Police work is becoming extremely complex, challenging, demanding, and ill-structured, which calls for better problem-solving and decision-making skills from police workers. Participatory action research approach is applied to understand how training methodologies can contribute to creative thinking, exploration of alternatives and democratization, consequently enhancing the problem-solving and decision-making skills of field-level police workers. A series of five sessions with two groups of police workers provided substantial insights that informed the research methodology, the learning experience of participants and the relative value of various training delivery modes for improving problem-solving and decision-making skills. The methodology gave opportunities to the researcher and the participants to reflect on processes and learn from the feedback. The study reveals that the training must seek to give voice to the learners and help them to discover an agency through which they can critically reflect on the needs of their job and fulfil them. This study reflects on the question of rigour and relevance in PAR and provides directions for future research.
AlexanderK. (2006). Police reforms in India: An analytical study. New Delhi: Discovery Publishing House.
2.
ArgyrisC. (1993). Knowledge for learning: A guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
ArnettR. C. (2002). Paulo Freire’s revolutionary pedagogy: From a story-centered to a narrative-centered communication ethic. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(4): 489–510.
4.
BaskervilleR. (1999). Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the AIS, 19: 2–31.
5.
BeckerW. C. (1997). Teaching economics to undergraduates. Journal of Economic Literature, 35: 1347–1373.
BoogB.KeuneL.TrompC. (2003). Action research and emancipation. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 13: 419–425.
8.
ChecklandP. (1981). Systems thinking, systems practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
9.
DavisonR. M. (1997). An instrument for measuring meeting success. Information and Management, 32: 163–176.
10.
DavisonR. M. (1999). An instrument for measuring meeting success: Revalidation and modification. Information and Management, 36: 321–328.
11.
DavisonR. M. (2001). GSS and action research in the Hong Kong police. Information Technology & People, 14(1): 60–77.
12.
DavisonR. M.JordanE. (1998). Group support systems: Barriers to adoption in a cross-cultural setting. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 1: 37–50.
13.
DicksonG. W.Lee PartridgeJ. E.RobinsonL. H. (1993). Exploring modes of facilitative support for GDSS technology. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 17: 173–194.
14.
EdenC.HuxhamC. (1996). Action research for management research. British Journal of Management, 7: 75–86.
15.
EldenM.ChisholmR. F. (1993). Emerging varieties of action research: Introduction to the special issue. Human Relations, 46: 121–142.
16.
FoucaultM. (1979). Discipline and punish. The birth of the prison. New York: Random House.
17.
FreireP. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
18.
GlaserR.BassokM. (1989). Learning theory and the study of instruction. Annual Review of Psychology, 40: 631–666.
19.
GravesW. H. (1991). Participatory action research: A new paradigm for disability and rehabilitation research. ARCA Newsletter, 19: 9–10.
20.
GreenwoodD. (1999). Action research. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
21.
GriffithT. L.FullerM. A.NorthcraftG. B. (1998). Facilitator influence in group support systems: Intended and unintended effects. Information Systems Research, 9: 20–36.
22.
HelmsG. (2007). Municipal policing meets the new deal: The politics of a city-centre warden project. European Urban and Regional Studies, 14(4): 290–304.
23.
ImrieR.RacoM.(2003). Community and changing nature of urban policy. In: ImrieR.RacoM. (eds). Urban renaissance? New Labour, community and urban policy. Bristol: Policy Press. 3–36.
24.
JickT. D. (1979). Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: Triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24: 602–611.
KanpolB. (1999). Critical pedagogy: An introduction. Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.
27.
Khorsow-PourM. (2003). Information technology & organizations: Trends, issues, challenges & solutions. London: Idea Group Publishing.
28.
KnowlesM.HoltonE.IIISwansonR. (1998). The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education and human resource development, 5th edn. Houston, TX: Gulf.
MarcuseP. (2009). From critical urban theory to the right to the city. City, 13(2/3): 185–197.
31.
McLarenP. (1999). A pedagogy of possibility: Reflecting upon Paulo Freire’s politics of education: In memory of Paulo Freire. Educational Researcher, 28(2): 49–56.
32.
McLarenP.GirouxH. A.(1995). Radical pedagogy as cultural politics: Beyond the discourse of critique and anti-utopianism. In: McLarenP. (ed.) Critical pedagogy and predatory culture: Oppositional politics in a postmodern era. London: Routledge.
33.
McNiffJ. (1988). Action research: Principles and practice. London: Routledge.
MonchinskiT. (2008). Critical pedagogy and the everyday classroom. New York: Springer.
36.
NiedermanF.BeiseC. M.BeranekP. M. (1996). Issues and concerns about computer supported meetings: The facilitator’s perspective. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 20: 1–21.
37.
NunamakerJ. F.BriggsR. O.MittlemanD. D.VogelD. R.BalthazardP. A. (1997). Lessons from a dozen years of group support systems research: A discussion of lab and field findings. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13: 163–207.
38.
OlesenK.MyersM. D. (1999). Trying to improve communication and collaboration with information technology: An action research project which failed. Information Technology & People, 12: 317–332.
39.
RemingtonK.PollackJ. (2007). Tools for complex projects. Aldershot, Hampshire: Gower.
40.
RobertsP. (2005). Freire and Dostoevsky: Uncertainty, dialogue, and transformation. Journal of Transformative Education, 3(2): 126–139.
41.
SennJ. (1998). The challenge of relating IS research to practice. Information Resources Management Journal, 11: 23–28.
WatsonR. T.HoT. H.RamanK. S. (1994). Culture: A fourth dimension of group support systems. Communications of the ACM, 37: 45–55.
44.
Whitney-ThomasJ.(1997). Participatory action research as an approach to enhancing quality of life for individuals with disabilities. In: SchalockR. L. (ed.) Quality of life: Vol. H. Application to persons with disabilities. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation. 181–197.
45.
WhyteW. F. (1991). Participatory action research. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
46.
YoongP. (1998). Training facilitators for face-to-face electronic meetings: An experiential learning approach. Informing Science, 1: 31–36.
47.
Zuber-SkerritO. (1991). Action research for change and development. Aldershot: Gower.
