Micro Community Based Participatory research- An experiential tool for STREAM

learning
The overall objective of the Pitt Bridge Program is to excite underserved adolescents in science
through engagement in micro-Community Based Participatory Research (mCBPR) in science
clubs. (Figure 1) The evidence for achieving this goal will be an increase in:
Personal outcomes of social development in self-awareness, communication skills,
leadership grit and Sense of Coherence.
Academic outcomes of STEM practices, critical thinking, class advancement, career
aspirations and College matriculation
Community Outcomes of cultural awareness, community engagement and improved
community health with reduction in health disparities.
In the educational and research
activity of mCBPR, the adolescent
uses real, current and relevant
health problems in their own family
and/or community as a health
research domain to identify and
solve a problem in community
health. Health disparities are
preferentially selected, as these by
definition can be minimized by
addressing the root cause for
intercommunity differences.
The process of conducting mCBPR
requires a systematic progression of
a series of activities, each involving
Figure 1: The Pitt-Bridge Logic model
different STEM practices. (Figure 2)
These process each demand the completion of activities with well-defined milestones as they
progress from:
Community Health-The identification of community health problems and the magnitude of
health disparity.
Hypothesis- A statement of the selected question formulated as a comparative directional
statement
Protocol A study design to be conducted on community subjects that is a feasible and
ethical.
Database- a structured description of all the research data collected
Presentation- A form of
communication of the results
of the study set in the context
of what is known prior to the
study
At each step in this sequence, it is
important to keep in mind the whole
sequence as the sections closely
interrelate, build and culminate in a
study outcome.
This first step in the sequence of the
mCBPR cycle is to identify topics or
themes by students in general
interactive discussions enquiring
about their lives in the community
as being locally relevant or

Figure 2: The Micro-CBPR cycle full cycle

personally interesting before being able to formulate a hypothesis, which then helps construct
and answer the question. (Figure 1) This phase provides a general road map for the whole route
for the student to keep in mind. It helps the student progress from a general theme about which
they know little, but sounds interesting to something they want to spend time on with a focused
question where they have learned a lot and are deeply engaged, it helps to consider the
Hypothesis Filter for mCBPR Project. (Figure 3) as a different schematic illustration to follow.
The objective of this reformulation is to
help formulate the hypothesis statement
as the key scaffold for a research project.
Prior to being able to pose a hypothesis, a
series of steps are required to embrace a
broad theme, identify key data to be able
to stimulate curiosity and get the student
to ask the question What would I like to
learn? From these questions look for an
umbrella question that brings the
questions into a single focus before
arriving at constructing a hypothesis
statement.
It is important to emphasize that all
studies in man can only be justified when
set within the context of available
information that is already known about
Figure 3: Hypothesis Filter for mCBPR Project
the research theme. For any theme, there
is already an extensive knowledge base, often synthesized and integrated in reviews and
summaries in the literature. This first step offers an introduction to a literature search to a
variety of sources followed by a critical synthesis and preliminary integration of multiple
concepts preferably into a concept model illustrated schematically into a map. By definition, this
phase is broad, inevitably encompasses a wider range of knowledge than was initially conceived,
but is a vital precursor to better understanding of the issue. This phase allows integration of
widely different fields of information relevant to the initial theme.
In the context of an urban situation, where local experts are available, The next series of steps
involve skills of discussing the topic with experts for the general theme, meeting experts outside
their neighborhoods ( often their first visit to parts of their city but within geographic reach of
Allegheny County) with the help of the Pitt Bridge Program and experts within the field relevant
to the local community with the help of the local club mentors. These meetings enforce students
to discuss the topic with the experts, try out ideas, look for guidance on what is feasible and in
general gain a broader perspective on their topic to be able to compare their underserved district
in the context of better served districts in the city, before designing project specific data
elements to collect in the study. This
perspective helps generate a
knowledge base, find quantitative
information about the topic nationally
and locally, and build enthusiasm for
the project. (Figure 4)
Each step of this process allows
students to bring back their findings to
discuss and share with the club. This
promotes communication skills, critical
thinking, rigor and curiosity. It also is
best conducted as an iterative process,
with each step offering the opportunity
Figure 4: the external and internal expert

for the research time to present (usually as power point slides) their key findings to their club. In
this way, a cumulative illustrated story is developed to assist communication.
The next step is to critically evaluate the information on which the key conclusions are based. In
almost every instance, numerical data can be found and used to base these inferences. Once
found, this information offers the opportunity to see how data is used by the authors to develop
an argument, and the reader can determine if the data and argument are relevant to the
questions they would like to pose.
Once a general theme is narrowing to a specific focus, in almost all instances the study design
can be built around three domains where the student needs to design their data collection
measures (Figure 5).
1. Who will be studied
2. What is already known about the topic in the global world
3. What is known about the topic in the local neighborhood.
In an underserved community, every disparity issue worth addressing is fundamentally complex
and offers the opportunity to pose numerous questions. The challenge is to identify a strong
question, which for our purposes is defined as being
rational based on known information that has been found
feasible for the investigator team, based on access to resources, effort involved and time
limit
Relevant for the
investigator and
community
The answer is unknown
It is a good idea to get into the
habit of posing as many
questions as one can think of,
then using the above criteria,
focus down to a single question
from which a hypothesis
statement can be built. (See
hypothesis statement write up)
his hypothesis statement will
incorporate the
Who: subject selection
and exclusion criteria
Figure 5: Three domains of information
What: will each subject
be asked to do
Where: will the study take place
When: when and for how long will the study last
These are elements of a study description that will provide the scaffold for the study design.
(Figure 3) It is important to realize that a well-designed hypothesis statement is designed to
only address one question. The wide range of information (variables), that in practice are
collected from each subject are designed to help understand that one question, but often can be
used in pilot analyses to explore other questions for which the study is not expressly designed.
Before deciding on which question to restate as a hypothesis, it is useful to pull together what
you have learned into a summary (Table 1)