Expanding Latinx for and by Latinx Research: Toward a Community of Researchers Approach

• In Event: The Necessity of Seeing Anew: Dreaming Up New Possibilities for Research on Nondominant Communities

Abstract

Purpose: This paper extends examinations of positionality in ethnographic research (England, 1994; Rose, 1997). We look to ways that scholars of color have critically explored their roles as researchers of their own communities (Collins, 1986, 2002; Crenshaw, 1989, 1993; Solorzano & Yosso, 2002). Through reflections as diasporic Latinx researchers on a research project studying everyday practices of Latinx families, we aimed to unearth the affordances and constraints of leveraging our cultural repertoires to 1) provide nuance to what constitutes Latinidad; 2) serve as socio-cultural brokers for a team comprised of Latinx and non-Latinx members.

Framework: We are inspired by Latinx epistemologies (Cruz, 2001; Mendoza Aviña, 2016; Urrieta, 2010) and how they move us toward “understanding [how] the brown body and the regulation of its movements is fundamental in the reclamation of narrative and the development of radical projects of transformation and liberation” (Cruz, 2001, p. 657). We are further informed by socio-cultural approaches to culture as dynamic (Cole, 1996) and comprised of repertoires of practice (Author, 2003). We bring these perspectives together to examine how research conducted with Latinx communities by Latinx researchers can be done in dignity-affirming ways (Espinoza & Vossoughi, 2014) that don’t reproduce reductive views of communities.

Methods: The analysis reported here developed within the context of a larger multi-sited ethnography (Marcus, 1995) that took an ecological approach for inquiry, noting daily routines, social networks, and family beliefs. A total of 14 families participated (12 Latino, 2 White).

Data: We draw from qualitative data sources: 175+ hours of video-recorded observations, activity logs, surveys, interviews, family-documented photos/videos, and memos. Units of analysis included family home practices (Level 1) and instances of ingenuity (Level II). Subcodes (Level III) were developed inductively.

Findings: We found that leveraging our Latinx identities for the purposes of analysis was a complex and dynamic process where we were able to 1) Identify moments when previously-produced analytical documents failed to capture nuanced practices of our Latinx participants (of which we had knowledge); 2) Aid in the development of analytical tools that were linguistically and culturally attuned to non-reductive approaches to seeing the everyday practices of our participants. Further, a research agenda that allowed us to voice our affective connection to our communities (Warner, 2015), problematized notions of objectivity, and iterated upon itself allowed for the challenging of essentialist assertions about our participants.

Significance: This paper contributes to scholarship on researcher positionality and epistemologies. We highlight the methodological potential of designing a community of research (Lemke, 2000) agenda that leverages the expertise of a diverse group of researchers. This paper offers guidelines that ask researchers to consider whose epistemologies are privileged and how to move beyond individual (self-centered) positionality.

Authors

• José Ramón Lizárraga, University of California - Berkeley

• Krista L. Cortes, University of California - Berkeley

• Arturo Cortez, University of Colorado - Boulder

• Kris Gutierrez, University of California - Berkeley