What Matters Most in Co-Authorship? Perspectives on Thinking, Writing, and Collective Sensemaking

• In Event: Perspectives, Processes, and Possibilities: Reimagining Co-Authorship for Relational and Anticolonial Futures in Social Studies Scholarship

Abstract

Purpose

Several features prove resilient across conventional perspectives of co-authorship: 1) scholarship is valued if it undergoes “peer review” and results in publication in journals, 2) “experts” with academic credentials and advanced training as writers are best-suited to lead authorship processes, and 3) “whitestream” (Grande, 2008) knowledges, and practices, and products that reinforce settler colonial structures are prioritized (Bang & Voussoughi, 2016; Biesta, 2007; Grande, 2018; Gutiérrez & Penuel, 2014; Tuck, 2009; Turtle Island Social Studies Collective, 2019). Instead of cultivating relationships, co-learning, and theory-to-practice transfer, such features reinforce hierarchies, encourage competition between individuals, and minoritize community members (Authors, various; Bang & Voussoughi, 2016; Windchief & San Pedro, 2019).

To imagine relational, anticolonial futures for co-authorship, we turn to our experiences co-leading development of a book on relational social studies research. We offer questions to frame the session, including:
● How do social studies researchers and anticolonial scholars understand “co-authorship?”
● What practices and processes support relational co-authorship?
● How does the field of social studies education support or hinder relational perspectives of teaching, learning, researching, and co-authorship?
● In conventional and relational educational research, who does the thinking? Who does the writing?
● How does “collective sense-making” transform thinking about co-authorship? What challenges and possibilities arise?

Theoretical Framework and Modes of Inquiry

Relational scholarship repositions academics as learners and community members as experts to collaboratively conduct research, examine topics of relevance to minoritized communities, and challenge broader settler colonial systems (Authors, various; Tachine & Nicolazzo, 2022). Our primary mode of inquiry—throughout the book and this session—is “collective sense-making,” which is a participatory approach that engages scholars, stakeholders, and/or other thought partners in collaborative, dynamic, and synergistic review and revision of research stories, interpretations, and representations (Archibald, et al., 2019). At the center of this practice is commitment to deep and sustained relationships with thought partners.

Results and Significance

The book includes a forward; seven chapters sharing examples of relational scholarship across social studies curriculum, pedagogy, policymaking, teacher education, and professional development; and a conclusion highlighting future directions for relational scholarship in social studies. Chapter teams consisted of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous scholars, and each chapter was reviewed by a community thought partner. Editors, chapter authors, and community partners engaged in multi-stage collaborations in person, using Google Docs, and through Zoom. Collective sense-making occurred during both planned timeframes and organically through conversations over meals, while driving, and while hiking. Conversations also engaged “dialogical spirals” (San Pedro, 2013; San Pedro & Kinloch, 2017) to simultaneously “bear witness” to the unique experiences of chapter teams and synthesize common threads across those experiences and chapters.

Results illuminated potential for relational co-authorship practices to inform thinking about diverse yet equally important forms of expertise (i.e., specialized cultural knowledge and academic writing skills). Additionally, contributors and reviewers noted relational co-authorship processes transformed their own awareness of both professional and personal relationships. They also described feeling “re-energized” professionally, experiencing “healing” of personal and professional trauma, and developing a sense of confidence and community.

Authors

• Christine Stanton, Montana State University

• Bradford R. Hall, Blackfeet Community College

• Cynthia Benally, University of Utah