Qualitative Conversations

SPEAKERSApril Jones, Venus Watson, Boden Robertson, Ryn Bornhoft Boden Robertson  00:00Hello everyone and welcome to qualitative conversations the podcast series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American Educational Research Association. My name is Boden Robertson and I'm a PhD candidate in educational research at the University of Alabama specializing in qualitative methodologies and will serve as the moderator for our episode. Our focus today will be the recent conference on culturally sustaining pedagogy to critique and reimagine teaching qualitative research that was hosted by the College of Education Department of Educational Studies, psychology research methodology, and counseling and funded through the Spencer Foundation. Drs. Stephanie Shelton and Kelly Guyotte at the University of Alabama received a grant for the conference. Put tons of planning and coordination into it and along with invaluable support of April Jones and Carlson Coogler, who are both graduate students here at the University of Alabama. The conference brought an array of scholars to examine culturally sustaining approaches teaching and conducting qualitative research. Our episodes guests today are graduate students in the educational research PhD program at the University of Alabama who are also specializing in qualitative methodologies, and who attended the conference and will and will focus on their experiences from the conference and their process of understanding culturally sustaining pedagogies and their impact. We're very happy to be participating in this today. And we'll start with introductions from our guests, April Jones, Venus Watkins, and Ryn Bornhoft, if you'd please introduce yourselves. April Jones  01:30Hi, everybody. I'm so glad to be here. My name is April Jones. I am a doctoral candidate in the program at the University of Alabama that Boden has just mentioned. My research interests centers, areas of child welfare and juvenile justice specifically surrounding issues of social work and social justice, social justice, along with the marginalized communities that engage with and intersect with those particular systems. Venus Watson  02:01Hi, my name is Venus Watson and I am a PhD candidate at the University of Alabama with a focus on qualitative methodologies. And my research interests include black girlhood, black womanhood, and identity. I'm super excited to be here with you guys today. Ryn Bornhoft  02:22Hello, my name is Renbourn haft I am excited to be here. This is my first time ever recording a podcast. So I am focusing on issues surrounding disability and educational access in informal education settings, such as museums sort of covering both K through 12 and adult to a certain extent since museums have mixed audiences. So I'm looking forward to all our discussions. And I'm a PhD student. Boden Robertson  03:01That's also that's also important, right. Well, thank you. Thank you guys. All for. Thank you all for joining us. So we'll start with, we'll start with the first question, which is, I guess kind of obvious. So in, in your opinion, what does culturally sustaining pedagogy mean? Venus Watson  03:21So in my opinion, culturally sustaining pedagogies, their teaching methods that do more than just accept or include a student's cultural backgrounds in the classroom. So they aim to support and keep those cultural practices and identities alive and growing. This approach understands that students come from diverse cultural backgrounds, and that these differences are valuable. And 

Hello everyone and welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American Educational Research Association. I am Jori Hall, a professor in the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Illinois at Chicago. I also serve as the chair of the Egon Guba Award for Outstanding Contributions to Qualitative Research for the Qualitative Research Special Interest Group. I am beyond excited today to be joined by Dr. Giovanni Dazzo who was the recipient of the 2023 QRSIG Outstanding Dissertation Award for his dissertation titled Restorative validity: Exploring how critical participatory inquiry can promote peace, justice and healing. Giovanni is an interdisciplinary researcher, and evaluator and assistant professor at the University of Georgia. His work is focused on critical theoretical approaches to research and evaluation methodologies. In particular, he is interested in exploring the intersections of validity and ethics within critical participatory forms of inquiry, and the ways in which research and social policies can better be informed by communities. His work has been featured in a multitude of peer reviewed journals, such as the International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Educational Action Research, Cultural Studies ⇔ Critical Methodologies, and Conflict Resolution Quarterly. Giovanni is also the co-author of the recently published textbook by Sage called Critical Participatory Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Guide. Giovanni, it is a pleasure to have you with us today.Thank you, Jori. It's a pleasure to be here. You make me sound so good.Well, it's easy based on all the fabulous things you've done. Are you ready to get started? Giovanni?Yeah, let's get started.Great. So I was thinking that our audience would greatly appreciate learning more about your dissertation work. Can you just talk a little bit about your dissertation, maybe about its scope?Yeah, so the dissertation really focused on a long term critical participatory action research project in Guatemala. And I partnered with an organization that conducts forensic anthropology. It's the forensic anthropology foundation of Guatemala. So essentially, in their day to day, they investigate possible made mass grave sites that resulted from the country's 36 year armed conflict, which happened from 1960 to 1996. And then they work closely with communities who witnessed and experienced those atrocities to document the stories of those who are forcibly disappeared by the government. And they then extract DNA from living family members exhumed human remains from mass grave sites, and then attempt to match the DNA so they can identify those who were disappeared. So I worked alongside the forensic anthropology foundation of Guatemala or FAFG. And Kaqchikel speaking my community to see how we could all together as a research collective, explore how the research process could be made more restorative.And really, if you start to think about it, the work of FAFG is literally extractive to communities. They're pulling DNA from swamps, they're digging into the earth, and they're hoping to produce a match. Unfortunately, the success rate at the moment is just 14%. Because these human remains have been in the ground anywhere between 28 to 64 years.And those who witnessed the atrocities happen.They continue to pass away as time goes by. So we really sought to form the basis for this conceptual methodological framework called restorative validity. Truthfully, I stopped calling it a framework, because journal reviewers kept asking, is it a theoretical framework, a conceptual framework, a methodological framework so I started calling it what it is, and it's an agenda. It's a call to action. And we really wanted to explore and understand the factors that aid or impede

100:00:03.980 --> 00:00:12.030Katrina Struloeff: We really appreciate having all of you here today to discuss alternative research roles. Some traditional and some non traditional spaces that we think about 200:00:12.680 --> 00:00:18.760Katrina Struloeff: and we're very grateful to have our 3 panelists Dr. Pharaoh, Dr. Sanchez and Dr. Pianan. 300:00:18.820 --> 00:00:30.150Katrina Struloeff: and just to give you a little bit of background on the qualitative research sig of Ara we are established in 1,983. And we provide a space for discussing Floss. 400:00:30.350 --> 00:00:34.440Katrina Struloeff: the ethical, mythological, and philosophical elements of qualitative research. 500:00:34.470 --> 00:00:40.439Katrina Struloeff: and we really are looking to ensure the legitimization of nontraditional forms of research 600:00:40.460 --> 00:00:51.169Katrina Struloeff: within academia and beyond and we're really excited to provide this resource for grad students, so we can have conversations around different avenues than we traditionally talk about in academia. 700:00:51.420 --> 00:00:59.140Katrina Struloeff: so today we're gonna allow each of our panelists to kind of tell us their stories and their pathways. in the nature of qualitative research. 800:00:59.350 --> 00:01:04.070Katrina Struloeff: And then from there we'll open it up for a. Q. A. From participants in the audience. 900:01:04.160 --> 00:01:11.770Katrina Struloeff: If you have questions that are budding, feel free to put them in the chat as we go, and we will be sure to collect those at the right time. 1000:01:11.900 --> 00:01:19.350Katrina Struloeff: And with that I want to kick it off because I know where a few minutes already into our space and hand it over to Dr. Fernaro 1100:01:19.420 --> 00:01:23.559Katrina Struloeff: to discuss her role as a non Academic academic Call 1200:01:23.630 --> 00:01:25.910Katrina Struloeff: Job at the School District of Philadelphia. 1300:01:27.170 --> 00:01:36.449Elisabeth G. Fornaro (Lis) (she/her): Thanks, Katrina. Hi, Everyone I'm. I'm Liz Fernaro and I currently work as a research specialist in the office of research and Evaluation. 1400:01:36.480 --> 00:01:43.540Elisabeth G. Fornaro (Lis) (she/her): I'm: so I'm just gonna give a little bit about my background, and how I ended up in this role. 1500:01:43.850 --> 00:01:51.479Elisabeth G. Fornaro (Lis) (she/her): And I think as we continue this app this morning. there'll be a space for questions. so just feel free to 1600:01:51.570 --> 00:01:55.910Elisabeth G. Fornaro (Lis) (she/her): Ask for any clarification or any more information on anything I share. 1700:01:56.190 --> 00:02:01.969Elisabeth G. Fornaro (Lis) (she/her): so I went to Temple University, which is in Philadelphia, and I studied urban education. 1800:02:02.270 --> 00:02:08.999Elisabeth G. Fornaro (Lis) (she/her): My dissertation was qualitative. I. It was loosely based on ethnographic methods. 

SPEAKERSTanja Burkhard, Shena Sanchez Tanja Burkhard  00:16Okay, thank you so much for inviting us to the qualitative conversations podcast. My name is Tanja Burkhard, and I'm really happy to be here with Shena Sanchez to talk about CRT and qualitative research. We'll start by maybe me introducing myself briefly and then I will give it over to Shena. My name is Tanya Burkhard. And I am an assistant professor at Washington State University Vancouver. And I've been a member of the QR SIG for a while and I'm very excited to be on this podcast today. Shena? Shena Sanchez  00:59Hi, I'm Shena Sanchez. I'm an assistant professor at the University of Alabama and qualitative research. And I'm happy to be here and have this conversation. Tanja Burkhard  01:13Okay, and so I know just a little bit about your work from a while ago, and I would love to hear more about what you're currently doing. But before we do that, could you speak a little bit about yourself and your work and how you came to CRT as a methodological or theoretical framework, just kind of your journey to where you are in employing critical race theory? Shena Sanchez  01:37Yeah, um, so my work is my work centers, student voice and identity, specifically, girls of color from poor and working class backgrounds, immigrant backgrounds, I also look at educators well being, and my hope is that, you know, we can understand students better into an identity better and as well as our educators to form just better school communities. Right? It's because so much of, you know, the school is about relationship and so. So just finding better ways to care for people who are in schools, students and educators alike. And I came to critical race theory. So it's kind of like a long story. But to make it short, many, many years ago, I was in a master's program at Vanderbilt. And that's when I really just started kind of exploring, just from like an academic standpoint, like inequalities and injustices and that sort of thing. And I was just very dissatisfied with the course offerings, because I didn't really feel like there were courses that helped us understand sort of the the power structures and the hierarchies that existed. So I don't know what I was doing. But I found this class in the course catalog. And it wasn't called critical race theory, it was called something else. And it was taught in the higher ed, I think department, and I took it and that's where I first was introduced to CRT. And I think like many people who come to the theory after just like years of just experience and knowledge that something is up, right, and that we like, for me, I didn't have the words to describe it. And I didn't have that theoretical grounding, and just reading their spells work. Like just from the get go, I was like, this makes so much sense. Like this is it and then bringing in, you know, Kimberly Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, just like just going through all of the, you know, founders of critical race theory. It just, to me, it really opened my eyes gave me the language gave me sort of the framework for understanding, not just my experiences, but how I was observing, you know, the world and society. So that's really where it started. And honestly, that's what made me want to go and get a PhD. That's what really prompted me to want to learn more. And so I looked for a program that really, you know, emphasize critical theory and had scholars and faculty that, you know, we're experts in critical race theory, and that's how I ended up at UCLA. And from there, I just kind of took the, you know, the years in grad school where you have ample time to, to just explore and be curious and learn. A

 2023 QRSIG Program Preview podcastThu, Mar 30, 2023 8:12PM • 20:30SUMMARY KEYWORDSsig, sessions, qr, conference, qualitative research, opportunities, year, program, virtual, submission, jessica, members, methodologies, education, annual meeting, reception, wonderful, community, literacy, reviewersSPEAKERSRenuka de Silva, Alexandra Panos, Jessica Van Cleave Jessica Van Cleave  00:04Welcome to Qualitative Conversations, the podcast of the qualitative research special interest group of AERA. I'm Jessica Van Cleave, the chair of the QR SIG, and I'm happy to be joined today by Alex Panos and Renuka de Silva, our program co-chairs. In this episode, we preview the QR SIG program for the 2023 AERA Annual Meeting, discuss what members can expect from the place-based and virtual components of the conference, and highlight opportunities to connect for QR SIG graduate students and members.   Alexandra Panos is an Assistant Professor of literacy studies and affiliate faculty in measurement and research in the College of Education at the University of South Florida. She earned her doctorate in literacy, language and culture education, with a minor in inquiry methodology at Indiana University Bloomington in 2018. Alex takes a transdisciplinary stance in her work as a critical qualitative methodologist and grounds her theoretical, methodological and empirical work in her substantive field of literacy studies. She has published numerous articles and book chapters that focus on qualitative methodologies and literacy studies. She centers her scholarship on the reality that, to quote Octavia Butler, there is no end to what a living world demands of you. For her, this means prioritizing community engaged and post critical activities that center spatial and ecological justice. Alex is completing her three year term as program co chair at the conclusion of the 2023 Annual Meeting.  Renuka de Silva is an Assistant professor of teaching and leadership in the College of Education and Human Development at the University of North Dakota. She is the director of the Indigenous teacher education program. As a qualitative researcher she examines issues and trends in Indigenous education, diversity, equity, inclusion, and cultural contexts of higher education. Her primary research focuses on indigenous epistemology and the importance of storytelling in native and indigenous cultures. Renuka is an artist and an activist. Her activism centers on creating pathways for scholars from underserved communities to engage in research that is non Eurocentric. As an artist, Renuka's research examines relationships between artists and their works, connecting activism and transnationalism. She hopes to promote and support scholarly work, where embodied experiences are [k]new knowledge that continues to shape people and create identities that are meaningful to themselves. From this space, scholars will interrogate imposed identities with prefabricated borders and limitations placed on everything that is self and the physical body. We are fortunate to have Renuka remain as program co chair for two more years. Thank you both for joining me today for our 2023 AERA Annual Meeting program preview podcast. As we all know, the Annual Meeting can be an overwhelming experience, especially if you're attending for the first time. Hopefully, this episode will orient and help our listeners to understand the conference as well as the QR SIG offerings. So let's start by talking a little bit about the format of the conference this year. The Annual Meeting will take place in two parts with the place based meeting in Chicago, April 13th through 16th, and the virtual component of the meeting May 4th through 5th. How has that impacted the program and what can attendees expect? Alexandra Panos  03:58Thanks, Jessica. It's wonderful to be here today. So the place-based and virtual components are really similar to normal conference experiences. We have 13 sessions in the place based conference taking place in Chicago, and four sessions in the virtual component in May. We're really excited that we received powerful proposals for both parts of the conference. And we wanted to make sure that people realized that if you register for the place based conference, you automatically are able to join virtually in May. And of course we encourage all folks to check out the program this year and reach out to the wonderful presenters about their work, even if they're not able to attend one or both formats of the conference. We tried to make the program really visible in our newsletter that will be coming out in recent weeks and right before the place based conference, and encourage synergies and connectivities over time and space in these place based and virtual components. Jessica Van Cleave  04:57Thank you so much. That's really helpful to conceptualize the two different spaces where we can engage this year. So can you offer us an overview of the program? For example, how many sessions does the QR SIG offer? And what kinds of topics can attendees expect to find? Renuka de Silva  05:55Thank you, Jessica. I would love to answer that question. As we said, we have a total of 17 sessions this year across the place based and virtual conference opportunities. We're excited about all of our sessions. One session that is particularly exciting is one we are co sponsoring with our wonderful colleagues in Division G, social contexts of education, on Monday at 4:10, titled, Educational Research at the Intersection of Contemporary Black Studies and Posthumanism: Risk, Possibilities, and Purpose. We hope that this session brings our two units closer together to consider the important ideas the presenters are sharing. We are grateful for the broad range of expertise being shared this year with topics addressing innovative applied methods, critical engagement with qualitative methodologies, and creative and thoughtful sessions designed to bring many ideas together from many perspectives, to other place based sessions that are bringing big groups of folks together, to think broadly are Writing and Articulation of Qualitative Research on Monday at 2:50pm and Postfoundational Qualitative Inquiry on Tuesday at 9:50am. And we want to give a shout out to our virtual symposium Interrogating Consequential Education Research in Pursuit of Truth in Living Theory, which will be Thursday, May 4, at 8am CST. Jessica Van Cleave  06:09Wonderful! It sounds like there really are some exciting offerings this year. I'm looking forward to this. So there is a long process that gets us to this place of building such an interesting and exciting program. So can you talk to us a little bit about what is the process for reviewing and accepting submissions and what kinds of things are taken into account in that process? Alexandra Panos  09:05Definitely. It's the biggest part of our work as program co chairs and one that we believe is exceptionally important and something we take very seriously. So we would like to start by saying that we rely heavily on the expertise of our volunteers who share valuable insights about each submission. This is not something we do in isolation. We rely on the volunteers in our in our community here in the QR SIG. To support this process. We together as program co chairs assign each submission for reviewers with one of those being a graduate student who's getting experience in this process and practice. While supported by outside folks, as a team, then we individually and collaboratively consider each submission and its reviews to make a final decision of acceptance or rejection. And one thing I'd like to point out is that when we initially match reviewers with a submission, we prioritize matching reviewers with submissions in their areas of expertise, in particular, for work that's being proposed that has been historically in prejudice presently marginalized in the academy. So for folks who submit proposals that might have keywords or topics related to critical race theory, queer theory, feminist methodologies, or disability studies, just to name a few, certainly others, we do our absolute best to ensure, in particular for those that they have reviewers with background in those areas. We also want to note that while we certainly love having submissions that address the conference theme, we welcome all submissions, addressing qualitative methodologies, and that that's the center point. For our review process, centering methodology, qualitative methodologies, the most important part of a proposal and what we're looking for, in the QR SIG. But as a whole, the review process, we tried to make it as holistic as possible, informed by the experts that make up this wonderful community. Jessica Van Cleave  11:09It's still in the context of AERA, which is enormous. So how can members locate the sessions that they are interested in from the QR SIG for the place based meeting.  Renuka de Silva  11:42Definitely check out the online program through AERA. There's a great feature that you can map out your own schedule by favoriting, or liking, your sessions. And you can search by unit to find the session for your SIG. Additionally, our newsletter will be out by the conference and includes an overview of the program. So that should be helpful.  Jessica Van Cleave  12:07Fantastic. Yeah, there are some great tools out there and, and do look out for the information coming out via the listserv as we get closer to the play space annual conference. So how can members access the virtual sessions. Alexandra Panos  12:24So very similarly, you'll get login information from AERA for accessing the virtual platform, and then you'll also be able to access the sessions through AERA web page, but look for info from AERA directly, not just from us for accessing that virtual space. But in terms of our program, you can see the sessions in the program the same way you would for the placed based session. So the online program this year, while we have two components, the place based and the virtual, you can find everything within our more traditionally understood AERA online program. So star are SIG sessions, favorite, like them, whatever word we want to use for that, review the newsletter, and that includes the virtual component as well as the place based. Jessica Van Cleave  13:14Wonderful, thank you so much for helping us understand some of the tools that are available to us for finding those QR SIG sessions. So aside from those regular sessions, what other opportunities are there for QR SIG members to connect with our SIG? Renuka de Silva  13:29Well, yes, please come hang out with us. We have two opportunities together as a SIG with all members, the business meeting, which will be Friday morning, bright and early at at 8am. And then reception will be on Friday evening at 7:30pm. A whole day of SIG events. Beyond these events, there are some closed sessions that are fantastic. And that if you haven't, if you aren't involved this year, please check out for, for it for next year. The mentoring session is on Saturday. And we'll bring together groups of scholars to problem solve and explore their stuck places. We also have what we call office hours, both in person and virtual, so that folks can sign up for to get to know, one on one opportunities to talk through a specific issue with a leading scholar in our field. So those are some of the ways.  Jessica Van Cleave  14:30Wonderful. Thank you so much. And you also hopefully saw that those office hours are were available for signing up through March 24. And if you didn't get that opportunity, as Alex and Randa mentioned, make sure to keep your eyes open for next year's opportunities. So you mentioned the business meeting and the reception. So can you talk to us about what members who attend the business meeting can expect at those events or at the reception? Alexandra Panos  14:59Yeah, definitely. So this year, we have a new format for gathering as a SIG. Typically in the past, we've had one evening business meeting and reception combined event. So everything took place at one time. But this year, we have been asked by AERA to separate those events. So we have a business meeting in the morning and the reception in the evening. As Renuka mentioned, we will have food at both so bright and early on Friday morning, when you join us for our business meeting, we'll have breakfast items, and coffee and tea. And at that event, we will be going over SIG business, getting program updates from our executive committee officers, we will also be sharing and giving out our awards to the exceptional work in the field that's being honored by our awards committees, including the Dissertation Award, the Book Award and the Egon G Guba Award. And then in the evening, that evening, Friday evening at 7:30pm. We will have our reception and the Guba lecture this year by Dr. Kakali Bhattacharya. So, please come and check that out. We also have a short speaker event related to the passing of Dr. Brigitte Smit. So if you would like to pay your respects to her with our, with our community, we'll be doing that in the evening. And at the evening reception, we'll have drinks and food and time to connect with one another. Jessica Van Cleave  16:46Wonderful. So it's great that there are all these opportunities to be together as a community in addition to sharing our work and scholarship. So what suggestions given all of these opportunities, what suggestions do you have for members to navigate the AERA program and take advantage of what the QR SIG has to offer? Renuka de Silva  17:08So we mentioned earlier the program options to create your own schedule to do this, AERA is so big searching by unit, and then selecting QR SIG is super helpful, too. Jessica Van Cleave  17:23Wonderful. So really thinking about taking those tools into account and using what is at our fingertips already is really, really helpful. So thank you for that reminder. So let's say you're interested in the QR SIG offerings, but you're not yet a member. How can you become a member of the qualitative research SIG? And what are some of the benefits of membership? Alexandra Panos  17:45Yeah, please become a member. But when you join AERA and become a member of the bigger community, the bigger AERA community, you have the opportunity to select and join divisions and SIGs. And what you can do is if you select the qualitative research SIG, you are a member. It's as simple as that. Benefits from joining the SIG include receiving emails specifically for our membership, which include many opportunities for connecting with other members, mentorship workshops, calls for special issues related to qualitative research, and our personal favorite opportunities to review for the conference and get that service in support of our community. I think just a final note that I wanted to share about AERA and navigating it is that it's the most important thing is to have fun. There is an overwhelming amount of things to do at AERA. It's really possible to overdo it. Jessica and I spoke earlier today about how at both of our first annual meetings, we tried to attend a session in like every slot and be at every single thing and couldn't say no to anything and it was just too much. It's completely overwhelming, not worth it to burn yourself out. So from that experience, I know I've learned to build in time to process after sessions that I attend that I'm incredibly interested in. I take time to write, even chat with colleagues, who had also attended the work like the connections are the most important part in many ways. And I think sometimes those in between spaces are where conference experiences happen. So if you get invited to lunch or coffee, or drinks or a reception at AERA, go. So just final plug for joining the business meeting in particular if you want to get involved in the SIG and learn more about it and joining our reception for time to think with one of the leading scholars in our field and have a drink with colleagues. Jessica Van Cleave  19:56Thank you so much. Plus AERA is really expensive. It's always in an expensive city. So find those opportunities for free meals. It definitely can help. Thank you both so much for being on this episode of the podcast to help us preview the 2023 annual meeting. Really appreciate your time. Renuka de Silva  20:18Thank you, Jessica. Alexandra Panos  20:20Thank you, Jessica. I can't wait to see everyone in Chicago. Jessica Van Cleave  20:24All right, coming right up y'all: April 13 through 16

SPEAKERSAlecia Jackson, Liza Mazzei, Jessica Van Cleave Jessica Van CleaveHello and welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast hosted by the qualitative research SIG of AERA, the American Educational Research Association. I'm Jessica Van Cleave, Chair of the Qualitative Research SIG and Associate Professor of Curriculum and Instruction at Gardner Webb University. The Qualitative Conversations podcast doesn't have a regular host. Instead, each episode is organized by our podcast committee. Today I have the pleasure of hosting this episode, in which I interviewed Dr. Lisa Mazzei and Dr. Alecia Jackson about their recently published second edition of Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research. Lisa Mazzei is Professor of Education Studies and Alumni Faculty Professor of Education at the University of Oregon, where she is also affiliated faculty in the department of philosophy. She is a methodological innovator in post human inquiry, and her work is widely read and cited across disciplines such as education, psychology, sociology, political science, anthropology, business and medicine. She is the author of Inhabited Silence in Qualitative Research from 2007. Alecia Jackson is Professor of Educational Research at Appalachian State University in Boone, North Carolina, where she is also affiliated faculty in the Gender, Women's and Sexuality Studies program. Dr. Jackson's research interests bring feminist post structural and post human theories of power, knowledge, language, materiality and subjectivity to bear on a range of overlapping topics deconstructions of voice and method conceptual analyses of resistance freedom and agency in girls and women's lives and qualitative analysis and the posts. Her work seeks to animate philosophical frameworks in the production of the new and her current projects are focused on the ontological turn qualitative inquiry and thought. Together they are co-authors of Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research, first and second editions, and coeditors of Voice in Qualitative Inquiry from 2009. Their forthcoming edited book, Postfoundational Approaches to Qualitative Inquiry, will be published in 2023. Lisa and Alecia, thank you so much for joining us on this episode of Qualitative Conversations. Liza MazzeiDelighted to be here. Thanks for inviting us. Alecia JacksonThank you for the invitation. Jessica Van CleaveAbsolutely. So some of our listeners may not be familiar with your work, or maybe new to your work. So would you be willing to tell us a little bit about yourselves, how you came to write together, and how you came to write Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research? Liza MazzeiWell, Alecia and I say that we share an academic genealogy. We first met at AERA in 2005, I think I was presenting a paper on some of my voice work. Alecia came to attend the session. And she came and introduced herself at the end of the session. And I had just finished reading an article that she had written about subjectivity with new teachers. And so I was so excited to meet her and I had just been reading her work. And so we sat out in the hallway for about an hour. And we're talking about projects. And we said that we should propose a session for AERA the following year on voice because we were both looking at voice and challenging conventional understandings. And so that was right before I was moving to England, I moved to England in 2006, was attending the British Education Research Association Conference, started chatting with a book editor. And like a good editor, he always says, What's your current project? And so I told him about this idea that Alecia and I had for a session and he said, that sounds fabulous. Can you get a book proposal to me in a month? So I'm at this conference, emailing this woman that I've met in person once saying, can we put a book together, a book proposal, and that was the proposal we wrote for voice and qualitative inquiry. And the reviews were very positive for the book. But people who read the proposal didn't think that we could secure some of the authors that we had said we would put that would contribute. And they didn't know that I had studied with Patti Lather at Ohio State University, Alecia had studied with Bettie St. Pierre at the University of Georgia, and through these feminist networks, we had connections with some scholars who were doing some very interesting work. So that was the that was the beginning of our long and fruitful partnership. Alecia JacksonYeah, when we were working on the voice book, I traveled to Manchester. And so we had some writing time together. So one thing I do want to say is that Lisa and I have, ever since the collaboration began, we've never we've never lived in the same time zone. Is that right? Yeah, that's right. Yeah. Yeah. So I think that's something that, you know, is really unique to the way that we've made things work. But we went to Manchester, we worked on the voice book, and then you came here, and we were working on Thinking with Theory. So we've had a couple of times that we've worked together, but in you know, Lisa has explained kind of the origin story. And then how Thinking with Theory came about is that after the voice book, we got really interested in we both were doing separately, we both were working on philosophically informed inquiry. And it didn't have that name at the time. Nobody was calling it that. Nobody was you know, calling it thinking with theory. It didn't have a name. And but it's what we were doing. And we started because we're reading each other's work and through the voice book, we realized is that, you know, what, what would it be like to, you know, to write something together, that was an alternative to, quote, data analysis. We were both talking about how to teach this way of doing this kind of analytic work and conceptual work. And there were lots of journal articles that people doing this kind of analytic thinking. But there wasn't anything that was out there cohesive, that we could use me, really to us in our teaching, that was kind of the impetus. So we were at the Congress. And we were out to dinner with Philip Mudd, who was our editor for the voice book. And we pitched this idea of taking, you know, one data set, and we will talk about how we don't really use that language anymore in a moment. But we talked to him about how to maybe conceptualize a book where we had one set of data that we looked at, that we analyzed across different theories. And he really loved it. And at that dinner, you know, he said, Yeah, let's put this together and see, see what it's like. Jessica Van CleaveThank you so much. It's really fantastic to sort of trace that process, obviously, briefly from that first meeting, until the beginnings of thinking with theory. So as you began the process of writing, thinking with theory and moving through to publication, what were your hopes for the book at the time? Liza MazzeiI think I don't know, I don't know what our hopes were, I think our hopes were that it would be I mean, we've talked, we talked about our work when we started envisioning a new project as what kind of intervention do we want to make? And I remember extending what Alecia was saying, I remember being at the Congress, and we started talking about wanting something for our teaching and going to the book exhibit and looking at what was what was presented as analysis. And it was all about coding. And so our I think, you know, our initial hope was, well, this, this isn't what this is not representative of the kind of work that we do. This isn't how we teach our students. And so as Alecia said, We wanted something for our own teaching. And maybe I guess the hope was that it would be picked up by others and be useful to them. So Alecia Jacksonyes, I think it was a matter of, of what Lisa said, the intervention, I think, is a really good word. We, as I mentioned, what we did there wasn't a name for what we were doing. And we said, we wanted that we you know, Bettie St. Pierre always says write something that people can cite. And so that was something that, you know, she's always said to, and you've probably heard it too, Jessica, write something that people can cite. And, and, and put something out in the world that people can, you know, can use, and I really have a big part of part of the impetus for both of us, I think was to give this alternative to the field and name it in some way and have it so that, you know, it was it would become something that was recognizable that people could use, and really to take the field into that direction. I think that we, you know, back in the early 2010 to 12 qualitative research was shifting. It was shifting away from, you know, interpretive work and even critical work. And it was just time, it was time to bring it all together and give it a name and give it a place. And there was just so much enthusiasm right away because I think people were really didn't feel like coding was really analysis. So, you know, we had already done some work on that talking, writing about pieces, we're writing about how coding is not analysis and, and I thought this was just a way to give it a place in in the in the in the field Jessica Van CleaveWell, I mean, it's fascinating because as you said, Yes and that advice from Bettie it's definitely something that that I think all of us who have ever worked with her have heard, and it's so true. since y'all have published the first edition of Thinking with Theory, there's been an explosion of all of the you know, the methodologies without methodology, and concept as method and anti-methodology. You know, this sort of thing that you said there was a hunger for at the time. I mean, I think there's no better evidence than how much has proliferated since then. So in the years since its initial publication, Thinking with Theory has become a staple in qualitative inquiry. People are citing it not only in dissertations, but in articles across the field, across publications. Instructors are using your text in their masters and doctoral level courses, Thinking with Theory has really become part of the canon of what qualitative analysis can be and can mean. And one thing also from Bettie, that comes up for me a lot when I think about what work does, especially aside from what your hopes might have initially been, is Alcoff's, quote, to paraphrase, you never know where your work goes and what it does there. So what do you think about where your work has gone? And what it's done there? How it's been taken up and received, since you published? Liza MazzeiDo you want to start Alecia or? No? Um, you know, I think, what do I think? This isn't about I remember the first time I was at AERA decades ago, and I had a piece that had come out in ED Researcher, and I was walking, like, from building to building and there was someone sitting on a bench. And I happened to glance and they were reading my article. And I thought, oh, my gosh, what, what? What a, what a validation, I guess, of one's work to know that someone would take the time to actually pick it up and read it. And so I think that the fact that people are talking about thinking with theory as a methodology is not something that I ever imagined would happen. I think one of the things that I'm most proud of in terms of the work that Alecia and I've done together is that people will say to us at conferences, or students will say to us how pedagogical the work is how, how much it helps them understand. And that was really a primary goal of ours was to, to extend the reach of this way of thinking, so that people would consider a new analytic, if you will. I'm not I don't feel like I'm really answering your question. I don't go ahead, Alecia. Alecia JacksonNo, I think it's, I think that Lisa and I are both very, I don't know, humble people, and we just didn't really write this book in order to, you know, do anything other than, I don't know, I think we kind of wrote it for ourselves, at first, you know, and then because we wanted to do something together. And then I think, I've been most surprised, I guess, at how it's not just in educational research, like when I've had to go through and do my, you know, annual reviews, and, you know, going up for promotion, and all that. And you pull up the, you know, the Google Scholar citations, and it's just surprising to me that all sorts of social science disciplines have picked up this work. It's not just educational research, but it's, you know, people in, in all sorts of disciplines that I never would have imagined. I think there was even some citations from a business journal. And I just thought, wow, you know, so I guess what's been most delightful is that it's crossed all kinds of boundaries, which I believe that's one of our missions in, you know, is reaching into other found, you know, do some do some deterritorialized thing through the book, in terms of qualitative research, but it moving across all these other fields, you know, anthropology, sociology, business, I mean, just, there's just a whole, a whole lot of other disciplines that have taken it up. And just the expansion of that has been really surprising. I would have never thought that the work would go there. But it's really, I think, it's exciting. It's humbling. It's very endearing for people, you know, on social media to, you know, make comments about that. They have it, they've read it. It's, you know, I had a colleague who did a Fulbright in Australia. And she got there and was working with a faculty member. And the first thing they said is, oh, you work with Alecia Jackson, look, I have the book, you know, do you know. And it's just so it's just wonderful that it's just connected us, to so many people. And it's been so useful and so helpful. So. Jessica Van CleaveSo then you get asked to write a second edition of this incredibly impactful book that has gone all of these places and done all of these things. When you were first asked to write that second edition, how do you approach that as a project, especially given how big Thinking with Theory is? Alecia JacksonIt was very difficult. And we've been working on the second edition for a while the pandemic hit us, and it slowed everything down as it did for a lot of people. We changed editors, in in the at somewhere in the middle of all this, but we, we wanted to do something because it will talk a little bit about how the book is different. But in the intervening years after this was published, we began to critique some of the things that we had done in the first edition. And we wanted to update some of the things that we had written in chapter one in particular, the way we were conceptualizing some different aspects of it. And we'll get into that, but the main thing we struggled with was, do we add more theoretical chapters? Do we keep them really, you know, they work? Why change them? Do we want to add? So it took us a while, a couple of years to really think about how we wanted it to look and what we wanted to say that would be different enough, so that people would, you know, find the second edition, you know, an actual extension of what we had done. Something different. So it, it took a while. It was a process, but once we really figured out what we were doing, it flowed pretty well, you know, we were able to really work with it. Quickly. So. Liza MazzeiI mean, yeah, I think, I think initially, when we first started talking about the project, we thought that it would not, it would not involve as much new writing as it did. And when we started even, even the chapters that we that we said, Okay, well, you know, we're pretty solid with the with Derrida, there's not a lot we need to change. But then when we started really getting into it, it's like, oh, everything has to change, because all of our thinking and languaging is different. And as both of you have talked about, you know, I think when the first edition was published, that was about the time when, when Bettie published her first piece on post qualitative inquiry, and then we had special issues on data analysis after coding and so forth. And so everything that was informing our thinking, in addition to the way we were doing our own work had shifted, and, and then what we learned from working with students and the places that, that we were able to be more that we were able to show more well, what we were doing, or what we thought we were doing, because we had been doing it, you know, in the intervening time, we've been teaching it, we've been working with students around these texts in the intervening time. So I think it was it's, it's a completely different text in many ways. Jessica Van CleaveSo that kind of leads in you, you have spoken to this, I think a little bit already with that, that your thinking and your languaging and your processes and your experiences and your inter and intra actions had all shifted since the initial publication, but how did you end up deciding then what to include, what to change ,and what not to include in that second edition? Alecia JacksonThat was a process. I think that emerged from what Lisa was saying about the teaching, you know, using the book and teaching what really kind of confused students, you know, what, what was what were some things that they just couldn't, you know, make the turn into, because it was some languaging. Also related to where the book has gone. What it's done is we have done lots of workshops, using this text at the Congress in particular, but also individually, we've gone to institutions and have done workshops together and individually. And we just started to notice there were some some languaging, that that didn't really quite represent what we really wanted to do. And part of that was if we wanted to really make a break, we really wanted to escape conventional qualitative inquiry and go on this line of flight, we would need to really, really change how we talked about it. So the second edition, we dropped data altogether, it's not even in the title anymore. We don't use that word anywhere in in the book, and we call it instead, we came up with a concept, you know, so we were very much into this work is about concept creation, and, and so we came up with performative accounts. And that's how we talk about the so called stories that are that are part of the part of the plugging in. So performative accounts helps us to say something differently about, about memory, about language about subjectivity, what words do, what stories do and rather than representing reality or experience that they're, that these are actually ontological stories and the process of plugging in is a performative and so we use that language in Butler's chapter. And we just decided to pick it up and use it in the intro to make well actually, in the preface, we, we describe that shift from data to performative accounts, and then we had to rewrite the whole, you know, all of the middle chapters because data was everywhere. And really reconceptualize not just replace the word throughout, but really rewrite what was going on in plugging in if we call this entire process performative. So that was that was one. Lisa, if you want to talk about a couple of the others. Liza MazzeiYeah, I think we do a much better job in this edition talking about the questions and the emergence of the questions. That was also a thing that I think, through workshops and teachings that students were, how do I, you know, how do I do this? And so so an example when I sit on dissertation committees and students would, you know, in their proposal say, well, this is my analytic question. Well, now we call them becoming questions, but I would, but then it's like, no, you're you're missing the point. Because you can't identify that question up front, because you don't know what's going to emerge until you are actually immersed in the texts, both the conceptual philosophical texts and the research texts. So I think we did, we spent a lot of time talking about how to explain the process and the way that we sort of came to the process, or the process came to us. I think, another thing and Alecia picked up on the, the nature, the ontological nature of this work that, particularly in the last chapter, we we talk about the ontological nature of writing, and we talk about the way in which the very act of doing is producing these new ontological formations. And so that, that that language, I think, is also present throughout and it's, it's showing how we're shifting in our, in our present work both individually and together. Alecia JacksonYes, a couple of other new changes and additions, I think, we do a better job in the second edition addressing thought and thinking. In the first edition, we were really focused on theory and I think in that first chapter, really justifying the use of theory and the importance and also in the handbook chapter four. We, we really focused on that and and in, in this second edition, we do a lot with thought and the movement of thought we rely a lot on Erin Manning's work. And in her collaboration with Massumi, and in writing about thinking and thought and in the ontology of that so that's some something that's, that's new. The Barad chapter is brand new, practically, of in the first edition, when it came out in 2000. When we were writing in 2010 and 11 new you know, Barad's book was very that's what everyone was reading. And everyone was there a lot of conference presentations on you know, using Barad, and we had to do it in the first edition, what we thought was some background work on new materialism some historical kind of description and tracing of how the emergence of this particular theory into the qualitative profession, but when we read it, when we read, we read it in terms of the revisions were like, we don't really need this background anymore ever. It's it's been around now for 10 years. People are very familiar with them. And it's new materialism and Barad and, and intra-action. And so we felt like we could do, you know, take a lot of that conversation out around some of the other feminists who were working on new materialism. So the Barad chapter is very much more focused on just Barad and intra-action, and we bring in power and we move the Barad chapter to follow Butler and Foucault that made it a little bit more sense to us, since we also added a section on post human performativity, it flows better, and we added a section on power in Barad. So both of those, the post human performativity, and the materialization of power are nice sections in Barad that flow from Foucault and Butler. So we felt like those three chapters just work together better. And then we moved Deleuze and added Guattari to the end. Liza MazzeiSo and just a note on the the flow. I'm I'm teaching a course this term and the students one of our texts is thinking with theory. And so last night, we started looking at we introduced her concepts last week. And so we actually took one of the performative accounts in class last night, and looked at the way it was talked about differently with Butler's concept of performativity. And then looking at the same account with post humanist performativity. And it really, it was a fantastic discussion, and the connection was much more clear for students. Alecia JacksonSo I think it's, we've just really worked to connect, you know, really pull through the coming questions, you know, game, we don't call them analytic questions. And we really make as obvious as we can the process of the emergence of those questions, how plugging in works, and just trying to be a lot more pedagogical, with with the process. Jessica Van CleaveSo I feel like you've already discussed this, and in your response to the last question, but I didn't know if there was anything else that you wanted to add in terms of thinking with theory as a as a concept or as a text. How, how would you say it has shifted for you both over the last decade? Liza MazzeiWell, I think maybe I think we did talk about this, but but the emphasis on thought, the emphasis on newness. One of the things we talked about, I think in the preface of the second edition is how in the first edition, and we've talked about this in other ways that we were, we were still in the mode of of writing against or, or deconstructing some of the, the interpretivist hooks, if you will. And we started from that place still with this addition. And then at one point, we both said, we don't need to do this anymore, we need to push into this different territory. And so I think that's one of the that was a very important but also very freeing moment, because it's like we can, we can let go of some of this language. And we had fabulous support with our editors, partly because I think of the success of the first edition. And so then we were able to say, this is what we're going to do and you know, dropping things like the starting with method, which we did in the first book. We don't we don't do that anymore. So that we I think we felt a lot more confident in our in the acceptance of us saying this is this is how the work is now and we're not going to pretend that it we're not going to try to fit it into another way of making itself intelligible. Jessica Van CleaveSo one of the one of the other things that has changed a lot in the last 10 years is the material discursive conditions of the world. So in what way does do those shifts mean that we should or need to, or might, think with theory differently or think with different theory or what? How do y'all think about those kinds of things? Liza MazzeiI'll start and then Alecia. I mean, one of the things that we do in this edition is we, we deal with the idea of the collective. Deleuze and Guattari, this idea of collective enunciation, we talk about memory in a very different way. I think even the way that we mobilize Barad's concepts is an attention to the the formation of subjectivity and and the way things are, the way not talking about agency as some even though we worked against humanist agency in the first book, it's not even attributing agency to individuals and things and talking about agentic capacities. And so I think it's a it's a reconceptualization, and I've had some students in recent years really do some very interesting work, I think that, you know, moving and thinking very differently. So that's a that's a beginning answer to that question. Alecia JacksonUm, I'm very excited about the way in which we talk about or write about power in in the new Barad chapter in terms of the materiality of power, I think it's a very different way of conceptualizing it. So that that's something that I think, that we've, that we paid really close attention to. I think that that's a concept that, that once you plug it into materiality, you know, because it's history is really connected to knowledge. You know, Foucault's famous couplet or doublet, the power knowledge workings, and, you know, when we get into the materialization of power in the Barad chapter, I think it just really opens up, you know, a whole conversation and I think it's got, we have a lot to say about about that, in terms of, like Lisa was mentioning the collective. And how that that is working, were much more, I think, smarter about assemblage in the second edition, I think that has some some implications for materiality, language, subjectivity, all of that. So we've got some real, I think, shifts in, in how we're bringing those, those theories in, not only in the Barad chapter, but also when in chapters one and eight. When we're talking about thinking, we talk, we, you know, we are using some of the material discursive theories around how thought is, is material, how thinking is, is material and that that's Barad, you know, we, we quote her on that, and then, and write about what that what that looks like. So I think those theories also allowed us to make the shift away from epistemology to ontology. You know, this book is not a knowledge project. It's not representation. So we, you know, we really relied on those theories to make arguments for how research is creation, it is creation. So when we're in this, this ontology, these theories that you've mentioned, Jessica, we, we can't talk about research as knowledge production. Really, we're in a, you know, an ontology where research is helping us to imagine the worlds that we want to live in. So that's what we talk about a lot in my classes is, so what's the what's the use? You know, why are we doing this? If we're not, you know, we know so much already. Like, why do we want to keep asking the same questions. I was somewhere one time, I don't remember maybe getting my hair cut, I don't know. And I was talking to someone about what I do. And I was in that that semester, in particular, I was teaching a women's studies course and feminist theory was a graduate feminist theory course. And she said, Oh, that sounds so, so cool. And so awesome. And I'll say, Well, it's kind of depressing, because for 10 years, we've been talking about the same things, you know, in this feminist theories class, and, and nothing is really different. So I've started thinking about that and talking with doctoral students in my research courses saying, Well, what if research was became something completely different, you know, its use its purpose. And I think what we're doing in this book, is we're saying that we're making worlds, when we think with theory, we're creating something new, we're creating openings for possibilities that have been unthought. So and I see students doing this in their dissertations now. So they're picking up, you know, their theories, you know, we just went to a defense last week of a student, I was chairing a dissertation for and she's, she has a son who has autism. And so she basically did a power knowledge reading of all the, the materials of autism, all the the documentation, the special ed, you know, just everything that the path to diagnosis is what she called it and, and just recreated an entirely different world. Through that work, you know, the outcome of what she did the she got to the end and, and she said, this is this is what we need to do to the DSM to make this entire framework less deficit oriented, and less damage centered. So she recreates she did her critique, you know, her thinking her thinking with, but what came from that was her own creation, you know, a creation of a different concept, you know, how do we redefine this? How do we, you know, how do we talk about it differently? Y'all know, Heather Cox Richardson, that the historian on Facebook has been doing her letters, and posting a lot. And as a historian, she said something recently that that I've been using in my class, and she said, the way that we make change is that we have to change the way that we that people think about something. And the only way we can change the way people think about something is to change the way that we talk about it. That's it from a historian's perspective, that's, that's how change happens. And so it is about language, but it's also about worlding. And I think that, with this, these new theories and the material discursive turn and attending to ontology, in qualitative work, we can begin to create the worlds through the words that we use, changing the way that we talk about it, changing the way that people think about it, and then the doing. So I think that this book, in particular makes those connections between thinking and doing creation, experimentation, and really pushes that, again, what we talked about this in the chapter eight, what we do in research is unleash becomings. And that still is so I can read chapter eight and see what we have to say about unleashing becomings. But, but that's what I I envision, I would like to see research moving in that direction. I think that that's what those these theories, these post foundational theories enable us to do. And students are doing it like, I see them taking risks in ways that are very exciting. Liza MazzeiThey recognize that the descriptive project is not is not moving us. I mean, we talked about that in class last night. Okay, we know we know what's happening. So how do we what are the mechanisms for, for creating these new worlds that Alecia is talking about? Jessica Van CleaveSo that was really exciting, because I was hoping you all would have something fabulous and, and generative and opening up to say, in relation to that, and I wildly underestimated what might happen. So I really appreciate that. That was, that was really helpful. I'm sure the, the audience is going to get a lot out of that. And I think, as I go back to the second edition of Thinking with Theory, I will now be reading it differently because of hearing the ways that you all frame it and how it's now being taken up and seeing where it goes with your students and in relation to the current projects that you have going on. So thank you for that. Um, so I'm gonna shift a little bit, if you don't mind to talk about the writing process. And you said that you have shifted and talked about writing as an ontological project as well. So what does that look like in terms of your writing partnership or your coauthorship? Either for this book, obviously, you've published a lot together and separately, so what does coauthorship look like and how has that shifted for you over the years? Liza MazzeiI'm not sure it has shifted. I think that we're I think we're very appreciative of the generative nature of our collaborations together. And we often when we have not worked together on a project before, and we're working on something separately, it's like, oh, we miss we miss this. Because it does, there is a, there is an energy. And a, I don't even know how to talk about it the way in which I think we've established a great deal of trust in one another. And so it's not. So there's not maybe a hesitation that there might have been at the beginning. But it's, I can't imagine not having projects to work on together. And we keep coming, we keep dreaming up new ones. Alecia JacksonIt feels often like it just a zigzag, you know, we're just kind of in it, we're in the middle of something. Sparks fly, and Lisa will write a word. And it'll remind me, I can you know, she'll she'll write a word that will just spark an idea. And then I can develop a paragraph from that, vice versa. We're not sensitive to, we don't hang on to our we're not, you know, if I write something, I'm not hanging on to it. And I think how many times have I said in the margin? I'm not wedded to this, or this is terrible. Just rewrite it? Or, you know, I think that we just have a real? I don't know, we see it, we look at it as as equals we don't, you know, we take turns on lead. You know, who's first? Who's second, but don't really track that. I mean, I couldn't even tell you, like, who's first, who's second on however many. It's very 50 50, I think, you know, on both of our leaders, we have that written very clearly that, that it's it's 50 50. And that way, it's in these collaborations we've done in the last decade with me on the East Coast, and Lisa on the West Coast, you know, we've had, we've joked a little while I'll get up and maybe work first, you know, and then and then, you know, Lisa will sometimes say, Oh, I can't wait to go in and see, you know, like what you've done and, and then I'll come back in the afternoon to kind of see, so it always feels like a gift. You know, when I go into the document, I there's never a time where I'm not a little bit excited to see what's developed and what's what's being made. Because it isn't an act of creation. And you know, we're not, but we're just you know, we're reading the same things. You know, it's just, it's, it's a collaboration in every sense of the word, you know, from reading the writing to, you know, the publishing, it's just yeah, it's, you know, we're respectful of when there's other things going on, you know, travel or family stuff. And, you know, it's just, yeah, it's just easy. Jessica Van CleaveWould that we all could have such lovely, collaborative relationships that are just easy. That's wonderful and of course, we all get to be the beneficiaries of that easy work for you. Not that it's easy, but um, so is there anything else that you want to share with the qualitative conversations audience either about thinking with theories, specifically, or qualitative research broadly or anything else that comes to mind? Liza MazzeiThis is not my this is not my original thought. This is something that you know, Bettie St. Pierre says all the time, but that I say to students, if you if you want, I mean, two things, I guess, you get into the middle of a project and you think that you want to think with this particular concept? Well start thinking with it. But if it's not doing the work that you want it to do, then try something else. But you have to be willing to spend the time to immerse yourself in the reading and the study in order to be able to, to do the work. I mean, Alecia, and I talked about with the first edition, people say, Well, how did you choose these theories? Well, some of them were ones that we had, because we had worked with them in pre, you know, with some of our other work. But then we as we started thinking, for example, with Barad, it was okay if we're going to do this, we need to really spend some time with it to see if it if it is doing something for us. And if it's not, then we need to find something else. So that's, I mean, we we talked about that a little bit in the book, but I think it's just really emphasizing that it's, it's it's not easy work, but it's such exciting and generative work. And I think once the students start, start encountering it then it's hard for them to imagine not doing their work in this way. Alecia JacksonYeah, I think that what, what Lisa just said reminds me of how I talk about theory is that it just finds you, you know, that's something I say, in every class, we're, you know, we're, we have two theory classes that we offer in our doctoral program. We just call it theory one, theory two, and it's just, it's pretty linear. You know, it starts with positivism. And then just, by the time we get to the end of theory two, we're in post humanism. So it's, you know, just going through those frameworks, and and there were some times students just nothing really speaks to them. And so we just say, you know, just keep reading, and something, you know, that language. You know, I tell the story of how, when I first read Foucault, it was like, wow, this is language that I've always sensed, and felt that I couldn't articulate, I didn't know what I needed to say. And then here's somebody who's saying it for me. And then all I had to do is plug it into, you know, what I was encountering in the world. And, and that helped me to think differently about it and opened up to the end thought so, you know, a lot of what I like to say to students is, you know, this, this work is the pursuit of the unthought it is the pursuit of what we, you know, can't imagine yet, the not yet. We were back to the movement between the first and second edition. And, and, you know, Jessica, you read a chapter for us on Manning, because we thought we need to add a new theorist, you know, and we'd both been reading a lot of affect and gone with the affect conference. And, and we thought that that was something that was missing from the book. And so we thought, well, let's just add a Manning chapter. And it didn't, it didn't fit well. It didn't, it didn't, it didn't, it wasn't working the way that we wanted it to work. But Manning was working on us, but we couldn't figure out what was going on. So we just kept wrestling with it. And and, you know, you read it, and we got great feedback from you. And it made us really ask some questions about what what is, what are we doing? And how are we putting this to work? And what happened is, I remember we were going back and forth on it. And, and I think I texted you, Lisa, or sent you an email, and I said, I think we're using Manning, Manning methodologically like as a technique. And so we're like, whoa, that's exactly what's going on. It's not that we need to plug Manning into the performative accounts, we need to plug it into writing and thinking and doing. And so chapter eight is where Manning shows up and affect because we do a lot with pre individual sensing, and how that is part of of a thought. That thought is not just cognitive, but it's this pre individual syncing of something coming into being of the coming that's emerging. So we just stayed with Manning, but it it shifted and helped us to say something about writing and thinking and ontology that we could never have planned for. So the last thing, yeah, I'll just say is that you just don't know where you'll end up. And all of this is emergent, contingent, relational, all of those things. So just stay, as Donna Haraway says, just stay with the trouble and you know, something will will come, Donna Haraway says something, something always happens, and it always will. So I think that that's part of what the message is in in the the second edition. Jessica Van CleaveWell, I want to thank you both so much for your time today. This has been a delightful conversation for me, and I know our QR SIG listeners are really going to appreciate your, your descriptions of the text, as well as the connections that that you are making and thinking about, both in their roles with students and in their roles as instructors as well as methodologists. So thank you both so much for your time this afternoon. Liza MazzeiThank you, Jessica. And thanks for prompting us to think more about our own process. Alecia JacksonYeah, it's very nice to, to articulate it and, and be able to really appreciate, you know, what, what we've done, I don't think I really sat and thought about the, you know, I mean, I know what the differences are between first and second edition, that really going back on this journey in time and space has been a real treat. So thank you. Jessica Van CleaveThank you. Thank you. It's been a gift this afternoon.

SUMMARY KEYWORDSukraine, war, people, ukrainian, asu, research, students, education, happening, invasion, qualitative research, february, questions, crimea, russia, universities, fled, podcast, family, momentSPEAKERSTim, MariiaTim  00:15Hello and welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast hosted by the qualitative research SIG through AERA, the American Education Research Association. I am Tim wells, a postdoctoral research scholar at Arizona State University and guest host for this episode of the podcast. The qualitative conversations podcast doesn't have a regular host. Instead, each episode is organized by our podcast committee. Normally, my role resides in the background coordinating episodes and editing audio, but today I'm behind the mic. In conversation with Mariia Vitrukh. Mariia is a doctoral candidate in the Education Policy and Evaluation Program at Arizona State University. She serves on the QR sig's graduate student committee. In the fall of 2021, Mariia had been in conversation with myself about an episode she had hoped to record for the podcast. That podcast episode was never recorded. This is because only a few months later, on February 24 of 2022, Russia made a full scale invasion into Ukraine taking over 20% of the territory of Ukraine. Over the past few months. Maria is Ukrainian, writing her dissertation on learning experiences of Ukrainian students who moved from war areas in Ukraine and continue education in the context of forced migration. For the past year, she had been living in Ukraine, she left only a month before the invasion to teach courses at ASU and finish her dissertation proposal. The country she left has changed forever. But this hasn't stopped her from returning. I don't think that's yet research to complete. But all of our family remains in Ukraine. So instead of the original podcast that we planned in the fall of 2021, I invited Mariia to the podcast to share her experience of researching and being a doctoral student, in candidate and in times of war. Mariia, I can't thank you enough for your willingness to be on this program. Perhaps we could start with you sharing a bit more about your background for the listeners, what brought you to ASU's doctoral program. And what were you doing beforehand?Mariia  02:41Tim, thank you so much for the invitation. I really appreciate the opportunity not only to share my experience as a student, but also to talk about the ones in Ukraine.Tim  02:53So what brought you to ASU doctoral program.Mariia  02:57So, after I did my second master's degree at the University of Cambridge, in psychology and education road, I went back to Ukraine and storage, or co founded an NGO Ukrainian Educational Research Association. We did a couple of projects on education in Ukraine. And as a member of the organization I applied for grant was the US State Department. And I collaborated with displaced universities in Ukraine. And those are the universities that moved from Eastern world areas of the country. I worked with them for about three years on the project, doing workshops, and preparing conferences, interviewing people. And I think this collaboration kind of pushed me to think what can I do more to speak about the stories and share the stories of those people, and especially students, and how to say that I was really impressed with what they shared with me. And I think inspired by their example, even though their stories were not the easy ones. And this kind of inspire me to look for PhD programs. So I applied to ASU because it offered an interdisciplinary approach and had a variety of methods to look into the ongoing problems. So I thought that that's a place that where I can find a way to explore not an easy topic of war and how to research war, especially education in the context of war.Tim  04:35Yeah, thanks. That's just a little bit of background that I think might help orient the listeners to this episode and kind of your own deep knowledge and experience in Ukraine and in how this connects maybe to your own research and really builds off some of that background. So perhaps we could start with you telling us what are you doing in February of this year when the war ramped up?Mariia  05:05So I've just finished my perspectives de France. And I was planning to go back to Ukraine in March, but then to do my data collection, but then all the flights have been canceled due to the full scale invasion. Yeah, so I think that was the moment where I had to make quiet, hard decisions first, do I continue with my dissertation? Then if I do, then how do I continue? And there were a lot of personal issues as well as research questions, ethical considerations. Yeah, so had to resolve a lot of those factors.Tim  05:54I can actually remember sitting down with you early in the winter of 2022. Before the, the the invasion, and we had a conversation. And I think, some, I guess, what struck me and what I still remember about that, as you were situating, lots of the events that were kind of unfolding because this was a time when Russia had started to militarize the border, and they kind of brought this big presence of military forces right around the border. And I was just kind of asking you about this. And what you did really nicely is situate this historically, you provided some context and things. And of course, this isn't a History podcast, but maybe you can give some background about the background and history of the war. And maybe share a little bit about what happened in 2014, and how that might connect in some ways to 2020.Mariia  06:53So although there is a very common discourse, saying that the vast and by West people usually refer to the United States and NATO, saying that they put too much pressure on Russian presidents, and it caused a triggered the war. But I think it the tension began much earlier between Ukraine and Russia back in 2010, when victory and a college, very pro Russian president came to power in 2016 Ukrainian government's decision to suspend the signing of an Association Agreement with the European Union, and choosing closer ties to Russia and the Eurasian Economic Union sparked progress among the Ukrainian people. The scope of progress widened, with calls for the resignation of President victory on a college and the garment. The protests later Friday expanded into Ramadan and the Revolution of Dignity. A year later in 2014, protesters eventually occupied a government buildings in many regions of Ukraine. The uprising climaxed on 18th 20th of February 2014 and fierce fighting and cave between Milan activists and pleas resulted in deaths of almost 100 protesters and 13 police officers present in college and other government ministers fled the country to Russia. And just a week later, the so called little green man, as they were famously named in media appeared in Crimea in unmarked green army uniforms, carrying modern Russian military weapons and equipment. They took over control of strategic positions in Crimea and set Russian flags. Later in April 2014. Large parts of the Knights can Luhansk regions were seized by pro Russian terrorists backed by a Russian military since the start of the war in Ukraine in 2014. With the annexation of Crimea and invasion into Donbass, which are Donetsk and Luhansk region by Russia, Ukraine has become one of the countries with the highest number of internally displaced people worldwide. And these numbers can be compared to countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Sudan. And by the summer of 2014, the Ukrainian ministry for social policy had already registered close to 2 million internally displaced people, and an estimated 1 million people have fled from war zone to the Russian Federation. In terms of education, from the scarce resources available, it is known that at the beginning of the conflict about back in 2014, about 700 educational institutions suffered both higher education and school level education at the higher level education about 700,000 students and teachers for more More than three and a half 1000 educational institutions experienced psychological difficulties due to military conflict in obtaining education. And students consider about 30% of those affected by war. After the 24th of February 2022, after the full scale invasion of Russia into Ukraine, over 1000, educational institutions have suffered bombing and shelling, and about 100 of them have been destroyed completely. And these numbers are continuously increasing. almost 10 million Ukrainian refugees have fled Ukraine since this escalation. And another 7 million more have been displaced internally within Ukraine, and over 12 million have been affected in the areas hardest hit by the war. And also how to remember that throughout over 7.5 million children that now are considered Children of War, and not to mention that the humanitarian needs are constantly increasing.Tim  11:10Yeah, thanks. So what's really clear, I think in talking with you, around this is that these events are part of a much larger, longer history that extends beyond February of this year in in dates much prior to that. But maybe you can tell us, if you're open to sharing a little bit about how you've experienced the changes of the war, the escalation within since this last year, and especially maybe how you've experienced this as a doc student doing research and qualitative research.Mariia  11:52Um, I think I made quite a few interesting discoveries for me both as a researcher and a human being and Ukrainian citizen, is that it's a very non translatable experience. So you can't really explain this to someone who hasn't been through similar events. Also, the news don't really reflect what is happening day by day process. After the full invasion, I had to make a decision on whether I continue with my dissertation, because the first instinct was just to pack my luggage and go back to Ukraine. And I wanted to help in some way I just didn't know how to help. I was waking up every morning with Assad if my parents are still alive. So I was sending them text messages to check in on them. And following the news constantly to make sure that the city they were in was not bombed. Also checking on my friends and their location. And I think just very recently, maybe a few weeks ago, my sister shirts that Monday, she actually saw a missile missile flying over her head. And I think that felt very surreal, because she saw that it was so close that you could literally see it. And actually, what she shared is that the moment the bomb is like about your head flying in the air, you can't really hide anymore, because it moves so quickly, that you don't really have enough time to hide. And my mom actually turned out that she saw the missile was acquired a few times, but she never told me about this. I know that my family does not tell me even half of what they're going through. And that's on the one hand, it's disturbing. On the other hand, I kind of understand that. I think another difficult aspect is that your family and France are constantly under the threat. And the first few days, of course, were a shock. I remember when I called my parents at 7am in the morning, cave time on the 24th of February. And I told them, like because they saw on the news already that the key was bombed two hours earlier, so and they were still asleep. My father saw that that's a fake news that that's not true. And I think it was true for most of my friends and people in Ukraine. And so the bombing starts at 5am. In cave time, and I think that's the most mean time to start a war because it's before the dawn. And at times, it's hard to process what is happening, especially if you're not fully awake. And some of my friends were in queue at that time. So they try to flee the city. Or normally it takes about five to six hours to get out of this key of to the most western city. And one of my friends heard that it took her about 12 hours. And it's only because she left immediately after the bombing started. Those who tried to flee like just a few hours later. If it either took them over 24 hours or even more, or they were forced to return home just because of the traffic chance, no gas, and the panic that was in the city. Also, like even now, people have to constantly be a large. They hear the sirens literally every day they have to hide in basements on some safe, safe space in their homes. It does influence children a lot, especially their education and schooling, because a lot of schools have been turned into refugee shelters, which means that in many cities and rural areas, there is no physically space to study and most of the education is done online. I guess the word is not the same throughout the time. So the first few days and weeks were the most uncertain. It is changing over time, because you learn to process things differently. It doesn't get easier, you just I think start to navigate the context of war better. At the moment, I think it's the most like drastic things is that a lot of people are dying, both civilians and soldiers. Also, the price for food is increasing constantly. Some cities just don't have access to food, water, electricity, mobile connection or internet connection. So that's that's what concerns the more like a personal explorations and discoveries I made for myself. When it comes to research, I think that the questions I was asking myself, because I was supposed to work with displaced universities and students from displaced universities. So I wondered, like how to do research with people who are under constant physical threat or whose family is under physical threat, when the cities are being shelled, and you yourself are going through this experience, or your family members, your friends are hiding in basements and trying to survive. Is it even ethical to do this type of research? Also, I know that, especially the first two weeks, people were in shock, they were panicking, there was a lot of uncertainty. A lot of people didn't know where to go and what to do. And also, like, how do you talk to people who lost their homes. So I knew that some of the students I'm may potentially be interviewing will go through the second displacement. So the first displacement was in 2014, when they lost their homes, and they had to leave the occupied territories, territories that were under war. And then in February 2022, they were going through the second displacement, losing their homes with a second time having to leave their education space for the second time, having their group mates and professors killed or injured, as well as their family members. And of course, there were like technical issues. And I just couldn't travel to Ukraine that easily. And my methods that I was using, because I'm using Artspace methodologies and somatic practices required on site participation. So this man that I need to meet with students in person, and I kind of wondered, how do we solve this issue? Yeah,Tim  18:31I'm actually just following up and curious. So how did you solve that issue? Were you able to meet with people in person? And have you conducted that type of research since?Mariia  18:45Yeah, I think that my volunteering and advocacy work actually helped me with that. Because when I started doing some volunteering at Arizona State University, I met some of the students who were from this place to universities. And through personal networking and social service. I got connected to a group of students who was in a different country. And I was very lucky to get a grant from gpsa. And travel all the way there and work with them.Tim  19:28This was after the invasion, correct?Mariia  19:30Yeah, it was actually end of April, beginning of May. And that was something completely found plans because so I thought that most probably I will have either to change the methods, change the population. Stop doing my research completely because I didn't see how it's relevant anymore because the history took a very unexpected turn, which meant that the research I wrote just half a year ago was not relevant anymore. It became a part of history. So it was not what was happening, the universities I was describing. Most of them don't exist anymore, or they had to relocate again. So when I was talking about the second relocation for people, the same thing happened for the institutions. And when I reached out professors from displaced universities, most of them told me like, we don't know what's going to happen next. We didn't know where our students are, we didn't know where most of our colleagues are. So it's very unpredictable what is going to happen next.Tim  20:36And that's part of well, in partly in response to that, you've also, that's you've been doing your advocacy, you started advocacy work? How have you thought about your advocacy work as related or connected in any way to your research? I know you said, partly through that work, you got funded through the Student Association at it at ASU to travel to the Ukraine correct. And do research.Mariia  21:05Oh, it actually was not Ukraine, I just don't want to name the country because I'm going to expose the students. I traveled to Europe to do my data collection. I think at that moment, I didn't think about advocacy, as connected to my research at all, I just had a feeling. I think there are two things First, for those Ukrainians who are outside of Ukraine, all of us feel the sense of guilt, that you are in safe conditions, and you survived. And you don't have to go through what most people are going through in Ukraine, and at times, it gets feel unbearable. And I think it's to somehow cope with a sense of guilt, and guilt of Survivor, I think you try to do something to contribute and help. So what I was trying to do was to get together those students who were at ASU into one group and organization and see what we can together do. And that's when I started meeting people. And I also had to collaborate more on meet some people from the Aspera, Ukraine people from the Aspera. And that's when I had a chance to go and talk about issues that Ukrainian students face here at ASU and had a chance to talk about was governor of Arizona juicy and as well as ASU representatives, as well as IRC and migration office asking for help both for Ukrainian students and Ukrainian refugees. Also gave interviews to local media. And I gave talks at the conferences just sharing information or what was happening at that time in Ukraine. But it was not there was not really like a goal to connect it to my research. Rather, it was like feel of responsibility to somehow do something or help in any way I could.Tim  23:14Write Of course. So I guess I'm Yes. still curious about research and what this process is looking like in in times of war in the middle of war and how this is, so much of qualitative research is about relationships, relationships that you form and maintain. But it's also about ethical considerations. And you're kind of in the midst of all of that, how have you navigated some of that? Both relationships, ethics, the concerns that you might have have around conduct both conducting research around a topic that's at the very least adjacent and likely very relevant to the experiences of people in war, forced migration. And then, at the same time, in this context, where so much turmoil and wars going on, I'm curious, a little bit of how you think about those and how you've experienced the research work during this time.Mariia  24:24I think it was not a straightforward way. And I had a lot of hesitations how and if I should continue with my research, I mean, was my dissertation. But I think working with students at ASU actually helped me because it showed where the needs are and how can I address some of the ethical issues. And in terms of building relationship, my key question was, I didn't want to re traumatize students, I will be potentially interviewing Just asking the question that may not be appropriate in that moment. So I consulted with psychologists from Ukraine that were working with refugees in Ukraine, like what is the best way to approach if it makes sense to do this research at all? And the response that I got is that, in that particular moment, people, most people feel happy that they survived. And they do want to talk they key consideration was that I do not tell them what to do, I do not tell them how to act, how to send have to feel, etc. So if I'm there to listen, and ask some questions, then have to be respectful and empathetic about their views and beliefs. And from my experience, back in 2017, when people shared although it was in retrospect, so the people I was working with back in 2016 2017, it's been already three years since the war hit for them. And one thing they shared with me is that the most traumatic experience for them was when someone would come with curious questions and observations, and would show little or no empathy. So I think I took made a note for myself and thought that if I'm there to ask questions, I have to be prepared to listen. And I realized that most of the time, it's not going to be an easy. And another aspect was that I realized that I have to be honest about my intentions for the research and the project I'm doing. And of course, confidentiality matters a lot, because for a lot of my participants, I realized they are still in Ukraine and their family members may be in danger. And also, another aspect I kind of anticipated is that the most interesting conversations are going to happen off record. And this man's that they would have to remain of records. And even though it could be tempting to use those for the project, or for the research, I realized that I mean, this is something that is shared of records, so it stays of records. Some other ethical considerations were that for most people, as it was, for me, it tends, it's hard to navigate what is happening and find, find the words to express what you're going through. So it gets easier in retrospect, that's what I've noticed, with my previous research, but it's hard. It's harder in the moment. So I had to be aware of that. Also, different people process words differently. And there are many factors for that. A lot depends on the location of the family, their economic situation, that pre will previous beliefs, experiences, involvement in the war, and how much their family members are involved. Also, the distance and safety, very often hardly an indicator indicators about how person feels because, like, as I said, like sense of guilt. And also times even helplessness can be present, even for those who are outside of the country and are relatively safe. So I realized that when I will be interviewing my participants, I have to be always aware of that. And I think also how you ask questions matter, because if you're just picking people's brain, you see what they're going through and like trying to satisfy your curiosity, this could be a very traumatic approach. And you have to be constantly aware that that these people are continuously going through the war, even though they may themselves not be in the middle of it, but their family members most probably are their friends are. And it immediately puts them in this, like continuous processing, or continuous influence. So I think these were like my key explorations. And yeah, and while trying to navigate and I think I'm still trying to navigate how to how to approach it. I don't think that that's the process that is over for me.Tim  29:36Yeah, of course, that makes a lot of sense. In so much is still changing. And yeah, the war evolves and continues to evolve. And what's interesting or what's concerning, I think, is that we're now creeping up on six or seven months into the war. And personally, I send It's there's just a waning of interest and it starts to get lose its front page headline status. And but so as we close out the conversation I kind of on that note, but also, I'm curious what you could share or what you would share to listeners, what else you would share to listeners, as yet we hit you know this half, half of the year moment in likely this will be a conflict and war that continues. But what else would you share with whether the listenersMariia  30:39so I'm not surprised that Ukraine disappeared from the headlines. Talking about war and listening in World War on daily basis is exhausting, I think to be in the context of war is even more so. But I don't think that this is an indicator that people don't care anymore. It's just you can't be focused on world the time. In Trump's of the case of Ukraine, I believe that it opened an interesting historical consciousness. And I remember that at the very beginning on the 24th of February, the whole world was giving Ukraine about 2072 hours, and trying to predict what's going to happen next. And I think that Ukrainians refuse this bit of realization that they may lose their homeland, and they were fighting back. And we are still fighting back. Even though the whole world bugs and was waiting for Ukraine to be taking over. I think that Ukrainian population showed incredible resistance and love for their homelands. And I have no doubt that we are going to win this war, and we are going to take our lands back.Tim  31:57On that note, thank you so much for your willingness to share about your experience, the war, and also your experience conducting war research in the midst of this war. And also thanks for your service in the qualitative research SIG, so I really appreciate it. And it was great having a conversation with you.Mariia  32:18Yeah, thank you so much for inviting me. I really appreciate this time and I appreciate listeners time to even explore this topic. So thank you

In this episode, James Salvo interview Jessica Lester on digital tools and technology in qualitative research. See the following link for the transcript of this interview: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTH5sN93LYnhIsNCI1Lvjm938OxVLyKoqoQlTClDNNbWklNd1rY791re9jTJy8lad7mMVM1fLRlSPUf/pub

In this episode, James Salvo interviews Kakali Bhattacharya, editor of the Departures in Critical Qualitative Journal. The follow is a link to the transcript of the recording. https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vRE14XdXBlCkELsYv-aktchCLq5GNtwUVQKvkwzyK6v8DoHqB40wKUZu4r69mPsxEMhHZGMBM6T0XYj/pub

In this Episode, guest hosts Kelly Guyotte and Seth McCall interview Candace Kuby and Becky Christ about their work on speculative qualitative inquiry and pedagogy. A transcript of the episode can be found at the following link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT3GPrMhAq3CEwVBq8RWbDijLun33mlqdbPamsjAdKDPG8w0Q1J_n4nkhfgELfVCRrunmZhAJzY1WP6/pub

In this episode, mentor, Dr. Kelly Guyotte, and, mentee, Carlson Coogler, discuss their experiences of mentorship. They specifically address mentorship within the Qualitative Research SIG. The episode begins with Carlson interviewing Kelly, but flips halfway through as Kelly begins to interview Carlson. Boden Robertson serves as the guest host, introducing the conversation. The transcript follows. ---Boden Robertson  0:11  Hello everyone and welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American Educational Research Association. I'm Boden Robertson, the guest host for this episode on mentorship. And I'm very excited today to be joined by Dr. Kelly Guyotte and Carlson Coogler that have been gracious enough to lend their time and support to our QR SIG podcast episode. We'll start with introductions from our guests, and then the guests will interview each other about the QR SIG mentoring program and their experience.Kelly Guyotte  0:41  Thank you, Bowden. It's a pleasure to be here today. My name is Kelly Guyotte. I am an associate professor of qualitative research at the University of Alabama. I am also currently serving as the chair of the mentoring committee in the QR SIG. I had the immense pleasure of also working with Carlson she is a student in our program or educational research program with a specialization in qualitative research. And I'll turn things over to you Carlson so you can introduce yourself.Carlson Coogler  1:11  Yeah, hi, I'm Carlson Coogler at the University of Alabama, as was just said, I'm a doctoral candidate in educational research. I'm also the chair of the graduate student committee for the QR SIG. And Dr. Guy, as she mentioned, is my wonderful, lovely advisor, Professor, co teacher and mentor. So I'm very excited to do this with her. So I guess I'll go ahead and start asking me questions. So tell me about your experience with the QR segment authoring program. What do you do have done? What does it look like?Kelly Guyotte  1:38  Yeah, I had to I looked this up recently, too, because I wasn't sure how long I'd actually been on this committee. And it's been a long time, I actually joined the inventory committee in 2016. And so I started off as a committee member, I was vice chair of the committee in 2018. And then since 2019, I've been serving as chair of the mentoring committee. And so during that time, I have done a lot of things behind the scenes. So that's mostly where my my participation and support has been directed. So in terms of planning and organizing our various initiatives, I have also stepped in as needed to serve as a mentor for things such as the proposal Forum, which I think we're going to talk a little bit about, as well as the mentoring session. But really, a lot of the work that I've done has been helping to make sure these initiatives happen. And now as a chair, really supporting the committee members to make sure that we can continue to support our QR SIG membership. And I'm actually, this is gonna sound silly, but I'm looking forward to rolling off his chair because one thing that I really want to do and look forward to do is become more of a mentor in the QR SIG. So it's been really fun to plan and to be behind the scenes, but I really value mentorship. And so I'm looking forward to being able to to put myself out there a little bit more in support our various members who are seeking participation in our in our various initiatives.Carlson Coogler  3:09  That's awesome. Yeah. So what does the QR SIG mentoring do? What kind of help or assistance is available for students or early for faculty?Kelly Guyotte  3:19  Yeah, it's a really good question. We have three primary initiatives that we undertake as part of the QR SIG. So our first one is called proposal forum and proposal forum happens before AERA submissions are due every year proposal Forum is an opportunity for graduate students, for postdocs and for early career faculty who are submitting to AERA. Maybe for the first time or the second time, who would like to get some feedback on their proposals, and most usually send an email out sometime in mid May, early June or something like that. And we'll ask for folks who want to participate in that, then we will seek mentors that will be willing to read those proposals. And then we do some matching that there's a matching that happens. And then the folks who are seeking feedback will submit their proposals, which will be read by the mentors. And then the idea is that we're really helping these early career and emerging scholars to get great feedback and to really submit high quality submissions that have a high likelihood of getting accepted into the QR SIG program. Our second initiative is the mentoring session. And this is one that I think is probably is one of our more popular ones. And a lot of people have heard of it because it actually shows up on the AERA program. This one is geared toward graduate students and postdocs and I think you're actually participating this year and that right person, Carlson Coogler  4:49  yes, I am really excited about it. Kelly Guyotte  4:51  Great. The mentoring session. Like I said, it happens during the AI era annual meeting. This is an opportunity for folks to get together. Thankfully, we're gonna be back face to face this year, which we're really excited about. We ran it virtually last year. And it actually ended up being really lovely in a virtual setting as well. But typically what happens is folks come together, they get an opportunity to, to chat with one another to talk a little bit about what we call, quote unquote, areas of stuckness. So where are folks stuck methodologically. And so we invite senior scholars and folks who have experienced this type of thing and have wisdom that they can share, and to serve as support for these folks during the session that actually happens during the eight year a meeting. And then the final initiative is our office hours initiative. And so we've actually recently opened this up so that it caters to a lot of different types of scholars. So we have it open toward graduate students. So all of our initiatives are open to graduate students, postdocs, and faculty at any stage. So the idea here is that anyone who feels like they need mentorship can participate in this program. And if you're part of the QR SIG, you may have seen the emails have gone out quite recently on this one. This used to be a face to face meeting that happened at a era. But we've since moved that to be more virtual, although people who are attending AERA, of course, could meet face to face. But these are typically one on one meetings and they're you know, about half an hour in length, we call office hours because if your graduates, your professors office, during office hours, you're having a short one on one meeting, getting some really good focused feedback from them. And then sometimes these relationships continue to evolve, and people stay connected after that. And then sometimes it's a one off thing. But regardless, it's a great way to get some feedback on things that are going on with you methodologically.Carlson Coogler  6:44  That's awesome. I have experienced or am going to be experiencing all three of those. So it's nice to hear it described like that you describe some of this in your last answer. But is there anything you'd like to add about the process about like how mentors or mentees sign up?Kelly Guyotte  6:59  Yeah, we always submit our calls through the QR SIG listserv. And so if you're interested in participating in any of our initiatives, become a member of the QR SIG. And that way you can get these emails and get information about all of our initiatives. You may also have professors or colleagues who are members, and they may be willing to pass along the information to you. But the QR SIG is typically how we share that information our mentees matched to mentors. That is also a really good question. So I am just one of a team. We have a big committee of folks that work together on all of these initiatives. And they work really hard on the matching part. So typically, we try to design our forms in our surveys that we send out so that we can get information that will be helpful for us to match our mentees and our mentors in a way that's meaningful. So for instance, we may ask for things like methodological areas of interest areas that you're working in. Or we may ask things to the nature of theory, what are the theories that that you're you're working with. And then oftentimes, we have started to ask for specific mentors that folks would like to work with. And so we take all of these suggestions and all of this information. And we just have really smart people that are dedicated to making sure that these pairs and these collaborations are meaningful and thoughtfully designed and constructed. A lot of the behind the scenes work that we do as a committee is the matching that really took tends to take a lot of our time. And we just really try to make sure that people are paired with the types of folks that they're wanting, and that we allow, or we cultivate methodological and theoretical fit. Carlson Coogler  8:46  Definitely experienced that methodological and theoretical fit and how I've been matched. I really appreciate that. What are the or what does a typical session meeting meet up between mentor and mentee look alike?Kelly Guyotte  8:57  So that's that depends. And I mentioned all three of our initiatives. And I think I may have talked a little bit about this, but just to be really concise and straightforward with your answer with a proposal forum. The connection is purely through email. It's all virtual. They're encouraged if they want to, they could meet up and do a zoom or something like that. But typically, it's just the mentee emails. The proposal to the mentor reviews, it emails back feedback. So it's typically email and asynchronous. The mentoring session, as I mentioned, happens at the eight year annual meeting. And so during that, typically what we do is we do some speed dating type activities. We'll then divide into to small groups and big groups, and it becomes highly dialogic, and then office hours. Like I said, it can happen either through the eight year annual meeting, or it can be virtual, and it's up to half an hour for one on one or group sessions. And typically, the mentee will come in with some very specific questions. some very specific topics that they want to discuss. And then again, it becomes very collaborative and dialogue.Carlson Coogler  10:06  What are the future directions for the mentor,Kelly Guyotte  10:09  this is actually my last year as the chair, but I will stay on the committee. So you can't they can't get rid of me too easily here. What I would love to see is I would love to see us continuing to find ways to support all of the membership of the QR SIG through mentoring is something that I would really love to see our committee take off.Carlson Coogler  10:31  That's, that sounds really important to me. I think that's really awesome. And you're doing such a great job right now with graduate students and our faculty. So I'm excited to see that develop, what else would you like to share about the room that didn't get covered?Kelly Guyotte  10:45  I'll just elaborate a little bit, we have a really active and robust committee of folks, some of the people on this committee have been part of the group almost as long or as long as I have. So we have people that have been servies for four or fives years. And so these folks are just really committed to mentorship and really value mentorship. When you see those emails that come out, just know that there's this group that that's behind them, and they're working really hard. Everything we do really takes team effort. And we have a distinct group of wonderful scholars behind it. They're making sure that things happen and are that we're doing what we can to truly support those, this SIG that feels they need mentorship. So I have some questions for you, Carlson, I know that you mentioned as well earlier that you are experiencing some mentorship by the QR SIG. Committee, and then the mentoring committee. So can you tell me a little bit about your previous experiences? As you see it?Carlson Coogler  11:54  Yeah, yeah. So this will be my third year of participating in in some way or another within the mentoring initiatives. So in 2020, I did an adapted version of the mentoring session that was virtual because the pandemic only was a sickness. And it was like via Flipgrid. It was really neat the way they all set it up. And I was the person who responded to my my video was on Dr. Wolgemuth. And then in 2021, I had did the office hours and ARA proposal, forum mentoring, and I happen to be paired with the same person two times. And that was Dr. Nordstrom. And then in 2022, I have the office hours and mentoring are coming up. And I'm really excited to see how that goes.Kelly Guyotte  12:38  So thinking back about your experiences as a mentee, what do you think has gone particularly? Well, you seem you speak very positively of your experience. I'd love for you to elaborate a little bit.Carlson Coogler  12:51  Yeah, there's really a lot that has gone very well. I think matching has been really excellent that y'all have been very thoughtful. And you have done a really great job of communicating what it's supposed to look like and how power how expectations etc. And the matching in the in the communication has been really nice. The mentors that I've had Dr. Wolegmuth, Dr. Nordstrom have been linked very thoughtful. And giving, for example, like Dr. Wolgemuth answered my my practical side of my moment of stuckness, but also weighed out and problematize. And I'm such an in my thinking. And that's been really helpful as I've like move forward and thinking about the relationships between this phonologies methodologies, disciplines, etc. It's like a seed that stayed with me. And very similarly, Dr. Nordstrom gave me really great and very practical feedback on my proposal. Like, for example, she's I, I should know, by the end of the first paragraph what your proposal was about. And she didn't, because I needed to make it more clear. And so that was very helpful. But then also, she gave me some suggestions for about people to read as I was struggling with the ideas. And that was really helpful. And actually it thinking through what she provided has resulted in my first single author publication, which is really exciting. So I'm very thankful for that. So I guess what I'd say is that what went well was I guess it resulted from coming with questions of stuckness and being open to how the professor's would answer it. And they did a really good job. And because I also did that with Office Hours too, and then asking questions that allowed us to move back and forth between the practical and the more like conceptual.Kelly Guyotte  14:29  That's really exciting to hear that you had a publication come out of your mentoring committee interactions. Congratulations.Carlson Coogler  14:37  Yeah, thank you and also out of your class as well. It's been a combination of all kinds of mentoring, but it would not have happened without these all these intersections. So yeah, I'm thankful for the opportunities.Kelly Guyotte  14:47  That's fantastic. So since you're you're now a very experienced mentee, what do you what would you want to share to other folks who are listening who may be thinking about Becoming a mentee and one of these initiatives, what would you suggest that they know before signing up and or meeting with their mentor? How might they prepare?Carlson Coogler  15:07  Do I think for sure, be engaged, come with questions, make notes reflect on the process afterward. And as I've said before, I think it's important to ask about practical and idea oriented stuff, to not be one one camp there. But also, I think something that's been really helpful for me is realizing this isn't a performance. Like I'm not worried, like to try not to be worried about impressing the other person, like, when it's our professor, a lot of times, we're supposed to we're student, we're expressing our knowledge about stuckness, for example, it can still be productive, not knowing can be productive. And so it's okay that you don't know the answers to your questions. That's why you're seeking mentorship.Kelly Guyotte  15:49  Yes, that's excellent advice. I hope that hope that folks heard that, because it is it's sometimes it feels like even to get mentorship, we have to have some answers, but really, that stuckness and those tensions and those struggles can be really productive, even if they're unresolved by the end of an interaction, sometimes it's those interactions can linger with us and affect in really profound ways.Carlson Coogler  16:13  Yes, I would say that all of mine had been unresolved still, or it's been pushing me in a different direction that a way to approach my question of stuckness from a different angle that's ultimately been really helpful in helping me work out where I am. That's not been fully resolved. SoKelly Guyotte  16:28  Yeah, you mentioned this in your introduction, but you are this year, you're serving on the QR SIG graduate student committee, and I believe you're the chair of that committee. Is that correct?Carlson Coogler  16:38  Yes, that's correct.Kelly Guyotte  16:39  Can you tell me a little bit about your role?Carlson Coogler  16:42  Yeah, this is my second year on the committee, my first year of being chair. So basically, what I do similar to what you were talking about on the being on the back end, is that I do a lot of organizing and supporting and facilitating, and basically, I think of it as being between two relation, two sets of relations, one between the larger grad student community, and then the grad student committee, and then between the grad student committee and an exec committee for the QR SIG. So we have three different initiatives, the writing, breathing, and our newest one, which is a dissertation Group, kind of job oriented. And so each of the members facilitate those groups like they use a few of them facilitate each of the groups together. And then we are, we've had a speaker event for this first time, which was really awesome. And we're hoping to do that similar, there's gonna be a podcast coming out about that. And then we have a meet and greet planned for AERA. So the organizing, supporting and facilitating of those things are what I do as the Chair, I wishKelly Guyotte  17:42  that I could have taken advantage of that when I was a graduate student. I think that sounds really incredible. And it seems like folks are really active and wanting to be involved.Carlson Coogler  17:51  Yes, they are in the committee. It's just absolutely wonderful. I really just I also like, help lead one of the groups, but it is definitely not a one person thing like we are a team and they are so active, involved and dedicated and creating spaces for community for graduate students. And so it's been really a pleasure to get to work with themKelly Guyotte  18:10  in thinking about the because our topic today is about mentorship. How do you see your graduate student committee also taking the practice of mentorship? Yeah, soCarlson Coogler  18:21  I think about the book that you and Dr. Wolgemuth edited that philosophical mentoring and qualitative research, there was this like general push to disrupt the hierarchical relationship between my mentor and mentee and to think about mentoring. And it's happening, even not even just between not even just between people that think it was Coker at all, they had the chapter where it was more than human mentors. And but so I guess as I'm answering this, I think our experience of mentorship is mostly happening not in the formal professor to student mentor mentee codified relationship. It's really like students, a student in our community groups. And I think that's really important, and something that graduate students maybe don't, or maybe not as aware of that it's not just your professors, especially if they're new graduate students who are or can be in mentoring relationships with you that you can learn a lot from other graduate students. So yeah, I think that is where we do most of our mentorship experiencing experiences are happening student to student,Kelly Guyotte  19:19  I love hearing you say that because it makes me think of over the years that I've been in the on the mentoring committee, I've had a lot of faculty that have communicated how much they really enjoy serving as a mentor, how much they enjoy participating in mentoring session, because they feel like they learned so much and they take away so much from those in those engagements. And so I think a lot of times students have a tendency or grad students have a tendency to think that like they're the ones getting and receiving all have this wonderful knowledge, but really, our mentors do as well and it becomes very reciprocal. So I just loved hearing you talk about that breaking down the hierarchy and thinking about mentorship in new and different ways. So, yes, as a current doctoral student, doctoral candidate, what advice do you have for other current graduate students? And maybe thinking about that under the under the topic of mentorship? How would you want to mentor them to move forward and learn?Carlson Coogler  20:17  Yeah, I think my main advice, especially in relation to this topic would be to really cultivate relationships in various types of relationships, mentoring relationships, like with professors at your school elsewhere and conferences, talk to people after you listen to their presentations. If you have questions or ideas even email someone after you read the article, if you have a question or thought and you want to share, just reach out, I think because a lot of us are a lot of us are in our these roles that we're in and as teachers and researchers, because these relationships are important to us and having communicating about ideas and having an opportunity to mentor and be mentored and for it to be reciprocal, like you said, so I think trying to cultivate in as many places as you can opportunities that are formal and informal for mentoring apply to be on committees like I've learned a lot about being a scholar doing qualitative inquiry as a result of being on the grad committee and learning from other graduates. And then also because I'm the chair of the exec committee, so I've heard a lot it's helped me understand and imagine what it looks like to be a professor and to be on a committee at ARA and like what that looks like. And then I think, like you said, the reciprocal aspect I can work in this weird liminal spot. We're still students, though soon, hopefully they have doctorates and be professors. And so we're learning how to be a scholars. And I think that there's like this slide that's always happening between like mentor and mentee, like we're always have. And so I think sharing and learning with humility, knowing that you do have something to share, but that you also always have something received that you're both always mentor mentee, I think is important. And it's relationships. Yeah, I guess that's the advice I would offer.Kelly Guyotte  21:56  I love that. And I think just having the opportunity to work with you as your as your one of your professors, and we're getting to co teach and we could get into right together, I know that I have learned a tremendous amount from working with you and reading with you and thinking with you. For me, that reciprocity is something that is really fulfilling and sustaining. So I appreciate you very much, Carlson.Carlson Coogler  22:21  I appreciate you too. And I 100% agree it's a joy. It's a joy to be in these relationships with you. Thank you.Boden Robertson  22:28  And I appreciate both of you joining us today for this episode. And I think that about wraps up today's episode on mentorship. I know that I've learned a lot and I really hope that our listeners have to, I'll be completely honest, I'm definitely sold on the mentor program and I will be and I will be signing up so you've you've at least convinced me congrat congratulations. So just to close out again to thank Dr. Kelly Guyotte and Carlson Coogler for taking the time out of their busy schedules to join us for today's episode. And until next time. Thanks for joining us for qualitative conversations.

In this episode, the QR SIG's Graduate Student Committee hosts a conversation with Dr. Cassie Brownell, Dr. Stephanie Shelton, and Dr. Sandra Guzman Foster about how to successfully navigate graduate school, dissertation reading and writing, and the job market. Below is a transcript of the conversation. Carlson Coogler  0:11  Yeah, so everybody, welcome. Thank you so much for coming to our first but hopefully not our last invited speaker about this hosted by the graduate student committee of the qualitative research SIG of AERA, my name is Carlson and I'm the chair of this wonderful group of people who make up the graduate student committee. And so first and foremost, I want to acknowledge them and around a virtual applause. Thanks for all their hard work. This would not have happened without them as what our groups are initiatives not happened without them. So thank you so much to Amir, Deleasa, Jen, Kristen, Ashley, and Mariia for the incredible job y'all have done with all of this and running and supporting our three initiatives, the reading group, the writing group, and the dissertation slash add group while being yourselves graduate students and therefore very busy. Second, I want to welcome our attendees and encourage you to participate in our initiatives. And so if you are not already on our listserv, you can send us an email and that qrsiggrads@gmail.com. And then we can put that in the chat, but also that's on the flyer. So if you if you're interested in joining the reading the writing of the dissertation group finding out more about, then we encourage you to join our listserv for that. So, and groups will be meeting soon. So if you have you're not missing anything if you haven't gotten started yet. Third, and of course, very importantly, I want to thank our speakers. We are so grateful for your time and energy and are eager to  [...]. Thanks so much. So first is Dr. Cassie Brownell. She is an assistant professor of curriculum teaching and learning in the Ontario Institute for Studies and education at the University of Toronto. Her research takes up issues of educational justice and equity in early childhood. Drawing on critical socio cultural theory, Cassie examines children's socio political development through school based studies as well as community based research. She has received funding from the National Academy of Education slash the Central Research Foundation, Canada's Social Sciences and Human Humanities Research Council, the International literacies Association and the National Council of Teachers of education. Samples of her research can be found in the pages of anthropology and education quarterly theory into practice, Teachers College record and research in the teaching of English. Dr. Sandra L. Guzman boster earned her PhD in educational leadership and policy studies at Arizona State University, where she was also at Gates Millennium Scholar and a Spencer interdisciplinary fellow. Prior to joining the University of the Incarnate Word Dr. Guzman Foster work as an educational consultant, where she worked on several projects such as leading research and evaluation teams and fieldwork, developing course curriculum for online programs, and serving as a research subject matter expert, Dr. Guzman foster brings experienced an online hybrid pedagogy, curriculum development, teacher education, program evaluation, educational research and social justice education. Additionally, Dr. Guzman Foster has taught at the K 12 level community college level at the university level in Texas, Arizona and Colorado. A first generation college graduate Dr. Stephanie Ann Shelton is Associate Professor of qualitative research and program chair of the educational research program and the College of Education at the University of Alabama and affiliate faculty member in the Department of gender and race studies and the Gifted Education Program, research interests are often interview and focus group base and include examining intersections of gender identities, gender expressions, sexualities, race and class and educational context. publications have appeared in qualitative inquiry, the International Journal of qualitative studies and education, qualitative research journal GLP, a journal of lesbian and gay studies, the International Journal of Transgender Health, The Journal of lesbian studies, and teaching and teacher education. She has published four books, including feminism and intersectionality in academia, women's narratives and experiences in higher education 2018, which was reprinted in 2020, and the just published Encyclopedia of queer studies and education. She was the 2020, recipient of the American Educational Research Association, Early Career Award and measurement and research methodology, and the 2021, recipient of the NCTE LGBTQ plus leadership and advocacy at work. So without further ado, I will pass this over to Dr. Brownell. Dr. Brownel  4:19  Thanks so much for having us. It's super exciting to be here with you all. And especially for this first event with such phenomenal co speakers here with me. I tend to speak a little fast, especially when I get excited. So I'm going to turn on the captions here for folks as well. So as mentioned, my name is Cassie Brownell, I'm an assistant professor just in my fourth year having just completed my interim tenure review this past year, and I have put together a bit of a slideshow to organize my thoughts and share with you all and so the link is available for you here. Just the tinyurl.com QR dash reading that you're also welcome to find me on Twitter either now or later. And I've framed this around motivation and procrastination, the lessons and overwhelm and academic reading. And I'm going to hopefully share some tips and tricks, but a little bit of my own journey with you as well. So to get us started just an overview of what I'll be talking about today, and I'm gonna begin with a portrait of a reader to be myself. And then moving forward talking about building your stack borrowing some language from NCTE, which I know Dr. Shelton will appreciate thinking about reading practice and reading as practice. And then thinking beyond overwhelm, which I think is a common thing when we're thinking about reading, at least for someone like me. So to begin, I wanted to insert a little comment here about this is really a portrait of a reluctant reader. So it felt like this image of this woman on her phone with her computer, that maybe with a text that she's turned her back to a really represents me a lot of days. And this is my reaction to how I felt to being asked to participate today was saying, what you asked me, I wouldn't say I particularly like reading. And then thinking, whenever I'm reading, I feel like I have to read a sentence, a paragraph, a page over and over again. And that's true, both as someone who is trying to often grasp ideas, theories, or in different sorts of ways remember the things that I'm reading. But it's also true in that I am someone who was recently diagnosed with ADHD. And so that sort of executive dysfunction and working memory is something that I've really been working through. And so I have a sigh here as well, in that having recently been diagnosed and started on some medications. Reading for me is something that is really quite different. And it's given me a new energy as I've moved forward with reading. So I'm coming to you today as someone who's practice reading a bit more recently in a new way, where I'm not having to reread sentences, pages and paragraphs over and over or reread articles over and over. But as someone who also has have had a lot of difficulty in reading at different times. So in thinking about those sorts of experiences, I wanted to start by talking a bit about myself as a reader, and both in graduate school and now as a faculty member. And so I have four big ideas here. The first is talking about building your stamina. And this is something that I borrow from my time when I was a first grade teacher. And we used to use this kind of program where we would talk about how you needed to build a young learners ability to sit and to read for longer periods of time. So we would start with just two minutes, two minutes of reading, and build up to having a little first grader who then is able to sit and read for 20 minutes. And this is something that I see as being really common and necessary for us in the world of academia, and learning to sit and read for long periods of time, or to pick up our reading and be interrupted by family members. But to come back to it in the same sort of way. And so in the same ways that we might build our stamina for working out, we need to do that too, for reading as well as for writing. The second sort of thing that I came into graduate school thinking about, and thanks to the wisdom of colleagues at Michigan State University who were farther along than I was in the program, as well as the wisdom of some of our faculty members who taught our initial pro seminars was to really not be afraid to divide and conquer our readings. So with a group of colleagues who are in my cohort, my first year at graduate school, we would take our readings for our Pro Seminar and each of us would really hone in on one particular reading, and then we would come together and we would share about those readings, having skimmed the other ones or maybe had more time to read some of them more closely than others. But it provided us a space to try out some of the ideas and you might want to talk about in class, to work through some of the questions you might have had in reading the different texts. But it also helped us to know that we didn't have to read every single word, which is something that I will come back to you throughout this sort of short presentation. Another thing that I think is really important that I definitely cried the first time my friend when Watanabe, who was a Michigan State student, and a bit more senior to me asked was, don't you the parts of an article, and I definitely didn't. So learning to deconstruct an article and identify that the parts that often exist, especially with an empirical work in qualitative research would be things like the abstract and the introduction and knowing how important those are to read really closely to give you a sense of what that pieces may be about, and then taking time to look at those different headings. And so those might be things related to the literature, review, the theoretical framework, the methods, the findings, and then moving forward to the discussion and conclusion. But knowing which parts of those you might want to hone in on to bolster your reading of that particular text or your understanding or to even just begin to understand if this is a piece that you really want to spend time thinking. So learning how to deconstruct an article is something that I talk about with my graduate students, as well as my undergraduate students in the various courses that I'm teaching. And if you're someone who's coming into graduate school or has been in graduate school and doesn't yet know how to recite those parts of an article don't feel bad I was I mentioned I definitely cried when she asked me because I felt frustrated that I didn't yet the fourth thing I have is that we have these reading rabbit holes that we can go down into and I think that reading rabbit holes can be really helpful. So for myself, I read everything by him Haas Dyson, he you and Karen Rowland really early on in my graduate school career as they're folks who are really engaged with ideas of qualitative research with critical lenses in thinking about children's play writing and literaciesAnd those are things I was really interested in. At the same time, I also went down other reading rabbit holes where I was then able to identify things that really weren't in my area were one of the things that I wanted to spend my focus and my time on. So I think that rabbit holes are great in terms of we can really come to know a researcher or an area very well, and know how those fit for us. But we can also use those opportunities to really think about the ways in which they maybe don't fit for us. And maybe we need to think differently about them in terms of thinking about myself now as a faculty member. And with some help from Carlson and Ashley, who are on the call and providing some additional prompts for how to go about this talk. One of the things that I think is really interesting is to think about how my reading has shifted. So as someone who is working often on multiple projects, my reading at this point is very much project driven. So I'm doing a lot of work right now in child radio, working with some middle grades, kids who are engaging in radio production themselves. And so really reading a ton about radio about podcasting about how that happens often at secondary and post secondary levels. But there's less about that for children. But that also means I'm reading in digital literacies. That means I'm reading in thinking about community based literacies. At other times, too, I'm also working on other projects that still relate to my dissertation. So I'm reading things about immigration, and I'm reading things related to the various methods that I use across these different projects. And so in many ways, I come to those readings with particular ideas about what it is I want to get out of them. So I do a lot of project based reading at this point that is a bit different than maybe in graduate school when I was reading both for coursework, as well as for my dissertations. I also read a lot in terms of maybe some of my stuff, if I'm stuck in my methods, I might go back to a really foundational text. That's also true for framing any theoretical framing that maybe I want to read additional empirical articles that have made use of that framing to see the ways in which they have applied it so that I can start to think about that for myself a little bit differently. I also do a lot of review based reading. And I say that both is someone who reviews for journals. So I'm an editor of curriculum inquiry and do a lot of reading for them, as well as people reviewing for various journals in qualitative research or in literacies in early childhood. And that's a great opportunity for me to keep up with what's new in the field. And at the same time, I'm to also engage in review of students work, my colleagues work as they're working to submit things as well. The last sort of thing I have here is inspiration seeking reading, which I think is something that I talked a lot about with my colleague John Wargo is thinking about, sometimes we just need to read something beautiful to help us get through the stuck points or think through our projects, and make sense of the words and work that we want to put forward ourselves. And so that's definitely something that I have been thinking a lot about, and try to incorporate into my everyday life if that's a book on Audible, or if that's like some poetry or some other short reading, or novels as well. So the next kind of thing I want to talk about is building our stack. So I've told you a bit about myself and my reading practices and how they've evolved. But thinking about how do we start to build our own stack. So I'm stealing a little bit from that old wedding adage of something old, something new, something borrowed, and something blue. But I'm putting Google in talking about things that are old, it's important for us to know like these foundational scholars and texts, and I put foundational in text because we know that there's a lot of inequities that have persisted in under representation of women, Junior Scholars, people of color, queer people, and so on. And so we need to be critical of foundational texts that of course, we do need to know them to some, in some respect, even if we're critiquing them, in terms of something new I BrowZine. So browsing on impress a text online BrowZine is a tool that you can do that you can connect it to your library and see articles that are actually not yet available, even on journal websites, but maybe they'll be published there. So that's a great way to pay attention to new articles, as well as following scholars on Twitter or following hashtags on Twitter following hashtags like a cite black women, just to help to bring yourself into conversation with newer pieces and different sorts of ways borrowed reading scholars and texts that are outside of your area. I think that's outside of your area of your little niche that is your dissertation work, but also maybe your specific field. And so I'm someone that is strongly in education, but I often borrow from writing Rhetoric and Composition scholars, I borrow from sound scholars who are involved in like ethnomusicology, or an anthropology in different sorts of ways. And those sorts of things have helped to make me think differently about my methods, but also about some of the work that I'm engaged in Googled, of course, we can set up our keywords, search things with keywords on Google Scholar, we can also set up different daily alerts reading his practice, I have here this image of this woman with headphones on but with music with books with the plant, so thinking about what it is that you need to be successful. How does this change based on what kind of reading you're doing when you're reading something theoretical? Is that different than reading something empirical? How, where do you need to be? What kinds of settings do you need to set up for yourself to find success in these sorts of moments? And I also think it's important that we have a plan for reading and a plan for how we're going to connect and recall the information. So that includes creating long and short term reading goals with wiggle room, but also developing a personally meaningful kind of system for collatingTax. So I just put up a made up little thing here in terms of planning, I think it's useful to create like a long term plan for your vaults semester or for the summer for your reading, as well as for your writing. And that might mean you're reading for coursework at the same time that you're doing things for your dissertation. But maybe you're incorporating reading in other ways in terms of listening to podcasts, watching lectures, or also reading those fun, beautiful books. As I mentioned, things like the library book on Audible is really great. At the same time, there's a ton of resources available for how you can connect this work and ways in which you can recall it to scholars here that offer a ton of different insights, our role, patto, Cecco, Vega, and just Calarco, whose book I have here, and it's really great. They talk about things using citation management systems using color coding, but I think the primary thing we want to think about as we're reading is what you're reading, how does it push you forward in terms of helping you with your argument, or maybe helping you to understand how your argument would be countered? And what can you do to help you in that way, for me, I'm not someone who uses a management system and that citation management system, but I have a notebook where I take all of my notes, and I organize things often related to projects. So you don't have to feel bad if you're not someone who color codes, or someone who doesn't use a citation management system. There's lots of ways in but there's tons of resources. I mean, it's really about finding out what works for you. So a few recommendations to close out and help us move beyond overwhelm. And some of these are borrowed from Jeff Calarco, and others. But the first is to read like a researcher. So when we're approaching our texts that we're reading, it's important that we bring our questions that maybe we have for a specific thing I want to know about radio for in particular, but perceiving those questions or like new answers, so coming with a research question to the piece that you're reading, the next thing is just to take the first step. So sometimes it's really hard for me to just get initiated on a task. So sometimes it's helpful to just read the first chapter or just the abstract, or maybe to read a book review before you actually read a book to get a better feel for it, and to make yourself more comfortable with it. The next thing is to make decisions, you have to decide where to focus your efforts. In times, we're not going to be able to read every word, I haven't read every word of every book behind me. Instead, I read really strategically in terms of reading it for chapter to find out what chapters I want to read or skimming articles and different sorts of ways to focus specifically on the frame at work, or specifically on the methods or specifically on the findings. It's also important for you to track what you read. As I mentioned, I jot notes in a notebook. Some people write annotated bibliographies, others write direct quotes that they might want to incorporate into a document. And then they use that later. A few other things we want to think about this guy right here has lots of distractions, it is important that we limit our distractions that we have around us. So pausing notifications, using things like Do Not Disturb on your phone or on your computer, finding time away from others, maybe taking a writing retreat, sitting somewhere new visiting a cafe, instead of staying just in your home, maybe partaking in a favorite treat, like treating yourself to coffee as a means to sit down and write. Another idea is to consider reading as writing, I really see these as recursive process practices. So we really need to treat them like that when we're spending time reading, we know it's going to push us forward in our writing. And when we're writing, we're always building from those things that we've read. And those are things that we shouldn't forget. The last thing is just to remember that you really need to evolve your practice. So you and your reading practice are not static. As I mentioned at the beginning, I've had a lot of things that have shifted my practices, interbreeding and the different experiences I've had, and the things that I've learned from others have really pushed me forward in these sorts of ways. So I encourage you to think about that for yourself as well. So I'll close there, I'm just offered that if you have any questions, comments, compliments, or suggestions, you can feel free to reach out to me on Twitter. And I'm very excited to hear from our other panelists today. Thank you. Carlson Coogler  18:29  Great. Thank you so much. That was wonderful. We're going to now move to Dr. Grayson Foster, who will be talking about writing. Dr. Guzman Foster  18:39   Thank you, Dr. Brownell, that was awesome. All right. So what I'm going to do today is I'm going to just share some tips, tricks and tips on how to get through with your how to really cope with your writing your dissertation. So the first thing and I do take note that institutions are different in what they do. But I really want to emphasize the importance of choosing a topic that you're passionate about, I believe, and I've seen with students who don't choose a topic that they're passionate about never finishing their abd they don't move on. But if it's something that you're passionate about, you're more likely to actually follow through with it and actually finish I hear different stories across the country about how students choose their topics. The one thing I want to encourage you to do is to not let anyone choose it for you. Again, this is your baby, your project. You choose what you're passionate about time. When you're writing your dissertation, you must be realistic. A lot of times the very first thing I ask my students when I meet with them is what is your timeline, and life happens. So you need to make sure you make room for those kinds of things. Also, reach out to your family to know what it's about to occur. You're doing your dissertation research. And writing goes along with that you're collecting data. And if you have a full time job or you're working talk to your employer to say this is about to happen in case any major projects are coming along so that we can manage your time better. I find that once students don't schedule a time to do their writing, they fall further behind, and then it takes them a little bit longer to actually finish. And not only that, they become discouraged and never pick up again. And so be realistic. And a little bit, I'm gonna talk about what you need to do as far as writing is concerned. But that time piece is so important, right every day as if it's an appointment, put it in your calendar. Also, if you're like, an age myself, but I didn't have a cell, I was doing my dissertation research. So what I would do without carry a little notebook in my purse, and wherever I was, whether I was in the waiting office, and my doctor, if I was waiting for someone that I was picking up, I would write anything that would come into my mind, I actually put that also on my nightstand because believe it or not, you dream about your dissertation, at least I did. And some of my students actually share that they do the same thing. So I put a notebook on my nightstand because I wake up with these thoughts about something an aha moment or some kind of something that I realized happen with data analysis. And I would write it down because believe it or not, I wouldn't remember the next day because of course, it happened while I was sleeping. But when I would pick up my notebook and see what I wrote, It makes total sense. And so that was one way also that I actually kept track of my thoughts. Because again, you're constantly thinking about your dissertation and you want to finish, you want to make sure it's great writing. But if you don't write every day, you're going to lose that passion and that motivation. And I think that students need to understand that it's important that you write every day, because if you go too long without writing, you may not want to pick up again, this is the one I really want to talk about, you need to silence your inner critic, all of us have that inner critic. And the idea is that you are at the point where you are because you worked hard, you are at the point that you are because you are a scholar, you are at the point where you are. So get rid of that inner critic that tells you Oh, you're never gonna finish or this is too much what am I get myself into silence that inner critic, it is so important that you do that. I know that's very hard to do, because I've been there myself. However, once I saw as my my inner critic being started to flow better, I started to find more motivation, more energy to actually finish my writing. Because you can't get discouraged when you read, you know, you receive comments from your committee or chair about revise and rewrite, know that it's not a personal attack on you. It's to help strengthen your writing, to help strengthen your study to make sure that you are able to demonstrate that you can actually do this. And you can, you wouldn't be at this point, if you couldn't. So make sure that you actually silence that inner critic chunking, which is a term I use sometimes when I was a K 12 teacher when you do things in different small parts. So I would do my chapter for small parts, I do my analysis and small parts, my conclusions, my findings, even the proposal piece, the first few chapters in small parts, and then put everything together at the very end. That worked for me may not work for you. But I highly recommend that you don't try to finish everything in one sitting. But basically try to do small parts every day. And that's where that little writing piece comes in work on one section one day work in another section another day. And the very end, you'll find that it's easier to put everything together because you've actually put the pieces and written the pieces. Now it's a matter of you putting together like a puzzle. And so working in small parts to me is one way to make sure that you don't get burned out that you don't get demotivated, it gives you fresh eyes every time you come back to another park the next day or the next week, and vice versa. This is something that I think is really hard for students to understand is that you're striving for progress, not perfection. Remember, this is your first time for many of you to actually do a research project or dissertation. And that doesn't mean that it can't be perfect. But I think many of us are perfectionist, and we tend to work towards that. But if you do that you're gonna burn yourself out. So it's about making progress, right and with your, hopefully with your charities, your advocate, that progress will be able to, you'll feel that progress, you'll see that progress. And at the very end, you'll see how much tremendous progress you've made. So remember that it's not about being perfect. It's about making progress for that final stage where you actually complete your dissertation and defend your dissertation. And that run is beautiful writing that you've actually completed on your own. Now, when I say on your own, that means you're writing it on your own, but you don't have to do this alone. I think too many times people and our students think they need to do this by themselves. No, you don't reach out to your peers, reach out to your chair, reach out to your committee members. You don't have to do this alone. It's okay to ask for feedback. It's okay to ask questions. It's okay to ask for help. Again, isolation, I think is really not a really good habit to have when you're writing, especially when you're writing your dissertation. Reach out to your peers. I know many of my students actually have partners that they're working with. And that seems to work really well because they keep each other motivated. They pump each other up. They give each other accolades. They also give each other constructive feedback, right because that feedback is very important, especially when it comes from your peers because I believe that our peers it's funny because I think that many times, peer teaching and peer alert learning is so much more stronger than myself doing it because I like to think of it as they're talking in student language versus faculty language. That makes sense. But I believe that our peers really are helpful. And again, reach out to your committee members, because that's what they're there are there, that's when they are there for. One thing I need to really explain is that you need to practice self compassion as well. This is not easy. Dissertation. Work takes time. dissertation writing takes time, you go through many different phases, you go through many different revisions, revisions, so it's easy to get discouraged. But when you do reach a point where you've made progress, reward yourself, do something nice for yourself, go get a pedicure, I don't know, go get a manicure, read a book that's not an academic book, go see a movie, hang out with your friend, call your mom, do something that is nice for yourself, because that's a reward that you've actually made progress and you deserve it. You can't continue to work. And if you don't ever do that, if you don't take care of yourself. And what will happen is you'll end up being frustrated, stressed, and you may actually hate your dissertation, which we hope that doesn't occur. One of the things that many people do, and I'm guilty of this as well is not for many While You Write tend to always want to go back and you make either color code and you run yourself, you have to go back and do proper citation. To save time, I would highly recommend that you actually do proper citation while you're writing so that way when you do defend your dissertation, and it's ready to go, and if you hire an editor, they'll have less work to do. And it'll be much more quicker to get your dissertation to come to the university so it can get published. Because what happens is sometimes, this is the last part they asked you to format, they asked you to do all the formatting correctly. And I don't know if everybody's APA but we do APA and then that takes time. And some people don't actually do it and believe it or not, they don't finish. And to me, that just seems like a just a lost cause. So if you can try to cite as you write because I think and format as you write because it does help save time at the end. Sometimes we think that this is going to be the best work that we're gonna ever do in a whole entire life. It's not our dissertation is not always our best work. It is a time where you can prove and demonstrate that you can actually do a research project. All of us who are overachievers, myself included perfectionist, myself included, have a hard time with this sometimes, but just know it is going to be great work, but it's not going to be your best. And that's okay. That's okay. Because guess what, as you're moving forward, and you finally get past this step more is to come more work is to come and more best work, several best works will come after your dissertation. You'll kill yourself with stress thinking that this has to be your best work. And then finally, I want to remind you guys and ladies, that you are scholars, you will not be here right now, if you are not a scholar, every student who enters my classroom are scholars don't let anyone ever take that away from you, you are a scholar, and you're going to do this reading, you're going to finish this reading. So remember a topic that you're passionate about. Write every day, do small parts, making appointments you're writing every day, keep a notebook or your phone or your nightstand so you can record anything. And then also don't do this alone. Reach out to others, whether it's your peers, or your chair or your committee members. Those are the tips that I have for you to actually finish your dissertation. If you find yourself demotivated, just not sure that you want to move forward. That's what your peers are there for. And that's what your chairs there for. Because guess what I know myself as a chair, I'm the biggest cheerleader for my students, and I advocate for them. But I'm also there for them. And space is life happens. Whatever happens, life happens to get them back on track. So those are my tips and tricks. I hope that you enjoy them. And let me know if you have any questions and reach out to me. Carlson Coogler  28:44  Great, thank you so much. Really wonderful, Doc. Now we're now going to move to Dr. Shelton, who will be talking about the dissertation and job search process.Dr. Shelton  28:55  As Carlson mentioned as part of my introduction, that I'm a first generation student. And so I want to bring that back up just because I want to emphasize that neither part of what I'm about to talk about was there's nothing intuitive about it. I always felt like maybe I was an idiot, or I was behind or whatever, because I didn't get certain things. And I would just I want to emphasize that whether you're first generation or not, there's nothing intuitive about the distribution or the job search. And if you don't know things that's natural and normal, and you need to not be embarrassed about finding out and so I'm going to talk about the two together first, Dr. Guzman Foster's presentation leads really nicely and it's an I think so for both the dissertation and the job talk. I do the job search. I do want to emphasize that you have options. I think a lot of times and academia there are defaults, and a lot of times because students don't know and are hesitant to ask, they don't know that there are choices and I'm gonna talk more about what that means in just a bit but you're in not stuck with a particular format or particular type of job trajectory. The other thing is for both a dissertation and for job searches to be really intentional and realistic for the intentionality, I'm really emphatic with my students, they need to make sure that there's not a lot of wasted motion doctoral programs can be very exhausting. And to waste a lot of motion is not a good use of your time, your energy, your resources, or your capacity. And then the trajectory as well. Like it's really important. I'll talk more about that too. But it's really important to be really honest with yourself about what you need to feel happy to feel like you've been successful and to be able to take care of yourself, and others you might be responsible for. And then the other thing for both the dissertation and the job search is finding faculty who support you. And I know that a number of you have those people, but some of you don't. And it's really important that you have access to faculty who are committed to help him make sure that you're okay that you're supported, that if you ask questions that you worry are dumb, they're going to be there to help provide information and feedback and support so that you realize like number one, I'm not dumb. But number two, here's the next step. Or here's what you need to understand. I remember very vividly sitting with my advisor, and I was Peters Samgorinsky, at the University of Georgia. And I was like, Peter, I don't know what the hell I'm doing. And he's like, Yeah, nobody does. And that was simultaneously horrifying and comforting. But it took a lot to say to him, I didn't know what I was doing. And so I just want to really emphasize that there are choices, there are options, there are ways to make this process, both processes, dissertation and job search work well, for you. There's other parts of it, you don't have a lot of control over but these are things that you do have control over. And so I'm gonna I'm going to emphasize theseFor dissertations. I'm going to talk through each of these. And then if there's more information that you want in any particular one, when we get to the q&a Certainly asked. So the first thing about dissertations is that there's more than two formats, a lot of institutions like it's either the five chapter dissertation or nothing. And then other institutions think that they're really progressive, because they have the five chapter dissertation and the three article option. Those are both great options. So those are certainly formats that have served many people well. But there's a lot of other ways to approach dissertations too. And you need to really think about if the five chapter dissertation has done a great deal of sense for you, if the three chapter or the three article, dissertation doesn't seem to be a good alignment, there's other options. And what's really important is that a lot of institutions, especially us based public institutions, previous dissertations that have been successfully defended are often public domain. And which means that you can access those for free. And there's been a range of dissertations that have for example, made like national news and so on a student at Georgia whose dissertation was a fashion show, but was a PhD in literacy, a student at Clemson whose whose dissertation was a rap album, we've had students here at Alabama who have done dissertations that involve, for example, like soundscapes and an art gallery walkthroughs as part of their research methodology, PhD, and in each moment, it was really appropriate for that particular student that they do their dissertation in an unconventional way. And so I really just I want to emphasize, if your faculty members seem I don't know how to do that, I don't know what that looks like. It's okay to provide them resources. But it's also okay to reach out to various communities. There's a lot of online communities on various social media platforms, for example, but to understand that the five chapter dissertation and the three article dissertation are not the only ways that one can dissertate Sometimes other approaches just make better sense for you.The other thing is, when you're getting ready to do your dissertation, you need to really think about what is the plan post dissertation because one of the ways that you are intentional about the format of your dissertation is being intentional about what your dissertation supposed to accomplish for you. I will say that when I was a doc student, I elected to do the three articles dissertation, I could, I think I would have had the support to have done whatever I ultimately elected to do, so long as I was able to make it make sense. But I decided I wanted to do the three article because I wanted to have articles ready to send out because my intention was to get a research methodology job, which nearly always as is that a research intensive institution. So I knew that publication was going to be really important for my future success. But what that means is my dissertation format aligned with my goals and my trajectory for myself. And so you need to really think about like how what I'm going to do in my dissertation going to help me with post dissertation, because if you're just thinking about the dissertation as I gotta get it done, whatever. I've seen, a lot of people have to do a lot of just really tedious and exhausting work to try to then rip the scenes out of the dissertation to make it be something that is more useful for them. Had they just chosen a different format that was more aligned with their goals. Everything would have been better correlated. Another thing is and this is gonna sound really silly to some of you, but I'm being really sincere about it. Does your dissertation feel good to you? Does it feel good for you? Because this is a pretty big commitment. In nearly all cases, there's a lot of data collection, there's a lot of data analysis in most cases, and there's a lot of writing. And if you're miserable for the entirety of the time that you're working on your dissertation, that's not a great place to be. That's not a healthy place to be. And I also want to really emphasize it's not a normal place to be, I feel like academia does this really phenomenal job of normalizing stress, normalizing exhaustion, normalizing anxiety, and it doesn't have to be that way. Your dissertation should be something where ideally you feel empowered, you feel excited, and that's not going to necessarily be the case all the time. Because we all get tired, we all get frustrated, but the dissertation overall should feel good. And if it doesn't, what what are the issues that are getting in the way of it feeling right? If you're going like a good fit, I feel like it's something that's helping you to feel successful and whatever those issues are, like, are they resolvable? Are they like, are they resolvable by virtue of maybe renegotiating some aspects of the situation format? Are they resolvable? Maybe I'm pulling in like a new faculty member to be a committee member to help support other aspects that the other committee members aren't not are not super aware of? or understand. If they're not resolvable? Why are they not resolvable? And to what degree can you live with those because I do recognize that some doctoral students don't have a lot of say in control. But I do think that it's really important as much as possible. And this goes back to the points earlier about taking care of yourself, making sure that your dissertation is not something that is just you just feel like it's beating you down.Related to that, be realistic, and be kind to yourself, I have seen students have this attitude of, I'm going to do all these things. I'm going to get all this done, and I'm going to write my dissertation over spring break. I'm not going to say it's not possible, I am going to say that it's not necessarily realistic. I mean, it's certainly not being kind to yourself. And so when faculty members tell you things like maybe you should revisit your timeframe, maybe you should revisit the plan that you have, a lot of times they're not doing that to undermine you. They're not doing that to try to throw obstacles in your way. Sometimes it's because they're trying to help you do yourself a favor. And so be realistic, how long, for example, it takes for you to write a course paper, a dissertation is a different level of that. And so whatever that course paper timetable is, you need to multiply that several times over and think about how can I make sure that what I'm doing again, feels good. Another thing I'm going to add, it always really frustrated me when I was a doc student, when people would treat the dissertation like it was some sort of like mythological beast that had to be endured and slayed. Everybody that gets a doctoral degree generally knows that dissertation is coming at the end. And so don't treat it like it's some kind of dragon that you have to pass through the cave and avoid the gaping jaws of the beast. It's an expected part of the journey. And if you work to be intentional, it can be really enjoyable. In many moments. I will say as a side note that for my dissertation, when I started writing it, collecting the data was great, I got to interact with participants that were really wonderful and amazing. analyzing the data was a lot of work. But it also was great, because I felt like I was really learning things. But when I started writing it, I had a whole new perspective and a whole new appreciation for just how amazing my participants were. And it really made me sad that some of my peers just it just felt like they were just surviving and enduring their dissertation. And it didn't need to be that way. And sometimes faculty feed into that, because a lot of times faculty unfortunately participate. And this idea that academia needs to be a you need to be exhausted, you need to be stressed out, you need to be busy. And so try to surround yourself with people that support you approaching this process in healthy, sustainable and positive ways. You've got to do it. So do it in a way that makes sense and is sensible, and is kind your committee, their job should be earlier, the previous speaker talked about, I'm a student's best cheerleader, your committee should be there to make you better, and one of their jobs and making you better. And this was referenced, I think in both of the previous talks, but definitely the writing one. They're going to provide you feedback. And I think sometimes that feels like it's just criticism, like I did everything wrong and didn't do everything right. But their job, they're allocating a lot of energy and time and expertise, and trying to give you constructive feedback to make you better. No committee should just give you a blank check and be like, Oh, this is great. You just do whatever you want to do. It's great. And I've seen that happen. I've seen students construct committees because they knew that this was the path of least resistance. That's not a great use of your time. It's not a great use of your knowledge. It's not a great use of your doctoral journey, to just basically be given this free pathway to completion that's not honoring the process that you've engaged and it's not honoring at the end you putting Doctor in front of your name. Conversely, however, faculty shouldn't create these obstacle courses they shouldn't constantly be obstructionist. In terms of you moving forward, and so making sure that you have you select your committee in nearly all cases, making sure that when you choose those people, you're choosing people that are they're prepared to, in fact, be your cheerleaders to tell it to give you potentially hard feedback, but also being prepared to help guide you through what to do with that feedback. And the last thing, and this is gonna sound really silly. But do you make sure your committee members can actually work together, there's a lot of personalities in academia, I'm sure you have all found that to be the case. And there are sometimes instances where faculty members are just paradigmatically, opposed like that, just their understanding of how data gets analyzed how findings get written up, they're just they're completely, they're completely incongruent. And that's not necessarily useful for you. And so make sure when you're building this committee of cheerleaders and support system, that they're also willing and able to support one another, it makes your experience so much easier. And these are things that by and large, I think you have control over there's a lot of aspects that dissertation you don't necessarily have a lot of control over. But these are things that to some degree to differing degrees, depending on where you are, you do have some say in most of these aspects of it.For the for the job market, the job market could just about be a full time job. I was stunned when I went on the job market, just how much time being on the job market took, it was shocking to me, frankly. And most of the time, when you're on the job market, you're also like deserting, you're getting ready to defend etc. And so it's a lot. And so I think it's useful for you to be prepared for the fact that you're going to have to carve some space and energy and time out to apply for jobs. So relative to you applying for jobs. First and foremost, there's more out there than just research intensive and teaching intensive jobs. The university that I went to was a research intensive institution and the department that I graduated from was a very publish or perish culture. And the effect of that was that as doctoral students, we were basically raised, if you will, to understand that the purpose of a PhD was solely to seek tenure track research intensive jobs, ultimately. And finally, that's what I decided that I wanted for a range of reasons. But at the beginning, I didn't feel like I had any choice. And it wasn't until I was probably in year three or four that I realized hold out like, this isn't what I have to do. Because that expectation was so normalized that it felt like it was the only choice. There are a range of different kinds of positions out there. I have friends, I have a friend who sought out positions specifically at small liberal arts colleges, because she wanted that connectedness. She wanted that really small student body. She wanted the connectedness between faculty, she wanted to feel like the institution was really knitted into the community where it was situated, she is thriving there. Because she was really thoughtful about what she needed to be happy and successful post PhD. Another friend knew that she loved teaching she wanted to teach, that's what she wanted to do. So that's what she looked for. In job posts, she wanted to be a faculty member, there are other people that I came from a K 12 classroom too. And I renew my teaching certificate before I graduated as a just in case. But there were a number of people that elected that they wanted to go back into a k two o'clock classroom, that was their choice. And they again, love it. They're delighted there. And there was really a culture in the department that sought to make them feel like they had failed somehow, by pursuing the very trajectory that they had, that they were after. And so just be really aware of the fact that you have choices, you have options, whatever the default, whatever the assumption is at your university, in your department in your program, you actually you have some choices, and you don't have to default to those just because other if you're going to the doctor for your name, other people shouldn't get to tell you what to do with your life.The other thing is be really honest with yourself about what's sustainable for success. And I'm going to give you an example of this. I had a friend, I have a friend, I don't know why I'm using past tense. I have a friend when we were doctoral students, again, it was very publisher perish culture. So we're all publishing our little hearts out not knowing what we're doing, frankly. And it made her miserable. She hated to have to publish, but then she because of the culture, and that department saw research intensive jobs. And so then she landed in a tenure track job where she was expected to publish extensively. And she's been miserable. And I frankly worry about her regularly because I wonder what would it have been like? Had you felt like you had choices? What would it have been like had you better aligned, where you landed as a faculty member with what gave you joy, what you felt like you were really good at versus what you felt like you had to do and so be really honest, if you really enjoy the research, that's great. Know that about yourself if you find teaching tedious and annoying. Know that about yourself. If teaching is what gives you joy. That's where you find yourself putting energy and time know that about yourself. If you know that you don't want to have a part in higher education know that about yourself.I do want to be really honest and say there are fewer tenure track jobs every year and more more universities and colleges post clinical positions and research based positions, the University of Alabama has started to have more and more assistant research professor positions, for example. And that's not scary. It's just real. Because, again, this is an opportunity for you to be really honest with yourself. There's I have a couple of colleagues here, who are assistant research professors, and will eventually move into being Associate Research professors. That was their jam, they want to do research, they want to pursue grants, they want to pursue fellowships, they didn't want to allocate a ton of time to teaching and teaching, preparation, and so on. So that shift in the market was really useful for them. And so know that about yourself, but also just have a realistic notion of what the market looks like, this year has looked really good relative to quality and your track jobs, frankly, last year, not good at all. Who knows, I went to the job market two years, the first year was really awful. It was the great recession. And there were two jobs that whole year. And both of them really wanted like advanced people. And as a doc student, I was not that person next year was there are also non academic jobs that you can keep in mind you can be aware of there are tons of government agencies or tons of nonprofits that are very interested in PhDs and interested in the skill sets a PhD earnings earners have and so be aware of the fact that you don't have to go into academia, nor do you have to go into some facet of education. For example, this is a qualitative research SIG sponsored event. And so a lot of you presumably are interested in research, there's lots of places to value those skill sets. And frankly, some of them pay better than higher education, I would also recommend that if you are early in your doctoral journey, I know that initially, we would have a listserv, and there would be all kinds of like job posts that would be sent out and I'd be like, I'm in my first year delete, I realized after the fact, it really is useful to look at them just to have a notion of what people are asking for, to have a notion of what jobs are out there. Because it was really like, once I started to pay attention to them, I realized, like, you can look at a job post to be like, Oh, that's so cool, I want that or I don't want that job at all ever. And that tells you something about yourself. And it tells you something about what you need to do relative to your pathway to make yourself competitive for some of those jobs. And related to that, when you're looking at the job posts. If you're close to the finish line, use your research or skills that have gotten you to the point where you're at the finish line and like really examine them really look at what they're asking for. And so to that effect, applying for jobs, I only have one more slide for this one. When you're applying for jobs, there is always a required section, or a mandatory section pay attention to that because that is not suggested. Typically, those required elements are actually required, by law, required by accreditation standards, whatever. But if you look at that job posting, there's required thing that you don't meet, you're almost certainly not going to be competitive for that job. We had an assistant professor of qualitative research job here at the university. One of the required aspects was, whoever replied have at least 18 hours in qualitative research methodology coursework, and we weeded out probably 60% of the applicants because they didn't meet that requirement. And that wasn't something we had any control over that was required. And so pay attention to what they say is required because you actually do need to be able to check those things off. Research the institution find out what it's like what what is an institution? What are they about? What are their missions? Were their visions? They aligned with yours? Does this seem like a play? Like, are you excited? You're gonna have to probably live in this place. Is it exciting to live in this place? Or does it make you potentially miserable? Research them use the skills that have gotten you through your doctoral journey research them? Look at who they've recently hired and or who they recently tenure? Are the lots of people leaving and people seem really happy and successful? Are people staying for long periods of time? What are the people who recently got hired? What are their meters look like beforehand? People who recently got tenure, what are their views look like? It gives you a notion of what does it mean to be successful in this place relative to getting hired and then being able to stay?When you are when you're like applying for this job I'm applying for this job is the jam. It's awesome. Write a letter for that job generic cover letters for job for academic jobs, you're not going to work, it's going to get you tossed out. You need to pay attention to what the job post says and incorporates some of that language and acknowledged some aspects of what they're asking for in that cover letter. If you want to actually move into potentially having an interview to get an interview. There's really standard interview questions that are pretty typical for most academic jobs, things like why do you want to work here at this institution? What about the what about this job excites you? If they're research intensive, they're gonna ask you questions about your research trajectory, with their teaching intensive, they're gonna ask you questions about like your teaching experience, and so on. A lot of the job interview questions that are fairly that you would expect are actually pretty typical, especially at the preliminary interview stage. And so prepare for those do you get a campus visit even if it's virtual these days? Practice before you go especially like your either your job talk and or teaching demonstration depending on what they're asking of you and do it in front of other people get feedback from them. My first research job talk practice was awful. But it was really useful to hear myself say it and know that I sucked because then I could get feedback and make it better. And then essentially, because it's cliche, but you're interviewing them to, I interviewed for and had a campus visits were an institution that it was very clear to me like I was gonna be super miserable in that space, and that you need to be aware of those things when you need to decide like, am I going to be okay with being miserable here for whatever amount of time? Or is this just not a place for me. And then the other thing is, there's aspects of the job search and the job hiring process in academia that you have no control over. And a lot of times, it's not personal, it's hard not to take it personally. But when they didn't want me, they didn't hire me, whatever. But sometimes they need a very specific skill, they need a very specific complimentary person to like another person that's there. It's not actually about you, and you don't have any control over that you can't like change the very nature of who you are and your scholarship to accommodate this institution. You wouldn't want to do that anyway. And so sometimes, if you don't get an interview, if you don't get a campus visit, if you don't get the job, it's not actually anything that you did. It's just that you weren't the right fit. And it's hard to hear that, but it's true. I've seen it on both sides as both the job candidate and as someone who's been a search committee chair and search committee member, and as somebody who's helped to negotiate hiring, and then actually, that was my last slide. I thought I had another one. So that those are mine. That's my overview. And as the others had said, I'm very happy to take questions and be as honest as I can possibly be.Carlson Coogler  51:08  Great. Thank you so much, Dr. Shelton. Okay, so we are going to move to the question and answer portion. And please, if everyone will, please put your questions in the chat as a reminder, then the committee members will be pulling those and we will ask them to our participants. And also I am going to go ahead and put in the chat, we have a quick little first our email if you want to get in contact with us, if you don't want to to our listservs. And also a quick little forums, you can give us some feedback on this event. And you know, what topics you might want to hear about in the future, that sort of thing. So if you would please fill that out after at the end of this meeting? That will be awesome. Okay, our first question. And again, it's panel so anyone can answer. What do you wish you spent more time on as a person professionally, and as a junior academic, like professionally, while you are pursuing your PhD, Dr. Shelton  51:55  I think I wish that I had spent more time taking courses and other disciplines, it's really easy to put yourself into a silo as a doctoral student, because it's very, it's very much a degree of like, milestones seven inches wide. That's how it's designed to work. But like looking back, I realized, like, there were moments when I could have taken a class like in a different department or in a different college. And I really, I think that I don't think it would have changed my trajectory in terms of where I landed. But I think it potentially would have offered me new ways of thinking, new ways of considering research and so on. And so that's one thing that I do regret as a doc student that I wish I had done. Dr. Brownel  52:31  I think that one of the things that I heard maybe later in my doctoral career that I wish I would have known in years like one and two more so I guess, but I think learning how to cautiously say no, and no thank you to things while also keeping doors open. And I think that's true, both in terms of opportunities to be on panels or to engage in like lots of different activities. But I think learning how to say no, early on is a useful thing, especially as I think my co panelists mentioned, like you're working towards this goal of your dissertation is not the end of your career, but like hopefully a launch pad for the rest of your career. And so making sure that you do get an array of like experiences, but making sure that those experiences are things that you're really committed to, and that will really push your work, your thinking, your connections, your network and your well being in useful ways. Because sometimes you get a little stretch and overwhelmed because we feel like we have to do everything in graduate school. Dr. Shelton  53:30  I'm going to add another thing real quick, if that's okay, if you will allow me the lot like the other thing that I wish I had known early on, was it no one knows what they're doing. I feel like I like the entirety of my first year of my doctoral experience. I felt like other people knew what was happening. Other people knew what was going on. Like, they knew all this terminology. They knew all these theorists, they're using all these big words. And as I progressed through my doctoral degree, I realized like, they didn't know anything, they didn't they had vocabulary to throw around to make it sound like they knew stuff. But like they didn't know anything, either. And, and so like, just recognizing that like the whole imposter syndrome, people that people talk about, it's real, but like, You're not an idiot. I think that's I think what I wish I had realized I wasn't dumb. I wasn't behind. I just wasn't participating in this facade, and this fronting that people would like often do.Dr. Brownel  54:19  I'm gonna jump back in again, I'm really sorry, Carlson, because I'm gonna throw this out because similar to Stephanie, I feel those sorts of ways. But I think that this book is really great. Just Clark, this book, which is a field guide to grad school, which talks about like the hidden curriculum of graduate school, because there's a lot of that that's true both for Professor Orient, but especially in graduate sc

In this episode, Jessica Van Cleave (QR SIG Chair),  Alexandra Panos (Program Co-chair), and Cassie Quigley (Program Co-Chair) preview the Qualitative Research SIG's program for the AERA 2022 conference. They share about the business meeting, the conference hybrid format, tips for having a successful conference, and much more. Below are helpful conference links and the transcript of the conversation.  QR SIG AERA 2022 Program in Google Doc form: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tP3sxCO91cc-qGYpw876t8adf1L_K1fy0cA2WsrP0DA/editAERA video training for presenters: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKfPWsLcI0cJessica Van Cleave  0:20  Welcome to qualitative conversations the podcast of the qualitative research Special Interest Group at AERA. I'm Jessica Van Cleave, the chair of the QR SIG, and I'm happy to be joined today by Cassie Quigley and Alex Panos, our program co-chairs. In this episode, we preview the QR SIG's program for the 2022 AERA annual meeting, discuss what members can expect from the hybrid format, and highlight opportunities to connect for QRC graduate students and members. Dr. Cassie Quigley is an associate professor of science education and Chair in the Department of teaching, learning and leading at the School of Education at the University of Pittsburgh. She received her doctorate doctorate in Curriculum and Instruction at Indiana University in 2010. Dr. Quigley's his expertise in qualitative research is focused on methodologies that center the participants such as community based methodologies, using data collection methods such as photo methods. In the past 11 years, she has published over 50 articles and book chapters focused on these methods, including in journals such as the International Journal of qualitative studies and education, qualitative inquiry, the Journal of mixed methods research. She also co authored a book on STEAM education titled An educators guide to STEAM education, which is published by teachers college press. She has presented her qualitative work at numerous conferences both nationally and internationally. Additionally, she serves as a program co chair of the American Educational Research Association's Qualitative Research Special Interest Group. She teaches qualitative research methodology courses on topics such as participatory action, research, validity and reliability for qualitative work and ethics around educational research. Cassie is completing her three year term as program co chair this year, and she's done an incredible job during this unusual and ever changing time for eight era and the annual meeting. I'm so grateful for her service and dedication and putting together meaningful programs over the past three years and she will be missed on the executive committee. Alexandra Panos is an assistant professor of literacy studies and affiliate faculty and measurement and research in the College of Education at the University of South Florida. She earned her doctorate in literacy, language and culture education with a minor in inquiry methodology at Indiana University Bloomington in 2018. Dr. Panos takes an interdisciplinary stance in her work as a critical qualitative methodologist and grounds her theoretical methodological and empirical work. In her substantive field of literacy studies. She has published numerous articles and book chapters that focus on the critical environmental and spatial dimensions of qualitative methodologies of literacy studies. Most recently, she has served as senior guest editor on a special issue focusing on the spatial dimensions have taken for granted qualitative research practices related to masking and anonymization published in the International Journal of qualitative studies and education. We are fortunate to have Alex remain as a program co chair one more year to complete her three year term after the 2023 annual meeting. So what we wanted to start by talking about is the fact that the annual meeting this year is hybrid. And this is the first time that AERA has has held the meeting in hybrid format. So how has that impacted the program? And what can attendees expect? Um, overall, that means that some of our sessions are going to be in person, and some of them are going to be virtual. And the virtual sessions are going to be accessible through Passable, which is the platform that Ara has hired this year and contracted with to provide the virtual conference experience. The in person sessions are going to look just like in person sessions have always looked at AERA. And so members can anticipate either attending sessions if they have registered for the in person or place based meeting, or I'm logging on to the Passable platform and attending via zoom, kind of similar platform. It's kind of zoom embedded within passable in order to access the virtual sessions. And then as happened last year, poster presentations are going to be provided in the virtual gallery that will be accessible both through the passable platform and the eight year website in our virtual gallery. Alexandra Panos  4:41  One thing to add to that, Jessica, sorry, I cut you off. I was just going to add that the play space participants can access the virtual platform space so for them it really is hybrid. But if you're a virtual, you can't access all playspace sessions. There are some that will be made available and streamed live through passable as well.Jessica Van Cleave  5:08  That's right, Alex. Yeah. So So depending on how you register, you're going to have access to different types of sessions. If you are in the playspace session, you'll have access to all of the various sessions. So I'm Cassie, can you give us an overview of the QR sync program? How many sessions there are and what kind of topics that attendees can expect to find?Cassie Quigley  5:30  Yeah, absolutely. We're really excited. And thank you all for your, you know, your work in the QR SIG. We will have seven in person paper or symposium sessions, we will have four virtual sessions that are paper or symposium sessions, one virtual business meeting, so hope to see you there and one in person mentoring session. So for the mentoring session, a folks who are participating have already received that information. And this is a closed session. But if you're interested in learning more, or joining this session next year, this is an annual event and you can contact them mentoring committee chair, Kelly Guyette. We have other exciting opportunities for mentorship as well, including mentor mentee office hours, we're so fortunate to have so many committed mentors, we thank them for their time and service to the QR SIG. And, Alex, do you want to just talk to us a little bit about the process for reviewing and accepting submissions? And what kind of things we tend to take into account as we're doing this work?Alexandra Panos  6:38  Yeah, definitely. Cuz he, um, so every year, the call goes out after after the conference. And then as program coaches, we wait for submissions, and look forward to receiving them. When we get submissions through the platform. We review each submission to be sure that they're complete, that they are a good fit for our SIG that there aren't any anonymization issues with those. And then we go on to invite reviewers who have expertise in the area of each proposal. So we've read each proposal, we invite reviewers to join us and thinking about those and give us their expert feedback. This is one of the reasons why we so value our SIG member reviewers, you are so essential to this process. I don't think Cassie and I could explain that enough. If you want to review in the future. Just a quick note, it's really helpful to indicate your areas of expertise using the keyword feature when you sign up to review. Because after we get the submissions when we review them, we make matches based on folks expertise. And once those reviews are returned, after a lot of hard work by reviewers, we carefully go through them looking at both the quantitative and qualitative feedback that each reviewer provides to determine which papers to accept. This year, we had fewer places, fewer allocated sessions and papers than we have in past year. So we definitely had to make a lot of difficult decisions. But as we process all the information we have available, we really take into account the reviews of these of the experts we invite to join us in this process, which includes three reviewers and one graduate student reviewer. And another thing about the system: how we access things. So we work on that back end system of AERA, which please sign up to review next year using that system. But it's a little different than the actual access to the conference system. So Jessica, I know you've been attending a lot of trainings on this. I wonder if you can share a little bit about how members can access the sessions that they want to attend through the political platform.Jessica Van Cleave  8:57  Yeah, absolutely. Alex, thank you. So if you are in San Diego, then the way that you attend sessions that are placed based in San Diego is you just go to them. So that is the easy part. Right? That's what we're used to doing. That is what's familiar back in the olden days of 2019. That is how we used to attend AERA, that option is still available and it's fantastic. So, if you have registered for the place based session, then that is how you will attend in person sessions. Now if you are a virtual registrant, you cannot attend to those playspace sessions. AERA is not planning to stream or record place-based sessions except for a select few as Alex mentioned earlier, like the Presidential sessions and things like that. Otherwise, the in person face to face playspace sessions are only accessible by those who are in San Diego attending the conference. If you are in San Diego, you can also attend the virtual sessions are obviously if you're a virtual registered, then you'll be attending those virtual sessions as well or presenting in that platform. And the way that you will access those sessions is through the passable platform. So, invitations we have been told should be going out the week of March 28. Once you get an invitation to the passable platform, you will create a profile. And from that platform, you'll be able to view your own presentations, add items to your schedule and create your your serve AERA personalized experience through that platform. You must register for the meeting to gain access either as a presenter or as a participant, we've been told that there are some things in place that make it so that those virtual sessions can only be accessed through the platform. And then within the platform, they host a zoom. So that will look familiar. Accessing virtual sessions will look like the kinds of virtual sessions we've been accessing and hosting ourselves for the last couple of years. So all of the the interfaces interactions, and what it looks like will be very familiar to us. And that same opportunity to share your screen and use presentation tools and software that you can use in zoom will be available through passable. So AERA has a lot of additional information, as well as specific trainings both for presenters and exhibitors and chairs that can be found on their website. And we'll include some links in the description to the podcast so that you can access those directly. If you have some, some specific questions, or you want to go through the process and see what it looks like prior to getting your invitation. AERA has also told us that based on those trainings and the questions that were asked during the sessions, they're putting together an FAQ to support members in accessing. And again, virtual sessions can be accessed by registrants who are placed based or virtual. And except for key sessions in person sessions can only be accessed for members who are registered for the in person meeting and they won't be streamed. So that's that's sort of how we can get there. We'll be finding out more information. And once the platform launches, and we receive those invitations, we'll be working on putting together some some access and information for our members to that we'll be sending out through the listserv. So I'm one of the things that we do at the annual meeting, in addition to our content sessions, is our business meeting. Cassie, can you talk to us a little bit about what members can expect if they attend the business meeting?Amy Stich  12:42  Yeah, we're really excited for the business meeting. And that business meetings on Saturday, April 23, and it will begin at 6pm. Pacific Time, the agenda will include a welcome from our president and then moving on to acknowledgement for for the work. And then we move into some committee and activity reports from our various committees, which is just a really nice way to kind of learn more about the QR SIG. And also here, what we've been doing over the last year. Then we have the Outstanding Dissertation reward award. And then the Egon G Guba. Award, we will announce as well. And we will end right around seven just after 7pm Pacific Time, you do not need to register for the business meeting. It is open to all members. And this will be a virtual event which so then it's open to both people who are in person in San Diego and have registered for the virtual events. So we're really looking forward to seeing you all there. It's a wonderful event to learn ways to get involved. And also just learn more about the work that we've been doing over the last year. So we're really looking forward to seeing you all there. Um, Alex, what suggestions do you have for members who might be curious about ways to navigate AERA program and take advantage of our exciting sessions and I'm thinking particularly if I'm a new member to the QR SIG, or this is the first time I'm attending AERA can be a little overwhelming.Unknown Speaker  14:22  Oh my goodness. Yes, Ara is a very large space with more sessions than it's possible to imagine sometimes it feels like so one of the ways that's really helpful, and why I love being a member of the QR SIG or other units in AERA is that it can create. If you take a lens of a sig or a division as a unit. To navigate AERA you have an ability to create a more personalized program based on your areas of interest and expertise. The kinds of scholarly conversations you want to be a part of. So when you're in the, the program itself, when you log into all academic or into the patible program, there should be searchable tools for you. So you can search by someone's name, like you really want to see a specific scholar and you want to talk to that person. But you can also search by unit. And when you search by unit, you have opportunities to search by SIG or by division. And so we of course, recommend that you go check out the QR SIG, and its program but you can also search and other units. So for us qualitative, folks, division D is another wonderful place to look because those are also all methodology conversations over there. And they have lots of qualitative conversations to be had there. So I just always recommend that you really think about the scholarly conversations you want to be a part of, and you find ways to streamline your exploration in in that way. But I think becoming a member of a SIG means that you are already like kind of like aware of things that are happening and you are trying to be a part of that scholarly conversation in a particular area, such as our area of qualitative research. So Jessica, will you share a little bit about how folks might join us in the QR SIG? Jessica Van Cleave  16:29  Absolutely, yeah. So to become a member of the QR SIG, and obviously, we hope all of our listeners are either existing members or will soon join us. When you get your Ara member membership or renew, you have the opportunity to select divisions and sigs that you want to be a part of. So if you go to that very, very, very long listing of SIGs and scroll down to Q and select qualitative research special interest group, you're a member. So you add that at the time of your initial membership or at the time of your renewal. And you can actually go back and add memberships to divisions and SIGs. If later on you decide that this is really a community of scholars that you want to be a part of, you don't have to wait until the next year you can join the QR SIG or any SIG at any time. For us and the QR SIG. We have an active listserv. So one of the member, one of the benefits of becoming a member is that you will receive emails periodic periodically that are specific to our membership. Those kinds of emails to the listserv include opportunities for connecting with other members. They include mentorship opportunities, publication opportunities, workshop, workshops, ideas, or invitations to submit to our newsletter and other kinds of things, calls for special issues related to qualitative research. We often have job opportunities, and interesting ways to connect and really become part of our community to join le

In this episode, Amy Stich interviews Kathy Roulston on interviewing in qualitative research. This conversation is great for both beginners and advanced researchers. The following is a transcript of the conversation. Amy Stich  0:11  Hello, everyone. Welcome to qualitative conversations Podcast Series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American Educational Research Association. I'm Amy Stich and associate professor at the McBee institute of higher education at the University of Georgia and affiliated faculty with the qualitative research program here at UGA as well. I also currently serve as the CO-editor of the six newsletter with one of our students here at the Institute Erin Leach as a guest host today I'll be interviewing Dr. Kathy Roulston on interviewing. Dr. Roulston is a professor in the qualitative research program at the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia. Her research interests include qualitative research methods, specifically qualitative interviewing and analysis of talk in interaction. Her most recent books include interviewing a guide to theory and practice. That's published with sage just coming out in 2022. And Exploring the Archives A Beginner's Guide for Qualitative Researchers co authored with Kathleen de Morais, and published by Myers education press. Outside work Kathy enjoys working with fiber and textiles, and exploring the creative pleasure of spinning hand dyeing and weaving. Dr. Roulston thanks so much for joining us to discuss a topic that all of our qualitative listeners will very likely know at least a little something about an interviewing may even be something that some of our more experienced listeners may at times take for granted as an all too familiar tool for data collection, rather than a method that provokes very meaningful, often critical methodological questions that I know you're going to talk about today. So why don't we just start by you telling us a little bit about your scholarly interests and interviewing and how you got started?Kathy Roulston  1:57  Thank you, Amy, for that lovely introduction. So I first became interested in the methodological aspects of interviewing when I was doing my doctoral studies at the University of Queensland in the 1990s. I had conducted quite a few qualitative interviews prior to that as part of my master's degree in the early 90s. But when I did those interviews, I really saw them as a transparent means for gaining information about the world. So when I was doing my doctoral studies, I was learning about ethno methodological approaches to analysis from Dr. Carolyn Baker. And I took a very puzzling excerpt from an interview that I had conducted in my earlier study, and I reanalyzed it. And then this analysis helped me to get a better understanding of the performance of work that goes into the construction of interview data, in the ways that interviewers and interviewees produce interview data together, and then also how, as a researcher, it's possible to cut and categorize the interview transcripts in a way that can generate findings that can actually distort the ways in which the talk was produced. So I think there's quite a lot of writing about that now. But Dorothy Smith wrote an article back in the early 70s, called theorizing as etiology. And I used that to think about how coding based approaches to data analysis can hide how researchers contribute to the generation of interview accounts. And, of course, I've done methodological work on research interviews since that time, and I still am very intrigued by how research interviews get done.Amy Stich  3:54  It's so interesting. And that's a really lovely transition into some of those deeper methodological or substantive questions surrounding interviewing. Can you talk to us about some of the recent developments in interviewing?Kathy Roulston  4:08  Yeah, thanks. Thank you, Amy. So, over the last couple of years, I've been trying to keep up with new developments in interviewing. And I have to say there's an incredible range of innovations that qualitative researchers can use to inform their work. If you look at the methodological literature, interviewing history of any interviewing historically, you'll find that some of the strategies that are now being frequently used by researchers are not actually new. But I think what really surprised me when I started to look at the methodology, methodological literature is that in the last 10 years, there's just been an enormous amount of publishing in this area. So I kind of think about this in several different ways. So there's methodological work that is looks at particular approaches to conducting interviews, there's writing that talks about working with particular populations. And then there's work in which scholars are using new theories, to re theorize what it means to do into an interview and what interview data are. And then researchers are also taking out all of the new modalities that we use in everyday life to conduct interviews that differ from, I guess, early ideas of a research interview as a formal place based and in person interview. If you'd like I could talk a little bit in more detail about those four different strands. Amy Stich  5:44  That would be great. If you don't mind. Yes, please. Kathy Roulston  5:47  Sure. Well, in terms of how researchers approach interviewing, I think you'll see a lot more writing on how researchers who use interviews can account for sensory awareness. Now, the most familiar approach would be the use of visual methods. But people are also using sound, smell, taste, touch, and so forth. And then there's also a range of writing that examines materiality as it emerges in interviews. People bring objects to interviews that are used as prompts to talk about research topics. Sometimes the researchers bring those sometimes the participants bring those. And then researchers have looked at how technologies such as recording devices show up within interview talk, how people orient to those and what that means in an interview. And then, of course, we're quite familiar, I think now with the use of images in work, whether that's moving images, use of videos that people orient to, or still images, and then sometimes the researchers can bring those images to the interview, or they might engage participants in generating or bringing their own images. Now, there's also writing on various forms of graphic elicitation. Researchers can ask participants to draw diagrams or timelines, and then they talk about those within the interviews. And you'll see work where researchers attending to place in space in interviews. And then they might do this through go-alongs, in which interviews go along with their participants in cars or public transport. And then, of course, in walking interviews. Now, as I mentioned earlier, ethnographers have used these kinds of interviews for very long time, things like walking interviews, but I think what is different now is researchers do not necessarily find their work as ethnography. And then you'll see researchers using new technologies, such as global positioning systems, in conjunction with those mobile methods, and also creating maps in relation to walking interviews and mobile methods. And that they you'll see these in articles. Now, as a second strand of writing, you'll see a lot more attention now to culturally relevant approaches to research. And obviously, that's probably long overdue. Researchers will find lots of guidance about how to work with specific populations. And I'll just mention a couple here. So how to interview children around play based approaches. So you can see work where researchers using toys or puppets, you'll see research interviews used in inclusive ways with people with disabilities, and the various solicitation advice, or elicitation devices people use. There's work on use of American Sign Language with the deaf community. And then of course, there's much work on how to work with people from other cultures. And I think some of this work does use participatory approaches, where the participants participants themselves are key stakeholders in the development of the research topics, they might serve as co researchers or even peer interviewers. So the peer, the participants are co participants with the researchers and they might act as interviewers with other people. And then, of course, because researchers are increasingly conducting research in countries other than where they might present their work, you'll see a lot of research that's methodological to do with interviews on translation, interpretation, and what that means for issues of data analysis, the ethics and representation. And then, of course, there's more writing on how to conduct interviews with elite populations or how to recruit those for interviews and so forth. But I think if you look at the methodological literature that's been published probably over the last 75 years, I think probably almost any population can emerge a special in some way. So if what ever group you are choosing to conduct interviews with, it's just well worth looking at what methodological literature you might locate that can support your work. And I encourage listeners to think about that. And now moving on to theorizations of interviewing, there's a good deal of writing that draws on concepts from post structural and new materialist writing, and it reconceptualize as what interviews are and how we might think about them, and some of this critical of interview research as well. Although there's loads of critiques you could find that have gone on for decades about interviewing. So researchers have used concepts from Deleuze and Guattari book 1000 plateaus, such as the assemblage the fall the rhizome to rethink interviews and interview data. And then you also see ideas such as diffraction and interaction from scholars such as Karen Berard and cartographies, from Rosie Bradotti, applied to thinking about interviews. And then I guess, just to finish off, talking about some of the strands of literature on qualitative interviewing, there's a host of work which looks at the modalities in which interviews are conducted. And of course, because we've all been living through the COVID pandemic that started in 2020, I think probably all of us have turned to online interviews as a way to continue our research during the pandemic. But I think we also need to recognize that researchers have always made use of new technologies to conduct interviews. So when recording devices first became popular in the 1930s, audio cassette recorders for those of us who were interviewing a couple of decades ago, and telephones, and mobile telephones. And then of course, moving into the 2000s, we have digital recording devices. And then, of course, what we're doing right now, which is an audio recorded interview over the internet. And I actually I've seen some researchers from folklore studies, use podcasting software to record internet interviews. So if you're not interested, there's actually some pretty cool tools out there. But I think we'll see now use of synchronous online meeting rooms such as zoom, which we all know about, to interview people across physical distance. But you'll also see researchers making use of asynchronous tools. And of course, we've had email for a very long time. But these taxpayer base tools such as WhatsApp, and I used for both individual and group interviews. And then just to wrap up some of the methodological issues. I think what I've really noticed in the last year or two is the rapid replacement of manual transcription of interviews. So for example, you might be familiar with Express Scribe or ink scribe, which were tools to help us with manual transcription. But now these are really been taken over by voice to text software. Now, voice to text software has also been around for a few decades. But it's never been entirely taken up because it wasn't that accurate. But now that artificial intelligence has been applied to the voice to text software, the accuracy is probably over 90%. And so I think you'll see people using tools such as Otter.AI or [...]. But I think it's always advisable to double check any kind of transcription. So that whether you use a transcriber, whether you transcribe these manually, or you use a voice to text program, I think it's just good practice to listen to the audio recordings, check the transcriptions and just ensure that what you've put in your transcript is accurate.Amy Stich  14:32  Absolutely. Absolutely. You know, despite having a vast array of these technological advancements that assist us throughout the research process. I don't know that anything will ever really replace the need for us to deeply engage with our data and meaningful sustained ways that of course result in more meaningful interpretation. You know, in other words, I don't know that technology were will ever necessarily replace the qualitative researcher, but that's probably a topic for another podcast. So now despite having all sorts of advancements in the field, can you talk about some of the persistent challenges that qualitative researchers face and learning to interview? Kathy Roulston  15:13  So I think teaching qualitative research, interviewing for about 20 years now, and I've also done some research on that. And I've got a project going on right now to do with that. And I also recognize that some scholars argue that you don't need to teach interviewing. And that's because as interviewers, and speakers, we use our ordinary language skills to conduct interviews. And I agree that that's what we do. We use our ordinary language skills when we ask questions about our participants. But I think one of the challenges for novice researchers is not that they don't know how to ask questions and conduct interviews, we are surrounded by interviews every day, we listen to them all the time, we see them on television, and so forth. I think the challenge is learning to become a really good listener, and thinking about what to say next. And so when I look at transcripts, I find that novice interviewers are challenged to listen well. And that's because sometimes they're thinking about the next question to ask. And I know this, because I asked them to reflect and that's what they say in reflections that was really hard for me to listen, because I was I didn't know what I was going to say next. So what happens is a couple of different issues, things can happen. So the interviewer can fail to unpack what an interviewee has said, by not asking any follow up questions. So rather than asking a follow up question on what's just been said, they move directly to the next question, without regard to whether an interviewee has fully explained the topic. And what happens then if you just move to the next question on the interview guide is your interview ends up being really short? Right? So we know from narrative inquiry and narrative research that people very frequently give the abstracts of the story first. So they tell you the short story. And then as an interviewer, it's up to you to ask thoughtful follow up questions to get more detail about an interview is meaning making now. And a related problem for novice interviewers is when they do try to ask follow up questions, they can come out as long convoluted and MultiPad questions, they might ask five or six questions, because thinking on the spot of what to say next. So what's interesting, when I've looked at how people answer those kinds of questions, is they do a pretty good job of handling these enormously complicated questions. So I think, though, that sometimes interviewees interviewers rather, they don't need to do that much work. There's ways to ask their follow up questions, just one at a time. And then that actually, I think might help when it comes to data analysis. Because if an answer has been in response to a multi part question, the analyst has to go through a good deal of analysis to think through, in what ways their question has been answered. Right. So I think, another issue, and I think this, potentially is related to the fact that we all are very familiar with interviews as a genre. But sometimes I find that novice interviewers are really challenged to recognize the implications of their own actions as interviewers. And I think it's important for every one of us weather where we've done a lot of interviews or a few interviews, we just need to be really aware of what we say, and then what happens next as a result. So I think some new researchers come to qualitative researcher thinking that they can be neutral and not impact what gets said. But it's been well known for decades that it's not really possible to not impact what gets said. So even researchers who use standardized survey interviews, find it very difficult to avoid engaging with interviewees because interviewees ask questions of them as they go along. So I guess my point is, even if you follow In a script, it's just very difficult to follow that when it comes to actual real life interaction. So when qualitative researchers are asking questions in open ended or semi structured interviews, whatever they do is going to enact what gets said next. And that even includes whether you say nothing. So even if there's a silence, so for example, if you were to ask a question, you open a slot for the interviewee to say something. And if you pause long enough, the interviewee will do something. And the next turn actually might be asking a question as to what it is that you want to know. But yes, so whatever interviewers do does impact what goes on. And I think each of us needs to recognize whatever it is that we do, and how that impacts what gets done. And think about our own, I guess, natural language skills and how we speak to one another and listen to one another.Amy Stich  21:13  Right, excellent points. And again, a really nice transition into my next question about the interviewer or the person and some of the qualities that might make for a quote unquote, good interviewer. So Dr. Roulston, can you talk about what constitutes a good interviewer?Kathy Roulston  21:31  Sure. Thanks for that question, Amy. So I have talked to other researchers about this. And that was one of the questions I asked them. And then I've also looked at accounts from professional interviewers who have talked about that topic. And I think there's a good deal of agreement on what a good interviewer does. So firstly, they prepare well for interviews, interviews, they're good listeners, they treat the interviewee with respect. They understand that to conduct a good interview, you have to be flexible. So what what works in one situation is not necessarily going to work in another. And I've seen several places, good interviewing practices likened to the improvisatory qualities of jazz. So sometimes you just have to make stuff up. And then, my good friend and colleague, Judith Price Lee, she reminded me quite a few years ago now that you just need to be skeptical of advice, including the advice I've just given. Sometimes I think advice is appropriate, and sometimes it's not. And perhaps interviewers just need to attune themselves to the specific context in which they're working, and also the people they're talking to, to figure out what's going to be a good interview in this situation.Amy Stich  23:04  That's great. I love that advice. And think it's appropriate in this context. So to be a good interviewer, really to be good at anything, it would also seem one would benefit from a great deal of experience and learning from what we might deem to be failures in the field or what we might at the time call, you know, a quote, unquote, failed interview. Can you tell us about any of your own experiences with you know, quote-unquote, failed interviews, or any interviewing disasters that you've had? ...Kathy Roulston  23:45  So I think because I'm a methodologist, I tend not to write off interviews as failures. Because I think if something is goes really terribly wrong, and interview, then that gives that will give me something interesting to unpack now, unpacking that failure might actually be quite painful. But I'll share some of my disasters. And as I think about these, I think all of them were because of my own lack of preparation, which I guess is the for the first rule of good interview. Be prepared. So I have conducted a couple of interviews that I think they were great interviews. But when I went to download them or transcribe them, I didn't have a recording. So that is every researchers worst nightmare.Amy Stich  24:46  I can relate to that. I've had that nightmare.Kathy Roulston  24:50   So the first happened when I did my master's degree so I was using one of those digital Walkman switch antiques now but it files and records. But in that case, I was able to reschedule the interview, I had a very kind participant who agreed to be interviewed for a second time. But I think what happened there was the spontaneity that occurred in the very first interview was lacking in a second. And of course, that's foreseeable. But more recently, this is probably maybe a little over 10 years ago, I think. I failed to generate a complete recording on a digital recorder. And what had happened, I'd been conducting back to back interviews all day, before an evaluation study. And the space on my digital recording device, it had a little desk in it filled up in half the interview, and I couldn't reschedule this, that there was no possibility. So what I did, as soon as I could, I wrote down as much information as I could for memory. And since I've read more on the history of interviewing, I think what's interesting about that is, this is how anthropologist used to record the interviews via hand, during the interview and all after. So there's one account by anthropologists who [...} Patternmaker. In 1966, she was looking back on her career. And she wrote about going back to her car after her interviews and writing as many notes of what the interviewees had told her as she could. And it so happens, because I'm interested in archival work, too. I've had a look at some other handwritten notebooks from a field worker who lived in Athens where I live. She conducted interviews as part of the Federal Writers Project. And she her handwritten notebooks. It's all in pencil. They're just incredibly detailed notes about interviews. And I have to think that before people had, I guess, ubiquitous access to audio recording devices, they probably had better strength of recall than perhaps we do, because we just typically rely on our audio recordings. But I guess back to your question around it. I think both of these disasters could have been avoided, if I did a backup recording device. That's what I do. I take them on an iPad or an iPhone or something and record it as well. I don't know when I have others to talk about it. I nobody want to know.Amy Stich  27:51  I think we will all love to know more.Kathy Roulston  27:55  Okay, so this is one of my embarrassments. So in another case, I, the interview, we selected the place where we were going to conduct an interview it interview and I had not met her prior to the interview. So we met for the first time. And we arranged to meet at a cafe in another county, and that I was not familiar with. So I showed up early. And I was just horrified to find that this cafe had closed. The person I was interviewing had obviously not been there for a while either. And so she was very surprised. So he we were in a strip mall in an County I wasn't familiar with trying to locate another place to conduct an interview. And I ended up recording this conversation in an open area in a grocery store, which had like a little eating area with tables and chairs. So as you can imagine, this was not a great setting, and it was not a great start to the interview. That's what I recall. I don't remember much about it. I do have a worst one.Amy Stich  29:11  Oh, yes. Thank you for your honesty.Kathy Roulston  29:16  Yes. So. Yes. So this one I, I guess was at a very busy point in the semester. And I had arranged to interview someone. And when I went to conduct the interview, I went to their office, which was on my campus, and they came to my office and our offices and two different buildings a couple of miles apart. So obviously that interview didn't get done. And that was incredibly embarrassing, because it was clear that I hadn't done enough preparation to double check the location that we're both on the same page. And I think that just goes to show that no matter how busy you are, you just need to really be systematic about checking the equipment, and then ensuring that both you and the interviewee know where you're going, that there is a place a space to meet, where you plan to meet, and just double check everything along the way. So I tried to do that now. But I've made errors along the way.Amy Stich  30:25  That's great. And as much as we may learn from our failures, it is of course wise to try to avoid them. Yeah, so. So Dr. Roulston, who were some of your favorite interviewers? Sure,Kathy Roulston  30:38  I would have to say that Terry Gross, who broadcast the program, fresh air, which is on National Public Radio in the United States, she's one of my favorite interviewers. If you listen to her, she, these interviews just seem to be so smooth. About I think she has published a couple of books on interviewing and in her introduction to those books, you'll learn more about how she does those. And you just need to be aware that she has a team that produces those interviews, and they're also not aired live, right. So the editorial team smoothes out the talk. And they also might even resequenced, the questions and answers. And then just as another note, and I think this is encouraging to all of us. She also has had some pretty challenging interview, and you can look around for those. So I guess as someone who has, she's literally conducted 1000s of interviews. It's just useful to know that she runs into problem interviews as well. And then I think what we can all learn from this is that to do a good interview entails collaboration on the part of both interviewer and interviewee. So interviewees can be uncooperative, for all kinds of reasons. And sometimes we might never really know what those reasons are. But I think in other cases, we might also consider why an interviewer might be reluctant to talk to us. And then, as a good researcher looking into the reasons that might be occurring, and why it is that people might might not be answering our questions. So that's something to think about. Right, right. And then we asked me about favorite interviews. I'm not sure he's one of my favorite interviews. I think I really like looking at his interviews to see what he does. So that's Sacha Baron Cohen. And of course, he's not a broadcast interviewer. And he's not a research interviewer. And he's also not necessarily generating information as researchers do. Because as, like, as a comedian and a satirist, he's doing something else altogether. So you probably have seen him in his various television shows and films. So he disguises himself to interview both ordinary and very famous people, is pranked quite a few policy, very famous politicians so far to say, I, I've seen Maureen Dowd of The New York Times has interviewed him and about what his work and what he's trying to do there. And he describes his aim as to expose hatred, bigotry and racism through those kinds of interviews. So I think what I enjoy about listening to comedians and satirists when they interview is how they upset out expectations of what an interview is, and also, quite often what's appropriate to ask. And then, of course, interviewees wide awake to what's going off on quite often. And so sometimes they'll just walk out of the interview, and just refused to participate. Rather than to avoid these embarrassing interactions, which some of these interviews are designed to elicit, and I'm not suggesting that researchers design interviews to do this kind of work. But I think what I find interesting about them, is it how it really helps us to think about the purpose of asking questions of one another.Amy Stich  34:39  Absolutely. Yeah, those are such interesting choices. Have you heard Terry Gross interview Sacha Baron Cohen on fresh air?Kathy Roulston  34:48  No I haven't. Amy Stich  34:49   You know that's a two for one for you. Kathy Roulston  34:52  Have they actually interviewed him? Amy Stich  34:56  Yes, she has. She has You guys, I've learned, I believe, just early this year. Yeah. So you might want to check that out.Kathy Roulston  35:04  Thank you very much. I appreciate that.Amy Stich  35:08  Absolutely. So before we end today, I think many of our listeners will also appreciate hearing some of your top tips for conducting interviews. So what advice would you give to those just starting out?Kathy Roulston  35:18  Well, I may repeat myself, so forgive me Sure, of course. But I think first, I think it's really helpful to for every one of us as interviewers to recognize and natural language skills. So if any listeners are those people who like to sit and listen, and he might be very introverted, it is actually going to be easier for you to listen to participants, and you are very unlikely to interrupt them, because you'll be listening. And because that's the natural way you engage in interaction. Now, if you like talking, and you like telling stories, it might actually be very challenging for you not to contribute to the talk. Now, I don't want to be understood as saying that there's not a time and place for telling your own stories as part of an interview. And if anyone wants to take conversation approach to interviewing, that's probably going to happen. But I think what I am trying to say here is that it's useful to recognize that what your talk does for the generation of interview data. And so for example, if you tell your stories, in response to what your participant is saying, these are actually there's a name for these kinds of stories, have the sociologists have called them second stories, which match a story that's just been told. Then when it comes to analyze your data, you as a researcher really have to be fair to your participant by counting for your own talk in the analysis and interpretation. And thinking about what your part in the generation of that talk was. So that's one, one thing, I think, is helpful for all of us. And then of course, this goes without saying, we just need to be listened to our participants respectfully. And I clearly if we're using interviews, we're seeking to learn from others. And it's our responsibility to just really be respectful. Now, I think that doesn't necessarily mean we need to agree with them. So sometimes participants say very disagreeable things that we might really disagree with. Sure. But I think the in that case, then we need to think about how we can be fair in how we represent them, when we write up our findings. And, of course, representing our findings is an probably a topic of another podcast, too. But there's actually methodological work out there now, which, like really thinks about what happens when we interview people with whom we might disagree. I guess the other thing to think about in interview is to really recognize that interviewing is performative. So people want to represent themselves to one another particular ways, for specific purposes. So even though research interviews are information generation, typically we are wanting information about some research topic. It's you can also ask what kinds of actions are being done in an interview. So for example, your interview is justifying or excusing the actions or they could be complaining about something or praising something or complimenting something. So that's just another order of data analysis, which the sociologists, Holstein and Gabrielle have written about, for quite some time, since the mid 1990s. They talk about analyzing both how interviews get done in as well as what gets said in those interviews. And then I think maybe, just to finish up here, there's more methodological work, which really calls on researchers to examine the search methods and how they might consider the participants needs very deeply in how they examine their topics. I've got one good example here, from Castro Dale. This is an article published in 2018 in qualitative inquiry, so he intended to use mobile methods in a study but the When he talked to his participants, they preferred formal sit down interviews. So even though we might have preferences for how we're going to conduct interviews, I think more and more researchers are writing and talking about how they design their interviews, research with their participants preferences in mind. So I guess a good interview can look really easy. But I, we can't ever really predict what's going to happen past the second term. So I advise all of us to be open to be flexible, and relaxing. Just enjoy yourselfAmy Stich  40:39  full again. That's wonderful advice. Thank you again for sharing your expertise with us today. And thank you, listeners for joining us for this edition of qualitative conversation.Kathy Roulston  40:51  Thank you very much me. I've really enjoyed talking to you. Amy Stich  40:55  Thanks so much, Kathy.

In this episode Stephanie Shelton talks with Kiara Summerville, Erica Campbell, Krystal Flantroy, and Ashley Prowell about their experiences collaborating and co-authoring an article on Black Feminist thought in the field of Qualitative Inquiry. The episode raises important questions about representation, experience, and process in the doing and teaching of qualitative research. A transcript of the conversation follows.  Stephanie Shelton  00:10Right. Hello everyone and welcome to qualitative conversations Podcast Series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group, the American Educational Research Association. I'm Stephanie Shelton, a guest host for this episode on collaboration and co-authorship. And I'm excited to be joined today by my brilliant co-authors of a wonderful article. Krystal Flantroy, Kiara Summerville, Erica Campbell and Ashley Nicole Prowell. And so Kiara, if we could just introduce yourselves maybe an author order. So Kiara, then Erica, then Krystal, then Ashley, and then we'll get started.Kiara Summerville  00:47Hi, everyone. I'm Kiara Summervile. Dr. Kiara Somerville, a recent graduate of the higher education administration program at the University of Alabama. I currently work in the Division of Student Life at the University of Alabama. And so certainly, a scholar practitioner in every sense of the word, and I am excited to be here with you all. Erica Campbell  01:08Hello, everybody. My name is Erica Campbell, and I am a PhD candidate in the higher education administration program at the University of Alabama. And I'm excited because I will be graduating in May, and I will be defending my dissertation this January. So I'm excited to be on the job market looking for faculty positions. And I here I am a scholar practitioners affairs professional, but I want to take that to the faculty route. So I'm excited to be here with you all today.Krystal Flantroy  01:38My name is Krystal Flantroy and I'm currently a PhD candidate in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction. I'm crossing my fingers and hoping that I graduate in July. I too, am a scholar practitioner who has found her way back to a classroom teaching position. And so I'm back to teaching high school science, which is something I love and love to do. But we'll see how it all works out in the end.Ashley Prowell  02:02My name is Ashley Prowell, or Dr. Ashley Prowell. And I am also a recent graduate of the social work department, PhD program. I'm also on the job market hoping to enter the professoriate and continue to do research and teaching. So yeah, I'm glad we didn't have to, like run down our research topic, because I'm so tired of writing about it, talking about it with everybody. So Stephanie Shelton  02:37We're here today to talk about your article that was published in the qualitative research journal. And it is titled, Finding ourselves as Black Women in Euro-centric theory: Collaborative biography on learning qualitative inquiry. And so I wanted to start by asking if you could share how this project got started, what, what initiated the ideas that ultimately led to this article.Krystal Flantroy  02:59And as it turns out, this project got started in, it feels like a group chat, right? We were, we would have class and then we would all leave class and talk in the parking lot before we all went to our cars, that led to a group chat of where we got to talk about things that we didn't understand things that we just didn't relate to things that were confusing in the readings of the theory that we were reading in qual three, and it kind of flourished from there.Kiara Summerville  03:28Right? We, as Krystal mentioned, were, you know, talking about frustrations and confusion that went along with it, this qualitative course that we were taking. And, and we thought about it one day, I think we were actually in the classroom after class one day, and had this thought like, well, maybe we should write about this, right? We all have a lot of thoughts about this. And, um, you know about our experience in that classroom and understanding the material and working together to make the make the material make sense to each other, we leaned on each other heavily for that. So we told ourselves, Well, how about we just write about this? Right. And I know, we'll probably get to this in a little bit, but we thought, you know, Dr. Shelton, would be a wonderful person to talk to about these thoughts, and to see if we can get something going.Stephanie Shelton  04:19So that's a perfect transition. Um, so could you talk through how you started the process of co authoring this paper? What did that process look like? Ashley Prowell  04:27I mean, I want to say, I want to say it was just, you know, just it just happened pretty naturally. I mean, like Krystaltal said, it started out in a group chat. And we all had these same, you know, same thoughts about what was going on in the classroom. So, I mean, I don't know if you're talking about like the ordering of authorship and how that happened. But I think just in terms of us all, you know, being engaged in this topic and wanting to instead of just kind of, I guess, complaining about it or griping about it wanting to be productive and, and turn it into something creative and productive for academia. And I feel like, since we've written this paper, like, if you just scroll through academic Twitter, you'll see like, you know, a lot of people are talking about this similar ideas these days, and kind of this incorporation of black thought, or black, you know, ideas into, you know, our readings in the classroom and, and just being more inclusive overall and responsive to other cultures. So I feel like we were definitely at the forefront. I feel like we were at the forefront, maybe we weren't, but, but it definitely feels good. That, you know, we're seeing more people talk about this issue in doctoral programs, and just overall in higher education,Erica Campbell  06:01Right. And I will also add that one of the things that we did, too, because we knew that we had material to write about or to share our personal narratives, and what that looked like in the classroom, also believe that we went to you, Dr. Shelton, to be honest. And we said, you know, we have this idea, just to kind of really just dive in about what our, you know, black feminist thought is, and then also to really think about how we use that with qualitative research and qualitative, philosophical, philosophical understandings. And so you gave us the idea, in terms of the methodology to really just think about how we could use that as an opportunity to kind of collaborate when it comes to our narrative. And I know we'll get to that in a little bit a little bit later, I'm sure. But that's where kind of the idea got the wheels to kind of keep moving, that you know, what this this is qualitative research, what are narratives are, what our experiences are in that classroom, and you kind of gave us a wheel with the methodology with that.Ashley Prowell  07:07And I guess, you know, earlier on, I think we also had the conversation of, you know, or at least I know, I brought this up and shared it with the group, just this idea of choosing a white professor to to, to being engaged with our scholarship or this manuscript that we were writing. And I know, while Dr. Shelton tends to be very open, and, or is very open, and often probably even can relate to a lot of the issues that we we talked about in our paper, are some of them. I think we chose Dr. Shelton, because because of that, that openness. But I do think, you know, we did think about like, what would the paper: How would things look different if we engage with a, an African American or a black? Professor? And I do think there are implications for that? I think it could, would she have been involved in our group chat? Or, you know, how would that have changed things in terms of our findings, and how we engage with the content throughout the course semester? So I think that is something that, you know, we should, I don't know, if you want to talk, share your own thoughts about that. But I know that's something that we brought up earlier on.Krystal Flantroy  08:27But I also think that we were, we were a bit treading lightly as we began, because we also were still in a class with a professor, whose course we were really critiquing for something that we thought was missing, that was something essential. And so it felt like, Are we really gonna write about this? Because the truly enough mean, we've all been taught by her are sitting in her course. And it's like, how do we know Levy, this, this heavy critique of the course that we've been in without feeling weird about it? So that was another thing. Stephanie Shelton  09:03So you've brought up some of these? The next question is really looking at like some of the challenges. And and so I think that these are definitely some that are really important. And I'm glad that, Ashley, you initiated some of these concerns, because very important, and thinking about like collaboratively writing, and then trying to go through this publication process, because I feel like a lot of times for graduate students publication seems like more of like an abstract concept. That's sort of reality. And so what were some of the challenges of the collaborative writing and the publication process when you're working through this article?Kiara Summerville  09:34I don't know that the when we actually started writing together and in sharing our mirrors with each other, that wasn't necessarily tough for me. I think on the front end, we had to learn the methodology. And that was something that we had to kind of sit with because I think even with the methodology and you know, the philosophers and we were attributing citing in our methodology for themselves, white men, right. And so we talked about how, you know, we were critiquing this use of using white philosophers in these courses. But we are in fact using them for this type of work, we talked about how we are turning it on its head, right? To make it work for us, which is really the the nature of the whole paper, the theme of the whole paper making, making, what we were learning in that class, make it make sense to us. So I think learning the methodology at first was something that we had to had to understand, but the actual writing of the narrative seems to come quite naturally. For me, um, ladies, I'm not sure how you all felt about that. Erica Campbell  10:43And I will say that it actually became natural for me, because we had been in that class and really was in that space of really sitting with our thoughts about those white philosophers. In that course, I really felt like, you know, this was my opportunity to really get that off my chest in a writing format, right. But then also, because we were doing it in a collaborative matter, I think what really helped me to was that, okay, I'm not the only person that's talking about this, right. So, you know, often as a black woman, you know, you we feel good in numbers, we feel good having that sisterhood support. And I think knowing that we were collaborating, and right, but also writing our own narratives, at the same time made me feel empowered to just say what I needed to say, and just express myself, because I knew there were other women who would be doing the same thing. And so that really empowered me, it felt very natural for myself.Ashley Prowell  11:39And I think we brought this up in the paper, too, is just this idea of like, earlier on, like, hold on, are we missing something like just trying to think back through before, you know, before you, you know, you write about something or talk about something you want to make sure you have, I think that naturally, like have the facts. Right. So, so just thinking through the course, and, and I guess, also in a way of not to be offensive towards towards the qualitative program that we were taking these courses in, and just just really thinking about, you know, you know, if we, if if there was something that we didn't grasp, or something that we miss throughout the course. And I think like Erica was saying, like other people are, you know, once we realized, collectively that we have these shared thoughts and that other people are also talking about this, I think that helped us feel better about moving forward with with writing about it.Krystal Flantroy  12:41I just wanted to add, when we went to our first like, we we put up conference paper, like, I can't remember which one it is. And, ICQI, right? And so we go and we do our presentation, and we're sitting in this room of people, and like people were enlightened and move by it, and it was like, wait, y'all, I think we got we got some, and like, we left there. We we knew we felt better, like people came up and talk to us after our presentation. I was like, oh, okay, this is it. Alright. So it that I think that part of it, like putting in conference presentations, I think ICQI and AERA, um, you know, made a world of difference, because what it said was, is that scholars in Rome want to hear what we had to say about this particular topic, which may moving the work forward a little bit easier. You weren't as the trepidation wasn't there anymore. It was like, Okay, this is something we can talk about that we need to talk about. Stephanie Shelton  13:48So Erica,and Krystal kind of alluded to this, but I wanted to ask if you had anything else you wanted to add? What were some of the high points are the advantages of collaboratively writing, collaborative collaboratively writing, and a collaborative publishing process? Ashley Prowell  14:03I think, I guess just piggybacking off of what we just talked about was just this idea of, okay. This is something, you know, kind of new for us and that we're, you know, this is our first time writing about something like this, but being able to kind of figure it out through our collaborative narrative and responding to each other and going back and forth. With that process. I think that was something interesting and just kind of kind of figuring it out as we went, you know, I thought that was cool.Krystal Flantroy  14:39I think here said this earlier, and it there's power in numbers, right? And having people to work with and having people to bounce ideas off of and having people that have maybe more experiences or publishing because we were all in different parts of our journey at that point, and so We are, you know, it was it made the experience a lot easier. But it also made it tougher, right? Because you're working with four different people with four or five, five different people with five different schedules,Stephanie Shelton  15:12I think it might be worth you you talking a little bit going back a little bit to the to some of the challenges. If I recall correctly, some of the ways that you all wrote the paper was you initially, you divvied up sections you did the you did the narratives collaboratively throughout, but then you divvied up other sections, but then there had to be a process where the paper became unified. And so I don't know if you want to talk about that or not. But I think that that was definitely a very interesting part of the process, that it can be used for other people to hear about.Erica Campbell  15:44So that's a good point. Um, one thing that we did, so after, like, Kiara, I mentioned earlier, we had to really learn, and, and really understand this methodology, right. So that's always key and important before you, you know, put yourself out there to try and do it. And of course, you know, you either learn through the process, and of course, you learn after the process. I mean, that's part of qualitative research, and what we are, you know, tasked to do, and good researchers. But one thing that we did first is we decided that we would divvy up our narratives. And so one person will write their own personal narratives, each person wrote a personal narrative, right? But then we decided that we would go back, and then respond to each person's narratives. And so in each person's there, there's a might be a thought that Ashley said or thought they crossed or keyed, or said, and then I might interrupt with my communication or a thought of like, yes, like we you said, you were in class. And maybe you didn't understand this, this philosopher, I will respond by saying something like, You know what, I didn't understand that either, right. And so it kind of created not just only our own narratives to be able to get that narrative on paper, but it allowed us to, for lack of a better word, to interrupt each other, and kind of have a conversation back and forth through our written narrative. And so we did that using a Google Drive. And from there is where we use that just to move forward in our analysis. Kiara Summerville  17:22And I think when it came time to piece the paper together, it's not really a challenge, it wasn't a challenge, I don't think we leaned on each other's strengths, to kind of understand, you know, kind of what sections of the paper so for instance, I had had some previous experience with the conceptual framework, right? So it was, you know, easy for me to feel like I could step up and say, Okay, y'all, I feel like I can write this conceptual framework. I, you know, Eric knows, I joke about this a lot, I feel like I do really well with time things with a bow and concluding. So I'm happy to conclude as well. And then, you know, we talked about who was focused on the literature review, and who would focus on, um, you know, our data and creating themes from our narratives. And so that part, you know, it's really nice to lean on each other's strengths. And that way to piece the paper together.Ashley Prowell  18:15Yeah. And I think we were all at different points in our, you know, of course, in our PhD journey, so, you know, especially when it came to authorship, you know, I knew for myself, at least, that I was kind of in the bulk of my dissertation, and then I wouldn't have a ton of time to commit to the final pieces of the manuscripts. So, of course, second to last author. And I think other people may have, you know, chosen their authorship similarly, so, yeah. But, you know, in terms of we tried to be fair, there were there were multiple opportunities that came out of that paper, like, we were saying, conference presentations. So, we, I think we each had opportunities to kind of lead those projects along the way while we were at different points. So for ICQI I was at a easier time in my, in my PhD journey. So I I did get a chance to lead that a little bit. In terms of like, submitting the proposal for ICQI and everything Stephanie Shelton  19:28And I think Krystal did a she did it. You did AERA, you led that proposal. Krystal Flantroy  19:34Yea but it was canceled, thanks to COVID. So there was a lot of work for I won't say for no reason. But yeah, for no reason. Erica Campbell  19:46And I think that speaks to us feeling like you know, we can take this on the road and we can really make this a worthwhile project. So you know, even though AERA was cancelled because the COVID and it was 2020 when we got except it is still helped us to make us feel like you know what this project is worth while. And this is something that we should definitely even though, you know, hell was breaking loose in the country in the world, we feel felt like this. This research still needed to go forward. And I'm glad that we continue to push towards wrapping this paper.Stephanie Shelton  20:24So many grad students are likely to listen to this podcast. And so in channeling a graduate student perspective, which for some of you is current for others of you, it's in the rearview mirror, but not too long ago. And channeling a graduate student perspective, what was the publishing process like? And what do you wish that you known beforehand that you know, now,Krystal Flantroy  20:42I wish I had known that those jokes about reviewer number two, are actually really serious, not just imagined. There's such extremes on what reviewers want out of your paper. And oh, I do remember what I wanted to say the unifying part of the paper, Dr. Shelton really helped with our language, that was whatever I want to say, and helping it all pull together. So it was concise and consistent, even though we all have different words and different styles of writing. But yes, reviewer number two, that is exactly the truth. I, when I looked at our reviews for the paper, it was like one person was like, Okay, here's these few things and somebody else, like, I think you should look at this, this and this from these people, I think you guys missed it. Kiara Summerville  21:28And then not even being able to find some of their suggestions. Like it was really hard because maybe our institution didn't have access to it, and then having to figure out if we were going to include it or not. And if we didn't include it, how to word that in the letter back to the editors, or their reviewers. How to say, you know, thank you, but nothing.Stephanie Shelton  21:53Yeah, my advice for that is just in overall publishing experiences, just like trying to respond to everything and making it seem like, you know, I'm, I'm so grateful for this feedback. And but or however, you know, that's the way to approach it. But you know, trying your best to still address each and every comment as much as possible. But if it's not in line with what you're you're trying to do, or your goal or aims for the for your work, then, you know, saying that, and being honest, honest about that,Erica Campbell  22:32honestly, I think we were really blessed. We had Dr. Shelton, the great Dr. Shelton, on our team. And so because you were on our team, as we thank you all the time, it really helped us walk through that publication process. So I've been a part of some publications in my past experience prior to this research, but really have an understanding of how everything breaks down how you respond to the journal, how you respond to each of their, you know, suggested edits, that was something that was really eye opening for me, because now because we did that, and because she walked us through that process, so that we can understand that I feel more confident. Just just putting in other other manuscripts that other journals, you know, it just made me really see the process from start to finish, and not just kind of a small portion of the process. And so I'm thankful for that. But also it really, if we had to tell graduate students what to do, find a coach, find a mentor, find someone who will help you walk through that process, because that kind of takes a lot of strain and stress off of the manuscript writing and journal process. And so that was very helpful for me, and I'm sure my colleagues will say the same.Ashley Prowell  23:46And I would say to just being on the job market, right now, you I'm starting to realize what a valuable experience this was. And not that either of us were, you know, being aggressive about you know, collaboration, we have to collaborate, I think this for us, thankfully, it happened very, very naturally. And I think that is something to cherish, whether it happens in your PhD Career or later on in your, your, your later on in your career. But you'll find, I think when applying to jobs and kind of thinking through your entire journey, that experiences like this are really are really useful because you will be required to collaborate interdisciplinary. And for me, I'm in the Social Work program, and I think most of my these co authors are these gals here are in education. So I think that's that's a that was a great experience. And I think it's something that just shared Being honest and sharing your thoughts about course experience or things that are going on in your own research, or your own research area of interest, sharing that with others, Dr. Shelton, sharing that with others, and just kind of seeing where that where that takes you rather than, you know, making it a point to, you know, collaborate just just kind of surrounding yourself with people who have shared interests. And I think it'll just happen naturally. Stephanie Shelton  25:31I do want to accentuate because of some of the things that you all have said, I want to make it really clear to anyone who would listen to the podcast that you all did the work, you all respond as the reviewers, you will do the revisions. Because I don't want to give anyone the misguided impression that like I was in charge of anything, or I took over y'all did the work. And so I want to make sure that relative to Eric has note about, you know, find yourself a mentor, I think that's a really great piece of advice for any graduate students, or even early career faculty, but making sure that you find someone who helps you to understand how to do it and helps a highlight you not someone who jumps in and takes credit for what it is that you're planning on doing. Because that, that's that's not what happened. These women, these brilliant scholars did, did this work. This article is theirs,Kiara Summerville  26:24Dr. Shelton, I'm thinking about how you helped us kind of understand the landscape of qualitative research journals and where this might fit best, and timelines. And, you know, I'm thinking along those lines when Erica said, you know, coach and mentor to help us understand, you know, the scope of what we were working with in terms of submitting to a journal, and what that looked like, and keeping us on a timeline or schedule or, you know, if we fell off encouraging us to hop back on that timeline, that was very, very helpful for us.Krystal Flantroy  27:05I do want to speak to the publishing process, and here brought this up, I think that there are a multitude of journals in which you can publish and being able to select a journal that is interested in your topic, and will find your topic relevant, I think that will be a struggle for every graduate student, like cuz, you know, you're supposed to try to shoot for like, top tier journals. But as a graduate student, you're like, Okay, I'm not really sure which journals I should shoot for. And having Dr. Shelton help us with that. And a realistic timeline, right? Like, we wanted to turn our paper around in, you know, six months to a year, not 18 months, depending on the journal as we go back and forth, and back and forth. And so that was something I didn't realize, in the process of writing and publishing, that, like where you publish can determine how often your published, you know, the turn around the editors, what they like, if you're you fit like all of those things matter. And so like the mentoring on that was amazing.Stephanie Shelton  28:11Well, because you're all gifted and talented. You've answered multiple questions that I haven't asked yet. So thanks for being amazing in that way. If you could, if you could rewind time, and do this entire process all over again, what might you do differently?Erica Campbell  28:26You know, I'm one of those people that's like, I have no regrets. And the reason why I have no regrets right now, when it comes to this project is because was my first time doing a collaborative article with majority of my peers and colleagues, and of course, was your assistant, Dr. Shelton, but then also, just because I feel like you don't learn until you just do something. Right. So that's kind of how you learn the good things. Like we were saying, you know, the good things of how to pick a journal article How to really dive into a methodology that you have never done before, how to, you know, just just collaborate and really share the work and and just do that effectively and share your part. I think those are areas that I would have not learned if we didn't do this project overall. So I will say, No regrets. I don't have anything that I would change. I know, we were in the midst of COVID. If we can change the world, we would change COVID happening, because that did affect us finishing our paper, like we wanted to finish it earlier. But because of COVID I think that kind of just shook up our timeline a lot. And so I think that was something that I will say, if we had control over the world, I will make a change to other than that. I really enjoyed this process afterwards. Kiara Summerville  29:47Yeah, I think the pause that we all took when you ask that question, Dr. Shelton is a testament to you know, I don't know that I have any regrets either. You know about the process. And I learned a lot. And even, you know, I wrote another book chapter after this one and Erica's a co author on that book chapter with me. And we use the same method, right. And so to be able to go to our co authors on on this call and just say, you know, we've done this, this is what we learned from this paper that we did, you know, prior to this was helpful, very, very helpful.Ashley Prowell  30:26Yeah, I think it's, I think going into it just knowing like, it's not, it's not going to always be perfect. And, and I know, whether you're working with a group or by yourself and publishing, you know, putting your work out there, it's, it's pretty scary. And as soon as, you know, you get that email saying that your, your paper has been published, you know, for me, I get this, like, deep sense of fear, like, oh, my gosh, people are gonna be reading now. Like, they're gonna think I'm so stupid, but just know, going into it. And knowing that, you can always return to the same issue and improve upon it and build upon it and continue doing the work in that way. I think that's something that graduate students should definitely keep in mind. And it's qualitative research, you know, you it's so flexible, you can, you can do that. SoKrystal Flantroy  31:19I think, um, with Erica, if I were to rewind time, I would probably just change the circumstances under which like our publication kind of happen, but you can't like change worldwide. I mean, she can't really predict a pandemic. But I also think that like, the things that I walk away learning from this is like, you can work with different people in different fields. Because when you're doing that, like you are using all of the knowledge, like all of us are in different fields, right? I'm in education, like for like secondary curriculum and instruction. And then we got Erica here, when higher education actually was in social work. Like, we collectively all felt the same way about the course that we were in. And so it was interdisciplinary. And it wasn't really about one person or another. It's like, this is the project that I would have never thought that I would have that we would have stumbled upon just from a group chat. Right. And so I think the rewind is, is like, if we could just rewind back in time, I probably would love to go back and be actually able to capture some of those conversations that we were having in a parking lot. Remember how you're having these conversations, you're going back and forth, you're talking about these particular articles. And like, I do remember one day I read are going three times I have no idea what's going on. Like, I came because like Y'all, I read it three times I've got it's like words on paper, it didn't make sense. But it's like, for me, the rewind would be to look at that as like data, right? Like if we could go back and just collect, like capture some of those, like intimate moments that were just what we thought were just conversations. And if we could capture that, though, probably the only thing that I would change, like, I want those, that raw interaction that we had, initially.Stephanie Shelton  33:11y'all have answered tons of questions that I've asked, and so what questions might you have for me?Erica Campbell  33:18How did you enjoy this process working with us Dr Shelter? How did you enjoy working with students of yours who, you know, really appreciate and are thankful for your mentorship and coaching in this process. Ashley Prowell  33:32And to sorry, could to piggyback on that to add to that, like, how, like being in in it and kind of disrupting it. So you are a part of the professor within the qualitative department. So being in it, and also kind of helping to disrupt at the same time, if you can talk a little bit about that. Stephanie Shelton  33:52Yeah, I think that's those are both really good questions. So I mean, for me, it was, it was it this is gonna sound really cliche, but I don't mean it that way. It was genuinely an honor. It was very touching to me, that you came to me and asked if I would help you support to help support you and moving forward? The answer was, of course, I will, you know, let's, let's figure out how to do it. But it also was scary. Because to go back to Ashley's point, I'm very aware of the fact that like, I'm a white person, um, and I do not have the perspective that you are describing, I do not, I do not know, the experiences, that that needed to be a core part of this paper. And so, working to be very deliberate about making sure that you were always in charge. That, you know, my role was never to take over, because that was already the problem, right? Like that was already wrong. That that white people were silencing black women that white people were, you know, a pervasive voice in qualitative research and so to not duplicate the very problem that was being critiqued. And then in terms of like your right, the article was Typically about the program that I teach in this article changed the way that I teach and a lot of different ways I became much more deliberate about making sure that the experience is the experiences that you describe, like didn't happen again, if I could help it. Um, and and I use your article in the class, students the semester read your article. But we also we, we've implemented like specific pedagogical frameworks that the students are aware of the students read with me, that are specifically targeted at rejecting the status quo rejecting these these Eurocentric white centric norms. And really taking the field of qualitative research to task about the ways that it's duplicated, the very oppressions that it sometimes pretends to critique. And so this process, it was helpful for me, just because I felt like there was an ordinate amount of trust in me helping to guide this process and mentor you. But it was also it was important for me professionally and scholastically, as well, because it's changed a lot of the way that I think about things because it's, I'm never so arrogant as to believe that I know everything. But it was a very explicit moment where the process that you were going through forced me to also actively interrogate the ways that I was potentially contributing to the very things that were being described. And so making sure that I was disrupting that as much as I was able to as well.Kiara Summerville  36:31And I appreciate Dr. Shelton, you amplifying our voices in your class, you know, I had multiple folks in that class you taught reach out afterwards, we read your paper in class. We even vote in tweeted about it, you know, as being hands on, and he read our paper. So I appreciate you, you including that in in your course, this paper in your course. And I'm using it as a tool to help your your students learn or think critically about the pedagogy in qualitative research and really, you know, any field that those students will will go on to, to work with.Stephanie Shelton  37:16I appreciate you all producing scholarship that that to be something that can make supposedly addressed.Krystal Flantroy  37:23I do you have a question. So you worked with us because we basically, were like, hey, we want to write this paper. Do you think in the future that you could see yourself collaborating with students more like maybe a project if, like how you've included us into your curriculum and to your pedagogy in your course, like maybe having a group project where they do something collaborative, and then they see something coming out of it doing this again, with another set of students possibly.Stephanie Shelton  37:53So I write the students a lot. Anybody who looks at my CV, there's there's a little symbol that I use to designate whenever the students I wrote soon as a lot. But the answer your question is, yes, I actually because this is an AERA Qualitative, Sig podcast. Boden and I are actually involved in an AERA grant project right now, that is a group of qualitative students. And we anticipate there being multiple collaborative writing projects that come out of that. And it's not that I've never done what you all propose doing ever before. But I do think that the process with us helped to refine and reflect on that process, to continue to make sure that what's happening is useful and helpful to graduate students. Because it's really easy, the stakes are different for y'all than they are for faculty, right? Like, I mean, like, Ashley, you talked about the very beginning when you introduce yourself, like I'm on the job market. And, and so the stakes are different, the calculus is different. And so making sure that what's happening is useful to y'all. And not just you being a means to an end for a faculty member. All right, to wind up my my favorite question, as you all know, what else would you like to share with graduate students, faculty or other listeners,Kiara Summerville  39:10I would say, go forward. If you have a project in mind, may use group in mind or just have been pondering on some things, when you're in the classroom or in your graduate student experience or even as a faculty, right? Go forward, you know, try to put it out there, think about how that can really influence higher education and push our field forward. Don't Don't be afraid to step out and try it. Don't be afraid to ask your colleagues if this is something that you think is worthwhile, and to go for it. And then also, like we said earlier, definitely seek out mentorship, seek out coaching, if you don't know how to kind of make those steps. In terms of manuscript writing, don't feel free to ask someone I know. It's like a fear that many of us kind of can, you know can overcome us as we're graduate students and kind of feel like we don't want to bother our faculty members. And we don't really want to ask questions, but feel free to do that, you know, get out of your comfort zone, ask those questions, you know, ask for coaching, ask for mentorship, but you never know what beautiful piece may come from that. So that's some of the advice that I would give. I think,Ashley Prowell  40:19I think in terms of collaboration, just also, you know, I think people tend to be afraid to work in groups, sometimes it just depends on your personality. Some people like would rather work alone, and some people actually enjoy working with groups. But if you're, you know, afraid of that, just being I think for us, it was a little bit easier because we were all friends and but just so being honest about kind of where we were at in our journey and what we had time for and okay, I can take on this and I can't you know, just so just being honest and upfront about that. And I think that tends to help the the process go smoother. Kiara Summerville  41:02In our paper we talk about we side Patricia Hill Collins in one of her 1986 essays, and we talked about how we use our marginality as an excitement to creativity. And so my thoughts for anyone, students, faculty, other listeners is, you know, what the four of us we could have just continued on about our way and maybe continue to complain, maybe, I don't know what we would have done if we wouldn't have done this paper. But we could have just went on finish that class that semester just kept going in our journeys, but we decided, like Ashley said earlier to use our thoughts in a scholarly way and that helped us write get a publication, but it helped us to you know, streamline our thoughts and, and even thinking about this conversation is helping us to give back to qualitative research in the field of education and, um, you know, really, academia, you know, all the things giving back by nature of sharing our experience and feeling like we were not getting in that class and having to use, you know, our marginality as an excitement to creativity to this creative work that we've put out into the world. So that would be my advice to listeners is to think about what he'll Collins said, and I'm using that marginality to, for to be creative with it, and help yourself to also helping others which in a lot of ways is kind of the foundation of black feminist epistemology in the first place, creating a gateway to entryway for all for all folks by nature of you know, our own position as black women.Krystal Flantroy  42:44And I just want to challenge graduate students, faculty, and other people who are listening to be the changemakers, right? Be the people that disrupt the normal pedagogical policies that we see in qualitative inquiry, right? You don't have to cover the people in the book, you can go out and research and dig deep, and try to diversify what it is that you have been doing. And what it is you have been learning about. If you have a thought in your head, it might be a theorist that already said it thought it up and go research that person, go follow that person, go use that person, scholarships and hope propel yourself forward. And so I just want to challenge people to think outside the box and dig deep and help your students to dig deep beyond what's on the surface or beyond what's Eurocentric and what's been normalized for us. SoAshley Prowell  43:44Yeah, I think it's a testament to Collins theory is like disrupting and kind of her outside or within theory, just disrupting and beat navigating the system, but also being able to disrupt it at the same time. So I feel like that's what we did with our paper. I feel like that's what Dr. Shelton was doing by helping us. So. Yeah. Stephanie Shelton  44:10Alright, so Dr. Kiara Somerville, and the future Dr. Erica Campbell, and the future of Dr. Kystal Flantroy and Dr. Ashley Prowell. Thank you very much for joining us today for qualitative conversations. 

In this episode, Dr. Travis Marn interviews Dr. Jori Hall, winner of the 2021 Qualitative Research SIG's Outstanding Book Award. The conversation revolves around Dr. Hall's book "Focus Groups: Culturally Responsive Approaches for Qualitative Inquiry and Program Evaluations." The following text is a transcript of the conversation. ---Travis Marn  00:11Hello everyone and welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast series hosted by the Qualitative Research Special Interest Group of the American Educational Research Association. I am Travis Marn, the current chair of the Qualitative Research Special Interest Groups Outstanding Book Award Committee. I'm excited to be joined today by Dr. Jori Hall, who was the recipient of the 2021 outstanding Book Award for her book, "Focus Groups: Culturally Responsive Approaches for Qualitative Inquiry and Program Evaluations" published by Meyer Education Press in 2020. Dr. Jori Hall is a multidisciplinary researcher, evaluator, and professor at the University of Georgia. Her work focuses on social inequalities and addresses issues of evaluation and research methodology, cultural responsiveness, and the role of values in privilege within the fields of education and health. She has contributed to numerous peer-reviewed journals and other publications like the "Handbook of Mixed Methods Research" and the "Oxford Handbook of Multi- and Mixed-Methods Research." She has evaluated programs funded by the National Science Foundation, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and the International Baccalaureate Foundation. In recognition of her evaluation scholarship, Dr. Hall was selected as the Leaders of Equitable Evaluation and Diversity Fellow by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Thank you for joining me here today, Dr. Hall. It's a privilege to have you with us.Jori Hall  01:32Hey, Travis, it's an honor to be here. Thank you for having me.Travis Marn  01:36So we had a highly competitive field last cycle and your book stood out immediately to members of the committee. The committee was very impressed with how you evolved a common qualitative method like the focus group, and innovatively lensed through cultural responsiveness. Considering the rapidly changing context of what it means to conduct qualitative research with and in marginalized communities, your book is exceptionally timely and innovative. The committee was impressed with how welcoming your book was to new researchers, while not losing any of the depth and complexity of your topic. The feeling of the committee about your book can best be summed up by the very first sentence a member of the committee sent after they read your book, quote, "this book is a must read text for any qualitative researcher and program evaluator who is considering working with focus groups, or already doing so." Your book richly deserved our 2021 Outstanding Book Award.Jori Hall  02:27Well, that is humbling to hear. I appreciate you sharing that I don't think I heard that quote. So again, thank you so much. And I will say, if it is something that is digestible it is because I have spent years teaching courses on qualitative inquiry and I don't lose sight of the fact that I am constantly trying to communicate to novice and even seasoned researchers alike, how it is to think about qualitative research and how to use it in ways that are responsive. And so I'm glad that that came across in the book, because it's something that I'm always challenged by always thinking about how to best describe any particular method. But in this case, focus groups. I do think that focus groups, as you said, is something that is underutilized. It's a common method, people heard of it before, but in some respects, it is underutilized. And given today's climate, with everything being online due to COVID, there are ways to think about it that can be creative, that can be culturally responsive. And that can even bring some rich information to any research project. So I hope people can see that as they encounter the book and take it up.Travis Marn  03:52I think the accessibility and how easy to read and how well structured the book just lends itself to being a work that anyone can use any kind of researcher, whether you're just starting out, or whether like you said they're seasoned researcher, like I appreciate it, you have whole chapters on like online focus groups, and how to do indigenous focus, focus groups, and all the way from design to analysis, your book, it's really kind of an all in one for anyone looking to conduct high quality focus groups. So we definitely with the committee, we really appreciated that about your book. So why don't you just tell us about your book?Jori Hall  04:31Wow, that's a big question, but I appreciate it. So the book tried to do different things. And I'm glad that it was executed well, because it was it was quite a challenge. I wanted to tackle some topics that don't get a lot of light or when they do get light. It's within the context of a larger methodological handbook, for example, and one chapter or one section is devoted to focus groups. So I'm very excited that we have an entire book dedicated to focus group and highlights how to do those were different types of folks. And so that's what the book is about. That's what I aim to do is to say, "Okay, here's a relatively common method that's underutilized. How can we think about that with respect to different types of groups," and I thought about which groups that I wanted to focus on. And there's so many more groups that deserve attention. But again, the book had limits, I have limits. And so these were the ones that rose to the top based on my experience. And I also wanted to have examples, right? I feel like oftentimes, you could share information. But to make it more concrete, give folks an example. Let them see how it was done in practice. And so the reason why those particular groups got selected the older adults is a group I looked at, I looked at indigenous folk, I look at Black women, like you were saying, and I had really strong examples, from practice taken from former students, current evaluators, current researchers that are in the field trying to make this work happen. And I wanted to be also very transparent, and very realistic about how it is this methodology gets implemented. And that's to say, it is challenging work. It's not easy to make those connections in the context of research. So within the examples that are sprinkled throughout the book, there are lessons learned, what would you have done differently, so people reading the examples can benefit from that those lessons learned? I think they're highly instructive. And I'll just say too, one of the things that's unique about focus groups, and I try to convey this in the book is that different from individual interviews, the most fascinating thing is, you get what I call a twofer trap. And a twofer is you get the interview data, but you also get observational data. And so you get to witness how it is people construct meaning. And I think in real time, and it's very dynamic. And I think that that's really fascinating. So they have a method where you get interview data, and observational data is something that is unique to focus groups, I think and, again, that's that's what I wanted to put in the book. To get across that we need to take advantage more so of the observational data that focus groups can provide the dynamics between the participants themselves. And lastly, I'll say, there is a social justice component that I tried to weave through as well. And this is hugely important given the culturally responsive orientation that I have Travis, because one thing I'm trying to say in the book is this focus groups in and of themselves, do not require you to do anything with the data beyond you know, collected from the focus group, moderate all of it. But the the lens that I'm coming from the perspective that I'm coming from is saying to be culturally responsive also includes being active action about data, right, doing something with the data, that's a benefit to the particular community. And so to think carefully about those things, how can it benefit the community? So there's lots of other things in the book, but those are some of the main things that I set out to accomplish with the book, Travis.Travis Marn  08:25And I think the examples that you were talking about the chapter on indigenous focus groups, to me was just so insightful, even someone I've never done, focus group before. And reading it really kind of showed me how much goes into kind of that social justice focused focus group. And so I'm wondering, how did you pick which groups that you wanted to kind of highlight in the book? Jori Hall  08:50Yeah, and I was alluded to this a little bit before, but again, it came out because these are the kinds of groups that I personally worked with. And then also, for the case examples, I wanted to make sure for whatever groups I decided to put in the book that I had strong case examples. And so those happen to be the ones that I have strong case examples for I have been working, teaching, conducting research at UGA University of Georgia for over a decade. And because of that, Travis, I've worked with a lot of students, a lot of graduate students, and I called on some of those former graduate students to help me think about the cases in the book. So all of these things to have is what I'm saying is all these things kind of work together to make the decisions about which ones rose to the top. And you know, even within each group, there are there is so much diversity, right? There's no one indigenous group. And so, and I just wanted to celebrate that and and I hope that comes across that I'm not suggesting that there is one type of anything, but that and that there's diversity within the groups that I'm talking about. So I hope that that comes across,Travis Marn  10:09I think it definitely does in your work and through your examples. So I'm gonna ask you a really this is a really small question. So I hope you can answer this one, what makes for a culturally responsive focus group?Jori Hall  10:21Right. So this is something that I talked about when I did a webinar for the CDC recently, and as part of that webinar, I tried to make this very point clear, and I had a slide. And I had on one side of the slide, traditional focus group, what that is, it was a definition. And then on the other side, I had culturally responsive focus group. And you can see side by side, we don't have that now, nobody can see my slides, because this is a podcast, right? But the point I was making is that a traditional focus group is defined as a group discussion that you have, with particular people about a certain topic, nothing about that definition suggests anything about being culturally responsive, or social justice, or empowerment or anything like this. So there's no commitment to those kinds of things in a traditional focus group, and actually some of the history of focus group, how did the methodology itself come about, it's through marketing. And so it has its own history. And what I'm saying is, okay, focus group has a unique history, it comes out of marketing techniques, when people trying to get information about different things different I don't know, you can think of different items in the store or different interventions, and people want it to have groups come together and give their opinion about those things. And then it moves into social science. And now what I'm saying is, we can enhance the traditional focus group from how it was previously done to be squarely focused on social justice kinds of aims and orientations. And I was just gonna say this as well. That's what makes it different. But also, when we say social justice, that means so many different things. And we have to even clarify what that means, given the people that we're working with. So it's just a real, intentional approach around actionable data, working with the community, thinking better about them in terms of the protocol, the questions we're asking and having them participate to some extent in that in terms of giving their feedback about what they want to, you know, share, and how could it be beneficial to them?12:48And so you suggest that multicultural validity and inquirer reflexivity as criteria for establishing qualitative rigor and focus groups. Can you tell us more about that?12:58Sure, it's kind of hard to do in a little bit of time. But I will refer people to the person that I drew from in those discussions, Travis, and that is the work of Karen Kirkhart. And Karen Kirkhart is a very wonderful, thoughtful, culturally responsive inquirer. And I drew on her word to explain those things primarily, and Hazel Symonette as well in terms of reflexivity. But Karen Kirkhart has articles and things about multicultural validity, as she says a lot of things about that, that folks can go and look at later. But one point that I tried to make in the book and for the purposes of the podcast, I'll say is consequential validity is part of that. And what that means is thinking about the consequences of our focus groups for the people that are participating. We don't want to put people in harm's way. We don't want to put people in jeopardy. And so what are the consequences of these people, whoever they are participating in your focus group. And that's one of the aspects of multicultural validity. The other thing that Karen Kerr cart makes very clear that I appreciate is that this isn't some other kind of validity. This actually is part of regular validity, if you will, and does do a lot to enhance the credibility quality of the work. And you also mentioned reflexivity. I drew on the work of Hazel Symonette and she does a very good job of speaking on this, but I won't do it justice but I will say the main point with reflexivity is to as researchers evaluators, is to not just think about what's happening, but create an action plan in response to things so it's not just reflection as an "Oh, I sit and think about what happened that was horrible or that was great." But what are you now going to to do and that's reflexivity, how are you now going to adopt the design if the protocol isn't working? Now what? So that's what I'll say about those two things. I won't do them justice in the podcast, but certainly both can, you know, go back and follow up on that.Travis Marn  15:18And they can read your book for even more insights. And that's something reflexivity is definitely something just so vital to all qualitative researchers. One thing that I'm interested in is novice researchers who are kind of looking to bring social justice into focus their focus group method, where do novice researchers were can they start to kind of go down this path of social justice in focus groups?Jori Hall  15:43That is a great question, where to begin? I think a great philosopher Winnie the Pooh said, "start at the beginning." I don't know if it was Winnie the Pooh, but I always like that, um, anyway, I think that one of the things to do is to learn about the strengths and the limitations of focus groups. So when I work with graduate students, which I tend to do a lot, I tried to suggest to them very strongly that whatever method you're interested in, you want to know the ins and outs of the method, what can it afford? And what are the limitations? And I think that's a good starting place, and really understanding that so then before you decide where it could fit into a design, you already know that it may be more appropriate here and less appropriate there. Beyond that, I think once you figure out the strengths and limitations of focus groups, I think you need to think about if you know who your participants are, how might they respond to a focus group discussion, and getting feedback about that, before any final decisions are made about where it fits in your design, culturally responsive approach would implore you to get feedback on that. And you can get feedback on that from, you know, another expert in the field, or someone in the community that you intend to work with or working with. But those are the two places that I would encourage folks to begin,Travis Marn  17:16I think there's no substitute for just knowing the method in and out. And your book, I think provides such a great set of tools for our novice researchers to really engage with the focus group. So shifting topics a little bit. A lot of people who listen to this podcast are people who are writing books or want to write books. So I'd be very curious. So can you describe your process for writing and publishing this book?Jori Hall  17:39Travis, it was bananas. Writing a book is more than a notion, right? Like, let's just be honest. So but in all seriousness, one of the first things is to write a proposal, and usually publishers out there, if you intend to go with a publisher, they have a template for you. And they will tell you exactly the things to include in our proposal. One of the key things, there's a lot of key things, but one of the key things that you want to think about is if you're writing your book, what are the books that are related to the kind of book you want to write about? So for me, it was what's already out there in terms of books on focus groups, and I wanted to pitch how my book is different from those books, right? Like, what is it that my book is doing that those other books aren't doing or aren't doing as well, or that I will do differently. And so I would encourage people who are interested in writing a book to survey what books are out there that are related to the kind of book that they would like to write, and you need a sample of let's say, like, you know, a handful or so and then from there, carefully begin to articulate how your book is going to do something different or stand out above those books, right? And how is it going to contribute to whatever literature you're trying to contribute to?Travis Marn  19:00And so the actual writing of the book, how can you describe the writing process?Jori Hall  19:05Sure, well, that was bananas, too. But what helped is that I talked to people who, who wrote books, to get feedback from them how they went through the process. But ultimately, Travis, you know how it is, is, you have to come to your own way of doing something, you have to adapt it for yourself, you have to figure out what works for you. And what worked for me was plotting out my writing time and sticking to it. So what that means is we're on semesters, so I had goals for each semester about where I wanted to go with the book. And I will plot that out for myself and then weekly goals, I will play that out for myself. Of course you negotiate with the publishers the timeline for the book, but you still have to figure out if the book is due two years from now. How do you write so that it is done, and we have benchmarks for yourself. The other thing I did for myself was I took myself on my own writing retreat. So I kind of eliminated distractions from just typical everyday life. And I said, Okay, I rented an Airbnb, for example, and plop myself in front of the laptop and plugged away and took breaks. And lastly, I will say, with the brakes, rest this, this may not seem important, but it is, rest is important. And health is important. Because what I've come to find out, you have to have a sound mind, and healthy body in order to be thoughtful, right. So all of these things play a role. If you're stressed out, if you're tired, that doesn't really produce your best writing. It's not your best self. So take care of yourself. Taking care of yourself along the way, is really, really important, given the stressors of everyday life in the stress of writing a book. So those are the things that come to mind straight away.Travis Marn  21:06It's very interesting to take care of yourself while trying to produce this work. I think that's a such a good thing, just to have researchers remember that they're human, and not robots producing this work? Did you write the book sequentially? Or did you jump around in the writing process?Jori Hall  21:24Yeah, so I explained this to students like research itself, it's dynamic, I jumped all over the place, because what would happen is I would get into a chapter, and I would be inspired by something which would then trigger a thought for another chapter. So I would create little notes for myself to incorporate it in another chapter. And I will come back to it. And so it evolved, I learned different ways of saying things. And as I read more, I was simultaneously reading a little bit as I wrote the book, and I think reading to me, is so helpful with writing is so helpful. So although I had goals to complete certain chapters, certain sections, believe me, I did have to go back into a section from time to time to beef it up, or to streamline it, to say it in a way that I felt like was more clear, more coherent. And then in the end, I had other people as much as I could provide feedback to make sure that the points that I were trying to, you know, trying to make came across. Travis Marn  22:34Was there any part of the book that was especially meaningful for you? Jori Hall  22:37Hmm, that's another good question. Wow you just come in with all these awesome questions, Travis.Travis Marn  22:42Um, I try. Jori Hall  22:46I think, for me, it wasn't so much a particular section. It's just I wanted to contribute, work that would support people that are vulnerable, that are put in these situations. And I wanted to contribute research and thinking about research that would give other researchers permission to tailor their work in a way that would not just benefit the literature, but would actually help somebody would actually be meaningful, and not give up on rigor, because I think there is this undercurrent, and maybe it's not an undercurrent, maybe it's this explicit thing that if you're culturally responsive, somehow you're giving up on rigor and objectivity or something like this. And I just wanted to contribute something that suggests no, actually doing these things enhances rigor. And you can also help someone along the way how, and to what extent, sure, that varies, and we could, you know, talk about that. But I think that that's what drove me to do it. And like with anything I see where you can be improved now. And, you know, I hope to continue this conversation about focus groups and being culturally responsive. So it's just a humble attempt to do that, Travis.Travis Marn  24:15A humble attempt and an outstanding outcome I think in that process, the book's just fantastic. So where can people access your ongoing work?24:25Sure. So Wow, that's awesome question, too. I the book is on Amazon and all the other things and then I'm still trying to crank out different articles, most of my articles, land in evaluation journals. And so the American Journal of Evaluation is where some of my articles are, that's the home for many of them. But what's also fun and interesting is you might find my name in some health journals. And that's because I also work with people in health disciplines and to think about, you know, methods and analyzing focus group data. So I'm sprinkled throughout different disciplines in different journals and things like this because I truly believe in collaboration, Travis, I truly believe in interdisciplinary work. I think it strengthens whatever we're trying to accomplish. And so yeah, I enjoy working with others.Travis Marn  25:21And I believe people can follow you on Twitter as well. Jori Hall  25:24Oh yeahTravis Marn  25:25Your hour by hour thoughts as well. Jori Hall  25:27That's right, that's right Travis. Travis Marn  25:29It was an honor to read your book as a committee member. And it's been a privilege to have you here and I want to offer the committee's congratulations again, your book very much deserved our 2021 Outstanding Book Award. Thank you again.Jori Hall  25:42Thank you. This was a treat to talk to you today. Thanks for having me.QR SIG AD  25:52The Qualitative Research Special Interest Group was established in 1987 to create a space within the American Educational Research Association for the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research. We invite you to consider joining the qualitative research SIG today. For members of AERA the annual fee for joining qualitative research special interest group for regular non-graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars as well as are many activities ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series, To updates and news related to recent quality publications and jobs. Please visit the American Educational Research Association's website at www.aera.net to join the qualitative research SIG today.

In this episode, Dr. Jenny Wolgemuth interviews the QR SIG's 2021 Outstanding Dissertation Award winner Dr. Marie Vea. Dr. Vea is the Assistant Dean for Student Services and Staff Development at the University of Vermont. Dr. Vea's dissertation is titled Sense of Place and Ways of Knowing: The Landscape of Experience for Black, Indigenous and People of Color in Natural Resources, Environmental Education and Placed-based Learning. The follow text presents a transcript of the recording. ---Jenny  0:25  Hello, everyone and welcome to qualitative conversations a podcast series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American Educational Research Association. I'm Jennifer Wolgemuth, the current chair of the qualitative research special interest group outstanding dissertation award committee. I am very excited to be joined today by Dr. Maria Vea, who is the recipient of the 2021 outstanding dissertation Award for her dissertation titled, Sense of Place and Ways of Knowing: The Landscape of Experience for Black, Indigenous and People of Color in Natural Resources, Environmental Education and Placed-based Learning. Dr. Vea is an assistant dean for student services and staff development at the University of Vermont in the School of environment natural resources, where she has worked and studied for over 20 years. Her areas of research expertise and experience include green jobs and internships, social justice, and engaged learning. Thank you for joining me today, Dr. Vea. I'm really thrilled to learn more about you and your work. So to get us going, I was thinking our audience would appreciate learning more about your dissertation work. Can you talk about your dissertation, maybe about its scope, and its methodological focus.Marie  1:54  Thank you, Jenny. And thank you also for the opportunity to talk with you more and to for the award, I was really honored to stand with so many wonderful researchers, and also to bring some light to some of the work that I and my co researchers and colleagues have been doing. And as you mentioned, so the title of the dissertation speaks a lot to what the content and scope is. So sense of place, and ways of knowing. So where we are in place, not just physically but also metaphorically and figuratively, and ways of knowing epistemologies, how we arrive at the things that we believe we know and are important to us and make meaning of experience. But that's specifically what is experienced for black, indigenous and people of color bipoc folks in the field that I spend the most of my time and career in. So those are places related to natural resources, environmental education, and place based learning. So I've worked in the Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources for 17 years, and have worked with bipoc folks coming through those curriculum in the environment, and have found witnessed the challenges that a lot of the students, alumni and colleagues have within environmental learning and working spaces. So the dissertation really focuses on what has been called academic imperialism and epistemic injustice, how ways of knowing and experiences of this population of folks are invisible alized, diminished, erased from the larger environmental narratives. And oftentimes, what I experienced is that when we ask questions about why aren't people of color interested, or in the environmental fields, it's from a perspective of no lacking something, or it's not interesting enough, it's from a deficits, perspective. And this dissertation focuses on the strengths based perspective because, like, with underrepresented folks of all identities, we're here, we've been here and we continue to be here. And why is that? How do we sustain how do we survive? So the dissertation is a strengths based perspective, with co-researchers that are nine alumni of the Rubenstein school. And we came together to share stories and images and reflections in an environment that really was inspired by indigenous research methodologies, methodologies and methods and came out understanding having a better understanding of our individual ways of knowing and our collective Ways of Knowing that help us to survive and thrive in these learning and working spaces. A big part of the journey qualitative research. So coming together with people that I had long time relationship with, and standing shoulder to shoulder and strength to strength with them, acknowledging and honoring their experience and wisdom, and uplifting, that they have as much wisdom and expertise of their experience as anybody that might have a credential behind their name. So the other piece that I'll just add in terms of scope, and I'm talking to primarily I hope, folks in education in higher education and environmental education, and in some part, telling them what has happened and how we can make a change. But really, I want to talk to the folks of color that are wondering, how can I make find my space in place in the field of education in research in the environment? And how do I do that, that is in integrity with who I am, where I come from my ancestors, and with a spirit of joy in the face of challenges, especially in the last couple of years. So, so all of that is, is part of the scope of this particular work.Unknown Speaker  6:26  Beautiful, I'd love to hear your talk. And and that really comes through so clearly in reading your work. One of the things that I appreciated about it as a methodologist is that the the commitment and the ethic and the epistemology, your epistemological position, seem to drive your methodology that the methodology emerged through the process of the inquiry, as opposed to what we so often see, which is the methodology was chosen and decided in advance. So I would be sort of interested to hear your thoughts on that, particularly in relation to your decision to take a participatory approach to do this as a collaborative work. Can you talk about why you involved your participants, as co researchers, and then more broadly, about the methodological decision making that you made this work?Unknown Speaker  7:28  Thanks, Jenny, it's, it's interesting and great that you should say that the methodology didn't drive the work was the the the work, the capital W work that drove the methodology. And if, you know, I was a career counselor for a number of years, and I'm still kind of a career counselor when I advise students. And oftentimes, I think the aspiration for all of us is that, that I can show up to my full as my full self wherever I am. And I'm working with students for the last 20 plus years and specifically with students that are interested in the environment for the last 17 building relationship, telling stories creating environments where people can explore and fail and be awkward and you know, share and be vulnerable is part of what I think really makes the community where work really vital. And so that when I was exploring dissertation work and doctoral work, from the very beginning, I wanted it to be creative. I wanted to I wanted it to keep me engaged, and have it be fun. I don't know that you can use the word fun in research I tried. And, and also have it be you can only tell stories, best the stories that you know, well. And the stories I knew well. We're working with students, with students of color, specifically, as they came through four years of development and in education, and then after they graduated. So when I thought about what I wanted to research and what what I wanted to spend a lot of time and heart on. It was with the students and alumni, actually, and these co researchers were alumni from the years 2005 to 2018. I kept in touch with them all of those years, dinners and chats and walks and adventures and really had gotten to see them through many years of change and, and identity work. So my I had several proposals for dissertation before it actually landed on this one. That's probably the case with A lot of people, but um, but out of relationship and love, I so wanted to tell the story of these folks that came through a lot of experience, and we're making changes in the world that I so admired. And I wanted to do it in a way where it felt like we were family coming together over the course of a few months. And certainly over the course of the year that I was writing this up. So um, so that drove the methodology, being in relationship, telling stories, being accountable to each other, creating environments where we could ask hard questions of ourselves, and of each other, and honoring the wisdom that they all brought. And it came together really beautifully. Because we loved being with each other. We love telling stories. And over the course of the two to three months that we conducted the research of talking and sharing stories, we saw each other through many changes and the methodology of a visual relational narrative inquiry, using images and stories. And using larger narratives as, as a means of making meaning just felt really natural. That's how we conducted our relationship, even before we could call it a dissertation research. So that's how we came to the methodology. And I have to, I have to give a shout out to my influences, Kelly Clark Keefe and the Rubenstein school. The the many authors, Robin kimmerer, and Gregory kahit. De and so many people that were part of the story and seen and unseen ways. It's a huge network. And I think that's part of a qualitative research is for me, is that it's not just when I sit down and crunch data, but it's all of my experience that bears meaning to what I'm trying to make sense of at the time.Unknown Speaker  12:13  I love that response I've been involved in pulled into not unwillingly some grant writing, and to do grant writing, you need to tell people what you're going to do in advance. And it's difficult to for me to, to do that we're going to do this in advance, but also hold that space for the emergent methodology in the emergent design and make everyone or try to make everyone on the grant team comfortable with that idea that, that in a really good qualitative research project like yours, the methodology does emerge with the work as opposed to often the other way around. So beautiful example of it. Thank you.QR SIG AD  12:58  The qualitative research special interest group was established in 1987 to create a space within the American Educational Research Association. For the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research. We invite you to consider joining the qualitative research SIG today are members of a era, the annual fee for joining qualitative research special interest group for regular non graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars, as well as our many activities ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series to update to news related to recent qualitative publications and jobs, please visit the American Educational Research Association website at www dot att era dotnet to join the qualitative research sake today.Unknown Speaker  13:52  I'm really curious about you have a strike through in your title that that caught my eye immediately. There are some words that aren't sticking through and then there are words that are stricken through and in particular, the words that are stricken through our natural resources, environmental education and place based learning. Can you talk about why strike through there and what what you wanted to communicate? And how other people have reacted to those strike? throughs?Unknown Speaker  14:22  Yeah, yeah. Um, so those terms on the in the field of environmental education, those are the most popular terms to describe anybody that is interested in the environment. And those are the names of the programs that are really popular related to that. So there's a familiarity of that. Oh, okay. So we're going to talk about these fields. And those all three of those terms have a colonialist and imperialist history to it, and it extractive history to it. So natural resources is extraction from the natural world where that the land is the source of goods and services. Environmental Education, writ large is connecting people to the land. And it was coined at a time where it felt really novel, to call it environmental education where environmental education had been happening for millennia, anybody who was living on the land was doing environmental education, and then place based education as, as a pedagogy. I had always had questions about what place whose place? How deep, are you going to ask those questions about history of place and connect and relationship to place. So I wanted to trouble all of that, to bring your eye to bring a reader's eye to those terms, and what those terms meant to them, and then putting a line right through them to say, you know, we're not, we're going to trouble this a lot. And I'm hoping to add hope to, you know, just pull the rug out from under some folks a little bit. But also demonstrate that we are going to go to some places where, you know, when you see something crossed out, it kind of gives you a little bit of a shock. And I find in my work that that little instability is actually that tension can actually be a really great site for learning if you're open to it. So that's the invitation.Unknown Speaker  16:39  I love it. I might have to connect with you after this podcast, absolutely. Questions and even some resources. So you're a fabulous source. So I'm just going to ask you about what inspired you to do the dissertation? And maybe that's still a valid question, or a good question to be asking, given everything you've shared so far, far, I'd also be interested in hearing beyond your career and your professional interest, if there's anything personal that really drove you to doing this dissertation.Unknown Speaker  17:21  Sure. Um, so I've actually been thinking, I don't know how far back we want to go. But I have been thinking it's I did, um, my graduate work a Master's of education at the University of Buffalo, in, in higher ed. And out coming out of that, I knew that I wanted to do a doctorate at some point. And, you know, of course, I'm the kind of person that just sort of follows my nose and flies by the seat of my pants. So back then back in the 90s, when I graduated, like, oh, international education, that sounded like a good doctorate, and then I hold on to that for a little bit, and then let that go. And so that the the wanting to study more and study more deeply had always been there, especially if you work in higher education, it's, it's in the water, in some ways, it's kind of an expectation. And after my master's degree, I'd worked at a couple of different institutions, or during my master's degree, I've worked at a couple of institutions. So one of them was Naropa Institute, now Naropa University. And it's the only Buddhist inspired institution in the country. And so imagine, my very first day on the job, I was in tea ceremony for six hours. So that's education. That's incredible. You can get a bachelor's degree in transcendental meditation and these disciplines that coming out of higher ed, I didn't know you could study these things. So that was one experience. And then, for four years after graduate work, I worked at the Savannah College of Art and Design. And while I can't claim to be an artist, the way that these students are artists, it really underscored for me how sharing knowledge can happen in so many different ways. And that getting lost in a medium. When students would tell me they were up for four days straight putting their exhibition together, that kind of experience. I envied, you know, to be so steeped in what you loved. Doing and doing it in an experiential way, not just reading and not just with your head, but with your entire body in many ways. I'm finding just the questions that you asked me Jen and finding that those are those are really profound influences on what I how I wanted to manage my my doctoral work. And then in 20,000, in 2010, when I finally had time to take some graduate work, I took a class with Dr. Corinne Gladney on qualitative research and data analysis. And poetry could be data, what? poetic transcription, drama, really all of these things, images, paintings could be data and analyzes data. So that really got me going. And things percolate for me. So all of these streams of artistic and arts based kind of methods and looking at data and graduate work is beyond just doing the scientific method data and collecting data, and then analyzing it and putting it into five chapters of a dissertation. I got the sense that I could do something much different. And so I did formally pursue the doctoral work and found people that were a bit left of conventional to talk with and, and also being situated in a school of Environment and Natural Resources, the nature connection, there are so many beautiful metaphors, and synchronicities, and, and learnings from that area of my work. It all kind of came together. So I think I might have lost the thread of what of your question, Jenny, but the journey, but there were multiple, multiple journeys, that because there's a time constraints on completing a dissertation, I needed to bring it all together, and brought it all together somehow, in questions about my own experience, in relationship with other people of color, relationship to land and sense of place. And I'm really grateful for the folks that pointed the way in terms of what qualitative research could be, and what I loved, I love the quotes from thin clendenen, that...if you're, if you're not asking more questions, after your research, you're doing it wrong. And that you fall in love with the people you are working with along the way and with the work. And I can sincerely say that this is this was a work of joy and love. It motivated me through the work. And it also compelled me to finish it in a way that honored and respected the contributions of my co researchers and everybody that was a part of, of this adventure. So all of that all of my experiences, all of the adventures and all the detours come up in this dissertation.Unknown Speaker  23:04  I love it. There's there's so much in higher education. That that encourages segmentation and encourages only bringing in a piece of yourself or a piece of your life or a particular storyline to your research. And for some people, that's fine, the segmentation works. What I like about you is that that there's a wholeness, even as you said, the story you're telling is partial or even the story you're telling has multiple lines, and there are multiple ways you could story are coming to the dissertation. There's a sense of fullness and wholeness. And you're bringing in so many experiences and so many values and so many emotions into the work and for you, it sounds like it wouldn't be satisfying. And we certainly picked up on that as a committee as we read it. Had you not done that. So I'm grateful for your work as an exemplar.Unknown Speaker  24:03  Thanks. And if I just add one thing, I just want to name that I had the privilege of doing this as part of it, it was it was a benefit to me as as a staff person at a university. So I mean, I do want to acknowledge that if it weren't for even some of the systemic privileges that I have in this space. I wouldn't I don't know that I would have been able to travel about and, and and move in circles with this. So I mean, there are tensions with that to that, you know, the creativity that that is part of this and the magnitude of of the connections might not have happened if I was compelled to complete it in five years because I needed to find a job afterward. So I think there are those other questions I have about just a system of doctoral work where you got to get it done and you and then you got to go on to the next thing. I think that's that can hamper some people.Unknown Speaker  25:05  No doubt. So following that, what advice or suggestions then would you share with graduate students who are writing a dissertation? like yours or otherwise?Unknown Speaker  25:20  Yeah. I was thinking about this question last night. And my head went immediately to Oh, bullet points and all of these things and you know, straight strategies and tips and people. And and then I remember that last summer, so june of 2020, I taught a course, to graduate students called epistemological plurality, or multiple ways of knowing. And, and I had 10, masters students masters in the leadership for sustainability at University of Vermont, and then 10 doctoral students from our college of education and social services. And because I was deep into writing my dissertation, I was all about relationality and authentic dissertation. And really, honoring that this body, our individual bodies are the site of knowledge and data and research as well. So I had no idea how I was going to conduct the class with 20 graduate students with Masters and PhD level students. But at the center of it was that each of them are crucial sites of knowledge and crucial sites of experience. So over the course of those six weeks, they were their primary teacher and learner in that experience, I, I shared my thoughts, I shared resources, I gave them prompting questions, but it was really up to them to engage their own learning, where there were no boundaries, there were there were expectations that they would engage with each other and engage with their work, but no particular deadlines to produce anything. And when you take off those, the if you when you offer that freedom, and to express their their exploration, and their their questions and learning in ways that showed up, like music, and drawing, and bookmaking and gardening, oh my gosh, the energy that comes out of that the synergies that come out of that. So my suggestion to graduate students would be to where you can find the the spaces that really strengthen your own internal muscles, engaging the work that you want to do. When you really honor that you do know what you need to do. And there are coaches along the way, but you you're driving the bus and find the Find the language that works best for you. If music is your language, find that if drawing is your language, find that poetry and images are my language. Those are the suggestions that I would make to graduate students. You know, a couple of the practical things. There's, you know, graduate writing centers, and other graduate students that can can inspire and also motivate if I didn't have our Graduate Writing Center as a space where I needed to really focus on my computer and write, I don't I think I might still be writing. So that dissertation, but um, but those are some of the things was there another part of the question about suggestions for reading was thatUnknown Speaker  29:11  Yeah, absolutely. I would be interested in for people who might be specifically interested in your focus area, your content area, as well as your methodological approach. What recommendations might you give to them for readings that really inspired you and your work?Unknown Speaker  29:31  Sure, um so you know, the default I'm looking at my my list of notes and the the people that I will name all have doctor in front of them. Before I get to that list of folks. There are there were there were so many people and and more than human folks that were resources for me. So you know, I want to acknowledge The land I want to acknowledge the, the elders indigenous and and others that graciously gave their time to me I want to I want to acknowledge the other other people that are devoted to these questions, but not in any educational or programmatic sense. And I am going to cite one article. And it's called how to cite like a badass tech feminist scholar of color. And the point of this is unsettling existing research practices by centering indigenous Asian and black feminist perspectives. And as resources I would encourage graduate students or anybody that wants to kind of go off trail for a little bit, is to look for the sources that have been historically erased or diminished. They're not going to show up in peer reviewed journals. They're not going to show up on the reading list of the majority of your professors. It requires a little bit more work and some deeper questions, but it makes the journey so much richer. So having said that, and I think the other programs that I look to look to are the masters of leadership for sustainability at UVM has a group of affiliates that span so many different disciplines and practices. They are inspiring and how they move in the world and ask these questions. Dr. Carolyn Finney, Gregory kahit de and Robin wall kimmerer. Lenny Strobel, who is a Filipino scholar in California and helped me connect to my own Filipino heritage. I mentioned Corinne Gladney, and Kelly Clark Keefe. And the books that I had on my desk all the time, where research is ceremony by Dr. Shawn Wilson decolonizing methodologies by Dr. Linda Smith, I see that on a lot of graduate student desks, and then the authentic dissertation by four arrows or Don Trent Jacobs, those really were inspiring. And it held me up when I thought that am I doing this right? Should I be doing this at all? Is anybody going to pay any attention? They really kept me on track.Unknown Speaker  32:39  Fabulous, I'm so glad this is being recorded. Otherwise, I'd be madly scribbling. So right now, I have many more videos. Oh, yeah. Well, you send them maybe we can attach them to the, to the podcast. So right now you are currently an assistant dean at the University of Vermont. Can you talk about your career path a little bit and your decision to get a PhD and maybe offer any tips to those who are seeking both academic and administrative careers in higher education?Marie  33:28  It's interesting, because I'm just thinking through what what my what my career path was, I shared a little bit about it. And I really, if I were to really encapsulate what my journey was, I just followed the the questions that I loved and the people that I loved. And that happened to land me in higher education. It happened to land me at places like Savannah College of Art and Design and the University of Vermont and, and the Rubenstein School of environment natural resources. I think the experiences that were most helpful it were learning how to get to know people, part of my graduate education at the University of Buffalo, which doesn't exist as a program anymore, is understanding higher ed administration. And there was also a component of that where we learned how to be counselors. And we understood or at least explored the psychology and different methods of understanding how people make meaning and move in the world. And I think for anybody that's pursuing a career career where you're working with people. And when you're working with minds, especially 18 to 27 year old, and I don't even want to bound that in a particular age group. being interested in people, and being interested in how people behave, and what's important to them individually and collectively, has been really important to me in my, in my work and in my career and how I interact with folks. So I think if I were to lay each of my jobs beside each other, that focus on people place in purpose has been the through line across all of those from the from the time that I was an admissions counselor as a graduate student on up now where I work with student services and advising and working with staff on how to staff development in terms of professional development and seeking strategies and opportunities to, to, to, to work better. In some ways, I feel like I want to open a bottle of wine and talk more collectively and in relationship with other people about what that what career means, what work means what it means to work in higher education. And I think higher education is changing so much now, that the path into higher education, I'm not quite sure the traditional ways are getting the degree and applying for the job and understanding the mechanics and the politics of higher education. But I think, and I'm going completely off script with what was my notes? I think, what, what the moment that we have right now is really asking ourselves, what is the value of learning? And is it learning at a university? Or is it learning in some other way that I can contribute to my community contribute to the challenges that face us, and those challenges are huge, their environmental, and their social, and from my perspective, people at the edges, people of marginalized identities are bearing the brunt of a lot of these changes right now. So I'm in this moment, I'm, I'm less interested in career in higher education, and more interested in a pursuit in life that actually will contribute to life and living. If that's how your education, that's great, if that's some other venue, go for it. And I think the possibilities, we are yet to be discovered.Unknown Speaker  37:52  I love that I'm going a little off script to I have the privilege and the honor to have met a doctoral student who I'm working with right now, who is a career current career counselor at a university and getting their doctoral degree. And they are very interested in the ways in which the university does or does not function as a compassionate or as a caring climate. And so, a lot of the things you're saying or resonating with me about it may not just be that learning can happen differently, or that higher education may not be the only path the most joyful path to learning. But that higher education in and of itself, needs to shift needs to make some shifts needs to do some deep reflection about the kinds of relationships that it currently makes possible. And the ones that it can and should and nurture and the ways in which that nurturing can happen.Unknown Speaker  39:01  Mm hmm. Yes. So and you know, that I, I talked with students about internal locus of control, that's a student affairs can kind of term and in heartwood is that the metaphor that I use where the the heartwood is the thing that actually keeps a tree, upright and upright doesn't necessarily mean stuck straight, but at least having that foundation within oneself that you know, that when you bend in the wind or in certain forces, that you're going to come back up in some measure. And I, you know, I'll say, you know, to kind of bring it full circle is the, when it was clear to me that qualitative research could provide the flexibility and the grounding and the integrity that I needed to ask the questions and make the Explorations that I wanted to It also demonstrated to me that if there are a number of us within the system of higher education, exploring these lines of thought, and conducting methodologies that are within integrity and relationship, that we might actually shift to the experience of higher education for a lot of people, whether we're explicit about it or not, exactly, you know, whether we're, yes, I like to use the word subversion, subvert the status quo and subvert the systems that aren't serving. Well. So nice.Unknown Speaker  40:38  Well the last thing I think people listening to this podcast would be really interested to hear is, what do you what are you engaging and thinking with now? What is your work look like now? And how can people get access to it?Marie  40:55  It's, I'm laughing, because when I was writing my dissertation, the last, you know, few years, I'd say, Well, I can't do that. Because I'm doing this dissertation. Like, I'll get to that after I'm done. And everybody was sort of, Okay, well, let's make sure Marie has time and space to do this. And then when I was done, like, okay, now that you finished, can you do this, this, this and this, and all things that I was really excited about. But ironically, I, I'm feeling like, Oh, where did all of my time go that I said, I would have after I finished writing. But so what I'm doing is them. Because the dissertation, the work of that I'm still in relationship with all of those core researchers, we keep in touch. And that work is so foundational integral and consistent with what I do at University of Vermont. Right now, in real time, where I'm working with the Rubenstein school, in asking questions about how to be a more inclusive place. How to look at the curriculum and make changes to the curriculum, how do we change processes for undergrad and graduate students so that they do feel more supported as they pursue their degrees. So there's that work and doing similar work with organizations that are environmentally related, like fish and wildlife, and our Vermont agency of natural resources. So there's that I'm getting more involved with the Masters for leadership and sustainability here at UVM, that I mentioned earlier. And that's a really liberatory radical, love centered graduate program. So anybody listening, please look at that. And you'll see a lot of what I'm talking about here. Talking with the CO researchers, because qualitative research, I think, in its best, in the best of times, has ripple effects, so that the CO researchers have taken the experience that we had a couple of years ago, and are finding themselves talking about it or learning from it even now, in their different contexts. So I'm curious about those ripple effects of that work. So I'm gonna convene those co researchers over tea and find out what's up with their lives. Leadership practices, and really interested in leadership practices, and facilitation, facilitating, learning and working spaces that are decolonizing, anti racist,and joyful. And then the last thing I'll say that it is immediate. I've been involved with three organizations over the last few years that I'd really love to spend more time with. And I attend an elders gathering each year, where elders from across the globe, talk about their wisdom, share their wisdom, so I'll be doing that this weekend. There's a center for Bobby lon studies based in California that is about Filipino indigenous spirituality. So I'll be spending more time with that. And people of the global majority in the outdoors Environment and Natural Resources is also a national organization that I'd like to spend more time getting to know. And then on the lighter side of things, playing on the water, tending to my garden, picking lots of berries, because it's that time of year. So and having wonderful conversations, I hope with with you, Jenny, again, and with anyone else who's listening to this podcast, I don't have a website. I need to create one. But please feel free anyone to reach out to me. I'm happy to share my dissertation and thoughts. I have conducted a few workshops and, and video videos that you can find on YouTube that I haven't consolidated into one place. But happy to share that too if you reach out to me, and then reaching out to me that isn't in integrity with building relationships. So I love to talk with people that are interested with this.Unknown Speaker  45:23  Fabulous Do you if someone were interested in reaching out to you, how would they do that? Marie  45:29  Yes, so you can email me at marie.vea@uvm.eduJenny  45:38  Thank you so much for your time today, Maria. It's been a joy and a pleasure. And I strongly encourage all of our listeners to engage your work because it was certainly transformative for me, as I am sure it will be for many others. Marie  45:59  Thank you so much, Jenny and I sincerely hope we'll talk again soon.

In this episode, Amir Michalovich, PhD Candidate at University of British Columbia, interviews Dr. Christina Sliver on Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis. They cover a wide range of issues and topics within CAQDAS, share numbers resources and recommendations, and talk at length about how graduate students might benefit from CAQDAS. The follow is the transcript of their conversation. Amir 0:25 Hello, everyone, welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American Educational Research Association. I'm Amir Michalovich, a member of the graduate students committee of the qualitative research special interest group, and a doctoral candidate in the department of language and literacy education at the University of British Columbia. As a guest podcast host. I'll be speaking today with Dr. Christina Silver on computer assisted qualitative data analysis, otherwise known as CAQDAS with a specific view of how graduate students might employ it, the kinds of challenges that they might face and some of the ways to address those challenges. Dr. Christina Silver manages the cognitive networking project based in the Department of Sociology in the University of Surrey in the UK, for which she leads the training and capacity building activities. She's the co founder and director of QDAS Qualitative Data Analysis Services, which provides customized consultancy services for individuals and groups engaged in qualitative analysis. She has many years of experience teaching CAQDAS, and has written extensively on the learning and adoption of CAQDAS. Christina is co author with an Lewin's of the book using software and qualitative analysis. And with Nick Wolf Of the five level QDA method. She has also published key articles and book chapters exploring the relationship between qualitative or mixed methodologies and technology, specifically, the use of dedicated contest packages. Alright, well, thank you, Christina, for joining us for this podcast episode. I am absolutely thrilled to speak with you today. I'd like to start with a basic question about CAQDAS. What is CAQDAS? And why should graduate students consider using CAQDAS software? Christina 2:16 Okay, so Hi, thanks a lot for inviting me, it's great to have this chat. So CAQDAS is an acronym that stands for computer assisted qualitative data analysis. So it's used to refer to software and other applications digital tools that have been specifically designed to facilitate qualitative and mixed methods analysis. It's an acronym that was developed in around 1991, by Nigel fielding and reily, after they convened the first conference, looking at software to facilitate qualitative analysis. So now it's used as an umbrella term to relate to all of these digital tools of which there are now dozens available. The thing about CAQDAS packages in terms of their use by students, graduate students, also undergraduate students and other researchers is that they are one of the kind of tactics that we have available at our disposal to operationalize our analyses. There are some debates about their use. And that's something that we'll probably touch on later on in our discussion. For me, you know, it's really important at the outset to realize that, although there are many ways that CAQDAS packages can facilitate analysis, they can help us organize our data, they can help us access different aspects of our analysis process, it's still possible to do bad analysis using CAQDAS packages, just like it's possible to do good analysis without using them. So that's a really important starting point in thinking about whether and how to use these kinds of tools. But for me, you know, really, the main thing is the access that it gets to the process. So using a dedicated CAQDAS package gives us access to the materials that we're working with. And that will be the data that we're working with the qualitative data, but also, other supplementary materials that form the context of a given study also gives us access to the ideas we have about what's interesting and meaningful in our data, allowing us to get back to those earlier thoughts. And also really importantly, in terms of process, it gives us access to the history, the journey of our analysis process. And for students, that's really important because when we're doing a dissertation, it's often as much about how we went about doing it and the lessons that we learn from that as it is the findings that come out of our research. So it can help in various ways, but it's also a useful skill set to have. I think when you're learning about qualitative methods, generally, learning about the technologies that are designed to facilitate the process is really useful for anyone who wants to have a research career after their studies. Were there That's within academia or outside of academia, because many qualitative and mixed methods, researchers are using these tools for their work. Now, Amir 5:08 that's fascinating. And I think that the notion of access is really important here in the sense of having that possibility to easily retrieve pieces of your data. And also, how do you conceptualize that data in different stages during the project. So we know that there's this growing need for graduate students to be familiarized with CAQDAS packages, but there is some confusion sometimes about how CAQDAS software is used, whether it's a method of analysis or something that kind of supports analysis. So why do you think people sometimes confuse CAQDAS software use with a method of analysis? Christina 5:45 Yeah, a good point. And something I think that continues to be discussed, even after all of these many years since these tools have been available. For me, I think there's two interrelated reasons for the kind of confusion between the software and the method of analysis. First of all, a misunderstanding or an assumption that the software does the analysis for us. And secondly, unsubstantiated and outdated criticisms about the negative effects of using CAQDAS packages, in terms of the kind of craft work that qualitative analysis involves. So these kind of misunderstandings and criticism started in the earliest moments of the availability of CAQDAS packages. But despite a fairly large body of literature now that dispels the notion that CAQDAS is a method of analysis, these kinds of misunderstandings and criticisms are still being perpetuated informally by some teachers of qualitative methods who are not kept as users themselves. But also formally in the literature, we see these misunderstandings and criticisms promoted, and that's often also by non users of these tools. So, as a caveat before I, before I carry on and talk about that a little bit more, you know, I'm not saying that everybody should use them, or that it's wrong not to use them, it's just understanding the role of them is really important. I guess the assumption that CAQDAS does the analysis is the thing to think about first. So for me, there's kind of two differing reactions to the realization that the software doesn't do the analysis. First are those who are saddened that it doesn't do the analysis, you know, some people are looking for a shortcut to accomplishing their work, and they want the software to do the analysis. So they're disappointed when they realize that that's not the case. So technology is developing really fast at the moment. And there are now some CAQDAS packages that incorporate AI technologies, such as machine learning, and therefore provide a lot more assistance than than was the case a few years ago. But at the end of the day, it's always the user, the researcher, who decides what to do, who decides when to do it. And who decides what it all means. So interpretation, differentiating interpretation from analysis, I think something that it's really important. But on the other end, sometimes there are people who are kind of outraged at the idea that kept us would do the analysis. So that's the other the other end of that continuum. So those are the researchers who really price the human interpretive processes, which underlie many approaches to qualitative data analysis. And it tends to be the this group of researchers who criticize CAQDAS because they think that that the software is taking over in some way. And therefore, that's where the criticisms come from. So it's interesting to me that that idea that the software does the software do, the analysis is understood very differently, depending on our understandings and engagements with the tools. So I guess the other thing I just wanted to say is that some colleagues of mine, Christy Jackson, Trina Paulus, and Nick Wolf, they wrote a really excellent article on the perpetuation of unsubstantiated criticisms of CAQDAS that was published in 2018. And they look at four different criticisms and kind of debunk those, but also look at how the literature kind of perpetuates those ideas. And I think it's really interesting to, you know, reflect on those criticisms. And you know, if you become a user of a CAQDAS package, to understand the context of those debates, so that you can place yourself within that context, and sort of justify your use of the software. Amir 9:36 Amazing. I think there's so much importance in understanding that context, and also and thinking very carefully about how we approach the role of CAQDAS in our work. What I found so interesting about your work with colleagues as well, is that you've really tried to unpack different ways in which we can think about that the role of CAQDAS in our work, how we can approach it and how we can operationalize it. And I've noticed that in your work in terms of First in terms of how we think about the kinds of skills that we need to attain when we work with when we want to work with CAQDAS, or the kinds of practices that we need to engage with. You mentioned three factors, among other factors that are particularly important in the learning and adoption of CAQDAS software. You mentioned in your work, methodological awareness, analytic adeptness, and technological proficiency. Could you unpack each of these a little bit and why they are important for graduate students conducting CAQDAS? Christina 10:33 Yeah, absolutely. So those three factors come from some research that we did, looking at how new users learn about software, what the challenges are, and also how they adopt technologies in their practices. So methodological awareness, first of all, is to do with the familiarity with the variety in qualitative data analysis philosophies, and methodological approaches. And they underpin the choices that researchers make in undertaking analysis. So having a methodological awareness is the kind of overarching kind of starting point, I guess, in thinking about CAQDAS and adopting it, and it's important method, this method logical awareness, because qualitative research is so broad and so diverse. So the choices that we make about how to go about an analysis really need to be made carefully, and then need to be justifiable within the context of the broader qualitative research field. So I've often observed confusion around the terms methodology and methods, and with students often being very overwhelmed or confused about qualitative methodologies, and unclear about how methods relates to methodologies. So I spent quite a lot of time trying to talk about this with with my students. And the simplest way I found to explain it, I guess, is to say that methodology is a description or a roadmap of how a project will be undertaken, how the research questions will be addressed, I guess. So methodology describes how the entire project will be conducted. And it kind of provides the criteria for designing or selecting the methods. And methodologies are informed by two quite scary words for students ontology and epistemology. And they're used to think about our philosophies or our paradigms or our assumptions that we all bring to our research. So ontology, you know, in simple terms, is our view of the nature of reality. Whereas epistemology is to do with our perceived relationship with the knowledge that we're uncovering or discovering. So being aware of methodologies is really important, because it provides that description of how you're going to go about your study at a high level. And that informs the selection of your methods. So what are methods then methods are the data collection methods, so whether we're undertaking interviews or focus groups, or generating data from online interactions, or surveys, or asking participants to generate visual materials, etc. And then we also have analytic methods, which are how we're actually going to go about doing the analysis. And there are many different analytic methods, thematic analysis, interpretive phenomenological analysis, content analysis, discourse analysis, those are all examples of analytic methods. And so what one of the challenges is, is understanding how those methods, the data collection methods, or the analytic methods relate to the broader methodologies. And that kind of basic framing and understanding is really important, because it leads to how we use the software. So that's the first factor methodological awareness. The second one is what we call analytic adeptness. So this has to do with the experience in undertaking qualitative data analysis. So specifically, the skills in designing an analytic task in the context of that underlying methodological context. So it's to do with what we actually do when we analyze qualitative data, what we do, how we do it, the sequence in which we do it. And this all depends on the analytic methods that we're using. So those tasks would be different if I was doing a thematic analysis from a content analysis or a discourse analysis, for example. So some analytic methods are more prescriptive than others in terms of the sequencing and the actual tasks that are undertaken. So I kind of think about that in two ways. I guess, first of all, the kind of what I call the strategies level, which has to do with planning what we need to do and that's different from the The tactics level, which is how we actually go about it. So analytic tasks, deciding what to do is kind of at the strategies, the planning level, and how we accomplish it at the tactics level is where the software potentially comes into play. Because a CAQDAS package and the tools within it can be the tactics that we use to undertake those strategy level tasks. But of course, cactus packages are just one of the tactics that we have at our disposal. So you know, many people, before CAQDAS packages were around, we worked manually, right with pen paper, my first qualitative project, I cut up my transcripts with scissors and put bits of transcripts in different piles and had a big matrix on my wall. Other people are using general purpose software, Microsoft Word or Excel or other tools. So these are all the tactics that we have to undertake our analysis. And that's where analytical adeptness kind of leads into that third factor that you mentioned, which is the technical proficiency. So analytic adeptness really straddles from the methodological awareness to the kind of planning what we actually going to do. And then the next struggle to the technological proficiency is when we're using tools, digital tools, or any tools, how much competency we have in operating the software, and also the comfort that we have, with the idea of experimenting with the software, without fear of making mistakes. I think that's one of the key challenges that I see in new users of CAQDAS packages. In that often students are learning about qualitative methodologies, and software tools at the same time. And that can be really, really challenging. So many cactus packages, one of the best things about using a dedicated CAQDAS package is that it's incredibly flexible. And they offer dozens and dozens of features. But the challenge for the learner is that not all of those features are going to be useful for an individual analysis. So the learner has to navigate that all of the technological possibilities at the same time as thinking about which features are going to be useful for their analytic needs. And that's a really big challenge. So, you know, often, I see, in many of the workshops that I run, I see students being really worried that they're going to mess things up. So being scared that, oh, if I do this, then something might go wrong. And that's, that's often happening in the early stages of learning, learning a cactus package. So technological proficiency is about learning the architecture and the functionality of the software, and how to operate it. But doing so in a way that develops confidence to experiment and be creative about how we use the tools, because there's no one way of using any of these tools, just like there's no one way of undertaking a particular research project. So those three factors, I think, are really important in learning about and successfully adopting CAQDAS, methodological awareness and analytic adeptness are really closely related. And they're to do with the strategies that we put in place, whereas technological proficiency is at the level of operationalizing, those strategies using tools to accomplish our tasks. So despite the sense in which those factors are interrelated, and how they straddle one another a little bit, I do think that thinking about them separately, really helps students to understand the sense in which cactus packages are not methods, but tools. And hopefully, to see that learning about what to do is different from learning about how to do it. those are those are really important, but they are different. So differentiating between them, I think, is a useful framework. Amir 18:52 And that is really important points. And I think they connect directly to your some of the work that I think you're kind of well known for, which is the work on the five level QDA method, where you really talk about the importance of thinking, what is the kind of strategic approach that I want to take to my data analysis? And how might I translate that using the particular features of the software that I'm thinking of working with, and perhaps combined different software features in creative ways or useful ways that are particular to the context in which I'm working? So you've really connected to that already. But I wonder if you want to say a few words about what is the five level QDA method and what what it might be useful? For? Unknown Speaker 19:34 Sure. Yeah. So I think that leads on from from what I was talking about before, in terms of those three factors and our work with the five level QDA method built on our earlier work as well. The first thing I guess, to say about the five level QDA method is that it's a method of learning and teaching practice, not a method of analysis. Okay, so it's not an equivalent or replacement for thematic and analysis or grounded theory, or discourse analysis, or anything else is the pedagogy. Really, and we think about it as a mindset, a way of thinking about the role of CAQDAS packages in our work when we're undertaking any type of qualitative or mixed methods analysis and using any kind of digital tool. So our focus in the development was around three of the most well known practice packages, but it's, it's relevant to any digital tool, whether it's a dedicated CAQDAS package or not. And we developed it because we had observed over our many years of using and teaching these programs, and also talking with other colleagues that there were a number of key challenges with being able to kind of harness the software tool for the particular analysis need, if you like. So we did some more research into that. And basically, we unpacked what happens in the minds of those researchers who have become really proficient expert users of these CAQDAS packages, we've unpacked their unconscious processes, what they do without thinking, as they have become more proficient in the in the use of the software for their analysis, unpacking that, so that new users can develop the expertise that they need, without the many years of trial and error that myself and my co author on five level QDA Nick Wolf, you know, we both went through many years of trial and error with these programs before we developed the level of understanding and proficiency that we now have. So one of our key aims was to try to enable that learning to be shorter and more efficient, by really understanding those unconscious processes and unpacking them and making them clear. So it's really a framework for for thinking about the role of CAQDAS, and enabling new users to be able to harness in a powerful, but also a quick way, what they need to do in terms of students. They're doing dissertations, they have a short amount of time, they're learning multiple things. At the same time, as we've sort of touched on earlier in our discussion, Amir, and, you know, we wanted to enable them to adopt successfully their chosen CAQDAS package within the time constraints that they have. And I guess the key principle, which relates in part to what I was talking about earlier, is that our analytics strategies are different from our software tactics. Okay, so strategies are what we plan to do. And tactics are how we actually go about doing it. Okay. And related, again, I guess, to the idea that or the misconception that the CAQDAS packages are methods is that strategies are developed, outside of the context of the tools that we use, and really need to drive the way that we use the software, I have to choose the appropriate tactics for the task, the strategies, tasks that I have, in my mind right now. And that's the way that we like to think about how to operationalize our analysis using software. So in the context of qualitative research, our strategies are the objectives and the methodology and the analytic tasks that we develop in order to accomplish our objectives. And they are, you know, they are not driven by the software that we decide to use. They're accomplished through the use of our software. distinguishing between strategies and tactics is something that's not often or clearly done in the in the methodological literature. And often those two terms are conflated or used as if they're synonyms. So the basic underlying principle of the five level QDA method is recognizing that strategies and tactics aren't the same, and that strategies must drive our use of software. AD 24:12 The qualitative research special interest group was established in 1987 to create a space within the American Educational Research Association. For the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research. We invite you to consider joining the qualitative research SIG today. for members of a era. The annual fee for joining qualitative research special interest group for regular non graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars, as well as our many activities ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series. To update the news related to recent qualitative publications and jobs. Please visit the American Educational Research Association website at www dot era dotnet During the qualitative research sake today, Amir 25:03 Right, WIWells I've engaged with that work quite at length. And I found it very useful in my training or work with graduate student peers. But one of the things that I've experienced is somewhat difficult at times, is to really try to find a concrete way to unpack how different methodological approaches might look like how they might differ from one another, as this first step, before we kind of translate them into software tactics or other kinds of tactics that may not even necessarily involve software. Sometimes grad students may not necessarily have the sufficient training in how these different approaches might even look. So that's an issue in itself. So I wonder if you could share with us one example, perhaps in which one methodological approach might significantly differ from another in the analytic strategy that it entails? Christina 25:57 Yeah, so I guess when I talk about this, I mean, this, I think you're right, that this is something that's difficult to make tangible, in a car in a kind of concrete way. And I guess that comes, you know, for the user of a CAQDAS package that comes with experience, and with that experimentation, and that creativity that I mentioned earlier, but I guess it's also partly to do with breaking down the analytic strategies. So what we do, so if we think about analytic strategy of grounded theory, and then contrast that with classic quantitative content analysis, then, you know, I talk a lot about directionality of analysis. So, in broad terms, grounded theory approach is about generating theory from a body of data that we have in front of us. Okay, so generally speaking, we're working in a kind of bottom up way, in an inductive way, that's often described as I think in a grounded theory approach, often we do some more top down some more deductive work as well. But the general directionality of our work is starting with the data and generating an interpretation or theory from that body of data. Whereas their content analysis, content analysis is as tricky. A tricky term, actually, because it's understood quite differently in different disciplines and different national context I found as well. But content analysis classic quantitative content analysis, is about looking at instances of key words, phrases, and other structures or patterns in texts, which can be written texts, or can be visual texts, and counting those instances and potentially doing statistical work with those instances. So a content analysis can work either bottom up or top down, depending on whether we have a hypothesis that we're trying to test, some content analysis starts with a hypothesis. And our techniques are about testing that hypothesis. But we can also do a quantitative content analysis in a more inductive way, a more exploratory way, especially these days, when we have so much qualitative data at our disposal from the internet that we can harvest in all kinds of different ways. A classic example might be Twitter, data, right. And if I, if I gather 10s, of 1000s, potentially millions of tweets, then I don't know what's in that data. So I may do a content analysis in a much more exploratory way. So for me, it's, you know, it's not so much about saying, oh, in a discourse analysis, you do this, then this, then this, then this, whereas in a grounded theory, you do this, then this, then this, then this, it's more about the individual tasks that we undertake. And in the five level QDA method, that directionality is something that's kind of quite important to reflect upon. But specifically, we break it down to what we call an analytic task, which is the smallest unit of what we do the smallest unit of analytic activity, and they are specific to each individual project. But I believe that there are commonalities in analytic tasks across the different methodologies. So what we do is to try to, to think and teach how to harness CAQDAS packages at that level, the methodology and all of that background that we talked about earlier is really important, because that's what leads to specific analytic tasks, that at the moment that we accomplish a task in the software, it's just that task in and of itself, that's the important thing. So what is an analytic task? There's many examples. We've got many examples in our publications, but, you know, one task might be to read my interview transcripts to identify potential concepts for coding That's an example of an analytic task, a small unit of what we need to do. Now in any CAQDAS package, there are multiple tools that I could use to accomplish that task. Another task might be to compare theoretical and emerging concepts and explain their similarities and differences. And that may be a task that's relevant to all kinds of different methodologies. So I guess for me, the contrast, are the examples of methodological approaches that differ from one another in terms of the analytic strategy. Yes, I think that's an important thing to reflect upon. But I think it becomes concrete in terms of examples and learning, when we take it down a level and think about, okay, what is it that I actually need to do, and break that down to the smallest level, and then it's much more manageable to build up the activities more generally, Amir 30:57 you've discussed so far, how important it is and your work, especially how important it is that notion of directionality in the sense of sort of planning ahead, what you're thinking of doing, and we've talked about how sometimes there are some gaps in terms of knowledge about what it is that we're supposed to do with certain approaches. But I wonder now, if in your experience, are there any interesting ways in which the work with the software is somehow influenced or somehow informed, analytic strategies? Or how we understand certain approaches, certain methodological approaches? Because I feel like it's such a fascinating area of inquiry? Christina 31:36 I think it's a great question. And it's something that I've spent quite a lot of time thinking about, whilst we were developing the five level QDA method. And also since when I've been talking about it, and using it in my own work, and some of the conversations we had with our colleagues and other researchers using CAQDAS packages, really speak to this idea. And I kind of guess I've realized that there's a really important difference between what we say, which is that strategy should drive tactics. And that that's not the same as saying that tactics don't inform our strategies. So, you know, I've had some really interesting conversations with some colleagues who have said, Yeah, but there are things that are possible in CAQDAS packages that just aren't practically possible if you're not using a dedicated tool. And I definitely agree. So that is a way in which the availability of software tools, their affordances can change the way that we think about going about our analysis. But for me, that's an informing process, not a driving process. So let me give you an example that will hopefully bring what I mean to life a little bit more, I had a student come to one of my advanced software workshops A few years ago, who'd been using a CAQDAS package to do a literature review, because they've read and heard that it's really great, you can do that review, using these tools. And she'd come along to this advanced workshop because she was in a bit of a pickle. And she was like, she said, You know, I've done all of this work, and I can't see how it's helping me. So we looked at her project, and she had 1000s of codes in her software project. And upon looking at her project, and talking to her and asking her what she'd done, it became apparent to me that she hadn't read any of the literature. She had used tools like word frequency tools, to tell her what words were in the literature. And then she'd coded every sentence or every paragraph in which highly frequent words came up, imagining that that somehow was going to tell her what the literature was saying, imagining that she there that her use of the software would mean that she didn't need to read the literature that it would tell her what was going on in her materials, right, which speaks back to what we talked about right at the beginning about CAQDAS not being a method. Yeah. But in terms of this idea of driving and informing she was looking to the software to tell her what to do, and also to tell her what was there. And that's, you know, we're long way off software being able to do that. So, you know, I think there are certain ways in which the availability of tools can inform our thinking about what's possible and may change some of our processes, but the availability of tools should be used to inform our strategies not to drive our strategies. And I think that's, you know, that's a kind of semantic difference between those two terms. But I think that's a really important one. Amir 34:50 What's very interesting to me and kind of how our conversation evolved here is that there seems to be seem to be two different areas in which we might see live or work on qualitative data analysis kind of moving forward into, it seems one direction is trying to really maybe based on the work of others, like Joe Maxwell, for example, who has written about the theory of qualitative data analysis, perhaps we could sort of advance this field and thinking about what might be some of the similarities across different methodological approaches, and what might be some of the important differences, that might be a useful way to kind of advance both our thinking and graduate students training in how you know, those approaches might be unpacked and translated to different kinds of tactics, including the use of software. But the other interesting point that you raised that was that interesting distinction between the sense in which software might drive our our analytic work, as opposed to informing our analytic work. And I think that's a really important area to consider. And thinking about qualitative data analysis with software Christina 35:58 is to deal also with a set with serendipity isn't it, it's like, software, the use of software tools can tell us things unexpected that we weren't anticipating or looking for or, and that's, that's, that's a great thing, you know, and one of the things about familiarizing with our data and getting a real in depth understanding of what's going on, which is a key to many different approaches, software can really help with that. And you know, that balance, I think you actually say something that, that we should be reflecting on war. Amir 36:31 And that sense of serendipity really connects to what you also write about quite a lot in your work about the iterative and emergent qualities of qualitative data analysis, right? So yeah, these things are coming to twined, in interesting, fascinating and yet to be explored ways. This leads me to the last two questions, I'll start with one question about the kinds of challenges that you might have seen, whether it be challenges that students experienced, or other kinds of researchers with translating analytic strategies and tasks into software tactics. So if we were to sort of go down that road as grad students, what kinds of challenges do you think we should expect? Christina 37:11 Okay, so there are two key things, I guess, to say. And the first one, I think, has to do with what we were just talking about when you mentioned the sort of iterative and emergent nature of qualitative and mixed methods analysis, and that idea of thinking ahead and planning. So sometimes a reaction to the five level QDA method, and the emphasis that we put on planning is this idea that Yeah, but you know, quantitative research evolves, we don't know exactly what's going to happen, and you're trying to put a structure on it that isn't really there. And my and I think that's, you know, a fair point. But the way that we would talk about that is that, to varying degrees, all of our processes are iterative, in an emergent, some methodologies are more intuitive and emergent than others. But that doesn't mean that we don't plan what we do, it just means that our plans change, as we see new things and come across new things. So the planning aspect is something that I see students find real challenges with, because they haven't always thought that connect with that methodological awareness and analytic adeptness that we were talking about earlier. So they don't really know what to do, what should I do first? And it's kind of like, Okay, well, if you start to plan, what you might do, and then think about what that would allow you to do next, and then come up with another scenario, well, I could do it this way. And then what would I be able to do, and that helps you to see how important planning is. And I've really, you know, seen in with many of my own students, you know, the value of planning in terms of fair reflection back on it, later on. And so we have these analytic planning worksheets that we developed as part of our methods, which we developed as a means to facilitate the learning of software, but has actually unanticipated consequences of us developing those is that people are using them to document their process. And that speaks to transparency, and rigor, and all of those things that qualitative researchers historically haven't been very good at, you know, explaining in concrete terms, how I got from my pile of data to my interpretation is something that historically we're not very good at. But planning and doing that in a structured way, and allowing those plans to evolve and documenting that it becomes very useful. So I guess the other thing I just wanted to mention briefly is, is units so as I'm sure you're aware, we talk a lot about units in the five level QDA method. And this is something that quantitative researchers typically are pretty clear about units because they normally use units to determine their variables that they use for their statistical work right? But in my experience, qualitative researchers don't really think very clearly about units and are often not taught about units but units are fundamental to qualitative analysis. And we distinguish between units of analysis. So they're the kind of main entities that form the basis of our research. So that might be groups or individuals or organizations, for example, units of data. So the form that the data is actually in, so that might be a transcript, it might be a sentence, it might be a discussion, it might be an interaction, and then units of meaning, which are kind of related to units of data, but are to do with which bit of data do we need to capture in order to be able to access the ideas that we've had. So units is a difficult concept, I think, for students to come across. But in my experience, that the, you know, I've seen those kind of lightbulb moments amongst students most often when they get what units are, and why why they're important, generally, in their research design, but also in terms of how they translate their tasks into those software tactics. Amir 40:58 Think I felt that light bulb moment when I've reflected on what is that selection that I'm making in software that I'm going to continue working with in terms of coding and connecting to memos, etc. So yeah, these are really important points. I also wanted to connect this to something else that you mentioned before, how sometimes graduate students may learn software tools and methodology at the same time as a challenge. But at the same time, you also, you've also written about in other places, I believe that there is sometimes a disconnect between the learning of software and the learning of methodology. I wonder if you could speak to that? Because those are, you know, on the one hand, the there's a problem with learning them at the same time. But what about that disconnect? Is that related somehow? Christina 41:44 Yeah, this is, this is a topic that's, I'm thinking a lot about at the moment. In terms of, you know, there's different opinions about whether you should teach and learn methods, strategies, methods first, and then the software, or whether you can teach and learns the two together. And, you know, in my opinion, there are kind of three ways of thinking about about that. One is the kind of the sort of sidelining or ignoring of technology and just teaching the methods. Yeah. Which I think is does the next generation of researchers and students a great disservice. So you mentioned earlier that students expect to use digital tools these days, of course, they do, because their whole lives, for many of them are embodied by the use of digital tools. So they can't understand why you wouldn't think about using digital tools for qualitative analysis often. So those teachers who are not teaching them or even making them aware that there are digital tools, which I think happens far too often still, I think that's, I think that we're, you know, we're not being responsible as teachers, if we take that approach. And then then the, you know, then there are two ways of thinking about this in terms of teaching methods and technologies, and then how and when to do that. So there's the kind of methods first, so teach a range of qualitative methods or a specific method outside of technology, and then teach the technology and sometimes that's bolted on and isn't integrated. So it's like, here's the methods piece, okay, now go off and learn about the software. And there's not enough connect between the two, which is the disconnect, I think that you're you're referring to, another way of doing it is teach a little bit of methods, and then teach how that can be operationalized in software, and then teach another bit of methods and how that can be operationalized in the software. So that's what I would call methods into methods and technology interwoven. But then it's also possible and there are people who are teaching methods via software. And in the collaborative context, that's really useful. So tools that allow multiple students and researchers to work on the same transcript, for example, at the same time, so coding is a good example, okay? You have a piece of data, and then you ask students to code giving more or less direction for how or what they should be coding, and then you compare the coding and then you have discussions about Oh, why did you code it like that? I coded it like this. And then you're teaching what coding is, what the methods of coding is via the software. So there are different ways of interleaving or managing that potential disconnect. And I'm not sure that that methods first methods into work woven or methods via software, I'm not really sure that one or other is better. They're just different, but they're all possible. And they're all better than just not doing it at all. I think. Amir 44:39 I think we can definitely agree on that one. All right. Well, we're moving toward the end of our podcast episode. And the last question I have for you is just if there are any resources that you would recommend to grad students who are looking to explore analysis or analytic strategies of different methodological approaches, one kind of deal Deep into some of the concrete ways in which they could think about their data analysis. Christina 45:07 So there are lots of textbooks out there. My favorite textbooks, I guess, are the ones which which taught me back in the day. So Miles and Huberman then in the 1994 textbook remains, you know, really close on my shelf. And I draw on that still now. I also really like Harry Walcott's work. More recently, Patricia Bazeley. Her work her textbook on qualitative data analysis. I think it's excellent. So in terms of textbooks, those would be the three main authors that I would say, look at those first, there are loads of others really good authors around qualitative data analysis techniques as well. But you know, if you're asking for Okay, what's the starting point, then then I'd say Miles and Huberman, Walcott and Baseley. But there's also quite a lot of online resources now. So there's a website called Methods Space, which is pretty active and has lots of resources, which are curated around different topics. And this year, at the moment, they're going through the kind of whole research cycle, and each month focusing on a different topic. So I think at the moment, the topic is ethics. And previously, they did a whole topic on research questions, etc. So methods spaces are really great websites to tap into. And that's related to the Sage Publications, methods map. So there's lots of resources there, and really good links to online and offline publications, etc, around particular key methods. There's also a resource called Online QDA. So online qualitative data analysis, which was a project which finished quite a few years ago now, but was designed for graduate students to help them navigate qualitative data analysis. And what's really nice about that site, I think, is the methodologies area where there is a clear and short definition of different methodologies. And then there are links to further resources. So the key publications to read about each of those methodologies or methods. So that's really useful, I think, for students because, you know, if I need to learn about a particular methodology, grounded theory, say there's so much written about grounded theory, how do I know which of the things I should read and the Online QDA website has kind of done that job for students and said, Okay, this is what that methodology or this is what that method is, and these are the key things to read. So I think that's really, really useful. And the final thing I'd like to say is that learning about analysis and learning about cactus is really usefully done while still doing a literature review. So literature is a form of qualitative data writes text and embedded images, okay, reviewing is a form of analysis. Okay. And we can really usefully learn how to do qualitative analysis, whilst doing a literature review in our in our chosen CAQDAS package. So that's something that I think, is useful for all students who are doing dissertations who need to do a literature review. And there's a book by Wallace and Wray, Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates, which is a really, really excellent book, which talks about literature reviewing, not in the context of cactus packages, but in the context of understanding how to read critically how to discern whether what you're reading is of good quality or how it relates to your work, etc. and then how to write critically, which is something that I think students also struggle with in their dissertations. Amir 49:00 All right, well, Christina, that was a fascinating conversation. And you've just given us so many useful resources on top of a really insightful and rich discussion. So again, I want to thank you for taking the time to participate in this podcast. And I hope you continue to do that important work that you've been doing in moving this field forward. So thank you for your time, and hope to chat again sometime soon. Christina 49:28 Yeah, many thanks. I enjoyed it.

In this special episode, Qualitative Conversations hosts a panel discussion with scholars who weren't able to present at the 2021 AERA conference due to technical difficulties. The particular panel session discussed in this episode was titled Critical Participatory Inquiry as Sabotage and included the following participants: Meagan Call-Cummings, George Mason University; Giovanni Dazzo, George Mason University; Sharrell Hassell-Goodman, PhD candidate in the Higher Education Program with a focus in Women and Gender studies and Social Justice at George Mason University; Alexandra S. Reed, George Mason University; Rodney Hopson, U of Illinois-Urbana Champaign; Melissa Hauber-Özer, George Mason University & Jesuit Worldwide Learning; Elisabeth L. Chan - Northern Virginia Community College & George Mason University. The following is the transcript of the conversation. Rodney 0:24 Good morning. Welcome. I'm Rodney Hopson, a faculty member at the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign professor and evaluation in the queries division, Interim Director of Korea, really excited to have some colleagues here today talking about some really critical issues. If you didn't get an opportunity to hear a Ura, I was discussing for the roundtable disruption, interruption and change. It's not enough. What we need is sabotage, critical participatory inquiry as sabotage in and of the Academy. So I'm going to open up by having our colleagues introduce themselves and their key ideas and then come back around with questions of dualism. Melissa 1:16 I'm Melissa Hauber-Özer, as I recently completed my PhD at George Mason University in the international education program. And our first paper in the panel was a collaborative counter storytelling piece that I co authored with Megan, Sharrell and Elizabeth which examine an incident that occurred within our ongoing YPAR project or youth participatory action research project. And this incident, and then our conversations about it after the fact pushed us to consider our power relations within the collective and then especially around race and gender. And then our relationships or interactions with the host institutions within which you're doing this critical, participatory work. Giovanni 2:05 Great. Thanks, Melissa. My name is Giovanni Dazzo. I'm a doctoral candidate in research methodology at George Mason University. My article was titled small acts of sabotage, unraveling expertise to push for restorative forms of inquiry. And in this paper, I've been reflecting on my personal background and how I needed to bring this into my own methodological work. And as a doctoral candidate specializing in critical methodology, I needed to acknowledge my identity as a child of Sicilian immigrants being raised in small rural California town, into a family of farmers and laborers. For example, in farming communities, when we see smoke billowing from an open field of crops, this isn't necessarily a sign of danger, but one of renewal of coordinated and careful sabotage. And when done carefully, this practice called slashing burn or slashing cover has been ecologically sustainable for millennia. So I started to think about qualitative research in this way, what type of lens needs to be cleared, burned and left uncultivated for some time, and reflecting on which methodological processes have been around for so long, that they're worth burning down? So in this paper, I discussed three areas. How often are We inspired by the words of our co researchers and community members, so much so that they should be cited alongside the greats who have 1000s of citations, but where we relegate their words to the finding sections of our papers? Second, I started questioning my parsimonious citation practices. So in some cases, I simply use terms like double consciousness and simply include parentheticals for WEB Dubois, and our usual APA and Chicago styles. But it's almost an eraser divestment of knowledge divorced from the historical, contextual, political and racial. So this small act of sabotage has required me to credit and balance the words of others at the expense of my own. And last, I've begun to explore what I call known methods or those that community members and I already use in our daily lives. So when I talk about these non methods, it's not about erasing our knowledge as researchers, but more about acting in humility to unlearn our methods through the act of recognizing community expertise. So I don't simply dissenter, my experience or romanticized community members traditional knowledge, which is another issue in and of itself, but recent are both acknowledging each as residing in expertise. Thank you, Giovanni. Rodney 4:48 I'm Sharrell 4:49 looking forward to reading your work. Hello, I'm Sharrell Hassell-Goodman. I'm a PhD candidate in the higher education program with a focus in Women and Gender Studies. And social justice. So my paper is a self study as a result of a black feminist critical participatory action research project, in which a group of 22 undergraduate and graduate women of the African diaspora and when I say African diaspora, we represent black African American, African, Afro Caribbean, Afro Cuban and Afro Latina women operate as a research collective. Throughout this manuscript I explored an in darkened feminist epistemological approach to critical participatory action research as an act of sabotage to radically center black women's knowledge as legitimate. I document the ways in which I navigated in negotiated my ethical commitments and obligations to the research collective, through critical events analysis. Along the way, I realized that my voice around knowledge shifted, and my orientation in the classroom was disrupted. I look at three incidents around my experiences in the classroom throughout the article. Using the researcher journal as data and critical events analysis as a framework, I explored the following questions. One, how does a first generation woman of the African diaspora a researcher come to know to what does it mean for black woman's knowledge to be interpreted as legitimate? And three, how is research an act of self sabotage? As a result of this study, I found that in darkened feminist epistemological approach to participatory action research is critical to undo the ratio of black woman's knowledge in the academy, exposing the nature of white supremacy that maintains normative confines within the Academy is to understand the challenges associated with other cultural norms and standards, specifically black women to be seen as legitimate. Elizabeth 7:00 Thank you, Sharrell. My name is Elizabeth Chan. I'm an associate professor at Northern Virginia Community College, and also a PhD candidate in multilingual, multicultural education at George Mason University. And I worked also on the paper together with Cheryl and Melissa and Megan that, Melissa, so very well outlined at the beginning. Sasha 7:28 Thanks, Elizabeth. Hello, my name is Sasha Reid and I am a PhD candidate at George Mason, studying special education and qualitative research methods with special interest in intellectual and developmental disabilities inclusion, and accessible and equitable research opportunities. I'm in the process of completing a three paper dissertation which is aimed at understanding the concept of inclusion at the post secondary level, from young adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities through a critical participatory inquiry project. My panel paper was titled sabotaging method the tensions of accepting responsibility. And I'm drawing particularly from paper three, which documents the process of how I've approached navigate, and in reconciling my researcher responsibilities and commitments to my researcher group during the entire traditional research cycle process. So question, design and approach, data collection, data analysis, and deciding on next steps. And I'm really focusing on where and how I'm yielding my position of power to disrupt that traditional cycle, and where I can design or simply leave room for organic participation to occur with participants with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Throughout I'm grappling with the following questions which guide the paper from the era panel? What is recognized as Reacher research in my field, field being special education and disabilities? And how am I now forgetting the difference between a method and a way of inquiry to Who is this research for and three, how is my power and positionality as a person who does not identify as having disability tied up in this tension of responsibility, my responsibility to produce knowledge that's deemed academically significant, as well as my responsibility to meaningfully include a commonly forgotten population in the research arena. Megan 9:52 Thanks, Sasha. My name is Megan Call-Cummings. I'm an assistant professor of research methods at George Mason University where we're all From in one way or another, so I specialize in participatory feminist and critical qualitative methodologies. The paper I wrote for this panel is called sabotaging significance, a call for less research and more organizing. The paper is kind of a description of my journey of sort of critical reflexivity and kind of messy and fluid processes of both and sometimes simultaneous adaptation to and also rejection of the status quo within academia. So over the course of the last seven years, I've sort of shifted professional positions from doctoral student to university faculty member and I've kind of flipped back and forth often between a research trajectory that I would consider to be kind of like edgy and anti racist, but still within the bounds, like the safety bounds of being deemed acceptable. And then research that kind of tries to give the middle finger to academia to you know, my university, even my future tenure committee, right? It's like, whatever I'm going to do what I want. If I get tenure, it is what it is right? So I kind of flip between those two often. So the paper follows this, this messy journey offering vignettes to illustrate the kind of difficult process of really, completely altering the way academia understands and applies the intertwined white supremacist concepts of rigor, validity, trustworthiness and of course, significance. So these concepts and practices, I argue in the paper are applied routinely and often invisibly, as tools of domination and control, as as much that calls itself research. So what I argue in the end, is that what we need, just like Eve tuck has said in this moment is less research and more organizing. And I wonder, you know, how would we measure the significance of such a move? For you? Awesome. Rodney 12:02 Well, let's go back to you. Actually, Megan, because I'm familiar with your work in this panel, seems to be an offshoot of some other work that you've been doing been asking, bringing in other saboteurs and other critical participants in this space. So what led us to this particular work at AERA in this presentation? And tell us a little bit more, Megan 12:24 if you don't mind? Thanks, Rodney. I appreciate that. So, yeah, we were all part of a class last summer, this summer of 2020, I had planned to facilitate a special topics class on decolonizing methodologies, really, because several students, you know, like the ones here and others had kind of come to me and said, this is something that they needed. So I put together a syllabus during the spring semester, I knew it would be online because of COVID. And then you guys can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think it was like less than a week before the class actually started, that George Floyd was murdered by police officers and on protests for racial justice erupted across the US and the world. So that not only became I mean, the sense of a backdrop really doesn't do it justice in terms of how it affected that class, it was like this simultaneous experience, we were all living in different ways, because of our different identities and connections to racial injustice, and things like that. And so, so it became these class discussions were like rich and messy and raw with vulnerability and anger and resentment of academia, and are places within the structure that's so often thick with injustice and inequity, but simultaneously have as so many people working for justice and equity. And it was actually one of Giovanni's posts, I think, along with some of Eve Tech's work that we read together, I believe that that suggested the idea of sabotage, right? The idea that what's needed now is, as Giovanni said, burn the place down, or start little fires everywhere, right? What's needed now is is not more research, right is not more research into what's wrong or who the problems are. But it's about organizing. It's about scholars becoming an activist and taking responsibility and ownership of these processes. So we talked a lot about being tired of academia or the way things are in higher ed the status quo. And so that's kind of what led us to the idea of this panel. Rodney 14:33 Yeah, that's, that's, that's quite helpful. Maybe I'll just pick on you Giovanni, as well to talk a bit a bit about both the theoretical frameworks that have inspired this work around subtour mean you don't have resistance. You don't use like resistant or resist or and then mean. Tell us more about what it is for you to bring those. Those frameworks slash and burn from the farming. Italian migrant. Please make the connection. Giovanni 15:01 Yeah, absolutely. I mean, first for me, looking at conceptual and theoretical frameworks I've been using more recently, I have put aside the academic literature, I have spoken with my grandfather, and spoken to my parents. And first and foremost, I have also spoken to community members that I work alongside in Guatemala who are ..., Maya, farmers, laborers, community members. And so when I started to think about theoretical frameworks, and what it means to theorize, I stepped away from the traditional scholars because I felt this needed to be my first small act of sabotage in unraveling. What I was socialized to think was expertise. So as now, as I construct conceptual frameworks or theoretical frameworks for my own dissertation, and various articles, I actually start with the words of community members and cite them alongside the greats, including Paulo Freire, a bell hooks, Martin barro web Dubois. But second, I've been engaging more and more with sociological theory and Communication Studies since I typically conduct applied research and program evaluation on human rights and justice initiatives. So Daren Barney's work on sabotage and the politics of withdraw have been pivotal for me, as it provides this theoretical grounding and critical theory and historical examples of sabotage, and how we don't really talk about sabotage when we engage in Marxist theory, and thinking about sabotage and and this politics of withdraw. I've been engaging a lot with the work of activists and scholar activists who talk about the politics and epistemology of self determination. Everyone from Kwame Nkrumah, Angela Davis, Patricia Hill-Collins. And then following on that, when it comes to these citation practices that I talked about, I argue that the way we cite is similar to what bud Hall and we're just 10 done in their 2017 paper on decolonizing. Knowledge call accumulation is dispossession, a term they credit to the work of geographer David Harvey. So in their example, just as universities stolen accumulated land by native and indigenous peoples to build campuses that would then dispossessed them of the right to then live, earn and learn on that land. We do the same as we race to accumulate as many citations of our own work by citing the work of great individuals that came before us, but forgetting those who inspired us in the communities we work in. So I see this as a form of resistance and refusal. In the words of Tuck and Yang to this parsimonious language, we're often forced to use just another small act of sabotage to the way that academics and citation habits unintentionally or intentionally silence entire populations. And when I think about this idea of known methods, I credit the work of Ignacio Martin barro, who was an El Salvadoran, Jesuit priest, and psychologist. And he called on researchers to de-ideologized everyday experience by working with communities to co construct data through routine practices. So now in our collective, we explore how ... Maya, traditional oral traditions and storytelling, as well as their traditional ceremonies can be integrated. But then also, I've pushed back against my own methodological associate realization and asked, what, how did I collect data before I was a doctoral candidate, when I was in a farming community. And so for Italians, it's often that we take a stroll. And so this is what I've been doing with my co researchers is that we often take us take a stroll, and we talk and they narrate their experiences and their landmarks. And an Italian it's called body on the passage of that. But now I think of that as one of my methods, one of my known methods that I've actually forgotten about, because I've taken so many courses on research methods. So that's really how I've been thinking about these small acts of sabotage. That what if we brought in more of our own every day, when we thought about method, rather than solely recognizing the easy things that we identify where we've carefully constructed ourselves through methodological training? Rodney 19:44 Hmm, let me. I'm not going to unpack that. I want to ask Sharrell to do a little bit of unpacking, actually. And thank you for that, Giovanni, because you've, you've left us with a few things to think about. What's your role I'd like you to to help us think about this balance. This this balance, oftentimes is contradiction in this tension in the academy between and picking up on some more Giovanni says was known methods, methods that exist and trying to engage in some methodological sabotage he makes it sound like we should be in the form of the farmland. But we're we're not always in the farm level we're calling one. We're calling out other others. So how do you? How do you think about this? Sharrell 20:34 Yeah, I think and this, your point really segues nicely to what Giovanni was talking about to lay the groundwork. And I think, you know, I try to think about my epistemological and ontological commitments, and to what into whom my research is answerable, and accountable to thinking about Patel's work, like specifically, I tried to engage in anti racist and D colonial research methods that center those that have been on the margins. And I try to be concerned with the lived experiences of others, and how they are centered in research. I think it's easy to get focused on identifying problems, to justify our research. But really, we have to be careful with these Western paradigms that center deficit perspectives, that focus on fixing people rather than attending to oppressive systems. With all that said, we also need to be mindful of the ways in which white logics and white supremacy is embedded within our research methods, and how we must work to retool and think about our methods and who they're excluding who they're exotifying and how they're dehumanizing people. What assumptions i think is also something that we need to be looking at, we're making when we utilize certain methods, what biases do these methods possess, that we need to account for and interrupt? If we say we are committed to methodological sabotage, I also think that that means that we need to be slow to conduct research. So similar to what Megan was talking about, and really thinking about why am I interested in doing this research? Should I be the one to conduct this research? What is the impact of conducting this research? Who will benefit from this research? You know, also thinking about how power is dispersed within this research? How will this research be disseminated? Right? For example? Is it published in a fancy journal? Or is it available and accessible to community members? And so so those are some of the things that I think about when trying to balance the commitments within the academy and the expectations, while also thinking about ways to sabotage methods and methodology? Rodney 23:04 Helpful. And thank you for the references. Let me ask you, Elizabeth as well to, to to think about that as well. Because one of thinking about John's stance feels working some of the notions that he lifts in terms of rethinking the ethnocentric reproduction of knowledge in our social science and universities. So how is it? And how might we as academics begin to engage in some sabotage in the academy with these largely older, oppressive, patriarchal systems that have been traditional, and have been driven in a euro and American thought for hundreds of years? Elizabeth 23:47 Yes, definitely. Thank you for that question. And kind of when I start out thinking about just the act of sabotage, and even just starting from that word, trying to get other academics on board with the idea of sabotage and thinking about it as a deliberate subversion to the system, that we are intentionally trying to be destructive or obstructive to the system. Right. And I think that's a good point that Cheryl had mentioned is just keeping the distinction there in mind between the difference between person to person versus looking at it and institution or system. And so, I mean, another way to think about sabotage is to think of it as as historically when people use the word sabotage, like some sort of plan or sabotaging your, your employer, right, as we mentioned, a way to kind of hinder the manufacturing right would be an example that workers or the labor movement would get involved in. And thinking about the post secondary education system. And with the rise of neoliberalism within the system, where we as educational experts are increasingly being treated, right like parts of this kind of machine, that we're we're churning out these monocultural body of, of laborers, right for the workforce, and a growing discontent that is felt by academics and educators. But it kind of with that, we also seen a little bit of this growth of apathy, as well, which I think kind of works against that, this feeling that this is the way things are going to be right, or the tides kind of swinging back and forth. And we'll just wait for things to swing back the other way. So in other words, they're thinking still within the system, rather than questioning the system and thinking about how we can start to do some of that deliberate subversion. So I feel like, especially right now, there's a lot of attention, people are paying more attention. Because I feel like it's always a political time, right. And there are always activists who are working and mobilizing and social movements are happening, you know, all the time. But right now people are, are paying more attention. And I think, to sabotage, you have to be willing to risk, right. So you have to be able to risk social, political, financial, other forms of capital. And so for many academics, I feel like that's a sticking point. That's a hurdle And in order to get more academics involved, I think we take advantage of that the fact that people are paying more attention now. And when people feel that motivation, maybe it's anger, or frustration, or around a certain issue, you do get more people on board. But it's not quite enough, because people need to understand why the issue is important. And that includes understanding the long history. And as you you mentioned, thinking of it in terms of ethnocentric understanding, then we know that there's that responsibility for people to do some of that internal work and learn more of that history and why it matters for them personally, and their responsibilities to that issue. And so knowing that history and questioning our own positions within it, and within the systems, then we continually reflect about what powers and privileges we have at doing that individual work. And I think during, at the same time, we start to build these relationships between peoples and between the academics within the community. Together, we can feel more confident in questioning the ideologies that are there and critiquing the institutions and the systems together. But to do that, I think we have to lay out a very clear vision of what the end result is going to look like, what we share in this vision, and to give very clear first steps that feel reasonable and doable. And then as we work together in that way, we, we have to understand that say we are supporting each others not quite enough, right? That especially right now, we hear a lot about I'm in solidarity with you, or I'm in solidarity with your communities. But again, we have to put our capital where our mouth is. And so solidarity is embodied practice, right? It's an embodied action. And it's a relational action, right, where we grow relationships with people in different communities, and that's from Fuji Connie. And so I really draw upon that idea to try to think about how to bring more people within the academic community together around these issues. Rodney 29:46 And that's very, that's profound. Let me let me move to Sasha to hopefully find a way to think through that. So I'm taking a lot from Elizabeth points here sash and one of them around relevance has to do with maybe one of the things you spoke on earlier the relevance of your work. Who's this work for? and responsibilities. Tell us a little bit about yourself your work in the relevance of your work around your topic as well, please. Sasha 30:23 I'm thinking about two points that Elizabeth made one. That The time is now and that we need to take first steps, we need to have a few clear first steps. I do agree with those two points. I do think the time is now. And we cannot ignore the centuries of dangerous and dark histories of research, particularly with individuals in what are deemed marginalized or vulnerable populations. One of which is the community that I work with individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Between between the recent efforts of the last half of a century trying to prevent the mistreatment that was their riddling their past and the socially accepted view, not my view, but the socially accepted view that these individuals will not understand the research or construct knowledge, therefore they have no interest in research or being included, included in the research has resulted in no research, including this group, it's lacking. In addition to that, there's not only a belief that this group will understand or group marginalized groups won't understand it's that there's a distrust of the data. So what they do tell us what we do listen, what we do hear from them. We don't believe in order to triangulate that data, we go somewhere else to trust the source. Oh, the academy and hope and what I'm trying to work on sabotaging is chipping away at that episode femicide, you know, D'Souza to Santos says, killing of knowledge, and particularly for the disability community, we've had centuries of killing knowledge. The research has not only been dirty and painful, it's led to silencing and truly killing of the knowledge production. it perpetuates systemic exclusion in research, and continues this gap gap between individuals with disabilities and knowledge production. I really think that's relevant to my work. And it's particularly dangerous in the fields that I'm in. Because special education and disability research tend to emerge from social sciences, social justice fields, right. And so the research that has been done, maybe seen as benevolent, but in fact was really harmful and contributes to the injustice in the silencing of an entire population. Additionally, to me, this work is really relevant because I like shut off that I approached this through a social construct of disability, not medical, not deficit view. biodiversity, including neuro diversity is natural, it's important, and it's everywhere throughout our world. Be Academy be institutions Higher, higher ed may still be an ivory tower. And I recognize that I am a tenant in that tower and rather rather comfortable. So how can I use my comfy position to push back push back what what the research mode looks like? In particular, for this dissertation? It's it's not following a traditional steps outline in any of our qualitative textbooks. It's it's not hitting all the check mark the checkboxes for a phenomenological study or for a participatory action study. But it is still solid work on my group doesn't fit into some sort of qualitative matrix. And I wonder, can this be okay and I continue to answer yes, it is okay. This is good, solid work. I am engaged, engaging in conversations and dialogue with my research community and I am exercising federates Trust through dialogue. These co researchers are the experts because of their lived experiences. And I want to center the experiences as expertise instead of well, the method wasn't followed through to see if that makes sense. I also enter this research with a background in explicit instruction, like training students. And a lot of these young adults have come from the school system, or the community system where they were trained to sit, listen, obey, copy, blendon, do what they do, do what somebody without a disability does, and giving room and space for doing whatever you want, say what you want, don't give, don't answer the way you think it is, or a test is a small act of sabotage for this particular community. But I I think that can extend to other marginalized groups as well. So really, I think just knowing that I'm a privileged white woman who does not identify as a disability as having a disability. I have a lot of power and then I can shake up what the privileged white male scientists and scholars have laid out for the last 100 hundreds of years. And I'm excited to continue working with my group beyond dissertation and hopefully lay out some new frameworks that can be used to be more inclusive. QR SIG Add 36:26 The qualitative research special interest group was established in 1987 to create a space within the American Educational Research Association. For the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research. We invite you to consider joining the qualitative research SIG today. for members of a era. The annual fee for joining the qualitative research special interest group for regular non graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars, as well as our many activities, ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series to update to news related to recent qualitative publications and jobs, please visit the American Educational Research Association website at www dot era dotnet to join the qualitative research SIG today. Rodney 37:19 Thank you, Sasha, that's also work that seems quite important and significant. And I want to dovetail your comments and relevance and issues of responsibility and carving new spaces to Melissa. How might we fear those who critique the saboteurs? What, how do we how do we respond to the status quo, to those who say that this diversity is about deviance or difference is really about deficit. Help us using some of the words that Evan Gordon has written in the paper as well that I'd like to come back to with other colleagues that help us Melissa, what do you what do you think? Melissa 38:26 Well, I would say that it's more important now than ever, to, especially for those of us who identify as as white, we have a responsibility to engage in explicitly anti racist work. Now that these racist systems and structures have been revealed to us we've been we've had these blind spots for centuries, as Sasha has said, especially in relation to people with disabilities that we have these movements going on right now reached the racial justice movement, of course, in the context of which we wrote this paper. And then as we revise the paper, and then it got it accepted for publication, more and more names are being added to the list, victims of police brutality, and now we see a rise in anti Asian hate crimes. And for me, personally, my research is with refugees. And there's been a lot of contention around the issue of forced migration and refugee resettlement in the United States. And here in Turkey, where I live, there's a lot of polarization around Syrian refugees, what their rights should be a long term outlook. So I really believe that this is the time that we need to stand up and push back Actually, this idea of sabotage is that we're working from the inside to dismantle these racist systems and structures. And so what we tried to do in our paper was start with ourselves, especially for Megan And for me as, as white women who have these blind spots, we wanted to engage in a really structured process of reflexivity, in order to kind of sensitize ourselves to how these incidents feel very different for our core researchers of color. The particular incident that we look at in the paper seems relatively simple. On the surface, that white man who works in the university in the facilities, actually he never identified himself basically accosted Elizabeth removing a table during this research event with us. And then, as we dug deeper, we saw how it was really racially charged, looking at it through Elizabeth experience, and through chevelles experience of trying to intervene and find some resolution for this incident. So I wasn't even at the event actually. But for me, it was a really important process of looking at how, how I'm missing the point in these types of interactions, how in my own research with refugee youth and young adults, I might be missing something that's, that's really affecting their experience some structural issues or interpersonal issues. So we took this approach of critical race theory and actually critical whiteness theory to examine these these kind of layers through a critical race praxis from Nam Moto, where we look at the experience and rethink it, and then translate it, looking at the how these racist structures and patterns of white supremacy are operating in our society and our institutions that are supposed to be safe havens for diversity, and then engagement, which is really grappling with the tensions that can happen within our research collectives in our interpersonal relationships, and then trying to center the experiences and knowledges of these communities, marginalized communities, and working towards more equitable curricula, policies, practices. So in my own research, I'm trying to do that with refugee populations. And it's, it's hard, but I feel that this is really our the commitment that we need to make as critical qualitative researchers to engage in hard work. Because we have this privilege, and we need to do more than just position ourselves as allies, we need to break down these structures from within those of us who have privilege have, perhaps more power to work towards change. Rodney 42:46 Well, I'm inspired. I don't know how much time we have and I don't know how much more you all have to say. But I want to thank you all for your appealing to ... of our communities, the self-determination. And not being wedded just to the university's own understanding of knowledge and relevance. Thank your for ... your pushing that notion of that understanding is the pure soul of what this work is about. Thank you as well for your parrhesia for your vulnerability for telling the truth. For not being afraid and coureagous. So as I turn back. I couldn't help but thinking about some things I'm thinking about now. The centenial year of professor Edmond W. Gordon who is celebrating his 100th birthday next month at the Teacher's College in a series of Webnars. But there are a series of activities this whole year. I hope you all can participate in celebrating this giant of a man. He wrote in ed research with fellow colleagues. This notioon called community centered bias, which is quite nice. Communitiy centered bias is this notion whcih he eterms as a tendency to make one's community the center of the universe. and the conceptual frame the frames all thought. He suggest that this androcentral, culturo-centric, ethnocentric chauvinsim known as community centric bias is rampid. And you all simply displayed that in yourconversation. I don't know if you all have anything else to say but I certainly would welcome your thoughts and some dialogue a bit back and forth,a bit more sabotour. Giovanni 42:46 Well i'll go first I I think you know with the work of of Edmund Gordon and and how he really brought forth affirmative, voices in the affirmative, as opposed to always looking at the achievement gap as a as a deficit, but one thing that i've seen as as small acts of sabotage. And really pushing back against this idea that our Community is the Center of the world. You know this is, this is a big thing in even Italian culture in Roman times Rome was was the Center of the world and that's actually something that often comes up in in Italian culture as much as. The nation has has struggled I would say there's still this this idea that Italy, of course, bread, the Renaissance, they had a number of other cultural and philosophical philosophical advancement, but getting into anti fascism and Neo Marxism there was the idea against this this cultural hegemony through the work of Gramsci and. And really in the Italian resistance movements in the Polish resistance movements. Looking back at those they had tiny acts of sabotage, or what the the Polish called small small sabotage your minor sabotage admit it was. They were things as simple as not acknowledging that you spoke German, even if you did or giving people the wrong directions simply so they would go the wrong way. And these are also things that are continued to be done in Italy in Rome. Just to mess with tourists, but I would say, even in my own work, and not only my studies, but my my full time job within government sometimes you have to not speak the same language as people and and recognize that so then it's a type of calling out and calling in to say. I choose to be different, and even though the work of sabotage is meant to be. Under the radar you still have to expose yourself, and I think that's important, I think. That type of authenticity in one's work comes out when. You enable yourself to. To be present to be visible as a Sabbath tour. Sharrell 42:46 I guess I can go. Next I. appreciate those examples, Giovanni because it's even thinking about my work and what i'm interested in doing is. working to site black women right and thinking about black feminist knowledge and it's contributions to the Academy that's often seen as an oversight. So I think about the work of Anna Julia Cooper who brittney Cooper and her work kind of in her work of beyond respectability draws from the work of Anna Julia Cooper. As this comparison approach right so specifically thinking about that as a methodological approach that's committed to seeing. The black female body as a form of possibility and not a burden and centering the black female body. as a means of black social thought, so I think it's about you know thinking about these different approaches and who are we centering. Right and so when we move beyond a deficit approach that seeks to sabotage Western ideas around research. You know, really exists, particularly we think about black feminist work exists outside what we think of as the Western research cannon. And so, how are we thinking about that work to infringe upon conventional notions of social science. and acknowledging the rebel relevance and the importance of centering black woman's knowledge is legitimate, so I think when we think about these acts of sabotage, we are thinking about. You know these ideas of resisting familiar Western paradigms that are oppressive in nature. Even thinking about scholars work like Dr kristin Smith, who creates a campaign calling cite black women in response to the academic candidate frequently you know doesn't recognize the intellectual and you know contributions of black women right, and so I think that's that's something that is really important that we're paying that we're considering we're thinking about these notions of sabotage and what does that actually look like and I appreciate Giovanni your connection. People, you know that we often don't see as intellectual so i'm thinking about black women are folks that were enslaved. And their acts of resistance and what does that look like and how do we take that to to the next level or how do we take that a step further and our own research, so I appreciate your connection Giovanni and just wanted to add my perspective as well. Rodney 42:46 Any final thoughts... You know... here's mine. And i'm just passing the baton. I'll tell you what it looks like. It looks like folk who have and can draw on a history of resistance not others not borrowing others resistance songs. Like I don't need Giovanni's farm songs Italian folk songs I have my own fucking songs in my own history if you don't know yours get yours. It's like Langston Hughes. The song the poem is I Sing America, I am the darker brother they sent me to the kitchen with company comes, but I laugh and eat well and grow strong tomorrow i'll be at the table and and nobody when a company comes. Nobody will dare seat in the evening coaching them there's a there's a form of resistance that's what it sounds like find your own resistance songs live your life.

Welcome. Tervetuloa. My name is Mirka Koro, I come from ASU, and I go by she and hers. I would like to acknowledge the land on which I am standing here in Phoenix and the original Hohokam caretakers of this land. I would also like to thank the Egon Guba awards committee and QRSIG chair Jessica VanCleave and her executive committee for this amazing honor and opportunity to share my thoughts with you all. Despite my indefinitely youthful appearance and my love of Apocalyptica, I have a somewhat lengthy past with qualitative inquiry. Aaron, Juha, who are my stimulating discussants, Egon Guba, and I are entangled in our past and hopefully our experimental and philosophical qualitative inquiries will keep forming and shaping new relationalities among us and others in the future. I think it was 1998 when I attended my first AERA, heard amazing talks, and met Egon and Yvonna. At that time, I also attended my first QRSIG business meeting and thought to myself how excited I was about qualitative inquiry, stimulating scholarly exchanges, thinking, doing, theories, and paradigms. Egon’s Paradigm dialogue and Yvonna and Norman’s leadership with QI and ICQI were very inspiring for a beginning scholar. Since early 2000s Aaron’s work on methodology, Foucault, philosophy, ethics, and responsibility has been intellectually engaging and provocative for me. My entanglements with Juha, in turn, extends even further in linear time. I met Juha during my master’s studies and he introduced me to the world and practice of qualitative inquiry. I remember vividly attending Juha’s lectures and methodological seminars describing his exciting field work. His critical scholarship, philosophical knowledge, work with Freire’s legacy, and intersecting lines of methodology are truly inspiring. Mahtavaa etta olet taalla tanaan Juha videon valityksella! Entangled narratives, shared professional and personal histories, paradigm dialogues, multiple matter of and within factory and working-class town of Tampere Finland, meetings rooms of SQUICK in Athens GA, endless sunlight and scented orange blossoms of Phoenix AZ come together today. I have multiple titles for this presentation yet all of them are quite inaccurate. Title 1: Restless methodologies and speculative wonderings multiplied Title 2: What does the light have to do with this? Title 3: Lived scholarly possibilities of (methodological) multiplicity Title 4: If we take speculation seriously…we need to multiply- also methodologically Title 5: Lost in the words but still alive-- many methodological lives of qualitative matter As you can tell, I deliver this talk with much speculation and hesitation. My methodological wonderings will not have core components or clear argumentative logic. The talk might not even offer anything new especially if one considers the relational nature of knowing and situatedness of being as simultaneously historical, already already here, and always multiple. Light encounters, in turn, have everything and nothing to do with my presentation today. This talk is designed to be light in its effects- dizzy, requesting little effort, having little weight, move away from inner light and truth, something that informs, to ignite and spark. I hope this talk may offer some provocations in the form of thoughts, wild ideas, images, light effects, and conceptual and theoretical movements and more. Maybe something I will say or do will enable you to enter the difference, feel affect, sense and live the methodological light/lightness and darkness differently, and access alternative spaces through unthought connections and different ways to work through and live realities of inquiry, methodologies, and qualitative relations. Still designs fail and continue with their hesitation. Provocation 1: Close your eyes and see. What methodologies become possible? I will wonder about the potential and possibility embedded in speculation and speculative practices in a methodological world where many worlds fit. Some of my thoughts today are prompted by the way I live and experience qualitative inquiry as a contemporary reflection, mirror, and actor in our complex and political global world. Many qualitative scholars are excited about opportunities related to experimentation, theoretical connections, onto-epistemological freedom, justice and ethical orientations research can offer. We have been inspired by the post, (new, feminist) materialisms, and more-than-human movements. We showed that qualitative research is needed, driven by practice, and can create different knowledges and knowledges differently. Recently, the field has also experienced ontological and relational turns paying more attention to ecologies of life and inquiry. However, some of my excitement has been tamed by artificial theoretical boundaries, conceptual regulations, standardized citation practices, overly descriptive guidelines, and other political ways to manage learning of qualitative inquiry and monitor experimentation processes. Occasionally I find myself mourning for more liberatory practices, worlds within worlds that stay open and welcoming in infinitum. Sometimes I feel saddened by the epistemological and ontological violence that we might have practiced against our community members, sisters, and brothers. It is also possible that I am late to the game, delayed in my reflections, dwelled in the past and we have already lived methodological pluriversity quite productively and practiced responsible collectivity for some time. However, I am truly inspired by visible and hidden potential, more inclusive vision and unthinkable hope for qualitative inquiry as a methodologically pluriverse community. This talk includes interrelated flows of relationality including speculative, experimentative, methodological, and plural flows. Speculation offers opportunities for creative imagination, hesitation, reflective questioning, and thinking with unthinkable futures. Experimentation reminds us that much of qualitative research is crafted in shifting practice, in artistic relations (Hannula et.al., 2014), and within different and internally creative and active time-space-matterings (Barad, 2007). Responsible methodologies and methodologists (see Kuntz, 2015) are needed while current methodological practices are radically re-visioned. Pluriversity and pluralism, in turn, are thoughtful choices toward more collective equity and ecological diversity. Finally, all of these relational flows ask for open-endedness and creative potentiality embedded in our ecological and relational onto-epistemological systems and practices. The flows come and go, relating and connecting logical and illogical ways while always creating alternative time-spaces. About experimentation Some years ago, I wrote about methodologies without methodologies, about methodological spaces without faces, names, and predetermined categories. I was interested in methodologies with inaccuracies and defects, abnormalities. At that time, my problem was the insufficiency of language, methodological non-imagination and inflexibility and my focus was on theoretical and methodological difference in infinitum. Now my breakdowns are more relational and material. Ndlovu-Gatsheni (2018) reminds us about a scary and lonely world without others, specter of difference, and the cruel and toxic identitarian politics. Now I see more clearly the vitality in pluralism, caring and sharing communities, and perceive the endless becoming of many. Worlds within worlds, methodologies within methodologies, researchers within researchers – in other words the multiplicity and methodological pluriverse are the worlds I want to talk about today. I also argue that for us to live the plural and many (also plural and many methodologies) we have to imagine. Qualitative inquiry is not a world without a difference and since its first visionaries and documented imaginations qualitative inquiries have been conceptualized as the other, multiple, and diversified. However, somewhere during the journey we may have lost our vision of this kind of relationality and collectivity. The paradigm and dialogue of difference can also be problematic since it is often guided by dualism and hierarchization leading toward methodological barricades, partition, ontological erasure, and epistemological colonialization. Furthermore, from the perspective/paradigm of difference one can also more easily locate and narrow down the ‘toxic methodological other’ simultaneously forming master subjects and methodological narratives. I think it is important to remember that perceived methodological differences are not natural but constructed. Provocation 2: Turn off the lights and sense the material you are sitting on. What methodologies become possible? If your momentary relationality to matter could speak, what might it say? In addition, I want to remind us about qualitative dreams, dreams of qualitative researchers, and the power of the unexpected. How might us, qualitative scholars, live our inquiries and allow more and infinite spaces for adventures of ideas and concepts created and crafted by scholars, surrounding materiality and all citizens of the entire world- not just the citizens of global North. For Whitehead (1967) adventures (of ideas) illustrate slow drifts of mankind toward betterment and civilization; a historical movement and adventures of framing the explanations influencing history. Not only the western history but the history of all humans (and non-humans). Adventures include a wide variety of mental experiences shaping human lives and their histories in diverse global contexts. Ideas also experience their own local histories. How do ideas arise and are infused, how ideas and concepts related and blend? How do ideas multiply in the infinite pluriverse? Furthermore, it is interesting to think with Whitehead also in the context of methodology. Methodological language has rarely been ‘correct’ and accurate and more importantly methodology has rarely been independent from other processes. Rather, I imagined methodologies outside the fixed, pre-determined and premeditated steps. Methodologies function as spaces for experimentation and as experiential experiences themselves. These processes have always had drifts, movements, and own collective histories potentially without causal and individual history and necessary linear logic. These kinds of methodologies still excite me. More specifically, speculative methodologies and experimental plurality seduce. Thinking with thought pragmatically—guided by transformation, application, and practice—has produced a series of experiments in my work including experiments with text, language, discourse, concepts such as data, slowness, seduction, academic conference machine, (methodological) darkness, methodological landscapes of desert, write-scapes, matter such as writing-feeling flamingos, ghost, shadows, monsters… and more. I practice methodologies while simultaneously recreating, reshaping, and reformulating the world we collectively live with and within. Methods do not order or predict the world, but they create an emerging sense of worldly events. Erin Manning (2016) noted that “Thought must not be mapped onto practice: it is an emergent, incipient tendency to be discovered in the field of activation of practices co-composing. To map thought in advance of its speculative propositions would diminish the force of study and reduce the operation to the status of the creation of false problems and badly stated questions.” (p.41). Experimental and plural methodological history does not start or end. Slowly and gradually, one may become interested in open-ended inquiry, problematization, and been drawn toward multiple simultaneous and conceptual shifts. Theoretical and pragmatic ruptures lead to inquiry and seductive forces of matter and images. For example, some years ago I was drawn to Baudrillard. Baudrillard’s work prompted me to consider how the signs of reality create a duplication, a virtuality, hyperreal, which made it impossible to separate true and false, real and imaginary data, matter, and concepts. Baudrillard helped me to see that objects and data can have their escapes, strategies, and resistance. “The more object is persecuted by experimental procedures, the more it invents strategies of counterfeit, evasion, disguise, disappearance” (Baudrillard, 2000, p. 79). During my qualitative research methods courses students produced virtual and hyperreal data, they ate their interview transcripts and documented the possibilities and impossibilities outside Cartesian dualism. Collectively with my peers I sensed methodologies and processes in dark rainy forests, words formed 3-dimensional cartographies, and sounds moved me toward more than human and beyond singular and humanistic dialogues. My scholarly body grew tired of linear logic, clear argumentation structures, and valid research processes. Academic conference machine took over my international collaborations and our ‘crazy gang’ willingly allowed tables, dolls, gorillas, pacifiers to take over and participate in our becoming and knowing. Materiality produced us slowly but steadily, relationality heavily guided our collective thinking-doing and enabled us to sense the world around us and thinking in action. The AcademicConferenceMachine and its striated spaces and regulatory intellectual organization created disturbing effects and we saw this machine as a reliable, regulatory, structured organizational space, a space of (non)repetition — which runs the risk of becoming so regulating, normalizing and standardizing. We had to conference otherwise and desire to craft alternative spacetimes collective grew upon us. Later, our sensing outside sensibilities and exploring text outside textual practices were guided by Poly-experimentalism, a multifaceted experimentation addressing multiplicity and plurality in their various forms. Following the practices of Delamont and colleagues (2010) who encouraged scholars to make the familiar strange, listening Norman Denzin’s (1970) proposal that sociological imagination should shape methodological thinking and practices, and more recently being inspired by imagination and performance philosophies that have emerged through representational innovations such as interactional theaters where “scientific” research is performed. Furthermore, methodological experimentation acknowledges the diverse processual, intellectual, and methodologic examining and forays that take place when scholars extend discourses and habits of thought as well as extend on common routines that seem to become habitual practice in research projects. Drawing from my work with Linda Knight we argue that methodological experimentation is difficult to pin down with a singular author, text, meaning, practice, discipline, tradition, discourse, or even example because it can vary in scale and impact as experimentations are diversifying practices. Instead of focusing on conceptual singularity and practical linearity of the methodological past, seemingly fragmented thoughts and acts are united through the concept of “poly” and multiplicity of methodologies across different flows. In my recent work on navel gazing my collaborators and I started thinking about research assumptions and practices that we keep hidden. This led us to think about ‘navel-gazing’ as one practice of excessive focus on the ‘self’ through aggrandizement, ornate reflection, or even self-plagiarism and self-citation. We laughed at the idea of looking at one’s navel--the image is a silly one--but we decided to try it. One by one, we tried gazing at our own navels and then discussed the experience, theoretical and methodological insights, and silly recordings of our philosophical conversations. The proximity of navel created an interesting paradox. One’s navel (including one’s scholarship, knowledge, reality, truth, practices and so on) became intimately connected to the physical body of the researcher while at the same time it was acknowledged that navel is rarely seen, closely inspected, and infrequently deep-cleaned. Yet (researchers’) navels form intimate connection to internal organs, trace baby’s connections to their mother, bridge the external with the internal, and also offer ultimately useless space and unused place of human cavity and relationality. According to Whitehead (1967) experimental inquiry avoids routines which force intellect to vanish and conditioned reflexes to take over. “The very essence of real actuality… is process. Thus each actual thing is only to be understood in terms of its becoming and perishing” (p.274). “A learned orthodoxy suppresses adventure” (p.277). Experimental work forms a fertile ground for troubling our learned orthodoxies and problematizing simplicity in its’ various forms. Wonderings about many possibilities of theory shaping inquiries, thinking beyond the thinkable methodological practices and countering existing practices can be generative. Methodological experimentation also offers endless possibilities to reinvent inquiries and re-conceptualize qualitative research approaches especially when experimentation functions as a vehicle and strategy to live our lives as inquirers. Whitehead (1959) distances speculative Reason from its (scientific and traditional) methods. Speculative reason’s “function is to pierce into the general reasons…to understand all methods as coordinated in a nature of things... the speculative Reason turns east and west, to the source and to the end, alike hidden below the rim of the world” (p.65). Speculative reason questions the methods not allowing them to rest. Whitehead explains how Greek thinkers advanced speculation by being curious, probing, questioning and trying to understand - everything. About speculative speculation Next, I will discuss some speculations of speculation. Speculation offers multiple strategies to think beyond the known, recognizable, and predictable. Speculation slows one down and forces us to think about alternative scenarios and differences. It does not take anything for granted and it is fueled by adventure. Created knowledges can travel from one location to another. Since 2007 speculative scholarship has taken many turns. Meillassoux’s speculative materialism, Harman’s object oriented philosophy, Grant’s neovitalism, Brassier’s radical nihilism, Bennet’s vital materiality, Barad’s agential realism, Whitehead’s process philosophy to name a few. In many ways speculation offers a response to the slow, hesitant, complex and uncertain world of methodological multiplicity and diversity that many of us live in and hope to acknowledge as a reality found and reflected in our scholarship. Speculative scholarship is tentative and thus rather impossible to repeat, teach, and even describe partially because language always fails. Speculative experimentation is less concerned about how materiality and research matter might talk back or have human agency and more interested in acknowledging that research matter’s dialogue and agency is possible and likely beyond human understanding, language, and consciousness. Like any theory, speculative theories are meaningless if they do not enable scholar to experiment and figure out things in the world. According to Weisman and Gandorfer (2021) “theory inhabits the gap between sensing and sense making. It is a sketch, a set of speculations of how to ethically and politically understand what we experience” (p.401). Weisman and Gandorfer exemplify speculation through forensic architecture which builds on a split of a second as a durational and lethal concept. Duration and spatial coordinates of a split of the second are in the continuous flux of matter, actions, and meanings. The indeterminate nature of split of the second makes this time-space lethal and extremely dangerous since it reveals the larger picture which unfolds within this molecular scale of time. A split of the second also functions as a zone of endless exceptions. In addition, Weisman and Gandorfer offers us matterphorical concepts as concepts that express the entanglements of matter and meaning within specific time-space frames. One might ask who benefits from speculation and why I propose that speculation is potentially needed and necessary in today’s Academia, scholarly climate, and field of qualitative inquiry. Our world is rapidly changing and we can no longer predict the most suitable methodological futures. Speculations may form infinite ways of life beyond academic capitalism, rigid citation indexes, and tenure clocks. Puig de la Bellacasa (2017) referred to caring as a speculative mode promoting interventions to become. Methodologies that speculate also wonder yet they don’t verify, offer fixed solutions, or pretend to understand the other and different. Instead, they care, connect and create educated guesses and various scenarios of possibility building on the exploratory, imaginative, and visionary powers of speculation (see also, Somekh, 2007). In some ways, speculation is about choosing and deciding without predictability and foreseeable future. Speculation also raises many questions without answers. For example, does speculation carry with itself an immanent critique of stability, norm, and of the anthropocentric? What critiques and collective discursive practices become possible within flat ontologies? Kaljonen et al (2019) described speculative approach to experimentation building from the philosophy of science, being open, hesitant, and involving participatory events. In this kind of experimentation, ‘participants’ can imagine and create new practices and framings. In speculative pragmatism qualities and knowledge are not mental building-blocks of real but practices ontologically emergent within nature. They are pre-objective and pre-personal functioning in shifting time frames. According to Manning (2016) “speculative pragmatism means taking the work’s affirmation, its urge of appetition, at face value, asking what though-feeling does in this instance, and how it does it. It means inquiring into the modes of existence generated by the act of “hypothetical sympathy”, honoring the minor gestures produced at this interstice, and seeing what these open up, in a transversal maneuvering (p.39-40)”. What might speculation do to a thought, to a thinking in action? Speculative inquiries, hesitant and slow scholarly projects are choices and these choices often come with bodily and material consequences. For example, speculative inquiry might emerge from collective subjects, immanent concepts, and relational objects urgently functioning as a crisis, pause, hesitation, horror, and revolt. New non-linear logic of speculative experimentation could function as non-consistent forces and dispersive matter. Can speculative projects forget their material and affective pasts? one might ask. How might spontaneous/restless/lightless inquiry feel? What might methodological hospitality look like? What degrees of freedom could today’s methodologies afford? How might speculation and speculative practices function in responsible ways? How might qualitative scholars think in knots and by tying themselves into knots in relation to spacetime and place? How could methodology as a matter of persuasion appeal to the experience of the other? Finally, “speculative philosophy has an irreducibly aesthetic dimension; it requires new, bold inventions rather than pacifying resolutions” (Shaviro, 2014, p.43). Shaviro writes that aesthetics includes feelings an object for its own sake beyond its legitimacy, usefulness, and interpretation. Aesthetics of methods offer affective potentialities through their relations and senses. More things are felt and sensed than known. Methods are a matter of degree and the world of methods is the world of experiencing relational differences. What happens to methods when the observer, individualism, and capitalisms are being removed? Maybe Alien phenomenology (Bogost, 2012) could offer some examples. Bogost draws attention to strange relational life of non-humans which could be analyzed through units, lists, excessive betweenness, configurations, and non-linear patterns. For example, when we can eliminate likeness-in-human-terms (within our scholarship), we may be able to attain the innerness of things of un-nameable units. What it is for the bat itself? Caring is creating and scholars could be moving from the problem of access to the problem of being with. Shaviro also proposes that “Knowledge is just one particular sort of relation- and not even an especially important one at that. Most of the time, entities affect other entities blindly, without knowledge playing a part at all” (p.105). Thus, Shaviro encourages us to speculate about things and experiences that we cannot access directly. Touch can be felt but not necessarily known. Every instance of beauty is something new. About (speculative) pluriverse Stengers (2018) in her book Another science is possible emphasizes the power of curiosity to bring things together, collectively and slowly change our world. [Slowing down science] “should involve an active taking into account of the plurality of the sciences, in dialogue with a plural, negotiated and pragmatic (that is, evaluated on its effects) definition of the modes of evaluation and valorisation relevant to different types of research” (p.52). After all sciences and inquiries are collective and value of individual and individualization is measured as a part of collective dynamics. According to Stengers speed also creates insensitivity. “Slowing down means becoming capable of learning again, becoming acquainted with things again, reweaving the bounds of interdependency. It means thinking and imagining, and in the process creating relationships with others that are not those of capture… the kind of relation… what a life worth living demands, and the knowledges that are worth being cultivated” (p.81-82). Could we imagine and experiment with methodologies which do not belong to ontological hierarchy? “All entities, of all sizes and scales, have the same degree of reality. They all interact with each other in the same way, and they all exhibit the same sorts of properties…Ontological equality comes from contact and mutual implication…They all become what they are by prehending other entities” (Shaviro, 2014, p. 29). The flattening of ontological hierarchies such as form and ground, past and future, foreground and distance could serve as productive provocations. Within this logic all methods are also embedded in other methods. Methods interact with each other also without human involvement. Methodological entities are distinct from each other only due to hesitant decision and spontaneous selection while still functioning within shared methodological and relational ecologies. Novelty arises from the act of positive decision and the act of decision is spontaneous and it cannot be predicted. A decision about methods needs to be done but it cannot be predicted or determined in advance. However, the creation of enabling constrains may assist scholars with these decisions and guide the processes of choosing, adding, subtracting, relating, juxtaposing, tweaking, and recombining and more. Provocation 3: Travel with a light beam in your home office/current workspace. Where does it take you? What methodologies could be added and subtracted? I conclude by advocating for methodological multiplicity in a worldly and experiential way (see Reiter, 2018). The world of multiple worlds, Pluriversity, is not an ontological project but a project of praxis. Escobar’s (2020) vision of pluriverse, following the Zapatistas concept “a world in which many worlds might fit” (p. 26) oscillates “between a politics of the real and a politics of the possible – between pragmatism and utopianism” (p. 226). Cultural, ecological, and methodological transitions characterize methodological movement within the pluriverse. In addition, this kind of methodological pluriverse takes into account biophysical, human, and spiritual elements. Diverse zones of contact beyond anthropocentricism become increasingly important. A methodological pluriverse of justices, matter(ings), and forms of critical qualitative inquiry offer new and alternative imaginaries. Mignold (2018) proposed that “pluriversity is not cultural relativism, but the entanglement of several cosmologies connected today in a power differential” (p.x). In methodological pluriversity methods and methodologies do not function as independent units but they are entangled through and by networks. One schema for methodological organization and design is no longer sufficient and different methodological approaches lay next to each other as pieces of mosaic. Mosaic methodologies search for alternative, limited, and contextual methodologies which potential is endless. Any form of knowledge is always in relation to other knowledges and methodologies. When methodologies are recognized as many physical, material, spiritual sites they are also brought closer to human and non-human lives and many materialities of these entangled spaces. Life maintaining and communal methodologies of the South and consuming and possessively individualistic methodologies of the North come together various hesitant but important ways. We desperately need more qualitative methodological sites outside the North America and qualitative research practice needs geographical decentering. As we further consider critical qualitative research that focuses on the complexities of justice matters(ings), the politics of research cannot be denied. Escobar (2018) provides a vantage point from which research can be approached as a political practice. He envisions a relational future which entails “the steady decentering and displacement of the capitalist economy…decentering of representative democracy and settling into the place of direct, autonomous, and communal forms of democracy; and the establishment of mechanisms of epistemic and cultural pluralism (interculturality) among various ontologies and cultural worlds” (p.76). In this kind of methodological world, methodological development is no longer the organizing principle but, rather, a variety of experiences and strategies are considered valid. Methodological processes are always under construction and criticality of our worlds and scholarship is a relational task and imperative. More specifically, this alternative world, a pluriverse, would carry forward epistemic decolonization, alternatives to methodological development, transitions to post extractivism, notions of civilization crisis, and communal logics. In addition, pluriversal methodologies build networks, assemblages, naturecultures, socionatures and strengthen distributed agency (Bennett, 2010) and and. Maybe it is a time for negomethodologies drawing from Shaw’s (2014) African feminism beyond individual methodological ecos and a move toward expanded ecological methodologies. It is clear that qualitative scholars are faced with modern methodological problems which do not have modern methodological solutions. The current methodological crisis has to do with specific kinds of world-making practices and fundamental methodological dualisms (theory-practice, mind-body, researcher-participants, reason-emotion, insider-outsider etc). More so, dualism itself is not the problem but hierarchies established around the binaries and hierarchical classification of difference shape our practices in problematic ways. Enacting non-binary and flat methodologies could be seen as a requirement for transformation and radical change. Healing of our fragmented methodological past and ontological practices by acknowledging hurt feelings and emotions could serve as one point of relationality. Massei (2004) encourages us, also qualitative researchers, to engage in the geographies of responsibility. It is good to remember that by designing methods/studies we design beings. Methodological design is as much ontological as relational task. About (methodological) futuring Escobar encourages us to think of the act, process, and design of futures; futuring- in this context methodological futuring. Methodological futurings can redesign themselves and work through breakdowns. It could be argued that the field of qualitative inquiry does not have methodological problems but methodological breakdowns. Methodological breakdowns bring to the forefront our current practices and tools. Some of these breakdowns might be anticipated and the insufficiency of current methodological tools offers opportunities for creation, experimentation, and invention. The shift from problems to breakdowns also positions knowing as relating and highlights connections rather than taking distance from the problems. How might methodologically sustainable futurings and productive breakdowns function? I agree with Ziai (2018) who problematizes progress and development especially since methodological progress and development does not always lead to democracy but potentially to various forms of violence and oppression. “There is no objectivity that can determine other people’s position and what they need. Socialization and economic planning are not necessarily the keys to a better world” (Ziai, 2018, p.124). A vision of different methodological world could include multiple scenarios. For example, existing ‘methodological rules’ could be changed at any time, all scholars could modify ‘rules’ based on comparable consequences, scholars would be able to leave methodological communities without exploitation and exclusion, dependency on specific kind of scholarly connections and citations would need to be eliminated so methodological dependency does not limit alternatives and make it impossible to leave the field and move across subdisciplines. Focus would be shifted from politics of discipline toward the politics of relationships. These kinds of scenarios might also mean that we need to unlearn various forms of hierarchical cooperation and expand our theories of free methodological connectivity and relationality. What if, …theories of systems and ecologies could help us to understand challenging problems. …objects and materiality could provoke thinking-doing without being themselves thought. …we could create diverse methodologies that protect and restore ecologies. …everyday life would serve as a context for methodological experiments. …we could support more place-based and globally networked methodologies. …we might utilize emergent encounters and participatory solutions and processes. …qualitative inquiry would build on continuously changing and diverse transdisciplinary knowledges and minor practices. …there are no more of the same but scholar go more frequently for the impossible. … the field of qualitative inquiry rotates methodological obligations and responsibilities. …the field of qualitative inquiry could create communities of radical methodologies. If light makes vision possible, I would like to end with one additional alternative title: “Other methodologies are possible and new methodological sensibilities on their way. It is time to dim our lights and see (the invisible)”. Thank you. Jessica: Thank you so much Mirka for your inspiring and thought provoking talk as always. You always leave me with a lot to process. So, we are lucky that we have two fabulous respondents this evening to help us process and think through some of what you presented us with. So, our first discussing is Aaron Kuntz. Dr Kuntz: Thank you. Oh geez you turn on the zoom video and I feel like I'm staring at my driver's license photo which isn't a great thing so my apologies in advance. Well thanks so much for the paper and for inviting me to respond. I'd like to thank, of course Mirka for this provocative paper. My mother always told me that I don't listen well and she's right so it was a delight to have the paper and material form as engaged with the ideas and to see I was privileged enough to see some drafts, as it went through so it's really neat to see how things are processed. So there's much to engage within this paper and Mirka's work more generally. So, for the sake of time. I think I'll focus in on notions of experimentation, plurality and ethical engagement in somewhat entangled order and offer a sense of inquiry, as an experimental way of making the just imbued with an ethical force for change. I'll begin my offering to overarching questions that this talk, provoked for me. Question one, what are the problems, to which speculative experimentation, respond or engage, or question to what problems are made possible through speculative experimentation. What breakdowns are enabled. So these questions arise because problems and practices and strategies are productively entangled, as do lose in glossary note, all concepts are connected to problems, without which they would have no meaning. And so I wonder about how the very notion of speculative experimentation are connected to problems and particular context, one potential issue might have to deal with the anxiety inducing problem of chaos anxiety for me anyways, that if we have no definitive future, nor defined present, then we live in a chaotic world, and speculative and experimental practices only amplify that multiplicity. Importantly, Elizabeth Grosz notes that chaos need not be understood as absolute or complete disorder, but in her words, rather as a plethora of orders forms with forces that cannot be distinguished or differentiated from each other. It's, it's for me it's the blurring of definition that manifest chaos. the overabundance of order, not its absence. So perhaps this is part of the effect of sadness or worry that permeates some work today, and creates I think into Marcus words that we have too much order, we have too much form too much will the excess of which overwhelmed and chaos ensues. As there was a braid it notes. This in her terms, too much this is one of the sources of exhaustion, which mass marks, so much of our current predicament, and ultimately brings about a shrinkage of our ability to take in and on the world that we are in, simply because it hurts too much to take in, and on. So, we perhaps turn to experimental engagements with this too much this this xxs that exhausts, which brings its own problems, of course, and that's a good thing. So on experimentation. I'm not creative, never claimed to be at least not in the conventional sense of the term, I can't sing, or I can but my singing does not mean even the most progressive claims of aesthetic worth. I'm also not a visual artist as such things such as experimental inquiry approaches, often simultaneously astound me scare me move me and closed me off from engagement, a multiplicity of effects, indeed, if I am creative I suppose it is through a sense of conceptual creativity, but I have manifest through an ongoing engagement with philosophy. Again I turned to Elizabeth gross who considers philosophy, the way would wayward sibling of art, a kinship as both enactments emphasize the degree of experimentalism as a means to create new relations, new problems, a few future not yet created as gross so eloquently writes, I love this phrasing she has twin wraps over chaos philosophy and art, along with their more serious sibling, the sciences in frame chaos. Each in its own way, in order to extend something consistent composed eminent, which it uses for its own ordering and also the ranging resources. There's a double mess here, right, of course that calls forth the productive potential and reduction of philosophy art and science, in one sense speech allows for a means to encounter chaos in meaningful ways. And another sense such processes of ordering might well lead to attaining of difference, a closing off of potential in order to allow for things to, Well make sense. And so as we engage with Marcus provocations, wondering what methodology is become possible when we dim the lights. I wonder about what might orient us how we might enact and eminent positioning that is not dependent on the prolific ordering have a past yet does not transcribe pure relativism through derangements either. This is a question I think of ethics. And I wonder about the potential for inquiry work to think the just as Michel Foucault termed it or more deliberately inquiry as a means to make the just because for co thinking that just requires an overt political stance that begins with an ethical positioning, a determination that normalized governing processes are untenable. Further, thinking as deludes notes, means to experiment and to problem that's thinking that just begins with an act of experimental refusal no longer abiding by the claims of convention and entails an imminent, making thinking that just dust becomes making the adjust and making the just might articulate as a process of entangling an ethical determination to produce a difference with an orienting belief in another future potential that we might become differently, through different relations animated by different forces within a materially generative world. I'm interested in in inquiry is making the just because I sense within Marcus work and ethical commitment, one that emphasizes and affirmative ethical engagement with potential, and a determination to experiment with that potential to speculate on what might yet become so hers would seem to be more than a neutral stance and what is to be done. This is important to note and contemporary work that engages with flattened hierarchies, how does one and unethical engagement with the world admits such flattening indeed a flattened hierarchical perspective is often critiqued for its political naivete and refusal to acknowledge histories of asymmetrical relations of power that is some would argue that flattening traditional hierarchies conveniently erase historical context that disproportionately govern some groups and privilege others, such a perspective may conveniently overlook a legacy of exploitative relations that are only extended through a dismissal of material hierarchy. In short, it is quite possible that the rush to lay claim to rise a medic expressions of flattened hierarchies extends from a privilege of not experiencing a legacy of power claims on one's person. As such, this theoretical embrace of a dispersed system stems from privileges gained from conventional hierarchies and systems of power. Such context situated, even the most well intentioned critique as reformist in order. Born from and transcribing the very exploited to relations they claim to disrupt. As an alternative, a materialist critique might complicate the smoothing of conventional hierarchies, for what Thomas nail terms, a twisted ontology in which different regions of matter are unevenly developed and circulated this twisted ontology remains vital to considerations of exploitation and material inequity that seemed to have fallen out of theoretical favor of late, our contemporary moment is rife with uneven material agencies, and that unevenness matters. Further our inquiry work certainly has a generative role in twisting ontology locating some ways of living as important for recognition, even critique and excluding others. As a consequence that remains important to locate those uneven exploitative relations map their intersections, even exclusions and consider their effect on ontological levels. As a practice of transgression inquiry martyred articulate as a type of challenge from within one and habits a limit in order to manifest a transgression. Because limits, always hold the material for transgressive potential experimental inquiry uses the condition of limits to manifest the rupture, and acting a future yet unknown. Recognizing the symbiotically productive relations of limits and transgressions shifts the intention and work of the inquiry. It's not simply enough to strive to break and limit, one must use the material of the limit to generate something else. This is a creative or experimental experimental relation to limit, one that manufacturers difference, were once there was only repetition such it is that inquiry must be decided the materialists in order to generate transgressions through governing limits, one must discern and intervene within the material conditions that make our governance possible. And this word begins from a place of ethical determination that are present exploitative relations are untenable. We cannot bear them anymore transgressive change extends from the very sensation of living then through the material world. 00:43:18.000 --> 00:43:36.000 In her provocative book entitled, what comes after entanglement ever Gerard advocates for an ethical engagement with exclusion, recognizing in her words the entities practices and ways of being that are for closed when other entangled realities are materialized. This perspective aligns with the notion of twisted ontology as I spoke of earlier is one locates those become things that are short circuited by the layered build up that occurs when some ontological formations are twisted together governed into relation, and others are necessarily excluded the landscape of twisted ontology is is one of uneven development and exclusion some relations are deemed to matter more than others and the processes of such mattering requires ethical deliberation and an emergent sense of responsibility as Gerard goes on to right attention also needs to be paid to the frictions foreclosures and exclusions that play a constituent a role in the composition of lives reality centralizing and politicizing these exclusions is vital and carving out space for intervention, examining rational exclusions is constitutive of our contemporary moment is an ethical act of inquiry for Gerard when that generates the conditions necessary for intervention. And for Gerard those constitutive fictions frictions foreclosures and exclusions serve as an important and often theoretically overlooked entry point for material analysis, more than the density of the entanglements themselves, it is their limits, those spaces were identified relations fade into necessary exclusions that provide opportunities for ethical engagement deliberation and contingent action. Let's it is that experimental inquiry necessary necessarily an X, X of difficult recognition, we are bound by and responsible for these tragic circumstances belief, we might be otherwise, and virtue, we must become differently. Experimental inquiry is in short and ethically laden making a means of generating the Justin circumstances that overwhelm through perpetuating injustice. This might bring us to a series of provocative, I think questions that call and Krugman asks, and I think extend from Marcus work. Here are the questions, what are the problems we cannot be, what are the problems we cannot but feel the force of over what and why are we constantly anxious and inevitably distraught. What are the problems with which we wrap and work our lives in burning intensities. In many ways I remain emboldened through Brady's notion that we practice a pragmatic engagement with the present in order to collectively construct conditions that transform and empower our capacity to act ethically and produce social horizons of hope, or sustainable futures for me inquiry is part and parcel of such resistive and productive practice. This is inquiry as an ontological way of living, motivated by ethical force, a way of reading the future into the present to borrow the phrasing of JK get some grand and work is work reminds us, this can be joyful experimentation, an exuberant experimental engagement with the not yet. And similarly, as for co admonished. Do not think that one has to be said in order to be militant, even though the thing one is fighting is abominable through inquiry we engage with the president as a delusion and music witness blurring the governing processes and practices of fascism, such that they lose their precise purpose, creating relational conditions through which specific forms of resistive potential become a new through inquiry we might engage the present to break its violent hold on our very being utilizing the circumstances that enforce our exhaustion such that we might become otherwise through inquiry we stand vigil look out for potential change, refusing the governing limitations of the status quo and using the material of our contemporary moment to generate a transformative difference. My thanks to Mirka's paper for helping to provide provoke these thoughts, and to all of you for listening. Thank you. Jessica: Thank you so much, Aaron such an exciting response I'm like all jazzed up now after here in New York I'm hearing you. I'm really looking forward to this being on the podcast so that we can revisit and re listen and continue to learn. So our next. Our next response is from Juha and I am going to do my best to share a YouTube video, and play. Perfect. Juha: Thank you miracle for your mind provoking talk, and for inviting me to comment on it. It's been my great pleasure to follow your career and success over the years. And here are my comments. Just let you put it in your speech global anti capitalist perspective is necessary. If we are to survive as a species. During the past year, a virus known as covert 19 halted the world. It's a biological fact that we can't wish away, but it has had tremendous social and political consequences worldwide. We cannot change the mechanisms, the wireless works and mutates, but like navigators who sense the strength of the wind, and its direction. We can take those laws into account in our actions. Neglecting them can result in a fatal multi organism disease. Like a mistake in a vacation can cause a shipwreck. Therefore, I must say all the sheep and take the storm caused by the wires into account in at least two ways. First, I may reason that life is dangerous. In any case, continue to meet people and ignore possible consequences for my health. Second, I can think that health is wider and therefore, I want to follow safety measures, wash my hands. Keep social distance and wear a mask. As I cannot escape the fact of covert 19. I still have the freedom to choose what effects. I allow it to have on me and my actions. Besides, by following the necessary safety measures. I take care of myself and my fellow beings. And by doing so, carry my collective responsibility. Indeed, many have had to consider how to live, not to become infected, or infect others, the recommendations of health experts have been clear. But humans are not machines. They take the official messages in their judgment and relate them to the totality of the individual lives. The weighing of these options on human decision and meaning making interests me as a qualitative researcher and a social scientist. The options can be seen in a continuum where at the other end of the other end. People lot live their lives as useful. And at the other follow safety measures, quite literally. The rationales and logics for these options vary. Perhaps the most exciting answers come from the unresponsive and individualistic risk takers. Who otter. Yes, of course, there is a risk of infection. And it makes me think. But even then, the philosopher gh fun rate has presented a general model of action, in which he distinguishes the result and consequence of an act. On the one hand, the result of the act of opening a window. Is that a certain window is open these consequences. A state of affairs, which by virtue of course or necessity, come about. When the Act has been done. On the other hand, a consequence of the act of opening a window, may be the temperature in the room goes down, or as the famous poet bent this article ski writes about a possible consequence. The bird could fly in. What makes makes the logic of human action and decision making, related to the covert 19, so special is the collective nature. My individual decisions are associated with a type global network of others choices. The post pandemic time will finally tell if the window has been open or closed. And how many black Corbett 19 ravens have flown in We managed to transform our teaching online early on, even during the pandemic my workplace down but a university succeeded to produce or produce enough degrees to fulfill its promise to the Ministry of Education and Culture, The largest funder of the universities in Finland. We have proven to be good academic workers, perhaps too good for the success came at a price, the temporary University's campus plan approved by the University Board in Fall 2020 states that, and I quote, the experience gained through the covert 19 pandemic highlights the need for flexible learning and working solutions. In particular, where digital and physical environments merge to support that user's data lives, and well being. Quote ends. In addition, the plan includes the promise and I quote, dumper the university's goal is to be carbon neutral by 2030. As part of the target, its office and teaching spaces, will be reduced by 25%, quote, and I guess no one sees anything wrong with the carbon neutrality. but many made the math and calculated. One plus one equaling that the university would eliminate our faculty building. In fact, carbon neutrality may be mayor smoke and mirrors the true reason being cost savings. under the neoliberal regime. The canvas planned. You know University is another example of the new management University managerial capitalist University. To add insult to injury. Due to the COVID 19 restrictions on the campus. The university managers could launch the plan without fearing that we teachers and students occupy the University, University building, as we did a few years ago, consequence. Consequently, it's possible that we lose our office spaces seminar rooms lecture halls, and more importantly, our sense of community, and perhaps turn into digital nomads without any other social existence than our digital presence. Many might feel betrayed. Maybe we managed to do our job too well and won the race to the bottom, the capitalist neoliberal University. As the world doesn't seem to follow the Broadway. The harder you work, the luckier you get, but quite reverse. Perhaps tomorrow we don't say that. We do killed the radio star. But that digital shift at our office space In the future, we might not teach in the shadow of the Corbett 19 anymore, or under the mango tree as Paulo Ferreira in Finland it's too cold for that. But carry on our solitary talk only in the Digital's fair. Okay, I do know the world though there is much, much crazier and uglier than this, and the ills of the world are last. But God is in detail. We cannot take our position as educational and social scientists for granted anymore. For it's not only the managerial University. That is after the critical scholar, but also the news media. Believe it or not, we have only one national newspaper in Finland Helsingin Sanomat plus few other regionals. A couple of days ago Helsingin Sanomat published but an editorial in which one of the editors in chief stated as follows, and I quote, the father, one goes from the core of science to the social humanistic and ultimately artistic research, the less empirical evidence, there is in academic competition. And the more ideological the reshoots becomes the editor then shared the editorial on Twitter and wrote. It seems that this editorial has raised diverse debate, the speculative assumption in the text was that academic competition would seem to have a greater tendency to become idealized. When there are no clear criteria in the field to compare theories, Ideally, just to become ideal a choice. Yes. When there are no clear criteria in the field or to compare theories. Quote ends, a sociologist, then asked, and I quote, I continue your speculation by asking what is in your view, the clear criteria to compare those theories in science lacking in social sciences, which prevents the power of ideologies. The editor replies Scientific Method. Then the philosopher of science intervenes. Would you like to tell us what is that what is the scientific method that we philosophers of science, despite many attempts, haven't been able to find one. This was also a quote. It seems to me that the powerful national media outlets mighty editor has aligned with the populist right, the conservative right, the racist right and the matches. And we have had a wake up call in so many places in the biological, psychological, social and political spheres. We cannot stay in our coupon compartments any longer. We need, what miracle was talking about poor diversity. We need to join forces as miracle and Fred, poor thing. Put it in a few years back, and I quote, this quote ends my comments. Scholars need to stop engaging in research activities for research sake, only research needs to serve the public citizens, students, parents, teachers and so on. Social Science Research should be a collaborative effort, and a form of public science. It's time to consider how to increase methodological attentiveness and the potential of collaborative inquiry that builds on collective yet contradictory stories extract and material life experiences. Thank you so much and congratulations Mirka.

In this episode, Jessica Van Cleave (SIG Chair) discusses with Cassie Quigley (Program co-chair) and Alexandra Panos (Program co-chair) what the Qualitative Research SIG has planned for the 2021 AERA conference. Below is the transcript of the conversations. VanCleave, Jessica: Hello everyone, welcome to qualitative conversations a podcast series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American educational research association. I'm Jessic vancleave the current chair of the qualitative research special interest group. And i'm happy today to be joined by our program co chairs cassie quickly and Alex panelists and will be providing an overview of the 2021 annual meeting, which will be virtual for the first time this year and will take place from April 8 to April 12. Doctor cassie quickly as an associate professor of science, education and associate chair and the Department of teaching learning and leading at the school of education at the University of Pittsburgh.She received her doctorate and curriculum and instruction at indiana University in 2010. Dr quigley's expertise and qualitative research is focused on methodologies that Center the participants, such as Community based methodologies and using data collection methods like photo methods. In the past 11 years she has published over 50 articles and book chapters focused on those methods, including in journals, such as the International Journal of qualitative studies and education. Qualitative inquiry and the journal of mixed methods for search she also co authored a book on steam education entitled and educators guide to steam education, which is published by teachers college press. She has presented her qualitative work at numerous conferences, both nationally and internationally, she teaches qualitative research methodology courses on topics such as participatory action research, validity and reliability for qualitative work and ethics around educational research. VanCleave, Jessica: Alexandra panels as an assistant professor of literacy studies and affiliate faculty and measurement and research in the college of education at the University of South Florida. She earned her doctorate in literacy language and culture, education, with a minor in inquiry methodology at indiana university bloomington in 2018. Dr panels takes an interdisciplinary stance in her work as a critical qualitative methodology. And grounds her theoretical methodological and empirical work in her substantive field of literacy studies. She has published numerous articles and book chapters that focus on the critical environmental and spatial dimensions of qualitative methodologies and literacy studies. Most recently, she has served as senior guest editor on a special issue, focusing on the spatial dimensions of taken for granted qualitative research practices related to masking. And anonymous ation to be published in the international Journal of qualitative studies and education, this year.And, as a co author for a book project under contract with teachers college press titled confronting denial literacy social studies and climate change, thank you both for joining me today to talk about this year's Program. Alexandra Panos: happy to be here. Quigley, Cassie (she/her/hers): Thank you JESSICA. VanCleave, Jessica: So, to get started on can you just offer an overview of the program how many sessions are included, and what is the range of topics we're going to see. Quigley, Cassie (she/her/hers): sure. So this year we are really excited to have 14 different sessions 15 if you include the mentoring session and 16 with the business. Meeting, as well as the sessions include a variety of sessions around well being and care as well, we have a session around advocacy and justice. there's a wide variety of critical work that ranges from critical race practices post-human position ality feminist approaches and critical participatory inquiry. We are especially looking forward to learning from scholars in one session called disruption interruption change it's not enough what we need is sabotage critical participatory inquiry as sabotage in and out of the Academy this work draws from black and Asian feminist and D colonial stances. VanCleave, Jessica: Wonderful that sounds really exciting and thought provoking so, can you tell us a little bit about how many submissions the singer seen this year and how many slots were allotted to the same by eight yeah. Quigley, Cassie (she/her/hers): yeah absolutely so this year we had 46 submitted proposals and symposia 37 of those for paper or poster Roundtable sessions we had, A really a ton of symposium submitted, which were we had 10 symposium submitted this included a mentor session which we'll talk about a little bit later. And so, our process for reviewing and accepting these submissions really takes a lot to ever viewers like you all, and so we were really fortunate that. All of our reviewers accepted that the numbers of submissions that they proposed. That they could handle and really turned those sessions those reviews around in it in a short amount of time, so we just wanted to extend that thanks to our reviewers for that. Each of the proposals reviewed by three different people and including at least one graduate student reviewer. At that time, then it's turned over to Alex and me, and we spent almost about a month going over the process of looking across the reviews we do utilize the scores as you'll remember if you're a viewer you're often you're asked to score on a numerical basis, but that is not used to accept or reject our sessions instead we look holistically across the reviews, which really just helps to ensure that there's a bias towards one type of research over another, and so that kind of gives you a description of the process for the AERA sessions for the qualitative Research SIG. VanCleave, Jessica: It is a lot of work to put this program together both by you and Alex and all of the Members who service reviewers and we are so so grateful for all of that service. It really is a big job and seeing what we can expect at this year's annual meeting I'm very, very appreciative of the range of opportunities and the thoughtfulness that was put into that process. VanCleave, Jessica: So uhm one of the sessions that Members will have the opportunity to attend is the business meeting, can you tell us about the business meeting and what Members can expect if they attend that session. Quigley, Cassie (she/her/hers): Yes, absolutely we're really hoping that everyone is able to attend the business meeting.Because it really is our one time to gather together as a group, and of course we are wishing that we could be you know in community with one another, together face to face. But we still would love to see everybody join us online for this session, the session is about an hour long and we were able to pack quite a bit into this session, including a program report awards, and we will have a speaker which i'll talk to you about in just a minute, so our program report moves us through the various committees that are on that qualitative research day, including the Program mentor session for the mentor Committee, among others, the award session, which is quite a heavy lift for that committee includes outstanding book award outstanding dissertation award, which will be presented by the committee chairs, then we will have the Egon Guba speaker this year and we are so fortunate to have Mirka Koro accept that award and she is going to be speaking on speculative experimentation and methodological … . Our discussant will be Aaron Kuntz. And then we will be JESSICA will be introducing that session will end the business meeting with some closing remarks and some an opportunity to give input from our sig membership, so please join us for that one hour session if you're a. VanCleave, Jessica: Are we so grateful, when many of our Members attend that business meeting it's a nice opportunity to have a little bit of Community and connect with one another, even if we're doing so virtually this year, so, in addition to our business meeting one of the things that the sig supports each year or mentoring opportunities so, can you talk a bit about the mentoring session that's going to be offered and the other mentoring opportunities that are on the Program. Alexandra Panos: Sure, I can take that one JESSICA. Um the mentoring session we're really excited about i'm Kelly and the committee have worked really hard to create a space where. Members of the SIG can get guidance and feedback and discuss their work as either graduate students early career scholars. And I know we opened it this year to associate level faculty for mentorship into the next stage of their career as well, but that's sessions, going to be Sunday at 230 and it's a closed session so if you haven't signed up this year, that means it's not open but. This summer, and next fall calls will be going back out for applications to join the mentoring session as a mentee and then. I know that Kelly, and her committee work to invite and solicit members of the sig to lead in their mentorship capacity and this year, as well as past years, I know they focused on the concept of sickness, so if you're feeling stuck if there's something that's. Challenging in your work right now, this is the session for you to consider for next year. VanCleave, Jessica: um well, as you mentioned Kelly on the committee have lots of opportunities they not only support on our Members at a era, but they also provide opportunities for mentorship in the proposal process so keep an eye out for announcements on the list about those opportunities. There's also informal office hours with members of the same that are available during the annual meeting again that process as Alex mentioned is already concluded for this year but, but if you are interested in connecting with more senior members in the segue for mentoring opportunities at any stage of your career be on the lookout for opportunities as they come through the listserv. VanCleave, Jessica: On, so this is a lot this program has a lot to offer and a wide range of things across every day that the annual meeting is active, so what suggestions, do you have for Members, maybe, especially first time attendees to navigate the eight year a program and take advantage of the exciting QR saying sessions. Alexandra Panos: yeah thanks JESSICA, I agree, it can be a lot it's one of the reasons that orienting to the conference via the QR sig can be so helpful because it directs you to the kinds of sessions that as a qualitative researcher. And you would be especially interested in, so if you're already a member of the sig JESSICA has sent out A Google Doc that gives a really sort of straightforward overview calendar overview of each day. So you can see what's coming up and then at the bottom of that document there's a description of each of the sessions, with the abstract and the speakers and their titles of their papers and Roundtable session presentations and the symposia etc. But once the the system itself gets underway, and we have access to our virtual conference program if you're registered as an attendee or a presenter discussing or chair you'll be able to access that virtual conference platform through the AERA website and You can search for us via the sig so that you can find those sessions, you can search by presenter you can search by paper title. So it's it's pretty helpful, especially if you've already sort of done some of that homework of what is the QR sig doing and what are the, what are we up to in this space. I think it's also important to remember that if you're assigned to a session as a presenter co presenter a chair or discuss it or have some active role in a session. One of the cool things that they've shared with us about the virtual platform is that the system will just sort of plop you into this space that you need to be at that time, like there's no clicking or searching for you as a presenter or someone with a role in a session. If you'd like to attend a session within the platform, we believe, what i've come to understand, about the platform is that you'll be able to design your own schedule and joining session simply by clicking within the platform itself And we also strongly recommend that, given the nature of these new spaces, we know now, after a year For many of us of attending other virtual conferences that each virtual platform is unique and we should have access to it honor around April 2 and we want to recommend that you And, especially if you're presenting you and your co presenters spend some time getting used to the conference space use it to develop your own schedule and Just sort of stick in there and and get your get your hands on it era has made a number of videos available that describe the conflict conference platform and answer some questions about that, but we expect that getting in there ourselves will be the most instructive and we're waiting waiting with great with bated breath to get in there ourselves so we hope that's helpful and if you have any questions about the conference platform, the annual meeting website is a place where help will be found, and we are also always available to send you information that we might be able to share. VanCleave, Jessica: there's some really great tips, thank you for helping us think about how we might orient ourselves and and navigate both the platform and the content of this year's annual meeting so. VanCleave, Jessica: you're interested in the qualitative research say you've got you've been checking out our Program. VanCleave, Jessica: On but you're not yet a member, so can you talk to us a little bit about how you become a member of the qualitative research special interest group and what some of the benefits of membership might be. Alexandra Panos: Of course. Well, we think that you should be a member. Of the QR SIG definitely, especially if you're listening to this podcast which is produced by the QR SIG, so this is one of the Member benefits that extends beyond membership, but that you'd be supporting But when you become a member of AERA one of the things that you have the opportunity to to do is to select a division and sig. For free so most of the time you have to pay a small fee that helps support the sake, but you can when you register get one of those those free memberships and if you select the call say you're a member. Benefits include receiving emails specifically for the membership, which includes many opportunities for connecting with other members of the same with mentorship with workshops calls for special issues sort of a first pass at important content related to qualitative research and our personal favorite with membership to the sig includes opportunities to review for the Conference, which is so beneficial to our field to. The sig itself and to your fellow call researchers, so if you have any questions about membership, you can reach out to any of us and we're happy to answer them and we really hope that if you aren't yet you will join us. VanCleave, Jessica: Absolutely, we are very lucky to participate in such a vibrant Community that is continuously growing, and we hope that as many folks as are interested well will join us and continue to diversify and broaden our Community. So thank you so much cassie and Alex for joining me today and providing an overview of what Members can expect from the qualitative research same program this year. I hope to see all of you who are listening at our business meeting and I hope you'll consider joining the sake and contributing to our Community thanks again for being with us today on qualitative conversations. Alexandra Panos: Thanks JESSICA. Quigley, Cassie (she/her/hers): Thank you.

In this episode Dr. Kakali Bhattacharya (University of Florida) interviews Dr. Jeong-eun Rhee (Long Island University) about her scholarship in the field of qualitative research and her notion of 'transnational intergenerational decolonial feminist knowledge' and her recent book, Decolonial Feminist Research: Haunting Rememory and Mothers. The following presents a transcription of the conversation. Dr. Bhattacharya 0:24 Welcome everyone listening in it is my honor to be your guest podcast host today. My name is Dr. Kakali Bhattacharya. I'm a qualitative research professor at the University of Florida. With me is Dr. Jeong-eun Rhee, professor of education at Long Island University. This podcast, Qualitative Conversations, is produced by the qualitative research SIG at AERA. Professor Jeongeun Rhee recently authored a text the Decolonial Feminist Research: Haunting Rememory and Mothers, which is part of my Futures of Data Analysis and Qualitative Research series hosted with Routledge. The book has already created a lot of buzz, and challenged people's understanding of home memories relationality transnational existence, and multiple forces of oppression that cross borders without being categorized as a specific kind of qualitative research. It is my distinct pleasure to welcome Dr. Jeong-eun Rhee, welcome. Dr. Rhee 1:27 Thank you for that wonderful introduction. Kakali, I feel so honored to be here. Dr. Bhattacharya 1:34 So to begin our conversation, give us an overview of your academic journey and how you came to write the book. Dr. Rhee 1:43 There are so many different ways which I think I can answer that question. But at the same time, I'm not sure if I can clearly they up out of past I have, walked. that let me write this book. At least what I can share, though, is that my academic journey has been never separable from my personal, cultural, geopolitical and even spiritual journey. And I think this recognition is in fact how I was able to write this book. But, of course, it was not simply my journey, either. Right? So my journey has intersected or integrated with my family's journey in the context of larger historical relations. As well, as having said that, I also think if we assume that we can now and explain how we've come to where we are, in certainty, I think it can be our arrogant assumption. And I think that's also point I make I made in my book. I mean, the question that I pursued in the book was, what do we do with What do we can never explain? Right? So I think there are certain aspects that I do not know how to explain in terms of how, you know, my last four years of academic life, including my graduate school experiences, etc, has led me to write this book. But, But I know is that I could write this book, because I have learned or remembered how to connect with my mother's not just singular but plural, right, my mother's and ancestors of this land, and then their lands who have prepared a space for me to do my work. And this book is in fact a testimony or or even a question about my journey, both academic and spiritual, that reveals these connections. Dr. Bhattacharya 4:48 Thank you. Thank you for sharing that. It is really interesting. Like, it's not like something that you can like, fully map, but it could be another book and in and of itself, if you just write it. The the journey to writing this book like it's a prequel to the book, perhaps you know, I know that I introduced your book as something that doesn't really fit a certain category or certain type of qualitative research very distinctively, it would be really lovely to hear how you see this book in the larger context of the terrain of qualitative research. Dr. Rhee 5:25 So let me first express my gratitude to you Kakali as a series editor on feature of data analysis and qualitative research, who really encouraged me to think of your series as an outlet of my book. And as I actually talked about, in my book, I had worked on this book almost five years. And during those years, I actually didn't plan out to slate, my work as a qualitative research role, per se. I mean, in fact, I didn't know how to characterize the book until I completed the manuscript. I mean, what I knew was that this work was an inquiry, my inquiry, but but I was unsure if the qualitative research field itself was big enough to include my work as a qualitative research. And so I'm Kakali your gesture of welcoming however, you know, slight that move was like in the context and the large context of the whole field, still made a such a big impact on how I saw potentials of both my work and the field of qualitative research. So I just want to thank you for your vision for your field. And also, you're using our editorial position to open up and expand the boundary of the field. Dr. Rhee 7:12 From my perspective, as a qualitative researcher, what I hope that my will contribute to is to offer more possibilities. So producing, sharing, and then remembering killing knowledge. I think it's interesting that, you know, technically, as I also shared in the book, I didn't have a proposal, research proposal for this book, I didn't have a human subject, nor methodology. You know, my field work included both physical and metaphysical interactions. In my theoretical perspectives came from Toni Morrison's fiction, beloved, and ... experimental autobiographical poetry ... In my research question was like, What do you do when you're haunted by your mother's rememory? But in this writing, as the inquiry process would, I was able to notice and learn was that, in fact, there have been so much work done that I could build on to pursue my question. Also, my question was not simply my question. There have been so many other women, particularly of color, who have asked similar questions. This was how I realized that my work was a part of a larger knowledge project, which I named, eventually, in the book, transnational intergenerational decolonial feminist knowledge process. I hope that my work shows how our deeply personal question is, in fact, a way to connect with a larger collective question that many interconnected diverse communities have pursued. And when we build those connections between our personal and collective we can produce different knowledge different. I think here what mattered was not about following particular techniques or mythology is in terms of technicality, utility, productivity, and also rules and regulations, but about being able to ask and work with and live with our questions. Yeah, so Dr. Bhattacharya 10:00 You know, your question? I mean, your response to my question makes me think about how qualitative research broadly is moving away from being like this technocratic social science, to a more humanistic oriented inquiry, versus, you know, certain steps and procedures we do. To think in very technocratic social science way we do these steps, we collect this data, we analyze it, we doing four or five different strategies or steps or approaches, then we triangulate everything to make everything check and confirm with everything else and have verifiability. And then we know we got something, whereas you are doing this work. And you're saying that the unknown is this, this fertile ground of inquiry, and it can still remain unknown as a result of the inquiry to, or it can create many types of knowings, without any certainty or any members check or any triangulation, or any peer debriefing, it can still remain a very open ended inquiry as a result of an inquiry. Dr. Rhee 11:10 Right. So at the level of, you know, I think methodology like, absolutely, I think that's kind of what I tried to, I guess, a share, not purposefully, but because that's what happened, but then at the level of epistemology, and then even episteme, I think what I tried to show is that actually, by really paying attention to this intergenerational transnational, decolonial feminist knowledge that have existed across the globe, right, that I was able to actually connect with it in the name of science, and how that opened up a new way, or different way, or, you know, relational kind of way of actually noticing the part of reality that I actually forgot. Dr. Bhattacharya 12:18 Yeah, yeah. And that's, that's a Western training and colonizing training that teaches us to forget our own knowledge is and that's so that's always a question that I keep asking myself, what knowledge am I forgetting? What knowledge am I forgetting? There are two anchoring ideas in your book that are re-memory and haunting, which is appropriate for forgetting knowledge or haunted by the met the notion of losing our connectivity? Could you talk a bit about how you came across this ideas, and why they become such critical anchoring for you. Dr. Rhee 12:57 So, read memory and hunting are affective concepts, meaning that to now what they are, you have to feel them. That's how you learn what rememory and haunting are no amount of reading will allow you to know what they are, how they work, and how they change you. And so I want to kind of put this out first, and, you know, conceptually, remember, it was first coined and introduced by Toni Morrison in our book beloved. And according to Morrison rememory is worth remembering and forgetting at the same time, that stays both in person and place that can be encountered by others. This notion, or even existence of remembering completely ruptures how empirical modern science functions. And then think about it. What does this mean that we memories, both remembering and forgetting, at the same time? How is it possible for one's rememory stay both in and outside a person's mind? If remember his base in place, as well, who's remembering? I mean, I can go on with all these questions, right that come from our scientific intelligibility. And to me, rememory of place has become like the source of a haunting as it is someone else's rumery that changes us. And so hunting becomes a demand from those who refuse to be forgotten. And I highlighted effective aspects of remembering and hunting, because I have read beloved so many times. But I really didn't get it. I mean, I cognitively understood what they were when the after my mother's death, and after my mother left to her remote memory for for me to encounter, I became able to see what rememory and hunting were. And so I think like this is the the point that I wanted to put out in terms of like, what I meant by affective concepts. And I think, you know, the famous instruction of Audrey Lorde, who said that masters tool cannot dismantle the masters house, it is very relevant here. I don't think I could figure out how to ask my questions with my academic training only. But with this absolutely non scientific concepts of remembering and haunting, which doesn't mean that they're not true, right. But with those, I started my super personal inquiry through my mother's death, and her remote remember is haunting. And and, in fact of her life was deeply implicated in US Imperial War in Korea. And through my work, now I'm carrying her memor, in this territory of the United States, where my mother's rememory interact with other mothers of colors from memories. And without this kind of embodied the spiritual relationships that have been that have become the source of knowledge. I don't think I could have made this and so my experience and wrote this work. QR SIG Add 17:26 The qualitative research special interest group was established in 1987. To create a space within the American Educational Research Association. For the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research. We invite you to consider joining the qualitative research SIG today, for members of a era the annual fee for joining qualitative research special interest group for regular non graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars, as well as are many activities ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series to update to news related to recent qualitative publications and jobs, please visit the American educational research associations website at www dot era dotnet to join the qualitative research sake today. Dr. Bhattacharya 18:20 You know, this is such a good reminder of the value of other ways of knowing and being then just using the the way that is, and that disconnects you from your body and from your emotionality is, this is like deeply embodied very, very emotion based but not just that, but there is a, there is a sort of like a beautiful spiritual understanding as well, you know, and those sorts of culturally grounded Ways of Knowing that can't all be translated and, you know, like, repurposed in research language and put it out for the world to consume, either you sort of know how to be in those ways of knowing and being and in those connections, or you don't, and that's okay, either way, but those are the connections that spoke to you, which is interesting, because as I was reading your work, I found myself crying, cheering, laughing, cussing, and just going on this journey with you, which was ultimately very healing, you know, from bearing witness, and also from my own embodied experience as well. So could you talk about the role of healing in your work and how it might have shaped your thinking? Dr. Rhee 19:42 So I think I want to reiterate that it took me five years to complete this book. The whole process of writing this book was a process of intentional process of bringing in justice to my mother's life. I mean, as I mentioned briefly already, I want to emphasize that, you know, this wasn't only about my biological mother, but also other mothers of color, who had prepared place for me to come and encounter, there were memories in this territory. So while that was my intention, the process has also become also the process of healing and re storytelling for me. And in fact, those five years became the time I needed to be healed. Through my loss, while I was fighting for justice, to my mother's of color, through my writing as inquiry. I think before I actually talk other things, I must acknowledge that, you know, this time luxury, my taking five years, partly came from my positional privilege is a full professor where I didn't have to worry about, you know, creating, getting tenured or, or getting promoted, etc. But at the same time, I want out other quality researchers to consider or have some time, we need this long staying in a certain kind of work, especially if the work is healing us. In fact, through this work, I have reaffirmed how important it is for us to produce work that heals us as researchers in the process of working on it, working through it, because the work that heals us, as researchers will help others as well, whether they are our participants, readers or communities we work for. So perhaps now we can even ask what is a mean that we as researchers work toward the healing knowledge? What different methodologies reveal bearable for us to do such? Dr. Bhattacharya 22:40 That's, that's a lot, you know, I think, like I have always taught about the work of justice, you know, is it has to be complemented with the work of healing, you know, so the work of justice, or the work of equity, or the work of creating space and visibility from previous unjust things, you know, requires a healing, it doesn't require it's almost foolish to require the dominant group to be responsible for creating anything because the privilege are not incentivized to do anything for those that they oppress. Right. So then how do we do this work without always being in relationship with the colonizer, the privilege, the masterclass all of that. And so I always felt that the work of any kind of equity based work, you know, where you're, you know, demonstrating the oppression demonstrating the wounds require a complimentary healing piece attached to it, you know, justice work and healing work should go hand in hand. So, I know that we don't have a lot of time to discuss all the great things about your work, because there is so much to discuss. So to the listeners, please go and buy her book, decolonial feminist research: haunting rememory and mothers. And I want to sort of wrap up this conversation with advice that you might have for someone whose approach to qualitative research is non traditional, and maybe culturally situated, but doesn't have a concrete path for doing that work and might be feeling unsure. And, you know, what might they think about? Or how might they think about doing this work? there? There are no steps, but what might be some guiding points of consideration Dr. Rhee 24:38 I must say that a colonial Western modern episteme really screwed us. I think our value on universality is a colonial desire. Meaning that, you know, cultural outsiders like me are trained to think that our particular Somehow too particular, meaning that, you know, not valuable not useful. But uh, but our particular existence constitute our interdependent ecology. So I think we have to remember that particularly particularity, and universality are not opposite concepts, but rather they constitute each other. So the challenge is how we can research and remember those interdependence and connectivity, our particularity has with other particularities, and also a larger historical and cultural context. And so actually, you know, as a way to do that, I encourage researchers to be real, like authentic in their questions. I think sometimes it's scary to put out our real, authentic question. I mean, I must admit that I felt that when I wrote this book, but to me, authenticity is our response ability to our particularity. And we doubt our particularity, there is no way for us to respond to what's around us. And then we must remember, there's always a rich tradition and history of knowledge productions, in any community or culture. And so I think we need to remember that we're not alone or interdependent. And what we need is the work of remembering our connectivity from our location. Dr. Bhattacharya 26:59 Yeah, I appreciate that so much, I you know, I get the authentic bit, I feel scared to use the word now. Because every time I use authentic, I hear like all these critiques in my head, how people would say this, and what is co opted and nod and essentially a nod. And then sometimes I like, some things are just what it is, you know, you can say authentic or change it to genuine if you want, change it to sincere if you want, but there are certain ways in which we show up that is unguarded, that is a free flowing version of ourselves in that moment, you know, in which we are allowing things to rise to the surface, including these questions, and and allowing us the freedom to choose to be curious about those questions have a beginner's mind with these questions? So I think that is a really strong advice that people should pursue that and know that knowledge exists beyond what has been presented to them. It exists pretty much in the world in various forms, relationships, things that are within academia, but things that are even outside of academia, outside of our fields, and all of that, Dr. Rhee 28:08 If I add one more, what do we represent, as a knowledge always betrays an actual reality we try to share made. So here I'm not simply talking about how our not least a partial and limited, but when we try to represent there's always violence involved, right. And so when we take this betrayal of representation seriously, I think we as researchers can approach ethics of doing research at another level, especially when we do our work in the name of decolonial, justice and equity. Dr. Bhattacharya 28:53 Yeah, thank you so much for your time and your generosity and opening yourself up to share your thoughts and how you came about writing the book and your thoughts about qualitative inquiry. There is much to unpack here. Unfortunately, we don't have the time to unpack all of it, but I want to thank you and I want to thank the qualitative research SIG for allowing me the honor to interview you. Dr. Rhee 29:19 Thank you so much.

In this podcast, Emily Nusbaum interviews Alice Wong, disability rights activist and founder of the Disability Visibility project. Their conversation Alice describes the relationship of research to her activism, her experience in the academy, and key questions that scholars should consider when embarking on research with marginalized communities. Below is a transcript of this talk. Alice 0:25 All right, Emily 0:27 my name is Emily Nussbaum, and I'm here with Alice Wong talking with her this evening for the Qualitative Research SIG of AERA. And I am super thrilled to be interviewing Alice for this episode. Alice is the director of the Disability Visibility Project, a thought leader known everywhere in Disability Justice and access issues and author of the recently published acclaimed book Disability Visibility. So Alice, thank you so much for talking with me. Alice 1:11 Thank you for having me, Emily. You know, I also want to say that we have been friends for a long time, and I just don't want it to be a conversation with you. Emily 1:24 Yeah, me too. So, since this is for a group focused on qualitative inquiry, I reached out to you thinking about your work through various forms of social media and the Disability Visibility Project and ways that the qualitative research community can start to think more expansively about what counts as qualitative research, and that kind of thing. But I think if I'm correct, and clarify, of course, that you began a more academic career in sociology. So I wondered if you could just give us kind of that background of how you started thinking about research and what that background was, and then we can talk more about the shift you made to the super important and impactful work that you're doing now? Well, Alice 2:31 Just a long story short...I really...my initial career goals, my vision was to be an academia, I love to Sociology, every semester, I stroke fast, and, you know, I feel like sociology gave me the lens to really see the world and analyze the world. Especially, you know, toward the event of disability, you know, beyond, you know, to create a better model. So, you know, I went to undergrad I majored in sociology, you know, I keep in touch with a bunch of professors. It is a sociology department at Indiana University, in Indianapolis. I can't remember who it was who gave me my first experience as you know a research assistant at, you know, to tell you the truth, I am so grateful for their support and their belief or in me to be their student really activated it, you know, I saw a lot of gaps in the literature. You know, just gaps in research, just, you know, where are the disabled people? You know, there's you know, Emily 4:10 like, in terms of only talks about talk about gaps and disabled people in terms of voice and in terms of like representation outside kind of more deficit based perspectives. Yeah. Alice 4:28 Health care very simple. You know, there's a lot of work guys out there equalities it's so such a structure of medicine but you know, also maybe I've been thinking about like, well what about you know, disability and there's a, you know a lot of work on devious and stigma, you know, Eving Goffman, it was it was earlist people. Goffman and Foucault as well, just really If you think about what are the disabled perspectives, disable scholarship, advance these kinds of ideas, extend these ideas. It wasn't until, you know, that's really where I started studying about disability studies, work of Erving K. Yes, his work. People of the UK, so despite all of her Emily 5:37 social model, Alice 5:41 those were trying to like, wow, like, there are these, you know, there are people doing this work. And, you know, I thought this to be my contribution, I think, to a person particular, that's really was kind of a model of what I wanted to do. To date, Barbara Waxman. Emily 6:04 Yeah, I just need to share if you can share a little bit about who she is, I only just learned about her and her work recently, in the last few months, helping a longtime activist sort of organize some of their materials for an archive for the San Francisco Public Library. And Amazing, amazing. So do you want to just mentioned who Barbara Waxman is? Alice 6:33 Yeah. So Barbara Fay Waxman is a disabled woman, she was both a scholar and an activist. She is no longer with us, you know, rest in power Barbara, and, you know, she was one of these. So, like, unapologetic badass disabled women just totally grounded in the love of her body, the love of her sexuality. She did a lot of work on reproductive sexual health, of disabled women. And that was traditionally one of the areas that I really wanted to focus on. You know, as I did, various, undergrad, you know, just searching, you know, just so, lucky for a bit of people that are out there, that I could kind of connect with or at least identify with. though, you know, I think Barbara was one of those people. And, you know, she had a really long career of being both a scholar and an activist. And she both. She did. She did both. they were hand in hand. Emily 8:06 Yeah, I'm interested in that. And I want to get back to, to more of your work or how you're thinking about it, but this nexus of being a scholar and an activist, and what more traditional kind of thinkers or people who are in more traditional academic spaces, what we what we could take away from that, or what any of those people could take away from that. Because I think that, that that Nexus is very, very important when we think about advancing that critical games of qualitative research. Alice 8:41 Yeah, I would say that, you know, people like Barbara [inaudible] and Paul or his story here. Also they are really both activist, that says a lot about the academy and, you know, marginalized people who are entering the academy they can't separate the lived experiences from the way they teach from the way they relate to students, faculty, staff, I think, you know, what academia does, it sectors normative perspectives, normative body-minds. clearly, you know, white perspective white norms. And you know, this is this place is a lot of pressure to force people to like, separate parts of themselves. It does not encourage people to be who they are or every state that they are. If you think about the way scholars of color are really just not welcome, you know, somebody marginalized students at university scholars enter academic spaces, but they often don't at that staying. this says a lot about structural racism, ableism, and classism, that is pretty much permiated. Yeah. So you know, I think sometimes people ask when I became an activist, you know it is a very simplistic answer, but, you know, being disabled in a in a non-disabled world did not give you a choice. This is not a privilege. [inaudible] You know a lot of what I admired in both Paul and Barbara is that they used their positions, they used their research, they used all of their expertise and skills to serve us as the disability community. I mean, it shouldn't be a radical notion. But I think it still is. Because it goes against every sort of conventional wisdom about getting tenure or being professional. and this is wha I did. So there's different motives. Oh, why they are stroller? Did I beat myself? You know, initially, I wanted to contribute to the field I, you know, thought my perspective my I would like to be somebody that does research as a disabled person, with disabled people versus about or at disabled people. Yeah. Thanks. And I want to just just pause for one second and reinforce that to people that are listening like that, that kind of distinction is really the crux of, say, the academic field of disability studies. And then also the way community scholars are working around and within in disability, right, which is research isn't about or on, or to fix or anything like that for abled people, right. But it's about centering disabled people and non normative body minds and thinking of disabled people as research partners, as well, in the process, so come kind of turning Inside Out of the framework. Yes. I did. Also, I want to share that, you know, lived experience in addition to other skills, they are not mutually exclusive. The big idea misconception or binary that's I want to smash. Because I think people presume that I just have to have the research skills that's it and a theory and all that stuff. And disabled people are the ones who are the ideas or the ones to give feedback versus active partners in the development of theory. Emily 14:33 That's super powerful Alice Alice 14:35 It should be obvious, but it's not. You know, there's still a lot of power dynamics. You know, disabled people are treated in a very tokenistic, exploitative and extractive ways, Emily 15:03 And especially when we think of multiple marginalized disabled people. Absolutely. So Advertisement 15:18 the qualitative research special interest group was established in 1987. To create a space within the American Educational Research Association. For the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research, we invite you to consider joining the qualitative research SIG today. for members of era, the annual fee for joining the qualitative research special interest group for regular non graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars, as well as our many activities, ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series to updates and news related to recent qualitative publications and jobs. Please visit the American educational research associations website at www dot era dotnet to join the qualitative research sake today. Emily 16:15 So I'm curious, because I think this is this notion. I mean, I wrote it down. And I'll just say it again, that is so powerful, this notion of lived experience versus academic skills are not mutually exclusive. Right? And it's like this question of who? Who gets to make knowledge, right? Like, it's a question of epistemology, really, and who, who gets to, to create knowledge. And so it makes me think about why I wanted to reach out to you to do this interview, thinking about your work in the public domain, right. And that you have a very strong social media presence, of course, and can speak about different different, like on Twitter with crypto vote, but also thinking about the Disability Visibility Project. And the way you're kind of work in those areas can help academics. You know, people who are, are in the, in, you know, academic spaces, really think more expansively about this idea of knowledge production. So do you mind sharing with us a little bit about the Disability Visibility Project, sort of how it emerged, what it is? And we can go from there? Alice 17:47 Yeah, sure. Before I get to that response, I want to also say, you know, think who gets to ask and form research questions is really central in terms of just really everything. Not just for creating knowledge.But who gets to ask the question, because even Emily 18:21 a step before that, right. Unknown Speaker 18:22 I think that asking the question is really about identifying that something is a phenomenon? I feel like, you know, what people did before in all disciplines that academia is more people with, you know, a variety of perspectives, but also located different places, different different contexts. You know we don't ever use the term research questions. Disabled people ask a lot of amazing questions all the time. But this is actually such a rich, you know, rich kind of intellectual work. But the think is that it doesn't take place within certain structures, so it's not recognized as intellectual work. So, you know, we need to also kind of unpack all of that stuff about, you know, really research. Yeah, asking question to produce in new knowledge, because, again, it's often Those who do have the means of production are the ones driving the qeustions. You know should it really be in the hand of those who are the focus of inquiry. Emily 20:16 I know, like I asked a previous question, I brought this up, but this thing even brings up this notion of like, I mean, I think a lot about this and some of the partnerships I have with community scholars about like, what do we then do with like, those questions and what comes out of them? Right, and how do we not use it? How do we use it for the purposes of the individuals that have framed the questions? Right, versus the purposes that people in the academy often use use them for? That? Alice 21:02 All of these kind of feelings and thoughts about who has control, you know creative control, just the ability to essentialize and articulate ideas, you know, that doesn't take place in a vacuum. These things happen, you know, in collaboration with others, did offer, you know, building on, you know, past work or past ideas. I think that leaves a lot of people out. Right now, I'm kind of not limiting myself to do stuff inside or outside the academy. I feel like I can be wherever I want to be, you know. I might just like have a day pass. [inaudible] that's fine by me. Because, you know, I like to kind of, kind of get by. You know, [inaudible] at a bit of [inaudible] but also, they will be engaged, to be what's really exciting that I don't think of these days as separate. I believe that disabled people belong everywhere. Emily 22:48 Yes. Alice 22:49 And you know while I have clearly, just to be honest, I do think that I have been driven out of academia. For a lot of reasons, But I don't regret it. You know, I just I think it was probably the smartest decision I ever made. To be honest. Emily 23:26 Can I offer before you start, like, I want to say that this project and thinking about this project as research, is, to me so transformative and powerful. And when we think about wanting to win, we're a part of an upcoming book project that I have with another colleague and our purposes in this edited volume to I think we called it quote, radical possibilities, maybe I can't quite remember but thinking about how something like the Disability Visibility Project can allow us to think so much more expansively. Right about this question of what counts, right. So I just wanted to give that intro of why of the super important connection, I think, between the DVP and qualitative research and the qualitative research community. Alice 24:32 I did yeah, we could use the terms content, media, culture and research of us interchangeably. whatever you want to call it. It's, it's useful. it's valid its a certificate. So the reason why I started it was out of my own frustration at the history about disabled people by disabled people. Yeah, I started in 2014. it was stories by disabled people here at artist history, nonprofit or storyboard, it leads up to the 25th anniversary. Yeah, what is it? 2015. I did that as a way to generate and document our stories, not to kind of wait around for historians. You know, I feel like that today was one of the most exciting days. Yeah. Because people say like, your story matters. You don't have to be an icon. You don't have to be a leader or famous. You know, your story is part of this growing collective of like, what is the disability experience like in the 21st century? Why can't we participate in the creation and documentation of our history? And the fact that story core has a relationship with our library of congress, that allows participants to have their story archived there. You know, this isn't just for academics for historians. It's for the public. And that's, that feels powerful. Yeah, feels really good. It feels like a something that we're putting out to the world that is for the future. Yeah. Which is precisely I think, so much of the intention of research. That's, it leads to Emily 27:34 orientation. Alice 27:37 Yeah, so I think that's where the idea started and You know, I'm just one person. So, you know, I just, I didn't know, like, I really didn't know, Emily 27:53 your impact is so huge, you know, that. I hope you know, that. Alice 27:57 You know, I guess but, to be honest, I just used the tools that I had in front of me, which is a website, which was social media advantage, you know these are the things I had available to me. You know, this snowballed. I thought it would just be to the detriment of what you're doing. And I think it's part of your interest to interview hundreds that's you know, people don't want always to tell their story. Emily 28:49 You don't need a history to create a history and knowledge base that has not existed before. Alice 28:56 Yeah. You know, clearly I didn't want to give of myself to only histories which could be you know, form a lot of perspectives and oddest form just a ball too. You know, people who are deaf and hard of hearing so, you know, I branched out and started publishing just essays about website. I started a podcast in 2017 which is really amazing because here I am talking to you in December 2020. I just published my 92nd episode. Emily 29:44 Oh my gosh. Alice 29:47 That's wild to me. Yeah. It's been a real adventure and a real labor of love to be able to jump around, try different methods, use different formats, for community to be involved in multiple ways. And I think thats for researchers and academics to have so much work. You're a qualitative researcher and you just do a page or a study or projects. There's so many jumps in your work. It really needs to reach people. You know, I would hope that academics think beyond their journal articles beyond their presentations you know, just like, you know these days our jobs are not rewarded in the system and that was a part of the problem. No incentive to create. Emily 31:38 like you're talking about like that sort of embedded forms of like, ableism, and racism and classism that exists within the Academy, and what, you know, traditional researchers are expected to produce. Alice 31:51 Yeah, I don't get the kind of pressures that people are under, especially here or junior faculty, or, you know, adjunct or graduate students, you know, because you do have to perform at, perform up to a certain point, right, this is the reality that I experienced as well. Emily 32:23 Ready to reality? And most places still? Alice 32:27 Yeah, and I think anybody who claims that otherwise is not really being honest. You know, to be real. Yeah, yeah, I think, you know, this is a real reflection point where, you know, for political and cultural climate, where people and institutions are being held accountable. Yeah. This is your time, if not now. to really think about what are your intensions? How do you practice your values? Yeah. Not just in your work life. But in your everyday life. Sure. You say, oh, you're an ally, or that you're in solidarity with others? Where does that show up? Like, what are the ways that you're actually doing this. And I think that You know in one of the ways. You know I could never to be more charitable. you know, yeah, put your work out there. And to really receive the critique, to receive, you know, real questions, by the people that are the most impacted. You know I think not receive that in a defensive way. Emily 34:22 And going beyond like, you know, in in a qualitative research class, or in most textbooks, there's something called a member check where you run your analysis by the people that participated. But I think what you're talking about speaks so much more deeply about the relational ways that researchers and participants are co researchers are engaging and allowing those who have more privilege and power to be asked really difficult questions. Yeah, thinking far beyond what gets talked about, I think in the typical typical qualitative research course or text? Alice 35:04 It's not a checklist. It would be more thoughtful, yeah, more intentional, Also just as scholars like, was your own with this is or areas that you're just thoughts as well first there I think, You know, there's also this very weird you know, job expectation of researchers and like, you know scholars often you don't know at all and i don't i think the offer is a art fair of expectation and I think you'd use a walkway when I see scholars who are just really open it just say what they know and what they don't know Yeah. Like with that frustration research make great art never ever neutral. if we can we can all start from that place. Yeah. I feel like that's where you really start out it really effective relationships with people from the outside. Yeah. Oh, sorry. Do you know there's all those times visible labor thats never going to be compensated. Yes by the academy and I think one other activity that's really undervalued is relationship building. Emily 37:13 Absolutely, absolutely. Alice 37:15 And I feel like that. For those of you, you know, this is it doesn't happen overnight. Today you have a study, you're gonna be you're getting IRB approval right now. You're like, Oh, shit, like, I better, you know, do outreach. You can't rush this stuff. And people will sit here doing this with the right intention. You have to lay the groundwork. You have to be of service to others. Yeah. And be really transparent. To be able to build relationships with people, whether they're going to be participants in your study, or as you know, true creators. Absolutely. There's just a lot of kind of foundational work that requires a lot of your own labor. But I will say that this is something that is absolutely valuable. It is really it rich. It is. Emily 38:50 I mean, it's essentially about the kind of the kind of research that you're that you're promoting. Alice 38:58 Yeah. They deserve you as well. Get along. Nice to serve everyone. That's, you know, that's just their place. Yeah. Emily 39:15 Oh, gosh, Alice, thank you so much for sharing. I feel like if I didn't, if I didn't try to wrap this up, I could stay on here with you chatting about different things for a really long time. But I want to I want to be respectful of your time and I know that everyone who's listening is so appreciative to hearing your perspective. So thank you so much for sharing your work and your thinking and your your prompts for sort of the academic community of qualitative researchers is super important. Alice 39:59 Also, before we end, I have some more questions. So this is from a book chapter for a book that you are [inauditble], I'm going to, people might not ever read this or come across this book chapter that I wrote for Emily and Dr. Lester. So here are just some of my thoughts and questions for qualitative researchers. Number 1, how are you uplifting to amplify the scholarship of people outside of the academy? Second, are you speaking in your classes and in panels that you're presenting and coauthoring in ways that emphasize your research partners? Here is another questions, how many non-academic scholars do you cite in your work and if it is not many, why is that? Emily Oh gosh, that is so important. Huge questions. Alice And two more questions. If you are conducting research about a marginalized community, how will you solicit feedback and critique from people with that experience? And a final question, which I think is probably, the thornest question, and could actually be an entire separate podcast episode, before starting did you research about a marginalized community ask yourself if you are the best person to do this? And whether it is appropriate to defer to other scholars who have been doing the work? Emily That is a good one. Alice: And Hopefully that leaves our listeners with some food for thought. Emily Thank you so much Alice Wong.

In this episode, Alexandra Panos interviews Jessica Nina Lester and Trena Paulus about doing qualitative research in digital words. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for digital methods and strategies has never been stronger. This conversation addresses important practice and theoretic questions for approaching digital inquiry. Digital Tools for Qualitative Research - Trena M. Paulus, Jessica N. Lester, Paul Dempster Doing Qualitative Research in a Digital World - Trena M. Paulus, Jessica N. Lester The following includes the transcript of the talk. (please excuse minor transcription errors) Alexandra Hello there and welcome to qualitative conversations a podcast hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American Educational Research Association. I'm Alexandra Panos an assistant professor of literacy studies and an affiliate faculty member in research and measurement at the University of South Florida. I also have the pleasure to serve as program coach with Cassie Quigley for the call SIG. And I'm delighted to be here with doctors Trina Paulus and Jessica Nina Lester to talk about the role digital tools play in qualitative research. Dr. Paulus is a professor in the Research Division of Family Medicine and director of undergraduate research and creative activities, as well as an affiliate faculty member with the Applied Social Research Laboratory at East Tennessee State University. Dr. Paulus's scholarship is primarily in the area of methodological innovation, especially as it intersects with new technologies. Dr. Lester is an associate professor of inquiry methodology in the School of Education at Indiana University Bloomington. Her scholarship focuses primarily on discourse and conversation analysis, disability studies, and more general concerns related to crop qualitative research. Dr. Paulus and Dr. Lester have co authored with sage, the 2014 book digital tools for qualitative research, and an exciting new and in press volume, titled doing qualitative research in a digital world. Thank you both so much for joining it today and sharing your time and energies. Thanks for inviting us. Yes, thank you so much. I'm truly excited to learn from you both and really just want to dive right into our conversation if that's okay. And I wanted to start with Alexandra a question that situates us in the here and now, given the shifts that have happened worldwide over the last 10 months with the covid 19 pandemic? Can you share a bit about what from your perspective, this really means for qualitative researchers? And how digital tools might play into this? Trina Yeah, so it's kind of this been this weird experience of being in the right place at the right time, or being in the right place at the wrong time? I don't know. But you know, COVID-19 is impacted all researchers in significant ways, for sure. And, you know, we had started writing this new edition of the book, Trina fully revamped book that's coming out shortly, a couple of years ago, actually. And then when COVID-19 hits sage really asked us to try to wrap it up, because researchers really needed some guidance for how to basically do their research in a new way. Trina And so how do we make sense of those spaces? How do we look at online interaction as a source of data as qualitative researchers, you know, we are interested in the human experience and understanding it as qualitative researchers, and that is now completely emeshed with, you know, doing business, doing education doing everything online. So, you know, there's new opportunities here, even though you know, most people have been, you know, there there are researchers have been doing this for a while, we all kind of have to consider how online spaces might be treated as a source of data, how our experiences are different. Trina And so while I think kind of one of the first things people want to know is how do we do interviews in zoom? It's, it's more than that. It's that we're all now spending lots and lots of time in zoom. So how can we understand what's happening there? So we've got digital tools, digital spaces, and also the digital space as a phenomenon in and of itself. Those are just a few of my initial thoughts. Jessica, what do you think? Jessica Yeah, I mean, I think that one of the things that's really helpful to keep in mind and in this moment, even though there's this you know, it feels like such a significant and even forced shift for qualitative research, I do think it's helpful to remind ourselves that this move to doing qualitative work and online spaces is not particularly new. And there's really a vast body of literature that we can draw upon to support us and offer some guidance to the questions that we're facing. And even really provoke us to think more about what it means to do qualitative research and be a qualitative researcher in a, you know, a historical moment where we're not just using technologies, but we're living through them even as researchers, and we're making meaning with them. So I think that's something for us to kind of use as a way to frame this particular moment. And that there's resources that we can turn back to, but that also, these are important questions that we should be asking ourselves about our work, and about what it means to make sense of meaning making in a space where technologies are really intersecting with everyday life. Alexandra Thanks, yeah, it's, it's, um, it's a lot to process. And I appreciate your point about that. Sometimes it does feel for Steven F, for we're all going through it. And it makes me think a little bit about design, designing scholarship right now designing qualitative scholarship right now. So I wonder if you can speak a little bit about how you work through as a qualitative researcher having to adjust your expectations about a research project, when what you'd hope to do isn't currently feasible. Given realities? Yeah, I Jessica can speak to that a little bit. You know, one thing that I often talk with about this question in relationship to students coming to me and saying, I can't do what I hope to do, particularly in this, this given moment, what are my options, and I think it is helpful to think about that, you certainly can return back to your original design and think about if there are ways that you can transform some of those methodologies and methods in engaging with digital tools, that you could digitize some of them, for instance. And then also, it is possible that you actually have to go back to the drawing board. And one of the things that you could potentially engage with is really thinking about designing a study, from the get go, that really engages in with digital spaces. And what that might mean is that you expand definitions of data. And this can be really exciting. And you can engage with new kinds of data that you hadn't even envisioned engaging with before. And so I think, you know, there are those two pathways to think about turning back to that original design and potentially, in some way, digitizing that original design or really rethinking it. And I think that this is an okay thing. I think that, you know, part of part of methodology writ large, is that it's always in the making. And so right now, our methodologies are in a really real way intersecting with technologies. And so what that means is that methodology is being remade. And that's, there's something also really both challenging, and also, potentially really exciting about kind of that moment. So at the same time, I think what that also means is, as we think about re envisioning a study, that we also have to keep in mind that the technologies that we engage with are, of course, not neutral. And they are, of course, you know, always fraught with consequences, including, you know, political consequences and equitable access. And so this is certainly something that we also want to set with as we think about our design, and particularly as we think about redesigning a study. Alexandra It's so helpful. I wonder if there are theoretical perspectives that have you found particularly helpful for conducting this kind of Digital Research and turning to to the stat sitting with process that you spoke of? Jessica Yeah, I can speak Jessica to this, this idea of theories that have informed our work, and I think I'll just share a little bit of a story of how we're coming to think with theory now. So. So first off, so just in general, if you were to engage with the literature around technology and qualitative research over the last, you know, about decade, you would probably conclude that qualitative researchers have historically kind of held on to this view of what's often referred to as technological determinism. So that's this orientation that humans are essentially passing And therefore, they must adapt to changes that technology forces upon them. So this particular view is one that often assumes that it's intrinsically best and most efficient technology will be adopted regardless of the context. And so this particular view is one that when Trina and I wrote the our first book, around digital tools and qualitative research, we really explicitly wanted to counter this perspective that was in the methodological literature. And in some ways, we did this implicitly, but what we really argued for was thinking about the ways in which we as qualitative researchers could really use technology to do things that we wanted it to do. So we didn't position ourselves that's passive. And so within this viewpoint, then qualitative researchers could be thought of as kind of retaining control of qualitative data analysis software, for instance, and not assuming that the software would control the study. So technology, and from this perspective, would be theorized and viewed as not just instrumental, but really positioned as what a human qualitative researcher can use it to do. But after we were wrote our first book on this topic I ran across a book that Katherine Adams and Terri Lynn Thompson had written, which was titled, researching a post human world interviews with digital objects. And in their book, they engaged with new materialistic post qualitative perspectives, and really offers some interesting ideas about how we as qualitative researchers are really intermingled intertwined with digital technologies. And as a read, I saw some references to our book. And so I immediately texted Trina and Katrina, someone has something to say about our book. And, and ultimately, it was a critique, it was a critique of our view of technology that we crafted in the first book was really not engaging and a full way with the ways in which technology really can be conceptualized and theorize as being co researchers with us that there's a dialectic. And so in our newest book, we really take up this critique and have begun to think more with you've been realistic ideas of technology, as well as some of the critical theories related to technological use. And we have found that to be really helpful, and generative, and pushing our thinking about how technologies are co researchers with us and are entangled with us in the process that is then something that we have to really think carefully about, and think about the implications of the tools that we use, and the ways that we're engaging in meaning making. Alexandra That I love hearing the story of how these texts evolve over time one, it also makes me wonder, the about the ethical and privacy considerations is something that's important when you do that kind of Digital Research when you are intermingled. So I wonder if you could share a little about that. Trina Yeah, I can talk a little bit about that. Because it does these issues come up a lot. In the work that I do. And the researchers that I work with these, I'm primarily looking at Digital spaces, online communities and online groups as a source of data. So I think the first thing to think about is that, you know, we always are dealing with ethical issues and privacy considerations when we're doing qualitative research as qualitative researchers, you know, we're often looking very deeply and intensely at people's lives. And so it's always different than if you're giving a survey or doing you know, lab based research is different kinds of ethics. The good thing is that there's actually been a lot of scholarship around ethics and Digital Research for many years. In fact, when we were writing this book, I couldn't believe the proliferation of entire texts on digital ethics that appeared since we wrote the first book in 2014. So there's a lot of guidance out there for sure. A couple of the things that issues that come up frequently for me in in when I'm giving talks and talking with people about it, is the issue of digital traces. And the fact that so much of us are so much of our lives now even before the pandemic world lived on the internet and in the cloud and with mobile devices. And as we go through the world, we're live leaving digital traces everywhere. And whether or not those should be treated as a source of data is the is one of the big issues, right? Who owns those traces? And whose permission Do you need to get to look at those as a data source? institutional review boards often are getting better about having policies around this, but they don't always know how to guide researchers. And sometimes, even though technically, the IRB approves the study, because they don't consider looking at online discussion posts as human subjects research because they're publicly visible, just because they say it's not human subjects research may not automatically mean that it's ethical to look at online discussion posts as a source of data without telling anyone. So I think that thinking about who owns these spaces, who's interacting on these spaces, who has access to them? I think, you know, there, there are no hard and fast rules, because the landscape is changing all the time, right? Like we have Tick Tock now, and we didn't even have that before. So how do we think about Tick Tock as a source of research data. But a few things to think about is, you know, I'm working in a medical school context now. So I hear a lot more about you know, the do no harm, first, do no harm mandate. And so you want to first be sure you're not harming or putting anybody at risk, whether that's an entire online community that no one would have known about until you wrote a paper about it, or if it's about an individual who was posting under their real identity, about a very sensitive illness online, and you bring attention to them inadvertently, or, or on purpose. really thinking about that is, of course, the basis and the fundamental issue around ethics. I've been also thinking about privacy. Do they expect that that this community is private? You know, is it really just for insiders? How can you respect people's privacy? At what point do you need to get informed consent, which may be very difficult when people are in online communities not as themselves, but under an assumed identity assumed identity? How do you navigate that? And so keeping identities private, protecting the data? If you do store? If you do treat it as data, then how can you make it as hard to track down the original sources possible? And then if you do do that, is it changing the essence of the data, or the essence of those online interactions, so that it actually might impact how you interpret it? So those are things that we have to struggle with? how sensitive are the topics that people are talking about? And again, you know, just trying not to put people at risk. So I think the good news, like I said, is that there are lots of case studies. The one of the best sources for guidance around this is the Association of internet researchers, they're actually on their third version of their ethics guidelines that came out, I think the most recent one came out this year. Trina And they really, you know, cover, it's all on a continuum. And they give a lot of holistic advice in terms of things to think through. And what I will always say on this topic, really is that if you can do research with people instead of on them, these issues are going to be much easier to navigate. If you want to look at an online community, get in touch with whoever's in that community and see what kinds of topics they would like you to study, and what would they like to know more information about, so that you're actually working in collaboration with the people that you want to understand better? Alexandra Thank you for that for the wonderful resource. And then just the plugs, work with folks to Trina think about their community. Yeah. Alexandra So important, simple, and, and really effective, I Alexandra think. Alexandra So I want to turn a little bit towards method here. And I'm wondering what tips you have for that data collection process online? Or how to think about additional sources of data to look for once you move research into those online spaces. Trina Yeah, and I can talk a little bit about that, too. I think, you know, one of the first things to ask is, okay, where are people talking about the issues that I'm interested in? So your research question like and just to give you an example of one of the earliest cities I did that was outside of an educational context. I'd collaborated with Dr. Mary Alice, Varga who's at the University of West Georgia now, and she's one of her areas is grief counseling. And she was really interested in why people choose to go to grief support groups or not, when you've suffered a loss, you know, you know, you're you're advised to kind of get support, but sometimes it's hard for people to go to grief counseling either individual or in a group. But we discovered or she discovered that there Actually a lot of online grief support groups out there. And she was really curious about why are people going online to get support when we have all of this in person counseling. And so we were able to analyze an online grief support group to kind of understand how people constructed their grief in those spaces. And those findings then could speak back to how people were doing grief counseling offline, you know, so in a pandemic, you may only have access to these online spaces, because so much of our in person services are no longer operating. If you think about any kind of social human experience, phenomenon, social science topic that you're interested in, think about where people talking about it, and just do some investigating. And we make the distinction in the book between naturally occurring or pre existing sources of data, which are things that are already out in the world, Reddit forums, tick tock, lots of online support groups for people who have specific illnesses. And they're just grassroots efforts or they're supported by a certain professional organization, travel blogs, and forums, Google Groups I hear is a huge source for parents trying to school their kids in the pandemic, there's all these neighborhoods and friend groups, setting up Google Groups, test text message threads. There's lots of places where people are talking electronically, and they have been for years, but now especially there's electronic conversations going on, that might give you insight into how people are talking about things without people talking to a researcher directly. research agenda generated data is when I decide to go interview someone, they're talking to me as a researcher, so they'll give me you know, their thoughts on things up to a point up to what they're willing to disclose to a researcher that they may not know that well. So that's important data. But what's really interesting is to see how people are going about their lives in these spaces without researcher intervention. And that can give us some really interesting insights that we wouldn't get otherwise. Alexandra That's, that's really interesting to think about all of those spaces that we're all contributing to right now. Trina Exactly. QR SIG AD Right. So that's really interesting. The qualitative research special interest group was established in 1987. To create a space within the American Educational Research Association. For the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research. We invite you to consider joining the qualitative research thing today. for members of a era the annual fee for joining qualitative research special interest group for regular non graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars, as well as our many activities ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series to updates and news related to recent qualitative publications and jobs. Please visit the American educational research associations website at www dot att era dotnet to join the qualitative research SIG today. Alexandra I guess something else I'm thinking about is that this idea that much might be lost when doing online interviews, interviewing is such a staple. For us as qualitative researchers, I think, do you have any thoughts or tips for enriching interview data beyond the recorded audio when we're working with digital tools? Jessica Yeah, I can, I can speak to this. And I think a useful place to start in response to this is actually to flip the script a bit on this. So rather than assuming that, you know, much is lost, I really prefer to think about it as just being different. I think it's really important to keep in mind that, you know, historically, face to face interviews, in qualitative research have really rested on some pretty notable assumptions about what it means to do qualitative research and about what participants should be doing and how they should be doing it. I have a favorite paper that was written by two critical disability studies scholars, Stephanie Kershaw and Margaret price in I think, was 2017. And their paper was was focused on thinking about how we can center disability and qualitative interviewing. And one of the things that they noted was that interviews writ large, and they were speaking both to those conducted in face to face contacts and as well as online, but that they really rely upon normative conceptions of body mind. So people, you know, ask a verbal question. And participants are expected to respond in a particular way. And we assume that language given in a particular way, and shared in a particular way is how it will occur. So it's a very normative assumption about even meaning making. So I say that because I think it's really important that we're reflective and careful about orienting to interviewing, as it has always been done as the only or even best way to capture making sense of people's lives and experiences. You know, we do know from some groups of people that this really has not been their experience of this method and crush on price speak to that a little bit from their own experience. Um, so then, if you are conducting interviews in a virtual space, I do suggest that you, you know, really orient to it as different. And certainly, there are important considerations, some of which are similar to face to face interviews, and others that are really unique to the particular technologies that you're using. You know, so like, an example of this might be, you know, if you want to consider whether videos will be turned on or off, and what does this mean for things like rapport building, or even how participants might experience a researcher viewing their private spaces. So, you know, corresponding price. They also argued that, even though you know, there has been this writing, and kind of argument from some researchers that we need to consider the significance of digital interviewing methods, because they do create access. And some people, some participants prefer that kind of interviewing space. They even pointed out in their work that even in these digital spaces, there can be this over reliance on kind of a normative body mind way of thinking about interaction. So I think in general, the real key is just to be critical, regardless of kind of the the modality that the interview is taking place in. And so as a starting point, I always encourage folks to, to your number one turn to your participants, to invite them to share with you ways that they can share their experience and their lives. In these digital spaces. They might have ideas, first, you know, ways that they want to do screen sharing, or even apps that are really useful in their own lives for sharing how they're going about living their lives. And also, you know, there is, again, a really nice body of literature that you can turn to, to get some guidance. You know, beyond Kershaw on prices article, Janet salmons has written a lot about online interviewing. And I also think it's useful to turn to some of the critical methods writing in the disability studies community that has really problematized interviewing, and both face to face and online spaces, and also highlighted how, you know, we never want to rest easy with being armed with a bunch of methods, literature, but the real importance of turning back to our participants to really help us understand better how we can collect data that allows us then to make sense of meaning making Alexandra you for, for talking through that and flipping that script, I think it's so important, and I just learned so much. And I want to turn now to your point about what the data is how we how we cope, how we collected or generated. So to think about technology, I guess I'm wondering if there are any, you know, specific particular platforms, technologies, devices that you have found particularly beneficial, and that you use when you're doing digital research? Yeah, I Jessica mean, you know, one of the challenges is that there are so many. And so of course, it depends on the the study and the nature of the project that you're working on itself. In our in our new book, one of the things that we have throughout is, is more than 40 vignettes, so on the ground researchers that describe their work and the specific tools that supported their work and that they engaged in. And so I think one of the ways to learn about what's out there is is really to engage with the writing of on the ground researchers who are are working across a range of disciplines and therefore asking really different kinds of questions that lead them to engage with different technologies. But again, you know, it really does depend on on the study and the nature of the project project. So if, for instance, I'm working with Instagram data, there are particular applications that I would use As I would download and format my image base data, versus when I'm working with interview data collected via zoom or another video conferencing platform. So it really does depend on the design of the study. And this is something that we've described in our writing as being part of you're generating your own Digital Research workflow. So in my own work, regardless of the project, I typically use qualitative data analysis software, specifically, I'm an atlas ti user, and recently have begun to delve into learning and using max q da. I mean, I use qualitative data analysis software really to manage and organize the entirety of my research study, including things like my literature review, and also using various features within a package to write up some of my my early findings within the package itself. So in this way, I, I personally orient to qualitative data analysis software, as kind of being like the the One Stop Shop that supports many of the aspects of my digital workflow. And I think what's important is that we we all individually spend time really not just designing our study, but thinking about where it intersects with our own Digital Research workflow, and identify ways that that can support the the work that we're interested in pursuing. Alexandra It's really helpful. I love the idea of a digital workflow and just having that be part of a study design and thinking through it that way. And I guess another sort of staple for us as qualitative researchers is transcribing data. I wonder about your preferred methods for that process? I know there's there's a lot of literature around transcription. But what what are you guys seeing right now? Trina Yeah, so that is, a whole chapter of the book is about innovations in transcription, because this is one of the areas that has really changed a lot since we wrote the 2014 book, in part because of just the leaps and bounds that auto transcription, artificial intelligence supported transcription tools, what they're able to do now such as Trent temi, otter AI, there's a lot of them out there, and they are getting better and better all of the time. And and just as an example of that, for the for people using zoom, you may have noticed that if your institution subscribes to it, you will actually get an automatically generated zoom transcript, which is phenomenal, if you're doing your interviews in zoom. And I would say this is actually where online interviews are hugely advantageous over face to face because there's an automatically generated transcript at the end. Now, granted, we all know that you have to make edits. But compared to what this used to look like the edits, if it's good sound quality, standard English or standard version of whatever language you're speaking in. If the conditions are right, the transcript can really be amazing. So for, you know, video conference type interviews, you know, if there's an automatically generated transcript, that's definitely a great place to start. This summer, I actually used Trent for the first time as a first pass to transcribe some patient, patient interviews, the health care providers, students in the health professions, were interviewing standardized patients. And I had a bunch of video data. So I ran it through Trent as a first pass it automatically it timestamps that automatically you can edit the transcript within Trent. It's a great data storage, it's all cloud based. So you do have to get IRB approval, and we didn't have any HIPAA data, HIPAA protected data, so it worked for us. But I do think that looking into some of these AI based services is definitely worth it as a first pass, if you're not actually conducting the interviews in zoom, another really good tool is ink scribe i en que se RIBE. It also lets you timestamp because what that means is if you can synchronize your recording with the transcript that is just so beneficial as a qualitative researcher so that you're not just relying on the words, you can actually click anywhere in the transcript and listen to that interaction again. And so Jessica and I both do conversation analysis and discourse analysis and other language based analytic methods were how people speak is as important as what they say. And so the technology, the ability to not just rely on the written transcript, but to be able to go back and listen again to how something said that's just been invaluable. And so I think we do need to really think about transcription as part of that overall Digital Research workflow. And there are cases in which some of the qualitative data analysis platforms We'll support that as well. So if you're using the Mac version of Atlas ti, I think that you can actually transcribe within that software. And the same with in vivo and Max q da, they provide the ability to do synchronize transcripts. So it's definitely worth thinking about how that's going to be integrated into the whole process. And, Jessica, I'm not sure if you wanted to add something on this one, too. Jessica Yeah, I was just gonna also say that is the one of the things that I think is really interesting about new technologies as they relate to transcription is, I think it's a really vivid example of how you can see innovations and technologies shaping how we think about method and methodology. And so what I mean by that is, you know, many of the qualitative analysis software packages now allow us to do import in a fairly fluid way. sizable video based data sets, though I work with a lot of video based data in my own scholarship, and they're relatively large data sets. So working with, you know, upwards of 100 plus hours of interactional data. And one of the things that these new innovations have really pushed to the fore is questions around do we even need to be transcribing our entire data set? And why are we transcribing our entire data set? What might it mean to leverage things like directly, Trina directly Jessica analyzing with the tools that are embedded within qualitative analysis, software packages, or video, and then we're selectively transcribing our data. And these questions, of course, become really pertinent when you're working with large datasets and just thinking about transcribing, which has been the norm and conversation, analytic work and much of discourse analysis as well. You transcribe everything and you transcribe everything, using transcription systems that are really, really intense, and take an extensive amount of time. So there's this time issue, but then there's also what's I think, arising is questions around why are we doing what we're doing. And I think if we trace across time, we'll see that there is a lot of methodological shift that happens in relationship to technological innovation. I mean, even if we just think about interviewing, how we collected interview data has radically shift as the development of recording technologies came to be, and then a refinement of those. And so I think right now, a really compelling and provocative and important question that I do hope that we, as a community, spend time really wrestling with is what is the place of transcription? And what might it mean to think about transcription differently at the intersection of technology and our methodological practice. Alexandra But I'm really thinking a lot about what you just said, I'm gonna send you a message after. Um, so I guess another question that I'm wondering about is the tools what tools are you using for storing all this massive amounts of data and these big files, etc, in both an accessible yet also secure way? Trina Yeah, you know, my biggest recommendation there is to use whatever your university is supporting, because you don't want to get in so like, at my institution, it's OneDrive, right Microsoft product, and, yeah, it may not be like the easiest, most accessible in terms of, you know, efficient way because the I don't necessarily like the way that the navigation is set up. But my institution has it, it's secure, it's supported IRB, are okay with it. Everybody that I'm working with in my institution can access it. Theoretically, people at other institutions should be able to access it as well. And so, you know, I think that really sticking with what your institution supports is a good first way to think about that. I do want to say that if you are thinking about long term storage of data, you need to consider a qualitative data repository, especially if you are willing for other researchers to have access to your data for reuse. to Oregon, that's another good reason to use qualitative data analysis software, because actually, all of your data is stored in that platform. That's how it's organized. And so you've got the software package, organizing your data, then you've got the original files, you know, also maybe in OneDrive, or what other whatever other system that you're using, that can keep it all very manageable. That's, you know, and then you know, that there's, there's the There's the password protected things with, you know, sharing files in certain ways that I do think you have to think about. But one nice thing about being in a secure cloud based service, like one drive supported by the institution is you don't have to think about it as much as you used to have to when everything was stored on individual computers, or hard drives, or zip drives and jump drives, and then you had to think about how you were going to password protect each file, and then how you were going to send it in secure emails to your collaborators. So you know, just look into what your your university supports. And I do realize that's a privileged position. If you're not working at an institution that provides something like that, then you do have to kind of think through all of those steps that that we did before we had these services... [End of the transcript]

In this episode, Maureen Flint, recipient of the QR SIG Outstanding Dissertation Award, discusses her work with the QR SIG Dissertation Award Committee Chair Jennifer Wolgemuth. You can follow more of Dr. Flint's work on her website: www.maureenflint.com. Below is the transcript of this interview. Jennifer Hello, everyone, and welcome to qualitative conversations, a podcast series hosted by the qualitative research special interest group of the American Educational Research Association. I'm Jennifer wolgemuth, the current chair of the qualitative research special interest group outstanding dissertation award committee. I am excited to be joined today by Dr. Maureen Flint, who is the recipient of the 2020 outstanding dissertation Award for her dissertation titled, methodological orientations, college student navigations of race and place in higher education. Dr. Flint is an assistant professor of qualitative research at the University of Georgia, where she teaches courses on qualitative research design, analysis and theory in the College of Education. The research agenda focuses on the theory, practice and pedagogy of qualitative inquiry. In particular, she's interested in artful methodologies, as well as questions of social justice, ethics and equity in higher education. Her research has been published in qualitative inquiry, cultural studies, critical methodologies, the review of higher education, Journal of college student development, and art slash research international and many other outlets. Her current work is interested in audio, visual and multimodal approaches to inquiry and representation. And some of her explorations in this area can be found on her website at www.maureen.flint.com. That's www.maureenflint.com Thank you for joining me today. Dr. Flynn. Maureen I'm really thrilled to learn more about you and your work. Thanks for having me. I'm excited to be here. Jennifer I think it would be helpful for our audience just to learn a little bit more about your dissertation work. So can you talk about your dissertation? What was the scope? What was its methodological focus? Maureen 2:27 Yeah, absolutely. Um, so my dissertation explored the socio historical context of race on campus, and particularly through new materialist and critical spatial, I'm going to critical spatial lens. So maybe we'll back up a little bit, I have a background in student affairs. And then I also have a background in the arts. And so both of those things really came kind of to the fore when I started my dissertation, as I've worked as an administrator, and it kind of started from this question, this gap between what I saw between what we was doing as an administrator, and then the things that we said that we valued and things that actually happened. And so I was really interested in kind of getting at that gap, particularly around the question of belongingness. and ended up finding theory is kind of this entry point to really work that tension. So a question of focus on place, and the way that place and the histories of place mattered, and students belongingness. And so this kind of starting there, I started with kind of traditional methods of interviews and focus groups. And then kind of found they necessarily getting at getting at the complexity of place that I kind of felt on the day to day or that my, my students kind of were alluding to in their interviews and so I started thinking about what kind of throughout my dissertation there's this question of faithfulness to theory is the way that I talked about it and how, how am I continually orienting to theory and the ways in which I'm designing and writing and representing engaging with my participants and thinking, thinking about kind of engaging with the space of campus and my research questions as a whole so throughout my dissertation, I can move in and out of these various methods and analytic approaches things like walking interviews and student I had students make maps that visually represented the police of Canvas and and kind of walk them through them. And then when I moved in de analytics started, I started to think with sound as a way to kind of explore the this layered pneus of place and and then that also, that kind of question. fullness also came out. And the ways in which I wrote through my dissertation is I can continually pausing and stopping and thinking about, you know, how is theory guiding you in this moment? Or have I fallen away from theory. And so I think, you know, that that really became the guiding threads throughout at all. And it closes and closes with this kind of question of ethics and theory, and faithfulness in the way that all those things in our twine, particularly in relationships with participants and kind of questions of futurity, and who are we as methodologists, in the future to come? So, yeah. Jennifer Wow, thank you. It sounds like what one of the things that I really heard you say, and I think would be really of interest to the listeners is, you you started out with what we might call traditional or conventional qualitative inquiry. And then it was a combination of engaging theory, new materialist theory and other sorts of theories that opened up different kinds of methodological possibilities for you. So can you give some advice to doctoral students who might be on that particular path right now as we speak? Maureen 6:23 Yeah, absolutely. Um, I think, well, I now I think about it, I teach because I teach one of the classes that I teach is our design course. And one of the things that I have the students in that class do, we have an of this traditional three interview project, that's traditionally the outcome of that course. And one of the things that I do in that class is have students have do one of those interviews as a non traditional scare quotes, non traditional interview, and it opened the door for them to do something different with it, with their their dislike of their interview, the research questions, this idea of interview itself. And I think that I see that for them really opening the door to think about how other things matter beyond just like an interview script, and sitting across from someone and asking them a series of questions help.You know, things like objects, or changing the place of the interview, or even going beyond, I've had students really challenged what an interview is, and like engage interview documents or going to go into different types of analysis, but always guided by the theories and their literature and the research questions that are guiding them. So I think maybe, I think that that is an entry point. They're thinking about advice to other students. And, yeah, I think in my own work, it was also reading interdisciplinarily. So I was reading a lot in critical geography studies. I was reading in like, literary fiction, poetic authors like Claudia Rankin, and Saidya Hartman, who write in a very, like literary poetic style, speculative fiction, like nk jemisin. And so those little really inspired mythological choices that I made in terms of like, thinking differently, or thinking otherwise about representation or methodology. Jennifer Um, so, you mentioned new materialism and new materialist theory and philosophy. So in addition to all this interdisciplinary reading that you're doing, and this sort of practicing with innovative methodologies, what recommendations might you have for new materialist readings for students? Maureen 9:02 Who, um, yeah, I think, Rosie Brady's My, my, my girl, um, so she was really what guided my dissertation. Um, she has a new book out on post-human knowledges that I think really speaks to this present moment that we're in a precarity and exhaustion and capitalism and white supremacy and the ways that all those things are colliding all at once. And I've also, Sara Ahmed has been although she's not necessarily a new materialist writer, she's really informed my work, particularly around thinking around feminism. And who else in a thing. work has been really important and I think she just had she has a new website out that's beautiful. That's thinking in these really layered ways about the Anthropocene. And I guess maybe more broadly, the thing that I would say about reading is that I've really been inspired by reading with other people who are working in other spaces and places. And so I end up reading things that I never would have coming out of my discipline, in educational research, but also with this background in higher education, we become, especially in higher ed become really siloed. And so thinking with people who are in math, education, or English, or geography or other spaces has been really an expansive,expanded my reading in productive ways. Jennifer This is some really great sources and great suggestions, and I appreciate the injunction right to to read widely and read across disciplines. It's It's impressive what opened up for you, your dissertation? Maureen 10:58 Well, I guess maybe what I think I found reading, really, I have always enjoyed reading a lot. And I think reading with people has been something that has been incredible. It's one of my favorite things about being an academic or getting to be an academic of thinking with people. And so me, I think finding people who you enjoy, who bring joy to your reading, is perhaps another thing. So that's great advice, finding anyone who brings joy to anything, it's probably important.So, in addition to everything that you've said, there are lots of graduate students right now who are writing dissertations. There are lots of faculty members who are writing books. Jennifer Can you talk about your process of writing your dissertation? What was it like what helped? What got in the way? Maureen 12:00 You know,I guess where to start. Susan, can I actually just wrote a chapter for an edited book that you and Kelly guy have put together. And we we actually were writing converting our distributions together, we met era, through the QR SIG, which, which actually to back up a little has been huge was hugely helpful for me in a variety of ways. my academic career trajectory as a grad student from doing putting together proposals for a year a,like suddenly getting descended to a senior scholar in the field and getting feedback I think I sent you in this could be like a 40 page manuscript, and she was like, Oh, you might need to cut this little bit. Um, but I just had no idea right of what to do. And so the cure was really helpful in mentoring me along in how to become a member of qual community. And so Susan, and I had met at the mentoring session at a year and ended up reconnecting and icti. And then reading together over the summer. And then both were kind of separately told their advisors to stop reading, insert writing, because we want it both on to graduate, but spring. And so I think, you know, that was hugely helpful having someone in a similar place to talk through not just and share writing, not just around like the literal parts of the dissertation, but all of that other stuff that goes along with it, like the excesses of like the hoops in the job market, and the worry and the anxiety.And so we read about in that chapter is like the swarming of like, coming together of texts, and others, other folks that were writing within our advisors and our writing is this kind of collaborative move, even as we were writing separately, we were writing together. So finding that type of community. And I also had a group of people. It was kind of a mix of faculty and other graduate students, who we would write together really early in the mornings. We had kind of this set schedule of Tuesdays and Thursdays, we're needed Starbucks or McDonald's at like seven in the morning or 630 in the morning. For me, that was really helpful because it was a time when like, there were no other distractions, or someone else who is expecting me to be somewhere there is some accountability. So that that helped a lot. And then I think starting at both the season and with the people ever with starting to think about your dissertation is like chipping away at small pieces of it, rather than thinking about it as a huge month long endeavor. I remember staring at a set, actually, my committee let me put a picture of it in my dissertation. But I stared at a stack of printed out transcripts, I think for like three weeks just staring at them not knowing what to do. So finding ways to chip away at it was helpful. And one of those things that I did, but that's how I like turned to sound, because I couldn't deal with the stack three inch stack of paper. So I started taking audio clips and layering them together to think about it differently. Jennifer That's, that's so interesting. Because you you notice something that wasn't working for you, right? Um, and it sounds like your dissertation emerged through that process you you had collected interviews to answer a question and you found them wanting in one way, shape, or form. And then you went to analyze that when you found that process that you were meant to do wanting. And so you chose something new. And that's something that comes out really loud and clear in your dissertation and in the rest of your work is that you're not just a scholar, you're not just an analyst, you are a creator, you're an artist. So can you talk about what being an artist and producing art? Maureen 16:26 I know, I didn't send you this question in advance. Apologies for putting you on the spot. But it's so fascinating. How,yeah, how that how that plays into your work and your identity as a scholar? Yeah, Mmm hmm. Well, I when I was growing up, I always wanted to be an artist, my mom was an art teacher. And I went to school to be trained as a pattern maker. So what that means is like the construction of garments, so like a designer drugs, a sketch, and the pattern maker looks at it and tries to figure out how to make that real or possible. And that often means like, being very creative, or inventive, and the fabrics that you use, or like the ways in which it gets seams or cut or the ways in which is put together. And so when I took my first qualitative research class, there's this kind of click that I was like, oh, like design is really, there's this there's this a parallel ness between, you know, creation, art creation, through this pattern, making lens and then design, it's like this puzzle that you're figuring out how stuff fits together. And there might be multiple ways for things to go together. Or maybe along the way, as you're trying to put stuff together, something else becomes possible. That's way more exciting than your initial idea. And so I think that's always like an under that's always been an undercurrent of my work. And then there's other places or spaces where I've thought more explicitly with art making practices as I mean, I think this having this happens in research design, but I also think it happens in art making where there's this ethic of experimentation or process. Actually, I was in a talk with Anna Sing last week or the week before, and she was talking about, like this idea of the detour or of contingencies and following this thing.And I'm always found in art making that those are things like those are things you should follow that you should see what what they make possible. And I also find that true. QRSIG ADD 18:49 The qualitative research special interest group was established in 1987. To create a space within the American Educational Research Association. For the discussion of ethical, philosophical and methodological issues in qualitative research. We invite you to consider joining the qualitative research they today are members of a era. The annual fee for joining qualitative research special interest group for regular non graduate student members is $10. And the annual fee for graduate students is $5. As members of the QR SIG, you will gain access to a network of fellow qualitative scholars, as well as our many activities ranging from mentoring opportunities to our podcast series to update to news related to recent qualitative publications and jobs, please visit the American educational research associations website at www dot att era dotnet to join the qualitative research thing today. Jennifer So can you talk about so some scholars build off their dissertation work? And sometimes like myself, they move in different directions for a period of time. So what are you engaging with and what are you thinking now? Maureen 19:58 Yeah, um,I? Well, one of the things that's been really exciting post graduate graduation or post dissertation has, has been getting to explore, particularly in my dissertation, like some of the lines of thought or ideas that I get to like fully fleshed out there. And so my writing right now is been doing some of that. So,for example, I, there's a footnote in my dissertation about a leaf blower, and like the way that it kept coming up in the audio of my dissertation, because I was doing these walking interviews, right, where it was asking students to take me on a tour of campus Sigmund on alternative tour of campus. And throughout it, there was like this buzz of the leaf blower and in my dissertation, I have this little footnote that was like, this is really interesting, the way it keeps coming up, like listening to this as a more than human sound like how what might this do to think about the productions of place and how it matters. And so I wrote this paper, that's an I guess, it's, it's accepted with minor revision. So it's not complete day, it's still hanging out. But anyway, I'd like it to follow this leaf blower around and like unfold these practices of like lawn maintenance and the history of leaf blowers in the way that that's entangled with low paid or unpaid or historically, enslaved labor and how like listening to them, and following that thread begins, like unravel this neutrality of place, and the ways that, you know, waste supremacy and capitalism are baked into the ongoing productions of higher education. So and that's been really fun to follow some of those threads. Um,and so I guess I'm still writing with my dissertation in some ways, like that. And I've also really enjoyed the opportunity to collaborate with people. That's been I mean, the that's been really inspiring and joyful, I guess, to return to joy. Um, so as soon as like Susan cannon, I can and I kept writing together, reading together and then we've been really thinking about feminist materialists theories and in conjunction with like counting practices, and metrics and how that produces academic subjects and how you might methodologically intervene and practices of counting. And then I've been writing a little bit with my friend, Carlson, Kugler at Alabama, and we've been thinking, choose a beautiful art practice around embroidery. And she's been thinking about artful ways to engage with and respond to theory.So those are a few of the collaborations, but I think that's been super cool to get to really, like lean into collaborative work and thinking postgraduation. Jennifer 23:10 Yeah. And the the viewers can't see it, but you have this big smile on your face. That clearly shows. Yeah, the joy that that collaborative work. Like, like thinking with other people is such a creative process. Because you end up in these like unexpected spaces and places because of, like, the publicity of your ideas. That's just so cool. And, yeah,yeah, you can. Yeah. Um, can you talk about speaking of joy, the ethical aims, or ethical tensions in your work? Sort of from an axiological perspective? What do you hope that your work accomplishes or moves or shifts within the field of qualitative researcher or the other fields that you work in? Maureen 24:07 Yeah.You know, um, interestingly, I will not ever up. It's interesting. It's interesting to me.I think that in a lot of ways, my work started off really interested in speaking to the field of higher education. great ideas, has this quote about seeking modes of representation and forms of accountability that are adequate to the complexities of the world we're living in may have mangled that a little bit but and I think that was really like an ethical move that I wanted. As a person who came out of higher education, I have a master's degree in higher ed administration that I really wanted. I saw You know, this intersection of theory and methodology, particularly new materialist and feminist new materialist theories as this ethical move in higher education to think more complicatedly about the space of college campuses and the way that they produce in are produced by students, and faculty, etc, etc. Um, and, you know, I've been talking with when I've read with my friends, Laura Smithers and Apple Ian, and we've been reading together over the summer following, you know, we're in the middle of a pandemic, and the always kind of this resurgence of racial justice movements and this anger around the ongoing violence towards black people. And all of it in this moment in the election, that's in a week. Like, I think about writing and methodology is, like a response to that, that is, like I think about it is. So we talked about, like, I feel, in some ways, like I'm writing, like, writing my way out of this moment, in some ways or way through. And I think that's actually misquoting Hamilton. But, um, but like, I like I think about methodology is this ethical responsiveness to the moment that we're in? And particularly like, as a white woman in this moment? Like, what how do I respond? And what's my place? And how do I do this in an ethical way? Like, I think about my researches, picking needing to pick up and engage with all of that, be responsive to it. And I never quite know what that's going to look like. In the moment, I guess, um, yeah, I actually, I think about a paper that a graduate student. And I wrote over the summer, that ended up in a totally different place than we expected. He proposed it last fall thinking with john lewis's good trouble. And then. And then we started reading in May, and you know, reading about good trouble, john lewis, in May of 2020, is totally different than writing with it in September of 2019. And so we really struggled through that paper with how to how to respond to this moment, in a complicated way is, and I think that's still ongoing. So, yeah. Jennifer So shifting gears a little bit back to advice given for graduate students. A lot of doctoral students that I work with, and I know others in our community work with, are very interested in doing critical and post informed and artistic sorts of work on and the come up against expectations for formats for what proposals like and, and so I'm just curious, from, from your experience and your perspective as the assistant professor Now, what does a proposal look like? And how did you communicate what you wanted to do to your committee? And what were their sort of questions and concerns? Maureen 29:13 Yeah, that's a great, that's actually a question that I've had any particularly in my I'm teaching in our analysis class right now that I'm, I've gotten from a lot of my students, there's I'm sharing articles from qualitative inquiry and stuff that moves beyond traditional formats. And they always ask like, oh, like, How did this get published? How are these people taken seriously? And one of the things is, well, this isn't necessarily responding to your question. One of the things that we do in that is, look at like, we take all those like traditional things that are in paper, and then I asked them to, like, think through this non traditional paper and think about one what's the purpose of it? What's it doing? And then, you know, sometimes they'll find that Oh, like all of these pieces are here, they're just presented in a way. That's different because and then we talk about, like, why that is like how presenting this non traditional format is actually pushing you to think differently about, you know, what research could be your purpose of it all. But going back to my dissertation, I was really lucky in that. I, Kelly guyot, who was my advisor, we talked about really early on the fact that I was probably going to do something that moves beyond traditional, the traditional five chapter format.And she actually really pushed me to do that. So I remember sitting down with her after my proposal, which actually looked fairly traditional, in that it had an introduction, a statement, like statement of the problem. This is what I, this is what this is, what the literature is, this is what I plan to do the slide. Here's my theory.And she really pushed me to move beyond that and think, otherwise, if she pushed me to think about what my represents, like, how is the way that you're representing your district dissertation aligned with your theory, like you keep talking about this in your methodological section, so how like your representation should also think about that so. And as I finished my dissertation, we have continually talked about like a more than representation like art, for instance, installation or something. And so that was something I ended, I did a pop up our installation for my dissertation defense itself, where I invited my participants and one student affairs and community members. And the room where my dissertation where I defended, had, I had created these, like fabric panels with quotes from participants.There was like sheer fabric, with their quotes on it, and some, like big pieces of theory, weaving them all together. And then the sound is compilations that I've made, we're playing in different parts of the room. So as you walked around, you heard different voices and different stories being told about place. And so that was really neat. I mean, so I think I was fortunate that she really pushed me to, like, push me to do that push me to think that so I think,and I, also, um, you know, I had, I think, 26 chapters and my final dissertation. And the graduate school didn't blink an eye about that, like they, I it's like it's interwoven with images and pictures, I have, like these layered maps that show up in between chapters. And so long as it had one inch margins, and like, APA was, right, they were pretty cool with it. So I think that really taught me and that's been my experience submitting to journals, too, is that one minute, so long as you're fitting in, do follow some of these rules. There's some space there and like creating like hypertext spaces where your work can be otherwise, like that hump of installation, or I had links throughout that link to my website. So I created a website. So yeah, I think so I think and talking with your advisor about what you plan to do, along the way, in fact, finding folks, I mean, I had a five person committee that was really, really supportive of me. And we talked about that all along the way of our stuff was, might look different than they were used to. So that was, yeah. And all of that. It's hard advice to give, because, you know, I also didn't know I did, so some of the stuff that ended up in my dissertation was actually stuff that I've experimented with, in classes or experimented with. I guess it was my prospectus that was fairly nor traditional. And my proposal started to move beyond that. And I started to play with that. So I almost like showed them like these are some things that this might look like, but here's ways that I'm thinking About experimentation. And so we got to have these really cool conversations about theory. And what that could mean for a referee, or how that might inform representation or inform, or, I mean, we also talked about, like, should I be representing anything anyway? Because I was using non representational theories.But, you know, we got to have these really cool questions about a theory, and the way that that might inform my work in multiple ways. So yeah. Jennifer So I'm hearing if I were to summarize your main point. I'm hearing that having mentors and committee members who are supportive is really important. I hear that having examples of other people who have done this kind of work, whether it's in journals, or your dissertation for, for example, is important. I hear that even though we think journals and grad schools are very rigid in their requirements, they actually may be a lot less rigid than we think they are.And I hear that being open to thinking about alternative ways to engage your dissertation, like the hyperlinks that you were talking about.are all ways in which we can open up the idea of what a good proposal and a good dissertation looks like. Maureen 36:32 Yeah, absolutely. Thank you for summarizing all that. I tend to ramble.Oh, no, no, no, I'm the I was the last thing. One of the things you said reminded me some of the best advice I got, especially when I was in my perspective, sir proposal stage was Kelly guyot told me to go and look at ICQI, experimental dissertations, who had won over several years. And that works, who won and the arts based research thing. And that was really helpful for me, I remember reading a David Bright's dissertation where he really plays with footnotes. And like, it was just, you It's beautiful. And like this, like kind of happening in my brain where it just was like, oh, like, you can really play with the format of this and neat ways. So that's some more concrete place, perhaps you're the best. Because you're so good at giving concrete advice. Jennifer And because you're in a fabulous position at the University of Georgia. So you're now an assistant professor at the University of Georgia, just in case fabulous didn't communicate. Um, so can you talk about your experience being on the academic job market? And do you have any tips for those who were starting to get that right now? Or soon? Maureen 38:06 Yes, I was trying to think I think, um, you know, the the way, as someone who is now working in the field as a new professor, I've been asked to be on like, all these panels of like, how do you get an academic job? And I never, even though I can, like, I think there are multiple levels of tips like there's like, the logistical, like, when should you like having conversations with having lots of people look at your CV and give you advice on it was really helpful to me talking really early in your academic career with your advisor about like, what you want to do, like I remember my first or second year talking with Kelly, about like that I wanted to actually have the time I was on the fence between the illustrator and going the academic route. But that chief after,after I had a middle manager job as an administrator and realize that no world I wanted to live in. Um, but anyway, we sat down and like, recognized that one area, like one gap area that I had was I didn't have a lot of experience teaching. And so she and I co taught a class with her and then also ended up reaching out to a faculty member in the higher ed program to co teach a class and Student Affairs because when I went on the market, I was actually doing a double search of methodology positions and higher ed position. So having experienced teaching in both of those was helpful. Maureen 39:46 So, I mean, there's like that logistical advice. And I think, I mean, some of the best advice that I got was about not not taking it personally. That the job mark is like this weird... Transcript over.

In this episode, Aaron Kuntz, recipient of the QR SIG Outstanding Book Award, discusses his work with the QR SIG Book Award Committee Chair Travis Marn.

In this episode, Dr. Travis Marn, recipient of the QR SIG Outstanding Dissertation Award, discusses his work.

In this special episode, host Jessica Lester is joined by an international research collective to discuss unexpectedness and disruption in qualitative inquiry. This engaging episode challenges the notion of what a podcast "should" be, include, sound like, and do. Please enjoy!

In this episode, Dr. Namita Mehta, an expert qualitative scholar on issues of educational equity, joins to discuss her work foregrounding human dignity within qualitative research endeavors.

In this episode, Drs. Candace Kuby & Jennifer Wolgemuth, QR SIG Program Co-Chairs, offer a preview and discussion of the Qualitative Research SIG Program at the 2019 AERA Annual Meeting, held April 5-9 in Toronto, Canada.

In this episode, Dr. Christie Poitra, Assistant Director of the Michigan State University Native American Institute and Affiliate Faculty in the MSU American Indian & Indigenous Studies Department, joins to discuss her scholarship in K-12 Indigenous education policy and practice.

In this episode, we learn from Dr. Kelly Guyotte, Assistant Professor of Qualitative Research in the Department of Educational Studies in Psychology, Research Methods, and Counseling at the University of Alabama. Dr. Guyotte's work with visual methodologies and arts-based research is the focus of this fascinating discussion.

In this episode, Dr. David Carlson, associate professor at Arizona State University, joins us to discuss his work engaging with Foucault as a qualitative researcher and methodologist in education, policy, and leadership.

In part II of this special two-part series, Dr. Meagan Call-Cummings, assistant professor in the College of Education at George Mason University, is joined by students and a classroom teacher to discuss and reflect upon their work together in a participatory inquiry collective. Join us for this fascinating, in-the-field conversation which sheds tremendous light on the process and products of participatory action research.

In part I of this special two-part series, Dr. Meagan Call-Cummings, assistant professor in the College of Education at George Mason University, discusses her work on participatory action research. In part II, also available today as a separate episode, she is joined by a group of educators and students in a participatory action research collective.

In this episode, Dr. Jasmine Ulmer, assistant professor in the College of Education at Wayne State University, describes her fascinating work in critical qualitative inquiry and place-based methodologies.

In this special bonus episode, Dr. Kelly Guyotte, assistant professor of qualitative research at the University of Alabama and assistant chair of the QR SIG Mentoring Committee, discusses key considerations, helpful tips, and important things to keep in mind when preparing AERA annual meeting proposals.

In this episode, we host a lively and thought-provoking discussion of thinking with theory, featuring Dr. Lisa Mazzei. Dr. Mazzei is an associate professor of educational studies at the University of Oregon, and the author of "Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research: Viewing Data Across Multiple Perspectives."

In this episode, Drs. Candace Kuby & Jennifer Wolgemuth, QR SIG Program Co-Chairs, offer a preview and discussion of the Qualitative Research SIG Program at the 2018 AERA Annual Meeting, held April 13-17 in New York City.

In this episode, we consider innovative methodologies, urban school choice, and the role of geography in qualitative education research. We are joined by Dr. Emma Rowe, a lecturer in the School of Education at Deakin University in Australia.

This month, we speak with Dr. Jeanine Staples, Associate Professor of Education (Language & Literacy Education) and African American Studies at Penn State. Dr. Staples is the author of The Revelations of Asher: Toward Supreme Love in Self – (This Is an Endarkened, Feminist, New Literacies Event).

Learn about resources available through Syracuse University's Qualitative Data Repository (QDR), as your host, Dr. Jessica Lester, joins in conversation with QDR Associate Director, Dr. Sebastian Karcher.

Discussing participatory and critical methodologies in relationship to research on schools and schooling. Dr. Shah is an assistant professor of educational foundations and qualitative inquiry in the Department of Educational Studies at the University of South Carolina.

Aligning critical qualitative methodologies with critical theoretical frameworks, featuring Dr. Kakali Bhattacharya, Associate Professor of Qualitative research, College of Education, Kansas State University.