The Ethnography of a Relational Methodology in Researching Indigenous-Language Immersion Schooling

• In Event: With Language at the Heart: Researcher, School, Community, and Tribal College Collaborations in Indigenous Education

Abstract

Objectives/Purpose. This paper examines ethnographically the process of a mixed-method, national study of Indigenous-language immersion (ILI) schooling, focusing on the “shared aspect” of Indigenous methodologies: “accountability to relationships” (Wilson, 2008, p. 7). Even as the study’s findings reveal the centrality of relationality in ILI schooling, we simultaneously document the ways in which “accountability to relationships” shapes the very nature of the inquiry process itself. This paper explores how that methodology was constructed in collaboration with community, school, state-level, and Indigenous Nation stakeholders. Our goal is to illuminate the power and possibilities of a relational methodology that takes seriously research that serves the needs of Indigenous communities “as defined by those communities” (Brayboy et al., 2012, p. 435).

Perspectives and Theoretical/Methodological Framework. Ethnography is both a process of conducting research and a product or account derived from that process (Presenter 2, 2015). As process, ethnography is a “way of seeing” culturally, historically, and systemically, and a “way of looking” based on long-term fieldwork (Wolcott, 2008). Ethnography is also a “way of being a researcher” that is humanizing and anti-hegemonic (Presenter 2, 2015; cf. Paris & Winn, 2014). In this paper we expand these understandings, highlighting the relational quality of seeing, looking, and being a researcher in Indigenous language education. Following Grande (2018) and Wilson (2008), we emphasize mutuality, reciprocity, and responsibility in research with and for Indigenous communities.

Methods and Data Sources. This is a critical ethnographic inquiry into a mixed-method study that includes a national survey of ILI programs and in-depth case studies at eight diverse ILI school sites. The data corpus derives from 16 two- to three-day site visits at eight ILI schools; 9 half-day to full-day meetings with school, community, tribal, and state-level leaders; 52 hours of research team meetings; and hundreds of hours of nonsite-based interactions with research participants and other school, community, state-level, and Indigenous Nation stakeholders. We draw on observational data recorded in field notes, transcripts of in-depth interviews, meeting records, and archival data, including official relational accountability documents such as memoranda-of-agreement and research permissions. Facilitated by Dedoose software, analysis includes within-case and across-case thematic analysis and content analysis of documentary data.

Findings. We report preliminary findings from this study-in-progress, examining relationality as (1) enabling, (2) empowering, and (3) necessary in research that serves community-defined needs and goals. Findings reveal the role of relationality within and across sites and participants; the building of relationships between researchers, sites, and participants; and the conditions that foster relationality among the research team. We propose that relationality is the lynchpin for research in support of Indigenous educational and linguistic sovereignty and self-determination.

Significance. Just as a paradigm of relationality calls for the re-subjectification of those with, for, and about whom we research, so too does it call for a critically reflexive re-subjectification of us as researchers. This ethnographic inquiry into a relational methodology demonstrates the expansiveness and inclusivity of such a research paradigm, pointing researchers and school/community/organizational partners beyond the erasures of coloniality and the confines of objectivist research.

Authors

• Teresa L. McCarty, University of California - Los Angeles

• Tiffany S. Lee, University of New Mexico

• Sheilah E. Nicholas, The University of Arizona

• Michael H. Seltzer, University of California - Los Angeles

• Winoka Begay, The University of New Mexico

• Kari Chew, University of Arizona

• Thomas Jacobson, University of California - Los Angeles

• Joaquin Noguera, University of California - Santa Barbara

• Jayashri Srinivasan, University of California - Los Angeles