroResearch in East Africa and in Canada. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 114(1), 147–151. https://doi.org/10.17269/s41997-022-00680-2

Research Methodologies

Methodologies are ways of thinking about, approaching and designing research, so they are also referred to as research designs. Methodologies shape the approaches and methods selected to do research. Below we provide research methodologies that are appropriate to the African situation.

African research methodology (ARM)

ARM is about valuing African techniques, activities etc. Khupe and Keane (2017) provided a good summary of this design as shown in the table below.

Afrikology

Afrikology is a philosophy that also promotes balanced and sustained relationships with all relations including people of other cultures, the environment and the living and non-living. This design is credited to Nabudere (2011). According to Nabudere, no one culture has right to knowledge production – amagesi sigomu. This means western knowledge is not superior to all other knowledge. Colonisation resulted in devaluation of African knowledge, and this devalutaion continues today. Nabudere (2002) model for the purpose of Africa research and education

1. To increase African knowledge in the general body of global human knowledge;
2. To create linkages between the sources of African knowledge and the centers of learning on the continent and in the Diaspora;
3. To establish centers of learning in the communities, and ensure that these communities become “learning societies”;
4. To link knowledge to the production needs of African communities;
5. To ensure that science and technology are generated in relevant ways to address problems of the rural communities, where the majority of African people live,  and that this is done in African languages; and
6. To reduce the gap between the African elites and the communities from which they come, by ensuring that education is available to all Africans, and that such knowledge is drawn from the communities.

Cite as: Nabudere, D. W. 2002. The epistemological and methodological foundations for an all-inclusive research paradigm in the search for global knowledge (Occasional Paper Series, Volume 6, Number 1, published by the African Association of Political Science, Pretoria, South Africa).

Indigenous research methodology (IRM)

IRM is about valuing indigenous techniques, activities etc. Chilisa et al (2017) and have a very good example of IRM, the Indigenous Research Framework.

Chilisa’s framework for measuring different levels of indigenisation and decolonisation of research

“Postcolonial indigenous methodology frameworks – Relational indigenous methodologies advance collaborative research that is inclusive of communities’ voices. It revitalises and restores lost identities and value systems, and legitimises indigenous knowledge as content and as a body of thinking (Chilisa, forth-coming). A relational indigenous methodology is driven by decolonisation intent and a reflection on the philosophies and world views that inform the research process (Figure 1). The shield illustrates the importance of protection, restoration and revitalisation of valuable local knowledge. The outer circle captures the influence of African philosophies on methodologies, while the middle circle shows the methodological frameworks that grow from these philosophies. The relational indigenous methodologies can thus be viewed along a continuum scale that ranges from the least indigenised to the geocentric methodologies (Chilisa, forthcoming). Indigenous and non-indigenous researchers can reflect on their work and place themselves along an indigenous research continuum scale that ranges from least indigenised methodologies to geocentric or third space methodologies”, Chilisa et al, 2017, p. 229).

Diverse methods of research, methods of understanding and analysis, are already there in our respective Indigenous cultures. It’s now for us to recognise them, to name them, and articulate them in a language that others can understand.

Chilisa, B. (2014). Indigenous research is a journey. The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work, , no. 2, pp. 41-44.

• Level 0 – Colonial research (African research approaches are not included, not recognised, they are devalued)
• Level 1 – Least indigenised approach (paternalistic recognition of African research approaches, pretense, false recognition)
• Level 2 – Integrative approach (both African and western are used but there is less conscious decision about the role of African approaches, often they get sidelined)
• Level 3 – Predominantly indigenous research framework
• Level 4 – Third space methodologies/Afrikology (this approach mixes African and non-African approaches by taking the best of African approaches and including carefully selected non-African approaches. Approaches that decolonise are selected). Nabudere is credited with creating Afrikology (Nabudere, 2011).
• Level 5 – Totally indigenous approaches

Chilisa’s assessment tool for indigenous or decolonial research

The assessment has 12 questions that should be asked about each research to determine what level it seats. The more YESes, the more decolonised or indigenised the research is.

1. Does the research have social relevance and is it transformative?
2. Is the decolonisation and indigenisation intent explicit?
3. Does the research take a stance against political, academic and methodological imperialism of its time?
4. Does the research highlight potential areas of Western research incompatibility with local and indigenous epistemologies as well as areas of convergence?
5. Is there any concept or variable that is unique to the local phenomenon of study?
6. Does the unique concept or variable contribute to building a new theory or modifying existing ones?
7. Is there a local perspective, indigenous conceptual or theoretical framework that is used to inform a reflection on the specific context?
8. Are there unique ontological, epistemological, cultural and value assumptions that inform the study that are different from the globally generic or other culturally approaches.
9. What are the local or indigenous methods that are in contrast to globally applicable methods that are generic?
10. What are the locally relevant constructs that are in contrast to globally applicable approaches that are generic?
11. Does the research contribute towards a new research approach that develops from an indigenous conceptual or theoretical perspective?
12. Does the research contribute towards the documentation and restoration of historical marginalised indigenous knowledge, cultures and values?

Cite as: Chilisa, B., Major, T. & Khudu-Petersen, K. (2017). Community engagement with a postcolonial, African-based relational paradigm. Qualitative Research. 17. (3), 326-339. 10.1177/1468794117696176.

Characteristics of Indigenous research (Chilisa, 2012)

1. It targets a local phenomenon instead of using extant theory from the West to identity and define a research issue.
2. It is context-sensitive and creates locally relevant constructs, methods, and theories derived from local experiences and Indigenous knowledge.
3. It can be integrative, that is, combining Western and Indigenous theories.
4. In its most advanced form, its assumptions about what counts as reality, knowledge, and values in research are informed by an Indigenous research paradigm.

Cite as: Chilisa, B. (2012). Indigenous research methodologies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Other methodologies

• Action research methodology – participants as researchers, researching to find and implement immediate solutions.
• Narrative methodology – focused on getting people’s stories or experiences.
• Grounded methodology – starting without a theory then creating one from data.
• Phenomenological methodology – understanding essence or importance of phenomenon or happenings.
• Critical methodology – challenging power structures.
• Ethnographic methodology – learning from people as an outsider by staying with them to understand how they behave or act.
• Experimental and quasi-experimental methodologies.
• Survey methodology – collecting responses from a sample.
• Correlational methodology – finding relationships between variables.
• Experimental methodology – using a control and non-controlled group or variables.
• Case methodology – studying one aspect using multiple methods (triangulating).
• Descriptive methodology – quantify a variety of factors.

Research approaches

Ubuntu research approach (URA) – applying ubuntu principles when researching including using Ubuntu philosophy, knowledge, theories, ethics and techniques. For African research, this is the overarching approach. Other important issues in research driven by the Ubuntu philosophy include use of local languages in seeking consent, collecting data and communicating findings, using languages that people understand. Ubuntu-driven research values humane approaches and discourages cheating, deceit, harm, injustice, unfair compensation and disrespect. Ubuntu-driven research is ontologically relational, it is epistemologically co-creational, theoretically humane and methodologically collaborative (Mugumbate, 2020).

Community-centred approach – focus on families and communities instead of individuals.

Sankofa methodology – “It’s not taboo to go back to the source and fetch what you forgot” (Bangura, p. 175). Sankofa is about learning from the past, the past meaning African culture, history, philosophies and identity. In order to “move forward into the future, they need to reach back into their past and take with them all that works and is positive” (p. 175). (Bangura, A. K. (2011). African-Centered Research Methodologies: From Ancient Times to the Present. San Diego: Cognella.

Collective research approach – researching with people and communities and not researching them. This includes planning the research together (co-planning), co-analysis and co-publishing.

Cultural safety approach (CSA) – research that do not devalue people’s cultures.

African-centred or Afrocentric research – this is research that address the needs, problems, aspirations and research questions of Africa and not those perceived by people from outside the continent (Bangura, 2011). Bangura’s model of Africacentric research

1. A focus on humanism (Ubuntu) (as opposed to a focus on materialism)
2. Decolonise European beliefs that Africa philosophy is inferior
3. Focus on spirituality
4. The renaissance – achieved through deconstruction, reconstruction and regeneration happening at the same time
5. Centred on the history of Black Africans achievements of ancient Egypt
6. Culture-specific and culturally relevant research of liberation
7. Research is done for the sake of humanity and African recovery and rebirth
8. all sources of human knowledge as valid within their own contexts
9. Recognises the role of ordinary, uncertificated men and women, especially of those in rural areas. Because the intellectuals with certificates ‘absconded and abdicated their role as developers, minstrels and trumpeters of African civilisation’
10. African languages at the centre of research

Bangura, A. K. (2011). African-Centered Research Methodologies: From Ancient Times to the Present. San Diego: Cognella.

Empowerment or capability research approach – acknowledging power and capacity in people and building the capacity of communities to research themselves instead of being researched by outsiders.

Responsible research approach (RRA) – no researching and over researching the poor, powerless and vulnerable in society but researching those with power and authority.

Developmental research (DR) – research that has an intention of improving the lives of people or community in the short and long term or research that has an immediate impact on the problems or challenges communities are currently facing. This is different from research that is done for the benefit of the researcher or funder or another community.

Household, Family or Community Oriented Research (HOFACOR) – doing research that does not have individuals as units of analysis but rather households, families and community. This aligns with Ubuntu values of seeing the individual through their family or community. This research avoids individuality.

Participatory Action Research (PAR) – Participatory research as “an emancipatory approach to knowledge production and utilization” (Mulenga, 1994:29). It is about involving households, families and communities (participants) in research that is part of their development. Participants identify and define the problem and contribute in ALL stages of the research process (Mulenga, 1994). Maguire and Mulenga (1994) said the main characteristics of participatory research are (1) involves the people themselves as researchers as they seek solutions to the problems which confront them in their daily struggle for survival (2) offers a way for researchers and oppressed people to join in solidarity and (3) to take collective action, both short and long term, for radical social change (4) It combines three activities, namely, research, education and action.

Environmental approach: this research puts the environment at the centre of methods used in research. For example, a walk in the environment while interviewing or observing is valued more than an interview at home or in the office.

Relational research approach or paradigm: research that focuses on and values relationships or connections instead of looking at things and properties as existing in isolation (Chilisa, 2019). These will be relationships between people being studied but also between the people and the researcher.

Spiritual approach: this research puts spirituality at the centre of methods used in research. For example, analysis or prayers as opposed to analysis of literature about a person or group of people.

Mixed approaches: the researcher mixes any of the approaches.

Creative approaches: the research comes up with new approaches.

Collaborative approach: participants are co-researchers from start to finish.

Research methods

Methods are the specific actions we take in the research process. When designing your research, each part of the methods should be informed by, should value and include Africa’s philosophy; oral literature (orature, such as proverbs, folktales and mythology; language; dialogue with participants and Ubuntu ethics (Chilisa, 2012).

Methods for ethical research

The process of ethical research is as follows:

1. Think ethically: as researchers, the African view is that you should think ethically all the time and not only think about ethics when it is time to research. This means that we embody ethics.
2. Plan ethically: the researcher should not wait for a community, research participant, ethics committee or a peer to tell them that their plan is not ethical. Instead, plan what is ethical. Ethical research does not necessarily need an ethics committee to say it is ethical.
3. Get approvals, advice, consents and confirmations: approval to do research is obtained from the people, community, organisations and leaders involved. They can also provide advice, consent or confirm your plans. Ethics committees provide both approval, advice or both.
4. Act ethically: from recruitment to use of results, the researcher and their team should act ethically.

The methods used to achieve ethical research are:

Decolonial Approach (DA) – taking an active role to remove colonial approaches, language etc. This approach argues that ethics are not one size fits all, western ethics are not all applicable in Africa and vice versa. Western ethics are based on western philosophy and African ethics should be based on African philosophy.

Local Ethics Approach (LEA) – use local ethics in all stages of the research process and getting local ethics approval including at family, community, Country and national level. This means that the researcher identifies ethical issues with their research communicate these at the levels their research qualifies together with a description of their research so that further ethical issues are identified. When all issues are ironed out, ethics approval is then provided. This is not the same as permission or consent.

The total agreement technique (TTAT) – this technique ensures that all people in the research are in agreement with what has been proposed and what will be done as follows (1) permission to do the researcher or to be involved or associated has been granted by all those responsible, not just the university or organisation (2) ethics have been noted, discussed, resolved and agreed (3) consent from participants has been obtained in the preferred way – verbal, witnessed or written (4) agreement on data, results and what has to be published and how

Non-verbal consent (NVC) – consent does not need to be written, writing down and issuing forms is intimidating and takes away continuous negotiation which is valued in African society. Ethics do not exits on forms, it is human beings that should be ethical. Alternative forms or NVCs include oral consent where someone says they are giving consent or witnessed consent, where they say it in the presence or one or more people.

Local language approach (LLA) – use local languages in all stages of the research process and not using language participants do not understand

Munyai approach – when you approach communities, use an intermediary. The intermediary can be an individual, a community leader, an elder, a family, a griot or an organization.

The San Method – In the San Code of Ethics (South African San Institute (SAAI, 2017), community has a key role. The code emphasizes respect, honest, care, justice and co-production of knowledge. The San method says there should be clear communication in understandable not academic scientific language, show San people reports before publication, align your research to local needs, and not stealing knowledge.

Scared places and spaces approach – as a researcher know and respect spaces, places and artifacts of cultural and spiritual significance

Methods for data collection

Experiential method – using your own experience as a data source

Auto-ethnographic method – same as above.

Orature review – analysing non-written forms of literature, including but not limited to proverbs, artefacts, symbols etc.

Diaries – participants write or record what they think or feel for a certain period of time.

Notes – participants write or record what they think or feel for a certain period of time.

Art – participants create, mould, sculpt, draw or make something that provide meaning or responses to research questions. They can use clay, wood, stone, seeds, wool, paper etc

Kutano, dare or Indaba or imbizo method – in Swahili, kuta, means to meet, kutano means a reciprocal meeting, and its mkutano in plural. In research, a kutano refers a meeting or improved type of an interview where the discussion is reciprocal, either person can ask and get a response. It is not consided, but an exchange of knowledge or ideas. Kutana is to use this method, for example, a reserarchr would say, ‘we will kutana‘. Sometimes called talking circles, dare, indaba and imbizo mean collecting data from a medium sized group (dare, about 8 people), large group (indaba, about 16 or more people) or imbizo. In an imbizo, the meeting is called by leaders, for example King, village head or mayor, mainly to discuss policy issues. In a dare, indaba or imbizo, people meet face to face or online. Each person has an equal chance to participate. Rounds vary, usually about four. This method values equality, respect, togetherness and collective knowledge building (Chilisa 2019). In other communities, a symbolic act, object, food or drink is used. For example, clapping hands before you speak, holding a walking stick before speaking, saying words of respect or praise titles/names before speaking, passing a cup with a drink or brew etc.

Baliano (plural is mabaliano) method – in this method, one person goes around seeking opinions from a selected category of people until consensus or agreement (baliano) is reached. The process goes like this: (1) an issue or problem is noted or realised but it is not possible to create a dare or indaba. (2) those who have noted or realised the issue or problem identify a responsible and relevant person to carry a message (ujumbe) to a category of people, for example, leaders, opinion leaders, parents, children etc. This person that is send is called the mjumbe or messenger and those sending him or her are mtumaji. The person receiving the message is mpokeaji (3) a message is created usually in the form of questions, suggestions, list of things to be selected etc (4) first round – the message is taken to each person selected and the messenger records their feedback (5) the messages are taken back to the senders who will determine where consensus has been reached or not. Senders adjust the message (6) round 2 – the messenger takes the message back to the selected people, pointing where consensus has been achieved and not and changes made. The messenger records feedback again and takes back to the senders. There can be more rounds until consensus is reached. A maximum of four rounds is recommended otherwise more rounds can be interpreted as coercion. Consensus varies, it can be 50% to 100%. The researcher chooses what consensus level that is suitable for their project. (7) The final message is shared. It is important to note that the messenger is send, he or she only carries a message.

To ensure the process and findings are stronger, there are many strategies that could be used including running a baliano at different levels (e.g village, then community), or across different groups (female then female), age groups or if appropriate, you can run rounds at national or global level.

To report results, show the total number of messages, it could be as low as one. The number of rounds and the number of mpokeaji at each round. Show the number of ujumbe that was agreed and disagreed. Use qualitative quotes from mpokeaji to support responses that were made.

Decolonised Interviewing – Chilisa (2019) says this method is more collective and different from the western style of interviewing which is more individualistic. For example, a decolonial interview favours more than one interviewers and more than one participants in one interview. In the western style interview, there is no real conversation, everything is structured and the researcher is expected to be rigid. A decolonial approach values relationships (ukama) between those being researched, the researcher and those being researched and relationship to the environment of everyone involved in the research. In decolonial approaches, it is the ethics and aspirations of the people that matter, not that of the researcher. For example, if the participant want their name to be revealed or associated with the research, that should be allowed. In western research, recognition is given to the researcher who becomes the owner of the knowledge revealed by participants. As Chilisa (2019) said, a story looses its power if the story teller is not revealed. If names are revealed, the participants become accountable to their families and communities, and the researcher becomes accountable in their analysis of data and reporting. The researcher becomes an author who will benefit from the knowledge as if it was theirs, these benefits including promotion at work or money. In decolonial interviewing, stories are constructed, interpreted and reported together. In decolonial interviewing, the participants are allowed to share the most important aspects of their life, including their relationships and should not be guided by questions constructed by the researchers. The participants can be reminded to include their full social system including their relationships, family (including identity, lineage etc), community, spirituality, environment etc. This is opposite to western research that starts with demographics, in decolonial research the participant will provide the demographics in the story, if they want. The steps of this method are: (1) Identify a preferred research gap (2) Revise the literature that is already there in your chosen field of study to inform the problem and question because most of the literature is colonial or was written from a colonial stand point even if it was written by authors from colonised countries. Use elders, leaders, opinion leaders, griots, sages, participants etc to critique the literature (2) Clarify the research gap with new information gained (3) Create research questions with the participants (4) Work with the community to identify who could be interviewed including family or small group interviews and who will interview (including two or more interviewers). (5) Decide with the participants how the interviewing will go. Options include dare, indaba or talking circles where everyone gets a chance. (6) Start interview by relationships not demographics.

Insider research method – a person who knows the community or respondents plans the research and collects data from them instead of a person who does not know about them

Side-by-side approach or collaborative research – this is about working side by side with participants to identify research gaps, creating methods and collecting data.

Narrative approach – participants are given a chance to narrate of tell their stories instead of being asked a series of questions (Chilisa, 2019).

Self-praise or self-poetry or praise poetry – These are songs, poems or compositions where an individual praise themselves, are praised by others or praise their family, tribe or community (Chilisa, 2019).

Griot approach – a griot is a historian, storyteller, praise singer, poet, or musician. He or she is an oral moving library. They can be a source of different information all useful for research (Bangura, 2011).

Community projects – designing a project that benefits the community while you research.

Stories Approach – participants are given a chance to narrate of tell their stories instead of being asked a series of question.

Stories research approach (SRA)

In general, when we do research in the social sciences, we could be interested in words that people (of families, communities or societies) use, at times statements that they make, their actions or events they were involved. How about focusing on people’s stories as in SRA or their histories as in biographical or historical research? [Multiple related stories make up a narrative]. A story is a sequence of happenings or experiences. It gives more and even deeper insights into the life of someone, their family, community or society. SRA uses stories as the standard input of participants into the research process. The stories are then reported as told, combined into one larger story or analysed to get more meanings out of each story or the stories combined. The advantage is depth of knowledge gained, cultural appropriateness, gives participant prominence and the researcher can benefit in several ways. The disadvantages are that stories take long to be told, may not be understood by people from a different cultural background and many be difficult or emotionally demanding for both the teller and listener. The most basic analysis of stories is to list the insights or sentiments (why, how, when etc) generated by each or all stories. Insights can include emotions, desires, challenges, barriers, behaviours etc. Detailed analysis could be focused on classifying stories or generating themes from one or all the stories (thematic analysis) or understanding the content of the story or stories (content analysis). Content analysis examines words, phrases, statements or language used by the story teller or tellers. More detailed analysis is experiential analysis, which means the story listener uses their own experience to interpret the story told or vice versa, that is the story listener uses the stories told to interpret their own story or that of others – the result is a validation or making sense of experiences. More in depth analysis includes stories can be shared through verbal narration in an interview or group, drawing, recording (picture, audio or video), retracing footsteps (walks), written by self or others. The tools used to tell or listen to a story include a story-line, plot-line or script (created by the teller or both) or story guide (created by the listener or both).

Tree of Life Approach – participants draw trees or are provided with drawings of trees and label the tree with their life information. The approach was developed by Ncabelo Ncube-Mlilo who worked with children at Masiye Camp in Zimbabwe during the peak period of HIV/AIDS. Ncube developed the tree of life idea to ensure that children tell their stories in a culturally appropriate manner and in a way that does not put grief at the centre. To tell their stories, the children drew trees and label the trees to show their relations, good things and bad things in their life. The tree is metaphorical, it is beautiful, strong, green but it also faces storms and there are bugs that give the tree some problems. The points below were copied verbatim from Ncube, N. 2006. The Tree of Life Project. Using narrative ideas in work with vulnerable children in Southern Africa. The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work 2006 No. 1, 3-16. the metaphor of the tree is as follows:

1. Roots: Children were invited to think about and write on their Tree of Life significant figures from their ancestry, origins and family history.
2. Trunk: The trunk of the tree was a prompt for children to draw representations of significant events that had shaped their lives: these were either positive events or events that could be regarded as difficult or that evoked a painful memory.
3. Leaves: The leaves of the tree represented important people or significant relationships in an individual’s life. At Masiye Camp we introduced the metaphor of fallen leaves to represent important people that had been lost to the child (e.g. parents who had died).
4. Branches: The branches of the tree were a prompt to elicit the child’s thoughts, ideas and wishes about the direction which he/she would like go in life.
5. Fruits: The fruits stood for the achievements that the child had accomplished in his or her life; the things that he/she was proud of.
6. Bugs: The bugs of the tree, which would sometimes eat parts of the fruit and destroy the leaves, were designed to represent the problems and challenges that children were facing in their day-to-day lives.

Dialogue Approach – conversation between the researcher and participant/s.

Action Research – research that contributes to development instantly.

Visual Methods – participants mould, curve, build, draw, photograph (take pictures), videograph (record videos) or describe what they saw or think.

Social Media Reactions (Sentiments) Approach – you create a research question then use reactions already existing on social media to answer the question. The reactions could include comments, likes, dislikes, shares etc.

Work party research – the researcher joins a work party (collective work e.g. farm work, construction etc) and collects data using suitable methods.

Working talks – this method combines interviews, observation, family/community group and working. In short, you join the family/community during their agriculture work and work with them while discussing your topics and observing at the same time.This method is more culturally appropriate, it is not disruptive and is mixed. Working talks can be done with individual participants too.

Task method – the researcher collects data while participant/s is doing their normal routine e.g. cooking, hair making or cutting, knitting, farming, water fetching.

Walks method – data is collected while walking through talking, recording, taking pictures or making drawings.. This may include walking in places that have meaning to the participant/s.

Prayer method – this involves listening to oral prayers in person, or having them recorded and written. This method values spirituality.

Experimental approaches – this involves trying things out unti a solution is found. This can be done in social, psychological, environmental, physical and technological research. types of experiemnets:

• Social experiments
• Economic experiments
• Laboratory experiments
• Psychological experiments
• Field experiments
• Trials
• Natural experiment
• Experiential experiments

Kuumba Method – kuumba means creativity in Swahili. The researcher uses whatever is at their disposal to gather data or to create knowledge. This method is useful for poor researchers who do not have the finance, tools and technology of research. It is used a lot by people with natural intelligence and those who lack opportunities for formal education offered in schools, colleges and universities. It is a method of the creative, innovative and dreaming poor, excluded and marginalised people. It is for people who accept criticism and are ready to learn and consult. In western research the kuumba method is called bricolage.

Mixed Methods – at times a decision to mix methods is a good one. Methods can be mixed as follows (1) indigenous and non-indigenous – when you do this ensure that indigenous approaches get prominence (2) indigenous methods mixed together (2) qualitative and quantitative methods mixed. Chilisa and Tsheko (2014) in this journal article have a describe a good example of mixed methods that give indigenous approaches prominence.

Methods for literature review

Orature Approach (OA)

Knowing that in Africa oral literature is the majority and using it in research including literature reviews and findings discussions (Chilisa, 2019).

Decolonising Literature Review (DLR)

A lot of literature exists that would not be accepted by the people who were researched for one or more reasons. We can use a review process to examine this literature and address its shortcomings. the process of DLR will be as follows (i) create criteria for literature you want reviewed (ii) read the literature with a selected group of people who are part of those the literature refers to (iii) report what was confirmed and what was rejected.

Decolonised Literature Approach (DLA)

The approach says if you use colonial literature to try to understand situations, then that is a flawed process. The narrative below by Professor Bagele Chilisa, who writes on indigenous research is very informative.

One of the first research projects I was involved in was on the impact of HIV/AIDS on the education system. I found myself doing research partnered with some people from the UK who were providing the funds. The person who called himself the ‘principal investigator’ came up with a review of literature. This review of literature was about how the pandemic was getting worse because according to the report, the Batswana love sex and so on and so on. It had all the stereotypes you could imagine. I said to him, ‘Oh my god, I’m a part of this research and people are going to read this’. I said, ‘When you are talking about “Botswana”, you are talking about me. All these stereotypes you are citing from the literature, it’s about me, I can’t possibly write about myself in that manner’. In response he said, ‘No, no, no … this is what is in the literature. We are going to cite verbatim from the literature. We cannot ignore the literature’. This was my starting point. I saw how mainstream Western research was describing us in Botswana, how the problem of HIV/AIDS was being portrayed. From that day on, I said to myself, there has to be other ways of doing research! I started thinking hard about how I could be involved in research that would describe people in a manner that they would recognise themselves.

Chilisa, B., (2019), Decolonising research: An interview. The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work, (1), 12-17.

Sankofa tree systematic literature review model

The Sankofa tree method of doing systematic literature reviews is simple yet very powerful. Metaphorically, the tree represents history, and by going back to history in a review, we are doing a Sankofa. The aim is to include all literature that answers the review question from old to new. Roots of trees represent old while smaller branches or twigs represent the new. The trunk represents what is currently agreed as the dominant position or answer while branches represent the different views. If literature reviews are to provide us with the best possible answer, then we should not limit them to 10 or so years, but we should examine all what is there, including orature and grey literature. This reduces publication and selection bias. Orature is included, making this method decolonising. The Sankofa tree systematic literature review template provided below is very useful to guide researchers while they review. It is a record of what was included in the literature review. The template should be attached to review publications, including reports and articles in journals. In the boxes, put the origin/author, source, year if available and main points that answer the review question as shown in the example.

https://africasocialwork.net/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Sankofa-tree-systematic-literature-review-method.docx

10 ways to strengthen literature and orature reviews

Methods for data analysis

Analysis can be done quantitatively or qualitatively, or can include a mixture of these. Quantitative analysis is reported as numbers which can be single statistics, or in tables, graphs, plots, maps, diagrams or charts. Qualitative reports include words, phrases, statements, paragraphs, conversations or dialogues, stories and biographies which can stand alone or be organized into categories or themes but can also include timelines, histograms, maps, mind maps, images (also emojis), word clouds and colour coded text.

Analysis is a process of examining the data to make meanings, themes and derive conclusions. It can be done by an individual, family, group, community or by technology. The most basic assumption of analysis is that if you listen to, hear, read, observe or discuss ideas or data several times, you will generate reliable meanings, themes and conclusions.

Below we provide a list of qualitative methods and techniques of analysis:

Methods classified by who does the analysis:

• In-situ primary analysis – doing analysis during data collection.
• Primary analysis – doing data newly or recently collected (primary analysis)
• Re-analysis – doing analysis on data that has already been analysed
• Secondary analysis – doing analysis on existing literature or non-written sources of information
• Longitudinal analysis (ndefu analysis) – this is a community approach that takes longer to get meanings and conclusions. Ndefu is Swahili for longer. This method can take months to years with the following steps (1) after data has been collected, it is presented to the community, initial reactions and comments are noted (2) reminders are put in place to remind people about the data, for example artwork, statues, posters or a champion is found to keep the data in people’s minds (3) after about a month, the community is consulted as to the meaning of the data (4) reminders are maintained or new ones put in place (5) final consultations and recording of meanings, themes or conclusions. This method of analysis allows hidden meanings to come out, it also allows time to digest as cows do until the stronger meanings emerge.

Methods classified by how analysis is done:

• Manual analysis – basic (read or listen, understand or make sense and generate meanings) and advanced (read or listen, understand or make sense, arrange or color code, rearrange, create themes or categories, generate meaning). Reporting is usually narrative (words, sentences, paragraphs and stories), verbal or written.
• Electronic or computer-aided analysis – basic (use applications/software like Word Processor and Spreadsheets) and advanced (use applications like NVivo, Strata, SPSS, Tableau, there are more than 500 apps). Applications can create narratives (sentences, paragraphs and stories); graphs, tables, charts, figures, illustrations or word clouds ; and frames (themes, categories or codes).

Methods classified by what the analysis looks for:

Methods for achieving quality and useful research

Reviere’s African-centred procedure of achieving ‘validity’ or ‘reliability’

‘Validity’ and ‘reliability’ are western concepts. In African centred-research, they are achieved in several ways. Reviere’s African-centred procedure of achieving ‘validity’ or ‘reliability’ includes these five elements (Reviere, 2001, p. 725): ukweli, utlulivu, uhaki, ujarnaa and kujitoa. Chilisa described these elements as follows “Ukweli is loosely translated from the original Swahili as “truth.” For the purposes of this article, it refers to the groundedness of research in the experiences of the community being researched. The experiences of community members become the ultimate authority in determining what is true and therefore become the final arbiter of the validity of research about their lives. Utulivu is loosely translated from the original Swahili as “justice.” It requires that the researcher actively avoid creating, exaggerating, or sustaining divisions between or within communities but rather strive to create harmonious relationships between and within these groups. Uhaki is loosely translated from the original Swahili as “harmony.” It requires a research procedure that is fair to all participants, especially to those being researched, and one whose applications are mindful of the welfare of all the participants. Ujarnaa is loosely translated from the original Swahili as “community.” It requires that the researcher reject the researcher/participant separation and not presume to be “the well from which spring theory and practice, whole and well-formed,” but that theory and practice should be informed by the actual and aspired interests of the community. Kujitoa is loosely translated from the original Swahili as “commitment.” It requires that the researcher emphasize considerations of how knowledge is structured and used over the need for dispassion and objectivity” (Chilisa, 2014).

1. Ukweli – truth
2. Utlulivu – justice
3. Uhaki – harmony
4. Ujarnaa – community
5. Kujitoa – commitment

Chilisa, B. (2014). Indigenous research is a journey. The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work, , no. 2, pp. 41-44.

Reviere, R. (2001). Toward an Afrocentric research methodology. Journal of Black Studies, 31 (6), 709-727

Methods for discussion

After data has been collected, it is analysed then discussed. Methods of discussion include:

Data linkage – compare and contrast data

Literature linkage – link data with existing literature

Sentiments linkage – link data with current sentiments expressed by policy makers, on social media, in community talks etc

Philosophy linkage – examine the philosophy on which the research was founded or guided

Theory linkage – examine the theory or theories on which the research was founded or guided, what needs to change, can you come up with a new theory

Model or framework linkage – examine the model or frameworks on which the research was founded or guided, what needs to change, can you come up with a new policy

Colonial knowledge delinkage – what is colonial, what can it be decolonised

Policy linkage – examine policies, what new measures are required

Practice linkage – examine usefulness for practice, what needs to change

Methodology linkage – examine the methods in detail

Indigenous knowledge linkage – what is missing

Researcher linkage – sometimes called positionality, how did your person impact the research and data

Methods for research reporting and sharing

Side-by-side approach – working side-by-side with people to report and disseminate findings

Knowledge checking approach/Shared knowledge approach – share reports with knowledge holders, leaders or participants before publication

Methods for research utilisation

Participants-first approach – this means first sharing results with participants so that they make use of them instead of publishing first hoping that they will ready the publications. Sometimes called the localised reporting method.

Policy approach – this means taking results to policy makers or those implementing policy so that research could influence policy.

Benefits approach – do research that has immediate benefits for the community e.g. produces knowledge to address a current or emerging social problem.

Action Research – researching and using the results for developing the community or country at the same.

Teaching and learning approach (educational approach) – data is utilised to improve education

Practice approach – findings are used to improve practice

Action approach – findings are utilised to support action by communities, institutions or government

Methodological approach – findings are used to improve research methods

Decolonial approach – findings are used to support decolonisation

Skills approach – research is done to gain skills only, for example, for honours, masters or doctorate degree. However, this is a waste of resources, all research should have tangible utilisation.

Checklist for Research Utilisation (CRU)

Targets and Methods of Utilisation	Done	In progress	Partly done	Not done
Outcome/s shared with the participants involved in relevant format (meeting, indaba, dare, poster, video etc), language (local language prioritised) and length (not too long)
Outcome/s shared with the communities involved in relevant format (meeting, indaba, dare, poster, video, media article etc), language (local language prioritised) and length (not too long). Community includes Elders and leaders.
Outcome/s shared with local research community in relevant and accessible formats (workshops, seminars, journal article, meeting, indaba, dare, poster, video etc)
Outcome/s submitted to or shared with the policy community in relevant formats (policy paper, letter, brief, exhibition, workshops, seminars, meeting, indaba, dare, poster, video etc). The policy community includes the head of state, ministers, members of parliament, cultural leaders, principal administrators and ministerial principal secretaries, departmental heads and leaders of local authorities and provinces. The policy community includes advocates for policy.
Outcome/s shared with service leaders and providers concerned in relevant formats (practice paper, organisational policy paper, workshops, seminars, journal article, meeting, indaba, dare, poster, video etc). Service providers include government, non-government, cultural, religious and commercial entities.
Outcome/s shared with librarians, lecturers and trainees or students through libraries and course/subject outlines, syllabus package, book or book chapter, newsletters, practice paper, workshops, seminars, journal article, meeting, indaba, dare, poster, video etc.
Scores
Total points out of 10

Methods for Monitoring and Evaluation Research

Made in Africa Evaluation (MAE) approach: The MAE seeks to identify and develop a uniquely African approach to evaluation. It emphasizes that context, culture, history, and beliefs shape the nature of evaluations, specifically in the diverse, often complex African reality. The MAE was developed by the African Evaluation Association (AfrEA). Its objective is to promote and adapt to an African evaluation framework – an approach initiated from inside the continent and overwhelmingly supported from outside Africa. The main aspects or focus of the approach:

1. Decolonisation of evaluation and evaluators, which means the transformation of evaluation knowledge and practices from global North dominance.
2. Indigenisation, which means to make it African focused.
3. Participation and evaluation based on mutual respect.
4. Use of local knowledge, philosophy of Ubuntu, theories etc.
5. Contextuality which means relevance to local situation, aspirations and priorities.
6. Internationalisation of MAE.

Chilisa, B., 2015, A synthesis paper on the Made in Africa evaluation concept, African Evaluation Association, Accra.

Chilisa, B., Major, T.E., Gaotlhobogwe, M. & Mokgolodi, H., 2016, ‘Decolonizing and indigenizing evaluation practice in Africa: Toward African relational evaluation approaches’, Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 30(3). https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.30.3.05

Dlakavu, A., Mathebula, J. & Mkhize, S., 2022, ‘Decolonising and indigenising evaluation practice in Africa: Roadmap for mainstreaming the Made in Africa Evaluation approach’, African Evaluation Journal 10(1), a620. https://doi.org/10.4102/aej.v10i1.620

Innovative and Creative Methods

At times, available designs and methods are insufficient or not suited to what a researcher desires. In that case, the researcher is allowed to be innovative and creative to come up with new methods. Innovation and creativity can be applied in:

• Research designs (methods of designing research)
• Broad research approaches
• Methods for ethical research
• Methods for data collection
• Methods for literature review
• Methods for data analysis
• Methods for achieving ‘reliability’ and ‘validity’
• Methods for discussion
• Methods for research reporting and sharing
• Methods for research utilisation

Valuing African Methods

The ASWNet values African research methods and is at the forefront of motivating researchers, academics and students to value these methods. The Network is happy that the trend has changed, and African writers have increased used of these methods. Some of the challenges that are to be overcome include:

• Unavailability of adequate literature on African methods
• Other people think that because African methods have not been used, it means they are inferior. The truth is they have not been used because of colonisation.
• Few others still think we should keep using colonial methods because they are the methods used in the west. These few others should change.
• Others do their research about Africa in the west, and they are ‘afraid’ to use African methods.

We can overcome these challenges by ensuring that African methods are taught in class, they are used in research projects and subjects/courses (honours, masters and PhD).

The Process of Research

1. Problem identification stage
2. Approvals, confirmations and ethics advice stage.
3. Data collection, analysis and conclusions stage
4. Reporting and dissemination of findings stage
5. Data use stage
6. Review of findings and usage stage

Throughout the process, the researcher should:

1. Think and act ethically
2. Think and act decolonially
3. Think and act holistically
4. Think and act respectfully
5. Think and act justly