1 Introduction: Towards a Complex Methodological Approach

Research on the intergenerational and transnational dynamics of migration is of specific importance. Due to the complexity of the links between relations, social relations and socio-cultural perspectives, this type of research tends almost always towards multi- or even interdisciplinarity. Thus these issues cannot always be examined only from a demographic, psychological, sociological, anthropological or political-science perspective, but need articulating between these disciplinary standpoints; usually researchers work together to build a conceptual framework and a theoretical perspective which take into account these various dimensions in order to better understand the temporal, spatial and social complexity of these dynamics. This conceptual interdisciplinarity also frames the complex methodology at play in studying these phenomena and processes. Here we have the two keywords. To capture the phenomena, draw up an image of them, compare their effects and identify their factors and correlations, the quantitative approach will be privileged. On the other hand, to understand the processes at play, the changes and transformations, or the circulation of exchanges between the generations, it is the qualitative method which must be brought into play. Furthermore, to understand intergenerational dynamics in migration we should also be aware of the different forms which they take according to the generation of actors and to the society and culture in which they live. The participation of these actors is, therefore, indispensable not only for the collection of data but also in order to interpret them and give them meaning. This issue of the interpretation and analysis of the data will henceforth be central and can only be carried out through a complex qualitative approach which includes a shared intercultural, intergenerational, interlinguistic and, of course, interdisciplinary perspective.

At least four principles of the life course perspective are underlined in this Chapter (Elder et al. 2003, Chap. 1 in this volume): timing , which means that transition change, and especially migratory experiences depends on the age at which they are experienced; linked lives , which means that life courses of related persons are interdependent and affect each other across generations and across borders; time and place , which indicates that life courses are shaped by the institutional and historical contexts; agency , which means that individuals and families develop expectations, have a certain degree of choice, and act intentionally, in relation to the opportunities and constraints structured by the institutional contexts they live in. Participatory qualitative methodology allow them to be aware of their potential agency.

Through several surveys carried out with immigrant and refugee families in Quebec, with transnational networks of migrants in different countries, with several generations of women, as well as at the very heart of the school world, this article reflects on the participatory qualitative methodological approach as a way of making sense of these relations and intergenerational links within a migratory context. We will thus develop a hypothesis according to which a participatory qualitative methodology enables a new understanding of intergenerational and transnational processes in immigration. After outlining the main trends in qualitative research, we will present six case-studies carried out with families and generations of immigrants in Quebec, as well as a short analysis of the literature which forms the basis for our conceptual frame. From this we will draw out our methodological approach, with its epistemological foundations and its operationalization, as much for the collection as for the analysis of the data closely tied to intergenerational relations in immigration. We will conclude our article by discussing the advantages of associating a participatory qualitative methodological approach with data modeling, in order to better understand, analyze and summarize the intergenerational dynamics of migratory flows.

2 The Major Trends in Qualitative Research

According to Laperrière and Zuniga (2007), the methodological discourse of traditional science often isolates the social sciences from the socio-political contexts in which they develop. Inversely, qualitative research enables this ‘silence’ to be broken, and to occupy the grey zone by revisiting the data and research questions in social and political contexts, which will allow a better understanding of them in time and space. A transdisciplinary paradigm then enters the equation which enables us to explain social relations, as well as the ‘deep structures of the actors’ involved. According to the various researchers who have developed and modeled this qualitative research (Paillé and Mucchielli 2003; Van Der Maren 2006), this methodology impacts as much on the social as on the scientific level, thus allowing a link to be established between the research and its results, social change and the people involved. Elsewhere, other authors stress the interest of qualitative research for particular areas such as the educational sciences, where it is invaluable in drawing out and analyzing professional practices (Deschenaux et al. 2011) and, finally, in understanding the meaning given to the experiences of populations who are victims of oppression or, like poor families, are neglected (René et al. 2009). This qualitative approach can thus be used both as a methodological process and as a Foucaldian (1966) episteme, i.e. as a body of knowledge in the context of a particular period, society and social group. Thus does the qualitative perspective go beyond the simple methodological process and form an ‘ideological sediment’ on which is built a different vision of the world.

Paillé (2012) provides an overview of four groupings of epistemological positions in human and social-science research. The first is the most conventional and relies more on quantitative approaches. ‘The epistemologies of control’ refer, according to Paillé, to the search for measurements, for so-called reliable, constant and replicable data, inscribed in a logic of proof. In ‘epistemologies of action’ it is the definition and the purpose of the knowledge which change, and these changes, where knowledge and intervention are linked, are the overriding focus of the research. Here we are thinking of action and training research which often relies on case-studies and on evaluations of project implementation, through a quantitative approach but with measurement of the effects and a modeling which will enable generalizations to be made. ‘Critical epistemologies’ deconstruct knowledge by differentiating between dominant knowledge and that which is undervalued and even suppressed. The neutrality of the research and the researcher are called into question and a critical knowledge is developed concerning the conditions in which it was carried out, and the functioning of the social and political system in which the research is inscribed. Finally, ‘epistemologies of meaning’ rely on a phenomenological reading of the world, on the importance of the interpretation of reality – both by the actors involved and by the researchers – and on an interactionist vision of social relations. The qualitative approach is thus preferred when deconstructing meaning and understanding interactions. Many intercultural studies and research with immigrants take this stance. Effectively what are interesting are the interactions between individuals and groups of different origins and even of several generations, whose migratory pathways have been travelled as much by people on their own as by families and cultural groups (Vatz Laaroussi 2001, 2009). Work has also been carried out on the transnational networks of intergenerational and intercultural connections and on international relations (Vatz Laaroussi and Bolzman 2010).

Consequently we can see that, when carrying out research on intergenerational connections within groups of immigrants, this latter position will be preferred; however, we will also find quantitative methodologies for monitoring cohorts – as in work on the transmission of values – as well as action research and more structural, even critical, studies the object of which is to improve both the intervention practices and the living conditions of migrants. An interactionist perspective will be especially useful in addressing the intergenerational process involved in the life-course of the young people and of their family members. The next Sect. 9.3 reviews several studies – carried out using this qualitative participatory approach – which touch on intergenerational issues within migration. On the basis of these studies, and following our initial description of them, a critical analysis of the methodological approach will be offered. We will then focus on the theoretical frame and the epistemological perspective, both of which run through these studies, then enabling the construction of the methodological approach.

3 Research on Intergenerational and Family Dynamics in the Context of Migration: A Conceptual Frame to Outline the Methodological Pathway

In our various projects we considered intergenerational exchange as a central dimension of transmission processes, decision-making, support and mutual assistance. As did Delcroix (2001) in France, with his North African families, Bolzman (2008) studied parent–child solidarity practices with groups of Spanish and Italian immigrants in Switzerland. In each case these practices are important and easily distinguishable from those which are common within French and Swiss families. Our studies (Vatz Laaroussi 2009) as well as those by Rose and Iankova (2005), Simard et al. (2004) and Ray (2001) highlight vital practices of mutual assistance and support between immigrant generations. Thus, in families from completely different origins, the mother will either travel to be with her daughter when the latter is pregnant and giving birth or, if she lives nearby, will look after her young grandchildren while their parents are at work. Some researchers (Thomson 2006) thus speak of added value for the host society, which should encourage more family reunification .

Elsewhere in the immigrant network, the younger generations provide support for their elderly parents and grandparents, whether in terms of health care, living conditions, income and the learning of the host-country language or of daily tasks. Elderly immigrants are amongst the poorest and most vulnerable in Western societies. This state of affairs has been noted in Europe (Attias-Donfut et al. 2002; Bolzman et al. 2001, 2004; Samaoli 2007; Samaoli et al. 2000) and also in Canada (Tigar McLaren 2006), where elderly immigrants are often dependent on their children for survival. Difficulty in accessing care, language problems and cultural and religious differences sometimes reinforce this dependence and oblige the younger generations to take care of their elders. Lavoie et al. (2007) talk of three analytical strands of solidarity within migrant families: the first, more culturalist, advocates that these practices of mutual assistance are a traditional cultural characteristic of migrant families; the second, structuralist, emphasizes that it is the difficulty in accessing the various social services which makes this solidarity necessary. They also allude to a third strand, which is what we are interested in here: how migration trajectories both strengthen this solidarity and transform it into family integration strategies (Vatz Laaroussi 2001). However, changes linked to migrants’ way of life in the host society often force this issue, transforming somewhat mechanical solidarity into original, carefully selected mutual assistance practices. It is these processes in the intergenerational relations which develop through immigration that we would like to examine.

As far as refugees are concerned, the exploration of networks and intergenerational relations focused essentially around two themes: family reunification , on the one hand, and legal mentoring practices on the other. Many actors concur on the importance of family reunification for successful refugee integration into their new society (Thomson 2006; Withol de Wenden 2004). For those refugees who fled their country out of fear for their own safety or that of their children or other family members, bringing their kin to this safer environment is a recurrent concern which will occupy the majority of their time and energy in the new society (and often taking several years). When in the host society, it is the presence of their kin which is often crucial in providing some refugees with the psychological support needed to start their new life, sort out their professional and economic situation, and learn new skills etc. As well as the help with daily tasks which the family provides, just knowing that they are now ‘all together’ gives these refugees a measure of self-confidence and a belief in their future in the new society (Rachédi and Vatz Laaroussi 2004). However, it is also once reunification has taken place that problems linked to loss, past conflicts and long periods of separation can surface. Several authors (Côté et al. 2001; Tigar McLaren 2006) have pointed out how difficult it can be to be reunited after a long period of separation. New intergenerational relationships need to be developed which take into account the different traumas, discoveries and knowledge which each individual has experienced or gained. For example, where refugees must guarantee sponsorship in order to bring relatives in to Canada is concerned, the material and psychological dependence of the newcomers is easy to see. Feelings of being in debt to the sponsor, of the loss of autonomy and of rejection can thus surface in sponsored relatives, and we can also observe an increase in the material and psychological pressure imposed on the welcoming generation. Bolzman et al. (2008) point out how this is particularly difficult when the person joining his or her family is quite elderly. Our approach to intergenerational relations aims to shed light on and strengthen our understanding of this difficult situation while avoiding any tendency to categorize people into ‘demons and do-gooders’.

Finally, we must highlight the importance of the gender aspect in intergenerational relations during migration. We have rarely used data on this issue across all genders, although several of our studies concentrated on women. The literature, in fact, stresses the importance of women in transnational networks (Conseil du Statut de la Femme 2005; Rose and Iankova 2005), in intergenerational relations (Mohamed 2000; United Nations 2002) and in the transmission of both knowledge and family memories which are transformed by migration (Montgomery 2008; Rachédi and Vatz Laaroussi 2004; Vatz Laaroussi 2007). If research is still needed on transmissions between men and on the intergenerational relations between the two genders, our work and our methodological perspective should highlight the gender dimension in any understanding of intergenerational relations during immigration. The migrant status and the pre-migration period, gender and intergenerational support relationships have all to be taken into account in order to understand intergenerational relationships within migration. Our research enabled us to precisely set out the concepts involved.

We propose the inductive and cumulative construction of a conceptual frame based on the literature and the results of six of our earlier studies. Since the 1990s, we have been carrying out research in Quebec on family integration strategies, in particular for migrant families settling in the region (Vatz Laaroussi et al. 1999). We first looked at family strategies and the local initiatives which helped or hindered the migrants’ integration. Our interest in intergenerational relations grew out of these family issues. The concepts of the family migration pathway and of their integration strategies became the basis for our analysis, which focused mainly on the dynamic, temporal and spatial perspectives, enabling us to go beyond the static, inflexible visions of cultures of origin and parent–child relations. These concepts have been used in our different studies in order to renew our approach and to problematize social and family relations and integration processes. At the theoretical level, this move is expressed through the concept of family strategies for citizenship (Vatz Laaroussi 2001, 2004) in order to better understand the connections between the strategies of the different members of the family and the aim of facilitating the family’s integration as a whole. From then on, we focused on history and the memory when speaking of change!

Later, in a study of the immigrant family–school nexus (Vatz Laaroussi et al. 2008) we reflected on the articulations between institutional and family strategies to ensure the educational success of young migrants. Two new concepts surfaced: that of resilience as a process enabling educational achievement and dependent on symbolic and significant adults, and that of the diversity of models of collaboration, including new actors such as ethnic and religious communities and community groups.

Intergenerational relations were thus studied not only within families but also between the different generations who were in contact in host-society institutions like schools or groups linked to the society of origin, such as ethnic or religious community organizations. Vatz Laaroussi (2009) then undertook a study on strategies for secondary mobility in immigrant and refugee families settled initially in the Quebec region. Forms of decision-making concerning mobility were analyzed together with the factors which influenced the choice of destination of the different family members. Thus we were able to map out the family mobility pathways, with the generations all moving either together or consecutively. This research then led us to promote the concept of the network as a vehicle for these mobilities, as a material and symbolic support during migration and as a reference point within family decisions. These intergenerational relations were analyzed as both a component and a result of these network dynamics. A study (CRSH 2009–2012) on the transmissions and exchanges between three generations of refugee women in Quebec (Vatz Laaroussi et al. 2013a) was directly conceived in the wake of knowledge acquired on family mobility pathways. We therefore set both intergenerational, familial and network relations at the center of our analysis and approached them from the perspective of the transmission and exchange of knowledge and practice. We discovered previously unknown intergenerational alliances, renewed modalities for mutual assistance and joint constructions of knowledge, history and memory.

A research project (FQRSC-MELS 2010–2013) was carried out at the same time on the introduction of family history in school reception classes as a way of motivating young immigrants and refugees, newly arrived in Quebec, to write in French (Vatz Laaroussi et al. 2013b). This idea and its analysis were used to illustrate the diversity of intergenerational relations in the writing of each pupil’s book on his or her own family migration history , and enabled us to model the intergenerational co-constructions through the different types of writing linking together the young people, the significant adult members of their family, the teaching staff, the other pupils of the same generation but from different countries and cultures and the adult participants from community groups. We then analyzed these relations through the concept of dialogue – between languages, within families, between the families and the school, and between the school and the community.

It was also with the aim of broadening and understanding the multiplicity of these intergenerational relations that we took part in a multi-sited project (with simultaneous fieldwork in different places) on the transnational networks of Peruvian migrants to three countries: Spain, Canada (more specifically Quebec) and Chile.Footnote 1 We were interested in the movements of change in the representation of rights and citizenship on the transnational immigrant networks of those leaving Peru and settling in different societies elsewhere. This movement was not only international but also intergenerational, and permeated the networks in many directions: young immigrants to their elderly parents who remained in Peru, immigrant parents to their children living in the country of origin or, again, young educated Peruvians towards their older, less-educated migrant relatives… We understood here that these processes of transmission and change were deeply interwoven within transnational networks, national and international politics and intergenerational relations .

4 Epistemological Foundations for a Methodological Approach

In line with these progressive theoretical frameworks and our conceptualization of intergenerational relations and migration, our theoretical and epistemological perspective is interactionist and sets the actors, their strategies and the contexts in which they are deployed at the heart of our concerns. We use a constructivist approach (Berger and Luckmann 1967) which, in its research question as much as its methodology and the type of results expected, seeks to analyze the emergence of new scenarios, and to understand the processes through which they develop and the meaning they have for the actors. This approach is catalyzed by the concepts which we consider to be key in the problematization of our first observations, in the organization of our fieldwork and in our analysis of the output of this methodology. From our point of view, it is through the immigrant networks which came into play during the migration pathway, incorporating the ‘before’, the ‘during’ and the ‘after’ of a person’s movement from one country to another, that these intergenerational exchanges , which catalyze the production of knowledge, intercultural competence, new practices and family memories , are deployed. These practices and knowledge are given voice through strategies which target and enable integration into the new society as well as the social promotion of the different members of the family and even of the network. These intergenerational exchanges are at the heart of often unequal social relations between cultural groups, societies and generations. Thus we cannot tackle a family’s history at an individual level without mentioning the ‘monumental history’, that of national events and famous people; we would not be able to appreciate the intergenerational relations within migrant networks without understanding the social relations and international politics which direct them. We can only analyze the relations between individuals and groups of different generations if we understand the societal structures which frame them and give them direction. Thus our perspective is ecological, too, and situated in the sense that these relations take place within contexts and situations which are well worth exploring. Therefore, undertaking research on the relationships and intergenerational connections in migration leads us to work with families, their networks and their environment, all from an intercultural perspective. It also means – if we wish to avoid a culturalist, fixed approach – working with migrants’ histories and memories and with their knowledge and empowerment, identifying their processes of resilience and analyzing and even strengthening their potential, their solidarities and their mutual assistance rather than their problems. It is through these social relations between social classes, countries, genders and cultures, therefore, that we will develop our analysis.

Four concepts are thus the basis for our methodological approach: participation, understanding, narrative and history (see Fig. 9.1). The participation of all the actors involved in the research (the researchers themselves, their research assistants, students, migrants and others who make up the research sample, and stakeholders), of whatever age, culture, social status or gender, enables the reconstruction and analysis, in the field and throughout the whole project, of these social relations and provides an understanding of how they are translated in dialogues between young people and adults, between researchers and professionals, or between tutors and pupils.

Fig. 9.1
figure 1

Epistemological diagram for a comprehensive approach to intercultural relations and connections

Full size image

We can also observe how they develop within a multi-ethnic, multigenerational research team. A comprehensive approach is key when embarking on fieldwork and when trying to seize, in participatory analysis, the different meanings given to situations by the various generations and groups (community, family, network). The narrative approach is preferred here as it enables the expression of meaning and symbols, as in the description of events or the scene-setting of their history and chronology as subjectified by individuals or membership groups. This approach also offers a way of looking at unequal contexts and relations through the subjective experiences of the interviewees, who reconstruct their history in order to narrate it. Finally, history, whether individual or collective, subjective or objective, chronological or symbolic, is at the heart of this approach, which can only comprehend these intergenerational relations and practices through lived, described, reconstructed and narrated times and spaces.

5 Critical Profile of the Data Collection Tools and Analytical Approach

This epistemological perspective is the basis for our preferred methodological approach. Through a critical analysis, we will first present our work package, then the tools for the collection and analysis of our data.

5.1 The Fieldwork

Our methodological devise is designed to provide the optimal conditions under which to gather the histories, the exchanges, the co-constructions, the continuities and the ruptures between the migrant generations. Several sources are necessary for this to happen and it is important to take an approach which is both comprehensive and reflective. In our research we work on the one hand with stakeholders from the social, health and educational fields and, on the other, with the different migrant generations. Our aim is not to cross or to validate these sources but to reciprocally enrich our understanding and analysis of them. For example, the most often we encounter these stakeholders through focus groups (discussion groups) at the start and again at the end of our project. At the start we try to understand the representation of the stakeholders concerning migrant family and intergenerational relations and we draw up with them a picture of their interventions and actions. At the end of the research, we give these groups of stakeholders access to the immigrant voices we have encountered; we provide them with new material to facilitate their understanding of the intergenerational situations they come across and encourage them to take a reflective perspective which will hopefully adapt and transform their practices. In this sense, these focus groups are part of the research process and of social change. And the process as a whole must also be part of an ethical reflection approach which debates the transfer and exchange between researchers, stakeholders and participants in the project.

Between conducting focus groups with professionals, we carry out our fieldwork with the families, the generations and the intergenerational networks of immigrants. As usual, we construct typical participant samples which will enable us to understand the specificities and singularities of the different migration pathways and networks. For example, we work with several ethnic groups, and a variety of statuses (refugees, independent immigrants) and groups who arrived at different periods and in diverse family configurations (couples, families with children, single-parent families, single people and widow(er)s). We identify our participants through snowballing and the use of networks of organizations, key interviewees, researchers and the immigrants themselves. In this way, by ensuring that we have a representative sample, we can guarantee the validity of our results. Two sample groups are set up: one for focus groups and one for case-studies. Initially we intend to hold discussion groups with immigrants of varying generations in order to open up the channels of communication between them, with migrants from the same generation but from different cultural backgrounds (for example grandmothers with different ethnic origins), or with different generations from a single ethnic group (i.e. three generations of Serbian women together).

We then implement our case-studies through semi-structured individual interviews with representatives of each generation, either for their family links (i.e. the grandmother, the mother and the daughter in our research with refugee women), for their primary networks (two members of the network in Quebec, one in Peru in our study of Peruvian transnational networks) or even according to our research topic (for example, a child, the child’s parent(s) and his or her teacher in our research on the scholarly achievements of our young immigrants and refugees). Finally, still with the aim of enriching, but not triangulating, our datasets, we carry out collective interviews with the family, the members of their network and with intergenerational threesomes or trios.

We realize that these multimethod projects are complex and, to undertake them successfully, we need a solid team of researchers in the field. We will come back to the composition of our research team as an essential element of our methodological approach later in this chapter.

5.2 Tools for the Collection and Synthesis of Data

Whether conducting focus groups or individual or collective interviews, we always use a thematic interview chart, with themes and sub-themes, illustrations and potential questions (Fig. 9.2). This chart must be sufficiently flexible to enable its use in different ways according to both the participants and the interviewers, but sufficiently structured to be usable by several interviewers in different languages and generations.

Fig. 9.2
figure 2

Intergenerational pathway: an analytical tool

Full size image

For example, the way in which an interviewer approaches the issues of death or of education should take into account the generation and the experiences of the interviewee; the same examples cannot be used in the same way with refugee grandmothers as with refugee grandchildren, even when they are from the same country of origin . Furthermore, talking to grandmothers about the transmission of values does not have the same resonance as when discussing it with their daughters or grandchildren. Hence the interview schedules are adaptable and intended to obtain discourses, histories and representations which are known to be subjective and which will collectivize the narratives of the members of the different generations.

We therefore use various practical tools during the interviews in order to obtain cross-cutting data. In particular, to understand the history of our interviewees, whether individuals, families or groups, we ask them to narrate their journeys and to illustrate them by drawing a line which represents their migration pathway, marking any notable events and commenting on them. Of course it is the commentary which gives us the most comprehensive data; nevertheless, the drawings of the migrants’ route maps which our interviewers systematically retrieve and complete at the end of the interviews allow us to summarize our approach to these very diverse life trajectories. For the intergenerational trios of female refugees, the interviewers traced a streamed migration pathway which shows the dates of the women’s travel, of their reunification with kin, and of notable events for the three women in each case (Fig. 9.3).

Fig. 9.3
figure 3

Example of an intergenerational trajectory in the research trios: Migration pathway of a family from Rwanda

Full size image

There are now many tools for data collection which enable us to identify the networks of our interviewees and which are used in both qualitative and quantitative research. Thus Bernardi (2011) sees a mixed method as the most appropriate for studying transnational family networks and, more specifically, proposes to use network maps with the children of the families. In the same way, during the interviews, we ask our participants to draw a map of their networks and to comment on it (Fig. 9.4).

Fig. 9.4
figure 4

Intergenerational network map of the intergenerational trios: example of a Columbian trio

Full size image

In particular, we are trying to understand, with them, those to whom they feel the closest, who give them support, who represent potential resources either on a daily basis or on a special occasion. The interviews also identify the spaces where members place their networks, whether of family members, of friends or of representatives of the service sector. Through their sketches, they illustrate their relational distance from or proximity to these people. We also ask them to specify their generation. In our research on the transnational networks of Peruvians, it was on this map of networks that the first interviewee identified the second person to be interviewed in the host country and the person to meet in Peru. This tool gives great freedom to the interviewees; in particular we willingly abandon the notions of strong and weak links and reconstruct the maps in the way that our interviewees indicated. This also enables the participants to visualize their connections and essential points of reference for what can, for some, represent a reassuring discovery, and even a way to take control of their lives again.

Often, drawing their transnational networks enables the migrants to assess their mobility. In our research on the educational achievements of the young, several mentioned people in their networks who were far away, back in the country of origin or in a transit country, but who were very important to them. This approach was also a way of giving them back a place in their own story. Once the interviews had been carried out with the different members of the case-study, the interviewers drew up a chart showing the overlapping networks of each case.

In our action research with youngsters in reception classes, the drawing up of the family tree and the network maps was one of the themes covered. These maps and charts have never yet been analyzed objectively or interpreted through a psychological or psychoanalytic framework. The aim was to enable the children to visualize the place of these people in their lives, on their migration journeys and in their individual and family histories (Fig. 9.5). They could include whatever they wished, and were not obliged to tell the ‘truth’. Several of them used these drawings to take stock of the changes they were experiencing and what they put in writing about them was along the same lines. Some parents were surprised, and even very moved, to find in these networks the grandparents, or uncles and aunts that the children hardly or never knew, but who were symbolically important to them. The family tree also, in several cases, facilitated discussions of the family’s history.

Fig. 9.5
figure 5

The networks of a young participant in our research at his school on immigrant family collaboration (Juan’s network)

Full size image

In our action research on family history in the reception class, and also, more exceptionally, in other studies, some young people and their parents kept multi-authored diaries together on the themes surrounding their journey, their arrival, and the memories of, losses through and benefits of migration. We can thus find, directly and in writing, the intergenerational connections which we wish to analyze. The parents who wrote in their children’s books explained: ‘For me, it was a question of writing down things I saw so that I don’t forget them and can read about them again’, ‘It’s a way of expressing our feelings’, whereas the children said: ‘Writing this book about my family history allowed me to get a load off my mind’, or again ‘It helps me to keep the memories of my father alive, which is why I love this project!’.

Others, and especially refugee or immigrant mothers, chose to write about parts of their journey, to keep a written record of their travels, a narrative which is sometimes romanticized, sometimes very realistic (see, on this subject, Charlotte’s narrative in Vatz Laaroussi 2009: 206–212). Here was precious material which we could then use as a direct outcome of the interviews, and which gave the migrants’ perspective on their history. Extracts from some of these narratives are thus be used in our publications, giving our participants a voice. The logbooks of our researchers and of the chaperones when we carried out our action research in schools also provided us with written material which are directly form part of our analysis, and even of our published outputs. Multi-authored texts can thus be shared between an interviewed father, a child through his book, the chaperone through her logbook and the researcher who weaves all the elements together into a published output.

Thus, after using these data collection tools, we can turn to the analytical tools which enable us to amalgamate the different types of data from several sources, first by case-study, then, transversally, by generation, by country of origin and by topic.

Some tools are used to summarize the collected data together with those of other actors in the same case-study, and to cross-reference them in order to obtain an intergenerational understanding. Thus in our research with our trios, we have developed schemes, for each case we encountered, which cross-cut the productions and transmissions between the three generations (Fig. 9.6).

Fig. 9.6
figure 6

Examples of charts summarizing intergenerational transmissions and productions in our research trios

Full size image

As with our research on family and school collaboration, we have drawn up resilience maps for each young person we met during our interviews with their parents, teachers and other youngsters. These maps show the ‘guardians of resilience’ – the ways in which young people find support in their entourage; whether symbolic or real, some support systems are gained from intergenerational relations , either as a model or as a form of support, encouragement or help (Fig. 9.7).

Fig. 9.7
figure 7

Nadia’s achievement (14 years old, Afghanistan, arrived in 1998). Networks and resilience

Full size image

5.3 Data Analysis: Dialoguing with the Actors

The process of data analysis cross-tabulates the data from all sources of which some have already been amalgamated and standardized through summarizing tools. It also seeks to interpret the data, respecting the position and narrative of each actor, while creating a new narrative out of their interview dialogue with the research team. In fact the entire process depends on having a multilingual, multicultural and multigenerational research team. We have already stressed (Vatz Laaroussi 2008; Vatz Laaroussi et al. 1995) the value of having a linguistically, ethnically, status-wise and generationally mixed research team who, at one and the same time, develop networks and recruit participants for the research, carry out the interviews and, finally, demonstrate their understanding through drawing up these summary charts. But even more than the closeness of the field researchers to the people, the families and the groups which they encounter, it is the type of interpretative dialogue employed between the different actors which seems to be pertinent and particularly rich here.

In fact we can identify five types of dialogue as a result of this research process which allow us to construct our methodological approach and our interpretative analysis of the data. The first level of dialogue is between the researchers – who have an official academic status and who are responsible for the funding allocated to the project – and the research assistants and students whom they employ to take part in the research. Here the question of origins, languages and generations is filtered by professional and social status and the first stage of the participatory methodological process consists to set up a dialogue between these actors. This takes into account the various differences, and even distances and inequalities, between them by catalyzing them into a collaborative perspective the aim of which is not to study equality or assimilation but rather the expression, the empowerment, the exchanges of knowledge and the co-construction of their expertise. In this way we can talk of an emancipatory dialogue for the whole team based on one essential condition: recognition of the experiences and knowledge of each and every member.

The second level of dialogue is between the members of the field team and the participants encountered during the fieldwork, whether interviewed individually, collectively or in focus groups. Here again the process of the mutual recognition of knowledge and a form of collaborative complicity will facilitate the narrative, enabling the greatest freedom of expression possible for the interviewees, the exchange, and research into the meaning of experience through reformulation and listening, and the interest accorded to these interactions. Another outcome of the process is the feedback which is given to participants in the wake of our analysis.

The third type of dialogue occurs during the analysis, when the participants are no longer present in person but are represented verbatim by their interview accounts, by the charts and summary charts and by the field researchers they encountered. The dialogue is now between three people, the one symbolically present, the other two – whether the project leaders or the field researchers – beginning a comprehensive process of analysis which gives back meaning and life to the actors. In this dialogue the issue of generations is always present, either in our understanding, in the meaning to be reconstructed, or again in the discussion process amongst the members of the research team.

The fourth level of dialogue is in the restitution, to both practitioners and professionals, of this comprehensive intergenerational analysis, of these new meanings and dynamics. Once again, the dialogue develops properly between these practitioners and the research team, with the aim of introducing the principal actors through a form of symbolic or concrete recognition. For example, several fora are organized at the end of the project in order to share the results with all the actors and participants. During the forum we organized at the end of the action research in schools on family history, the families, teachers, researchers, students and community stakeholders all shared their experiences and were given access to the written output of the pupils and the family, as well as to videos filmed at different moments of the exercise.

Finally, a fifth dialogue is generated – this time between the generations – through the different exchanges and can be found within the groups taking part in the research and the members of the research team themselves. What is more, this approach often enables new intergenerational exchanges to be set up within families and networks, as was the case for our research with our trios or with the action research in the reception classes.

Illustration through interview extracts: the use of intergenerational dialogue.

I talked about it with my mother, my grandfather and my aunt. They helped me over the phone. They spoke to me in Spanish and I took notes. After, when I got to school, I added my own memories to what they had told me (Secondary-school pupil, Montreal, action research).

Interview extracts from mother–daughter dialogue, trio research:

These are the values which I would like to transmit to my children – not forgetting femininity. It’s important. A woman should be looked at and appreciated for the way she is. This is why she should carry herself well. That’s what I learned from my mother. My daughters know it. When I get my little one dressed she knows what goes with what. I cannot mix any old colors, everything must be coordinated (mother).

Mummy also taught me to carry myself properly. A woman should be elegant. Where we come from, people don’t wear jeans everywhere. We coordinate the colors. That’s what my mother always taught me; it’s important to be elegant and beautiful (daughter).

These five levels of dialogue can also be found in the output from the project – whether articles, volumes, conferences, guides or videos. The texts will be multi-authored and the verbatim accounts intergenerational. In all cases we will try to summarize them in order to enter into new exchanges with the wider public.

6 Interpretation Through Participation and Meaning

The cumulative, intercultural, intergenerational and dialogic analysis of these discourses, representations and narratives is undertaken through interpretation by the team as a whole. It draws on what Soulet (2012) calls the realistic imagination, a constrained, collective, interpretative activity. The constraints are those of thoroughness, authenticity, relevance and recognition of subjectivities. This analytical activity is implemented both through a conceptually designed interpretative framework and within a grey area, even a margin of discretion, occupied by the different members of the team. Searching for meaning leads to an intergenerational and intercultural reinterpretation of histories, practices and representations. The research team, fueled by the participants they encountered, reveals new configurations of meaning which provide a different take on the intergenerational relations , transmissions, circulations, exchanges, co-constructions and social relations in which they belong. These hypotheses of meaning can thus be applied to texts which give voice to the actors and to the collective imagination of the research team. Each person’s sociological intuition, colored by his or her language and culture of origin, generation, experience and knowledge, and gender, is called upon in a cumulative emic perspective (Paillé 2012); new accounts are redrawn, written and narrated. The examples below illustrate several possible links which give meaning to multi-stranded discourse and dialogue.

Grandmother–mother dialogue from the same trio through individual interviews. This dialogue demonstrates the intergenerational circularity of the apprenticeships.

From my daughter I learned that each one of us can be patient when we want to be. From my granddaughter I learned that the way we behave depends on the environment in which we grew up (YU4SGM).

As I have already said, my mother taught me to be patient, and to respect others. My daughter taught me to be brave and to accept those things that I cannot change (YU4SM).

Daughter–mother dialogue (two different cases, same country of origin ) in a three-way interpretative written text. This dialogue allows us to analyze the intergenerational cultural convergences.

What interests me is dancing. I would love to teach my children to dance. Here no one dances, it’s very sad. It’s important to let the body express itself through rhythm and sound… (R1QF).

Singing and dancing helped us to keep our spirits up and be brave. We knew we would be OK because the Rwandan is brave, it’s an inherited trait. There are several types of dance, each having a different meaning. For example dances where we clap our hands and stamp our feet to the rhythm of a tune we all know. For us, this dance symbolizes enthusiasm and freedom. If it is a man and a woman who dance together, that means friendship. Dancing for us is an act of exchange and communication. Each step we take involves changing places with the partner opposite. This signifies a climate of understanding and movement the one towards the other. This all goes to show to our children that it is important to be sociable (R2QM).

Three-way interview extract (trios). This dialogue highlights intergenerational transmissions.

We have also brought with us books on the democratic leadership in Colombia. How women are taught to acquire or develop this leadership. I think my daughter can benefit from reading these books. She will be able to understand how we worked with women in Colombia. It’s something she can showcase (C3ST-M).

Intergenerational link between individual interview extracts, different cases (trios). These dialogues are based on a comparison of countries of origin and highlight the intergenerational circulation of changes linked to migration.

It’s easier to grow old here. We can benefit from being here. We can relax, go for a walk, and take part in many activities. It is much better for the elderly here than back home (YU3SGM).

My role has changed. I live better here and I don’t have many obligations and responsibilities (YU2SGM).

I feel like ‘a castle neither on earth nor in heaven’ in terms of obligations towards my children, my grandchildren, my mother. I am well organized, but I would like to have a bit more time free for us all. Once again, I think that it is much easier here; it would be much harder in our country (YU3SM).

We can in this way reconstruct a complete intergenerational network narrative, as presented in several of our books (Vatz Laaroussi 2001, 2009).

7 Intergenerational Research in a Migration Situation: Increasing Participatory Projects

Participation and the reconstruction of meaning represent the two foundations of the qualitative methodologies which contribute here to our understanding of intergenerational relations in migration. We can thus speak of collaborative and/or participative research. This can be presented in several forms which result in different models: joint research, networking, action research, training research or critical advocacy research. It is always characterized by a knowledge production process carried out in collaboration with the actors in the field. These studies all aim to ‘harness the knowledge of citizen-actors, identify potential participants and, for the elderly, strengthen their self-belief in their own ability to initiate and control the action’ (Anadon 2007: 4).

These different types of collaborative research address the generations in migration in different ways, thus enabling a comprehensive, in-depth portrait to be drawn up which is relevant to the topic of the research, acknowledges the different meanings given to their experiences by the actors concerned, and is liberating. In this sense, the tools developed allow for the summarizing of these collaborative approaches. Our tools, together with our interpretative approach , enable a modeling of the processes at play in these intergenerational relations as well as the construction of typologies. Participation, meaning, narration and history represent the foundations of our methodological perspective, the combination of which enables us to approach intergenerational interactions within migration through the life-courses of all the people involved.

Thus it is through integrating these participatory qualitative methodological approaches and developing modeling approaches that the researchers can associate them with quantitative approaches, the purpose of which is to draw up an evolving portrait of intergenerational relations , for example on the cohorts of migrant pupils or on transnational networks. The work of Marie McAndrew and her team (GRIES, research project on educational and school intervention, FQRAC 2010–2014) – who carried out a meta-analysis of research, at once quantitative, qualitative and participatory, involving the academic achievements of immigrant pupils in Quebec, both first and second generation  – provides an excellent illustration of the successful linking of qualitative and quantitative approaches, of research and practice, of the expanding of new intellectual knowledge and the different ways to transfer this to an ever-widening public, and of academic work and political decision-making.