**10. PAR as the approach to generate data on inclusive entanglement of relationality**

We chose PAR because, better than any other approach that we are aware of, it is compatible with the above criteria of quality. For example, PAR advances the same agenda for social justice, equity, freedom, peace, and hope among all who work with it [37]. Even the youth we worked with participated in determining the vision, the direction, the activities, and the monitoring of the research process and its outcomes. As researchers we did not call nor treat them as a sample, research objects nor subjects, respondents nor participants. On the contrary we regarded them as co-researchers who had an equal voice in the process of generating and documenting the entire study, because we saw them as equally human as us. Gloria Ladson Billings supports this approach because, according to her, people who are best suited to lead research are

#### *Employability as Inclusive Entanglement in Relationalities: A Design in Sustainable Learning… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.114033*

those who have a problem [38]. Patti Lather identifies three very important phases in such a respectful study, namely the interpretive, the analytic and the educative [37]. The interpretive phase involves us all as researchers and co-researchers in the process of identifying and formulating a vision of, and in response to the problem. This is based on such techniques as SWOT—analysis which is about identifying our individual and collective strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and plausible as well as possible threats as we pursue to formulate the intervention and response to the problem [39]. Then, during the analytic phase, based on the best arguments among us all informed by the above, we collectively put together a strategy using design thinking techniques. These enable us to identify the challenges constituting the problem, the solutions shaped by best practices from across the world, conducive contextual factors that make the strategy to succeed, as well as those contextual factors that present threats to be circumvented for the success of the intervention. The last design thinking principle guides us to seek, generate and document evidence for what we present as the plausible and possible framework and/or strategy towards the solution of the unemployment problem of some youth, based on our findings and recommendations [39]. It is through PAR grounded on these principles that our study attempts to address issues of power differentials in such a critical and emancipatory research through which we hope to empower and transform the status of the unemployed youth for the better [38].

It is our belief, based on Maibi's observation, that PAR is the research approach of choice because it enables our study to "…address some social Issues…" such as youth unemployment that might be exacerbated by the intersectionality of exclusionary practices based on race, gender, socio-economic status, and rurality among others. We agree with them (Maibi) that,

*PAR generates knowledge for transformation, and redressive action, It promotes teamwork and collaboration as it is emancipatory and opens discourse around issues of power differentials. The role of the researcher the relationship between the researcher and the co-researchers [37].*

We furthermore chose PAR for our study because it helps us to achieve the interventionistic objectives of the study as we collectively attempt to create sustainable learning environments for employment, where we together attempt to recreate and re-enforce positive inclusive entanglements in supportive relationalities. PAR enabled us all to deliberately be respectful among ourselves as we collaborated as equals with compassion.
