Pre-Conference Seminar: SAY IT OUT LOUD!!! Using Disruptive Methods in Your Qualitative Dissertation (Day 1 of 2)

Session Type: Invited Speaker Session

Abstract

How can the gnarly, knotted spaces of disruptive qualitative methodologies be
negotiated in the classrooms and corridors (Metz, 1978) where marginalized youth are
negatively impacted by schooling? Dialogues surrounding the nexus of research, social
justice, and schools is a well-trodden space in educational inquiry (e.g., Jackson, 1968;
Lather, 1986; Nespor, 1997; Tatum, 2003; Meiners, 2016). As sociopolitical norms and
values continue to reify structures that have traditionally marginalized people and
groups, the call for conversations focused on equity and access in schools that
resonates through historical and contemporary contexts becomes increasingly
significant (Cooper, 1892; Woodson, 1933; Watkins, 2001; Gershon, 2013). With these
histories and contexts in mind, we ask: What does it mean to research in ways that are
disruptive? How do we, as Meiners (2016) argues, enact research agendas that “resist
new forms of capture” (p. 19) within oppressive structures? How do we, as researchers
and educators, move from “straining to look over the shoulders of those to whom
[social movements] properly belong” (Geertz, 1973, p. 452) to engendering and
maintaining disruptive research with communities? In short, what does it mean to
“disrupt” through research?
This preconference seminar focuses on the art of disruption through qualitative
methodologies. Specifically, we examine the process of research through the lens of
social justice as it is intended to interrupt sociocultural norms and values (e.g., Boucher
2017; McCready, 2004; Meiners, 2016; Ward, 2017; Wozolek, Wootton & Demlow, 2016).
We do not denounce current qualitative research methodologies as a post-next choice
but, rather, recognize the multiple ingresses toward social justice through research. As
non-traditional presentations of research continue to grow (e.g., Sousanis, 2015), this
preconference seminar aims to enter graduate students into this dialogue through the
nested layers of its historical and contemporary iterations. Through the facilitators’ and
participants’ methodological commitments and frameworks, this preconference
engages in the challenges and possibilities of getting lost (Lather, 2007; Behar, 1996) in
justice-oriented educational research. Resonating with Ruth Behar’s (1997) work, we
invite participants to engage in “loss, mourning, the longing for memory, the desire to
enter the world around and having no idea how to do it, the fear of observing too coldly
or too distractedly or too raggedly, the [desire to think] in the utter uselessness of
writing anything and yet the burning desire to write something” (p. 3) about the
inequities of the classroom, the everydayness of schooling as it collides with research.
Pre-conference seminar description: This two day session with early career scholars is
designed for doctoral students in their second or third year to workshop disruptive
methods in qualitative research in the hope of meeting Meiners’ challenge to create
works that challenge the structures of power through scholarship.
The connection to the work of Division B: We agree with Au (2012) that the study of
curriculum should, “…relate to the classroom practices of teachers [or other educators],
but also… have enough theoretical explanatory power to interrogate the complex
material and social relations embodied by those very same practices” (p. 33). The work
of division B is specifically to explore these possibilities and to move the study of
curriculum, the space, objects, people and experience of the classroom, in new ways,
creating new understandings, theories and practices. Our hope is that the participants
will be better equipped to do that work after our session.
The connection to the conference theme: Public education in a democracy is the
necessary enterprise . In curriculum studies, our work of critique is never ending as an
act of love. We love schools, kids, teachers, and the trappings of our schools while we
rightfully demand that they become better. Our love, like our abiding love of learning,
ideas, creativity, and that sound of recognition, the “ah-ha” is the reason for our critique.
We are the first to criticize and the first to defend. We are the “warm demanders” of our
schools and we work to prepare a new generation of teachers who demand that each
child’s experience in schools is equitable and excellent (Ware, 2006). This work of
critique is done best when applied with complexity and intentionality and our plan is to
aid the participants in that work.
Intended participants: 2 nd and 3 rd year doctoral students working on their method for
their dissertations and finding that they need more voices to move them forward.
General structure and tentative schedule: On day 1 , after introductions, the four
scholars in this session will present on their chosen frameworks and methods they are
currently using on research projects and will pose specific questions regarding
methodology, data collection, participant selection, positionality, and their theoretical
frameworks. Participants will then discuss and workshop in small groups in
collaboration with one or more of the scholars. Scholars will bring expertise, resources,
and reflection to the process to help participants clarify their thinking and consider new
frameworks to aid their inquiry.
Overnight : the participants in the session will be asked to map out their methodological
commitments, frameworks, and collection methods to bring to the morning session.
Day 2: The participants will informally present their ideas to small groups led by the
scholars and continue to workshop their methods. At mid-morning, participants will
present to the full group their thinking and learning about their method and ask the
whole group one or two questions regarding their work that will provide the participant
with ideas for further reflection.
At 11:45 : The two-day workshop will conclude with participants and scholars
exchanging contact information for ongoing mentoring and collaboration.
References
Au, W. (2012). Critical curriculum studies: Education, consciousness, and the politics of
knowing . New York, NY: Routledge.
Behar, R. (1996). The vulnerable observer: Anthropology that breaks your heart . Boston,
MA: Beacon Press.
Boucher, M. L. (2017) The art of observation: Issues and potential of using
photo-methods in critical ethnography with adolescents. International Journal of
Adult Vocational Education and Technology (IJAVET). 8 (2) 1-14. doi:
10.4018/ijavet.2017040101
Cooper, A. J. (1892). A voice from the South, by a Black woman from the South.
Retrieved from http://docsouth.unc.edu/church/cooper/cooper.html
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretations of cultures . New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gershon, W. S. (2013). Resonance, affect, and ways of being: Implications of sensual
curriculum for educational theory and urban first graders’ literacy practices. The
Journal of School and Society, 1 (1).
Jackson, P.W. (1968). Life in classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Lather, P. (1986). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and a
soft place. Interchange, 17 (4), 63-84.
Lather, P. (2007). Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double(d) science. Albany, NY:
SUNY Press.
McCready, L. T. (2004). Some challenges facing queer youth programs in urban high
schools: Racial segregation and de-normalizing whiteness. Journal of Gay &
Lesbian Issues in Education , 1 (3), 37-51.
Meiners, E. (2016). For the children?: Protecting innocence in a carceral state.
Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Metz, M. H. (1978). Classrooms and corridors: The crisis of authority in desegregated
secondary schools. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
Nespor, J. (1997). Tangled up in school: Politics, space, bodies and signs in the
educational process. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Sousanis, N. (2015). Unflattening. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Tatum, B. D. (2003). “ Why are all the Black kids sitting together in the cafeteria?”: And
other conversations about race. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Ward, M. C. (2017). Youth-constructed narratives on the negotiation of urban youth and
peer educator identities (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). George Washington
University. ProQuest # 10263673
Ware, F. (2006). Warm demander pedagogy. Urban Education, 41 (4), 427-456.
doi:10.1177/0042085906289710
Watkins, W. H. (2001). The white architects of black education: Ideology and power in
America 1865-1954. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Woodson, C. G. (1933). The mis-education of the Negro. N.P.
Wozolek, B., Wootton, L., & Demlow, A. (2016). The school-to-coffin pipeline: Queer
youth, suicide and resilience of spirit, Cultural Studies<>Critical Methodologies,
1-7.
Faciliators
Michael L. Boucher, Jr., Ph. D. is in his fourth year as an assistant professor at Texas
State University where he teachers research methods and adolescent development. His
research on race and teacher identity has led to publication on ethnographic photo
methods, White teachers’ relationships of solidarity with students of color, racialized
historical understanding, and the racialized curriculum of public museums and
monuments. Beyond publication, Dr. Boucher was the Principal Investigator on a 1
million dollar NSF grant seeking to increase the numbers of teachers of color in Florida.
He uses Critical Whiteness Studies as a framework and photo elicitation as
ethnographic technique to study White classroom teachers, exploring their complicated
identities and theorization around race.
Boni Wozolek, Ph.D. is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at Loyola University Maryland
where she teaches research methods, urban education, and secondary teacher
education courses. Her work considers questions of social justice, qualitative research
methods, and teaching practices that focus on the examination of race, gender, and
sexual orientation in schools. Dr. Wozolek is the 2012 recipient of the James T. Sears
award and the 2016 Outstanding Dissertation Recognition Award from AERA’s Division
B (Curriculum Studies). She is also a member of the American Educational Studies
Association’s executive council as well as the University of Michigan’s National Center
for Institutional Diversity. In addition to her recent publications on her theorization of the
school-to-coffin pipeline and Queer Battle Fatigue, and numerous conference
presentations, Dr. Wozolek is on the editorial board of Taboo and a founding editor of
the International Journal of Curriculum and Social Justice. Finally, in addition to her
service and teaching, Dr. Wozolek runs sessions on anti-racist/anti-homophobic
practices for K-12 educators and advises a high school Genders and Sexualities
Alliance.
Dr. Maranda C. Ward serves as a Visiting Assistant Professor in the GW School of
Medicine and Health Sciences where she designs, evaluates, and teaches health equity
curriculum for undergraduate students. She is also a community educator, curriculum
developer, and youth builder. Her participatory action research explores how urban
youth serving as peer educators in an arts-based program actively construct their
identities. Dr. Ward's research is translated into practice as the Co-Founder and
Executive Director of Promising Futures - a youth development pipeline for youth ages
11-24. She is also a certified trainer for three Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) evidence-based interventions: Focus on Youth + ImPACT,
VOICES/VOCES , and Project AIM .
She recently authored a curriculum based on the Social Change Model of Leadership for
undergraduate GW business school students to implement a citywide social
entrepreneurship venture with D.C. youth. When she is not teaching on-campus to
undergraduate health sciences and business school students or pre-service teachers in
the Secondary Master's Program, she is using D.C. as a classroom for the youth in her
after-school program. She has commitments to service-learning, equity, community
legacy, youth development, and honoring youth voice.

Where to Send Applications:
Michael L. Boucher, Jr., ( michaelboucher@txstate.edu ) Texas State University

Sub Unit

• Division B - Curriculum Studies

Participants

• Michael L. Boucher, Texas A&M University - San Antonio

• Boni Wozolek, Loyola University Maryland

• Maranda C. Ward, The George Washington University