Your search
Results 8 resources
-
In this article, we explore transformative interviewing through the lens of new materialism. Rather than viewing transformation through a humanist perspective that centralizes a transcendent self, we draw upon Barad’s agential realism to reconsider transformation following the ontological turn. Thinking with agential realism, we engaged two interview studies, one on biracialism and one on masculinity, to demonstrate how the materiality of our interviews (e.g., research bodies, computer programs, questionnaires) intra-acted with our participants to both facilitate and hinder our attempts at transformation. We conclude by theorizing transformation as a type of purposeful entanglement that proceeds from the material-discursive intra-actions of our inquiries.
-
A team of systematic reviewers successfully completed a government-commissioned review of ‘what works to improve post-school outcomes for youth with disabilities’ in 2012. Despite its success, interviews with 10 review team members revealed dissatisfaction with the process and indifference to its outcomes. The purpose of our analysis was to examine how the systematic review process itself led to review team members’ feelings of indifference, resignation, and pessimism. Drawing on the writings of Henry Giroux, Gert Biesta, and Hanna Arendt that warn of the death of democracy and the rise of totalitarianism, we explored how the systematic review certification process, examinations, rules, and structures deadened democratic deliberation and critique necessary, we argue, to conducting good educational science. We end with a call for systematic reviews in education whose researchers, products, and processes remain ethically oriented to keeping democracy alive. © 2021 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
-
This article introduces the special issue, “Manufacturing Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research.” Rather than viewing trustworthiness as an inherent product of high-quality research practices, this special issue considers how researchers manifest and construct appearances of trustworthiness within and through academic texts. Conceptualizing trustworthiness as produced within scholarly writing opens the idea of trustworthiness to broader scrutiny, but also to a wider array of possibility—if trustworthiness is not singular or solely produced through methodology, then it is malleable and full of potential. It is not one trustworthiness, but a million tiny trustworthiness manifested and proliferated across multiple research accounts and readerly engagements. This is our special issue’s conceptual play space that sometimes pushes on and against the notion of trustworthiness itself, and in which the authors, coming from a range of orientations, explore and tinker with their ideas of trustworthiness, highlighting how they produce their research as “trustworthy.” © The Author(s) 2025
-
Academic success is now coupled with social media engagement. Social media has become so normalized in the academy that absent a carefully curated social media presence, scholars risk being seen as unscholarly, unproductive, and unpopular. This article lays bare the pressures, mechanisms, and monstrosities of using social media to promote scholarship. We argue that the widespread adoption of social media outpaces critical attention to its ethics and wonder about the future of public scholarship and the monstrous scholarly selves we are becoming. Thinking of monstrosity, with Krecˇicˇ and Žižek, as the preontological domain that rests beneath society and constitutes alterity and otherness, we ask what kinds of #scholarfamousmonsters we want to be, become, and promote in the digital era.
-
This special issue takes up urgent questions about how we education scholars might think and do policy and methodology in what has come to be known as the post-truth era. The authors in this special issue grapple with questions about the roles and responsibilities of educational researchers in an era in which research and policy have lost their moorings in T/truth. Collectively they reconceptualize educational research and policy in light of post-truths, anti-science sentiment, and the global rise of right-wing populism. At the same time we editors wonder whether post-truth is given a bad rap. Could post-truth have something productive to offer? What does post-truth open up for educational research and policy? Or, is the real issue of this special issue a collective despair of our own insignificance and obsolescence in the wake of post-truth. Whatever we editors and authors aimed to do, this special issue will not be heard by post-truth adherents and partisans. Perhaps its only contribution is encouragement to stay with the troubles of a post-truth era, even as we despair the consequences of our research and policy creations. © 2018, Arizona State University. All rights reserved.
-
Inspired by work/think/play in qualitative research, we centered the idea of “play” in a qualitative research project to explore what proceeding from the idea of work/think/play might look like and accomplish. We pursued play in an experimental qualitative inquiry over dinner one night at the 2016 Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Our article centers on one work/think/play inquiry three of us conducted. Through a playful account of how play unfolded in our work/think/play inquiry that evening, we explore research play as generative, deadly, and censored in the context of neoliberalism and other terrors. We reflect on what (good) play does in qualitative research, what our work/think/play/birth/death/terror/qualitative/research accomplished, if anything. Maybe research play is vital, what keeps us fit to do critical qualitative research. Yet research play moves (well) beyond normative rules of much qualitative research. Is it worth the risk? Can we know? Even after?
Explore
Resource type
- Journal Article (8)
Publication year
Resource language
- English (6)