Democratising Evidence with David Patton: From Experience to Leadership Pt. 1

Professor Goodman Sibeko speaks with Dr David Patton about the experiences that shaped his journey into criminology, recovery research, and the movement to centre lived experience in knowledge production.

David reflects on growing up in a community marked by inequality, the people who helped shape his path, and the turning points that led him into academia. He discusses how these experiences influenced the questions he asks as a researcher and his commitment to ensuring that research reflects the realities of the people it seeks to understand.

The conversation also explores participation, representation, and the challenges of bringing lived experience into academic spaces, setting the foundation for the discussions that follow throughout the series.

Featured Voices

Host – A/Prof. Goodman Sibeko

ISSUP Global Scientific Advisor.

Head of Addiction Psychiatry, University of Cape Town.

LinkedIn: goodmansibeko

Twitter/X: @profgsibeko

Guest – Dr David Patton

Dr David Patton is an Associate Professor in Criminology at the University of Derby whose work focuses on lived experience, participatory research, recovery, and social justice. He leads international initiatives that amplify lived experience voices, including Recovery Atlas and New Central Media, and has over 25 years of experience in higher education.

Time Stamps

Professor Goodman Sibeko (00:00)
Hello and welcome to Democratizing Evidence, Lived Experience and the Future of Addiction Science, a special ISSUP podcast series that seeks to explore how lived experience can reshape the way we understand, generate, and apply evidence in prevention, treatment , and recovery support. I'm Goodman Sibeko I'm the ISSUP Global Scientific Advisor, and I'm your host. You can find me on LinkedIn and on social media if you just look for Prof. G Sibeko. And you can find ISSUP on LinkedIn X and Blue Sky by simply searching ISSUP. 

Across these four episodes, we're going to look at how knowledge is produced in the field of drug use and recovery and how lived experience can be more meaningfully integrated into what we recognize or really appraise as evidence We will reflect on how participatory approaches, storytelling and community-led insights can in fact strengthen systems of care and inform more inclusive and effective responses. And joining us for this really awesome conversation is David Patton, whose work seeks to challenge traditional boundaries between academic knowledge and lived experience and who's been at the forefront really of advancing participatory approaches in addiction research and recovery studies. I know this conversation a few weeks ago certainly challenged me in the best way when we met, David. So, I'm excited to see how this conversation helps you, as the listeners at ISSUP, consider how you think of evidence. 

David is an associate professor in criminology at the University of Derby. His work focuses on recovery, lived experience, and participatory research approaches that broaden traditional understandings of knowledge and addiction science and criminal justice. So, drawing both on academic and lived experience perspectives, David has been instrumental in developing innovative approaches such as participatory research methods and creative knowledge sharing platforms that centre the voices of individuals with lived and living experience.

His work really is focused on the importance of co-production, epistemic justice, and democratization of evidence, advocating for a more inclusive understanding of what constitutes valid knowledge in prevention, treatment, and recovery support. And through his research and teaching, David continues to influence how systems engage with lived experience as a critical component of evidence-based practice. 

So, in this first episode, we start off by engaging with David's journey and really understand what David's about. We'll talk about the personal professional experiences that help direct his path into criminology, recovery research, and the growing movement to centre lived experience in knowledge production. This is a story about resilience, a story about perspective and a willingness to question how knowledge is created and whose voices are heard, whose voices really matter. 

David, it's a wonderful pleasure to have you join us and indeed to talk to you again. Maybe just to get us going. I know I've already s spoken to the listeners about your background, be it maybe in a very abbreviated form. But in your own words, who's David in a nutshell? Who are you?

Dr. David Patton (03:00)
Oh, great to see you again, Goodman, and really great to be here. Thank you so much. Yeah, I think it's funny. I was recently introduced by someone, and they said that I reminded them of Morpheus from The Matrix. And I think I've always kind of regarded myself to be a bit of a boundary spanner, but they said that for them, the reason why they call me Morpheus was that they said, because I keep pointing out that the system is lying to us. And they said that through the work that I do, I guess it's kind of not that the system is the enemy, but the illusions that they create are. And in that sense, I'm an academic, so I span the academic world, but because I sent a lived experience, I also span that world as well. And as a result, think the lived experience, knowledge production that we've created, actually that cuts through the illusion and it exposes kind of some of the dominant narratives that I believe are kind of a harmful and not very helpful. So, I guess in a nutshell, I describe myself as a boundary spanner.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (03:56)
Wow, that's incredible. So now you're gonna help us understand first of all which pill you picked, whether that just the red pill or the blue pill. So, what about your early life and the experiences? I mean you I think you've alluded to it already somewhat. but what about you know, those experiences shaped your perspectives on equality, on justice and on recovery?

Dr. David Patton (04:15)
Yeah, it's funny, Goodman, of last summer I turned 50 and it's kind of always a good point for reflection. And also I think what occurred really over the last six months is just how you look back and you see threads come together and you go, my goodness, you my work is a mirror actually of lots of the themes that influenced my childhood and realizing actually, know, I don't study inequality, I grew up inside it. And so, as a young person, I grew up in the Northeast of England and in England, there's a North-South divide where the wealth and opportunities and investment is very much down South. It's very London centric kind of country. But if you live towards the North, actually, you know, the opportunities, the investment is scarce. So, I grew up in a small town on a kind of social housing estate, council house. call them in England projects, if you're from America.

My parents were kind of on benefits or welfare, depending upon which country you come from. you know, I think for some people they learn about power in lectures, but for me, I learned about it kind of growing up in a housing estate whereby there was so much inequality under my everyday experiences and they didn't realize it. It was in the classroom that I went to kind of being in the bottom set for all of my subjects.

And why was that? Obviously, I grew up in a house where, you know, that there wasn't a book because my, nobody in my family had had a qualification that nobody left school with any education. but also, I think people like me from my postcode, your destiny was kind of the narrative of what was espoused wasn't positive. People like me didn't grow up to become academics or professors or, experts or policymakers or have lots of money and successful jobs. People around me, there was that intergenerational welfare benefit dependence. People ended up using substances and going to prison and best working in minimum wage kind of jobs. what was fascinating as well, seeing and growing up amongst that wonderful community at the same time, later entering criminology and hearing this different narrative, this deficit-based narrative, people like these and the risk factors that they had. And I was like, but that's my auntie So-and-so that they're speaking about, and my neighbour Billy. I thought there's a different story. There’re two stories operating here. So right from the very start, I think it was this melting pot of inequality and justice and stories being told about people and populations that didn't marry my own experiences. Yeah, sorry, that was a long-winded answer to your question.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (06:48)
Not at all, David. For me it sounds almost like you took both pills, didn't you? So, there was this whole of realizing the limitations of the space you were in. And I think you've done such a great job of situating your past in in that experience of inequality. but also having the space and vision to be able to see beyond that. I mean, I feel like my past reflects that quite a lot. The idea that this is not a great space I'm in but also having the capacity to dream and to feel like there can be a difference, there can be a change.

Dr. David Patton (07:18)
Yes. And dreaming was the pathway out, Goodman, you know. I think for me, was kind of when I was 13, the turning point, it was during the six week summer school holidays and I was kind of bored, stupid, didn't have any money, so there was nothing to do and was staring out my window kind of one sunny day. And whilst I was kind of looking out the window. Literally after about an hour of just being bored, relentless thinking, what can I do today? I started having this kind of daydream of things that I could do. And it kind of went on and emerged a kind of life of its own. And eventually over time, I began seeing these books kind of floating in the air. And there was this like sense that one day I would write books and that those books would help people. Now at this point, Goodman, I'm in the bottom set for every subject.

So, you know, the intelligent kids, they're in the top sets. The kids that are average are in the middle. And then there's the, the rest of us, you know, and the carried shame of that Goodman of being in the bottom set in that hierarchy of who's intelligent, who's the best and who really you feel like you're being babysat by your teachers because the classroom is going wild. So, for me, having this then daydream vision of kind of one day writing books, that changed the trajectory.

So for me, that then, as I rejoined school in the September of my fourth year of secondary school, my penultimate year before, you know, sitting the exams and leaving with the qualifications or not, I started going to school and put my hand up and going, sorry, miss, what does that mean? Sorry, miss, can you say that again? Cause I didn't quite understand it. But when you're in the bottom set, that's not, those are not the questions that you ask. You stay silent and you let the teacher talk, whether you understand it or not. And so that for me just allowed me that moment during those holidays allowed me to occupy a different identity. And I think because I occupied that different identity and still with all of the negative deficit-based narratives still dominating who I thought I was and who I could be, it began to move me in a different direction.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (09:19)
It sounds to me you know, like you know, being able to have space to visualize that there could be something different and to be able to be inspired to start asking questions that might even have surprised you. Th the sort of a combination of environmental situation or exposure, but also potentially exposure to individuals or some certain moments that might have driven you to start evolving into this academic you've become. So, you know, that having been said, from your perspective, were there any key moments or specific individuals that you would say possibly helped you shape your path towards academia?

Dr. David Patton (09:57)
Yeah, I think there's always people along your journey and no one ever gets to wherever they are in life without the help and support of other people. And for me, it was early on kind of particular teachers who really believed in me, and they called forth those future identities that they saw potential in me that I didn't quite know was there. And so there was a kind of college lecturer, Angela Boyle, who I always have to give tribute to and she was just, yeah, someone who was sent to encourage and nurture and help me navigate systems and kind of the rules of the game that I didn't even know I was playing, you know? And that helped me get to that next stage and to apply to university because, you know, as I said, nobody in my family had left school with a GCSE from secondary school, let alone to be first in family going to university. And then along the way, it just feels like people have been placed at key moments of those junction points for that next kind of rise, that next move, that next kind of ascension point that people were placed to help me move along. And I would not be where I am today were it not for countless people who supported me along the way.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (11:04)
You know I was I was having this conversation just yesterday, David, with some of my colleagues at the office about having a champion. Having somebody who can bat for you and somebody who can listen to your ideas and challenge them or agree with them as a as may be the case.

Dr. David Patton (11:18)
Integral. Well, that's it. Yeah. You just left drifting and you just reside within what the container that you've been given. So, they call and draw things out of you that, you know, that you can't see for yourself.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (11:31)
And so, you know, you've already spoken about your personal exposure to you know, not being in the best space. You know, y you were in the in the in the lower, in the bottom set at school, you grew up in an area where it wasn't the most affluent and you weren't necessarily exposed to resources. And then you managed to navigate this you know, into scholarship and growing your academic career. But what specifically would you say drew you towards criminology and addiction research specifically.

Dr. David Patton (12:00)
Yeah, think, lots of people around me during my kind of, formative years, your friends, family members were using drugs and I'm somebody who never has done, which is a small miracle in itself, given my background and some the life events that I've seen and experienced. But I was never drawn to that. I think because I had a vision of where I wanted to get to that 13-year-old was a life changing moment.

That kept me kind of moving and motivated. I never needed an alarm to get out of bed in the morning to get to my nine o'clock lectures ever because I knew why I was going. It was never about Mr. So-and-so's assignment. It was my assignment to help me get to that next stage. I started off doing the law degree because I was watching lots of jazzy law movies and series.

People dressed nicely, went to lunch a lot and didn't do a lot of work. And I thought, hey, I can do that. and so, I started off doing the law degree, the way in which it was taught was, know, this is the law, memorize it and repeat it in the exam. This is what the judge said. Memorize it and repeat it in the exam. And I was always the why person. Yeah. But why did the judge say that? Why was that the conclusion of the jury?

On what basis was that? So, I was always asking those analytical critical questions. And so partway through my first semester, a friend of mine said, you know, I was saying this isn't working out for me. think I'm going to drop out, you know, and she says, I'm saying criminology, but I think you'd love it because you love to debate. Um, and so I switched in my first year and it was like the light came on two levels. One is that it allowed me to consider power and inequality and all of those why questions and so what questions. It wasn’t just the photocopier of knowledge, but also it allowed me to understand the upbringing and the environment in which I'd grown up. Like all the theories I was studying, I was like, that was what was going on between years five to 10 and during my teenage years. And that was what was causing these people to behave in this way and contributing factors. I understood lots of life events and the lifestyles of those people around me. So, for me that the two came together and that was it. kind of from that point on just got straight A's. So, I ended up getting a first-class honours degree, you know, and the power of that moment of graduating from being bottom set in school to now first-class honours degree. When I was told, I wasn't, I didn't have the, enough GCSEs to study three A levels.

I was downgraded to only studying two. Basically, what the message was, know, David, you're not intelligent enough. So today, and it was once I was doing my degree that I studied a drugs module and it just, it ignited something inside me that I couldn't have foreseen. And I was obsessed with identity and culture and how drugs intersect with that and how that shapes life outcomes. And I knew whilst I was studying that, that I would like to do a PhD in drugs. And so that was the next vision. That was the next goal. And so, I kind of applied for a scholarship and received a scholarship because, know, coming from my background, I couldn't afford the fees. There's no way I could afford the course fees, living fees. and my parents blessed them. They were willing to move cities, you know, so I could live with them because they could get the free housing. but I got a fully funded scholarship based upon the merits of my application. And again, that opened up the next doorway. I think in terms of what you asked around kind of you know, the drugs in particular, during my PhD, I started working for Cambridge university. Again, another one of those kinds of pinched me dreamlike moments from the council estates to Cambridge university. Who'd have thought? And I remember I was working on this big multimillion pound home office study.

And it was the first one in England and Wales to look at the connection between drugs and crime using criminal justice population. So, we were working in police stations a month at a time. There was a team of us, and we'd work 24 seven and we'd go in and we'd interview anyone who was arrested. Providing, you know, their mental health and the way they intoxicated at the time and a few other kinds of criteria, but we'd ask them like all of these horrendous questions like.

And you've just met them, okay. And they've just been arrested. So, they're in this police station and you take them out to this small room. And the opening questions is, so have you ever used drugs? And then you go through each drug. Have you ever used it? Have you used it in the last year and the last month? And then, hey, tell me, so how much on average do you spend on drugs per week, per month, per year? And then you repeat all of those types of questions. But now with crime, hey, have you ever committed crime?

Have you ever sold or exchanged yourself, your body for sex and for money? And we're asking these really invasive questions. And the more I was doing it, you because at first you just did all like, wow, I'm working for Cambridge university. Wow. I'm working on this home office project. You know, I should be so grateful. But the more you're in these situations with these people asking these deficit-based questions, you go, but all these deficit-based questions. And it struck me partway through, I think it was the end of the first year of this two-year project, what possible story could we write about this sample, about this population group? Because all we're asking is negative questions. So of course, the story is that these people take drugs and commit negative, nasty, harmful behaviours. And that therefore legitimates the state to then the police, the courts, to have these powers to intervene and do certain things to these populations. So, after a year, I kind of went to the project lead, the professor, and I just said, hey, you know, we ask about 150 questions as part of the interview. I was just wondering if we could ask further two questions. so, question one was simply, what else do you spend your money on apart from drugs?

And the second question was, what else do you do with your time beyond consuming drugs or committing crime? Assuming that it's answered yes to either of those questions. And the answer came back that no, couldn't add those two questions. Now, Goodman why couldn't those two questions be added but mentally it would change the narrative that we could write about these people because we would realize their answers would be, I care for my sick mother.

I look after my two children. I have leisure pursuits. I buy bread and milk. I buy groceries. I read magazines and humanize this population. There will no longer be the bad people and the deviants. They would become people.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (18:25)
So, David, I think, you know, stemming from our first conversation, which I really enjoyed because we challenged each other and I'm gonna maybe challenge you again here in in how I frame the next question. I think from me it sounds like even though you've had a lot of challenging spaces that you've navigated, spaces that didn't necessarily align with how your life has turned out, you've always managed to somehow find a voice and you've always managed to somehow find a way to express what you need or what you need the space to do for you. And my next question was going to be about how, you know, your lived experience has shaped the kind of questions you wanted to ask. And in your reflection now, you've really represented the fact that you realize that the voice of these folks wasn't necessarily coming through in how the questions were being framed. How do you marry this? How does your lived experience link to how you evolved and how you want to ask questions? Is it because you realized people didn't have the voice you'd learned to use? Or is there another way to frame this? Help me understand. Help me help me understand how your how your journey helped you realize the importance of having their voices represented.

Dr. David Patton (19:32)
Yeah, so it's fundamental to me so that I will not participate in any project that causes harm to another person. And so as soon as we're considering the aims and objectives of a project, whether research or otherwise, I'm looking at what's undergirding this project. What's the intention behind it? What story will be told as a result of this project coming out into the world? And if it is a research project and I'm looking at the research instruments and the questions that are being asked. I'm looking to see, it a deficit-based instrument or does it give hope and possibility and are the questions kind of strengths based and are we allowing space for the sample to be co-researchers and project leaders with us? So, for me, think having those early negative experiences personally, growing up where I didn't believe I had a voice being in situations, the classroom is one powerful example. think we all have those childhood memories of what occurred in our school education. so being within that hierarchy of top, middle, bottom set, even being told in English that I couldn't study Shakespeare, that was for the top set and the middle set, but the bottom set, we were only allowed to it was called Boys from the Black Stuff, which nobody will know internationally.

It was about a group of kind of builders, working on a building site. We were only capable of studying that literature. And I think what happens is that when you're told that you don't have a voice, the other message that accompanies that is that you're not intelligent. And therefore, people like you don't do X, but people like that go on to do all of the positive things and the successful things. So, I'm so grateful now in retrospect.

Having had those experiences because the work that I seek to put out into the world will not reproduce those patterns. So, I will stand for something different. And I think it's not about just giving people voice. You hear a lot about kind of inclusion and giving people a seat at the table. And, you know, that sounds admirable and impressive at first, but again, when you scratch a little bit deeper, you know, the famous slogan, nothing about us without us.

But what does, then that's an important step and I want to mark that and then be explicit that that, you know, unfortunately is an important step from where we were in the dark ages. But it's not enough Goodman, because if I invite you to my table, okay, then it's tokenism because I might allow you to speak, but there's the hierarchy. A, it's my table and two, I will allow you to speak.

But am I listening and what will I do with the words that you share? Once that kind of meeting is over, once that co-production steering group has been held, how will I take on board what has been shared by the marginalized, the poor, the vulnerable, people with multiple complexities, all of those labels, I hate by the way, but I'm using them on purpose here, stringing them all together to highlight to the listener, aren't they awful? And the power of language to place people in a hierarchy because when I go to the meeting, I'll introduce myself as Dr. David Patton, associate professor. But when people with lived experience come into the room, you go, hi, I'm Sally, I'm the lived experience representative. What does, what's the power dynamic at that table? Yeah. So, for me, it's not just about inclusion, but it's about transformation. So, all of the projects that I do are kind of participatory action research.

What that means fundamentally, it collapses the hierarchy so that it's not the academic and then the rest of the sample group. But we are co-leaders together of the project and it gives you control of the narrative, the agenda, what we do, the questions we create, how we do the project, the analysis, the dissemination is the whole gamut of the process.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (23:20)
Yeah. Yeah, David, that aligns so well with me because you know the I the concepts of social exclusion and social inclusion have been so key to my work and really the idea that communities must be at the table. Individuals who have a really deep understanding of what we're trying to tackle should definitely be incorporated. And I think, you know, the idea I feel like if you haven't been told you're not intelligent enough, you probably I think a lot of us have been down that path, right?

Dr. David Patton (23:50)
Yeah, yeah. it's kind of, know, you may have, somebody may have said, you're thick, you're stupid, but oftentimes it's much more subtle Goodman, isn't it? Yeah. It's in the invisible structures of which the society is made. It's in your postcode, the neighbourhood you live in, the job title you have, the number of zeros in your bank account.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (24:09)
Actual unperceived access. Actual and absolutely David, you you've done so much in terms of already trying to make me understand. I was about to ask this next question about that, you know, when did you start questioning traditional appropriate, but I think you've already started alluding to that. But I think what I'm curious about is, how did you think about what was what was the language that you used in your own mind to conceptualize traditional approaches to knowledge? Was it words like outdated? Was it words like inadequate? What sort of concepts came to mind for you?

Dr. David Patton (24:40)
Yeah, but I'll probably reframe myself if I may just to answer your question. think that for me, I kind of learned through experience. so because of that experience that I had working on the Cambridge University project, which after two years I decided to walk away from, which was huge career suicide.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (24:57)
You turn the blue.

Dr. David Patton (24:58)
Can you imagine coming from my background, getting a seat at that table, being given that opportunity. I mean, I was a senior researcher training people on the project, you know, and then for me to turn it down, people were like, are you crazy? People like us don't get into those hallways, David, don't do it, don't do it. But because it didn't align with my values and at this stage, you know, I'm kind of 25, something of that nature. I'm still finding out who I am. Forming my own identity personally as well as professionally. But I walked away and so what I did is that I set up my own, I got some funding from the home office to set up a drugs education project. Because I had all of this knowledge from the PhD and I thought I don't want to keep it contained within the ivory tower of academia. If it doesn't change Rob's life and Sally's life, then what's the point?

So I worked in Sheffield Youth Offending Service, which is the government kind of work with young people who unfortunately kind of get the wrong side of the law. And I set up a drugs education project. And it was like, was immersed in this whole other world, like thrust into this industry that I didn't quite appreciate. And, you know, they were like, okay, so David, what's your program about? Like, who's it, who's it for? What's the criteria? What will the outcomes be?

What's the inputs, what's the outputs and what will the outcomes be and how will you evaluate it? And there was all of this kind of narrative, which I'd heard in the lectures around positivistic forms of knowledge that I was supposed to go in to these sessions with young people who were struggling with drug issues and criminal justice issues and to be this neutral, detached professional. So to be objective and kind of use knowledge that had been like generalizable kind of that can apply to all populations. yeah, it just didn't sit right with me. And again, you know, before you could work with a young person, had to do this risk assessment. And so I'm asking them about all of these traumatic experiences about child abuse and their situation at home and, know, really negative invasive questions. And I thought, what gives me the right to be asking a young child? Younger than 16, these questions. And so I never did it. You know, I thought, first of all, you know, when you're first meeting somebody, let's think, let's take it outside the realm of work. If you're meeting like a, an emerging friendship, you wouldn't, on the first conversation, so you're to tell me Goodman, have you ever been sexually abused? We tend to start a bit lighter, don't we? Yeah. What programs have you watched?

And why should it be different in a work context when we're working with vulnerable young people? So I never did that. And so I used art-based work so that the entry points that people can jump into wherever they felt comfortable with, and they could disclose to the extent to which they wanted so they had control over it. But for me, that was a real, again, another aha moment following the Cambridge University example, whereby I was really just expected to become this distance professional. And that's supposed to somehow give a more professional experience that I am detached and neutral and objective. And of course, we all know that that's not possible because we're people and we carry positions, positionalities, beliefs, and we can't park those at the door when we show up for work.

Do I think that we should, I think what we see in the work in addiction recovery with lived experience is that it's that resonance with somebody who looks like, sounds like, has been through the same sorts of experiences. And somebody who's not detached, objective and neutral at all, seems to be having a more positive effect than people with the PhDs, the clinical psychologists, the people who are behind the desks. They have a very different impact. So that was another work defining moment where I thought actually these vanguards of science, these principles upon which hard data, evidence, the evidence base, best practice. I had to question it.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (28:53)
So David, I think you've already given a pre-intro into our upcoming episodes. And so when we publish all of these episodes, everybody's gonna be able to delve some more into some of those concepts and we'll get to it in a moment. I think what I'm really curious about now is, you know, you mentioned having surrendered your seat at the table. I mean, that must that must have been a really challenging decision for you. And I you know, the more the more I listen to you, the more I think we've had parallel lives because I think I might have done it done that a couple of times myself.

But in your perspectives, what are what were some of the challenges that you've encountered really in trying to actively bring the lived experience into academic spaces? One or two examples.

Dr. David Patton (29:31)
Yeah. Well, so somebody once said to me, when you work with a marginalized, that you get marginalized. And I think that, that's certainly true. So there's a hierarchy of knowledge. And so if you're doing the large quantitative national or international studies, I see people getting fast-tracked to promotion and that's seen as the science and better science on hard data, hard evidence. So when you do these qualitative participatory action, you know, forms of knowledge production, they're seen as soft knowledge. And there, and we've got to critique this hierarchy. Why is hard data and what is hard knowledge? Because, you know, quantifying somebody's story does not make it science. Like we think that something is not subjective if we codify it, classify it, or give it a numerical value.

That then becomes science because it's in a number form and all it is doing is that it's hiding forms of domination and oppression. It's coded within a much larger system of knowledge production, which in my view is flawed. so, yeah,

Professor Goodman Sibeko (30:37)
Thankfully we will dive into that a bit more. So it it's all good. I think so. That's just a final question, you know, for this for this episode, David. I'm quite curious about how practically ⁓ you navigated, you know, the tensions between traditional academic expectations. You know, you were speaking about, you know, the promotion track and what's expected of a traditional academic.

And the more participatory approaches. So how did you navigate that? How did you how did you push down the wall? How did you how did you lift the veil on you from your perspective?

Dr. David Patton (31:09)
Yeah. I mean, I'm still on that journey. I'm an associate professor, not a full professor. And, you know, it's quicker to become a full professor if you're doing the large quantitative stuff. Because it's much more accepted. That form of knowledge production is the gold standard, you know, as it's perceived. And so you're welcomed much more readily if I'd have done those forms of projects where, I feel like on both counts, 

Professor Goodman Sibeko (31:16)
Yeah.

Dr. David Patton (31:34)
I'm both critiquing the illusions of the system and using these alternative methods on both counts, you feel like you're being penalized. And the other side to it, of course, is that, you know, I could knock out a survey tomorrow and through the use of my networks and social media, I could have, you know, hundreds of kind of survey responses by the end of next week. And if I whip that through SPSSS, which is a kind of a, this is a statistical package. You know, I could write up that journal article quite quickly. But whereas with qualitative and participatory studies, it's much more elongated in terms of the research process because you're bringing along people with you. And then also once you've even got the data, you've got a sip with the knowledge, you're reflecting on the knowledge, you're going back to the community, their voices and perspectives are included.

Dr. David Patton (32:24)
included in that kind of analysis process and what's coming out of it, let alone when you're writing it up. it can take two years. Like every article that I published has been a minimum of two year journey, you know? And so it's a lot slower, but actually I believe in what is being produced is a lot more rigorous and richer than just spewing out a statistic. you know, yeah, those types of studies.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (32:48)
That's great, David. So we're basically two associate professors telling each other exactly. David, thank you so much. So for sharing your journey with us. And really what this story does, it reminds us that knowledge is often shaped by lived realities and that the path into this work is really hardly ever linear. So in our next episode, we're going to turn our attention to the concept of evidence itself. What is it? Who defines it? And how does lived experience challenge and enrich traditional models of knowledge production? 

So stay with us as we continue this important conversation. David, we'll see you there.

Dr. David Patton (33:20)
Fantastic.

Professor Goodman Sibeko (33:22)
Thank you for spending this time with us. We hope you enjoy that as much as we do. Be sure to hop on over to our website, isop.net, where you'll find information on how to sign up for free membership. Take care and catch you on the next one.

About the ISSUP Exchange

The ISSUP Exchange podcast series explores the evolution of responses to the challenges of substance use—from research and training to ethics, quality standards and evidence-based practice. We connect the dots so you can see the big picture.

Explore more episodes and join the ISSUP podcast community here>>>

About ISSUP

ISSUP is a global network that unites, connects, and shares knowledge across the substance use prevention, treatment, and recovery support workforce. Our mission is to make our members’ work as effective as possible—by providing access to training, resources, and a vibrant professional community.