Abstract
This chapter turns to and proposes the use of decolonial methodology and its accompanying methods of grounded theory and rhetorical–cultural analysis. Decolonial methodology seeks to recover the lost identities of colonized people by championing self-determination, empowerment, decolonization, and social justice. The author sees decolonial methodology as the appropriate approach to conduct research that seeks to advance user localization strategies for two reasons: (1) users’ ways of knowing have been marginalized and colonized by discourses that favor designers. This means we need to recover the lost voices of users; and (2) the context of study, Ghana, is a colonized context so it is necessary to use an approach which will help to demystify colonialism. Because decolonial is a flexible methodology, the author combines it with grounded theory method.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
1992 Constitution of the Republic of Ghana. (1992).
Acharya, K. R. (2019). Usability for social justice: Exploring the implementation of localization usability in Global North technology in the context of a Global South’s country. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 49(1), 6–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047281617735842.
Agboka, G. Y. (2012). Liberating intercultural technical communication from “large culture” ideologies: Constructing culture discursively. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 42(2), 159–181.
Agboka, G. Y. (2014). Decolonial methodologies: Social justice perspectives in intercultural technical communication research. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 44(3), 297–327.
Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007). Introduction grounded theory research: Methods and practices (A. Bryant & K. Charmaz, Eds., Paperback ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Charmaz, K. (2014). Constructing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Comaroff, J., & Comaroff, J. (1991). Of revelation and revolution. In Christianity, colonialism, and consciousness in South Africa (Vol. 1). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ding, H. (2014). Rhetoric of a global epidemic: Transcultural communication about SARS. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
Ding, H., & Savage, G. (2013). Guest editors’ introduction: New directions in intercultural professional communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 22(1), 1–9.
Dorpenyo, I. K. (2016). “Unblackboxing” technology through the rhetoric of technical communication: Biometric technology and Ghana’s 2012 election. Open Access Dissertation, Michigan Technological University.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Gonzales, L. (2018). Sites of translation: What multilinguals can teach us about digital writing and rhetoric. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Gonzales, L., & Zantjer, R. (2015). Translation as a user-localization practice. Technical Communication, 62(4), 271–284.
Goodall, H. L. J. (2000). Writing the new ethnography. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599.
Harding, S. G. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinking from women’s lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Hart, R. P., & Daughton, S. M. (2005). Modern rhetorical criticism (3rd ed.). New York, USA: Pearson Education.
Johnson, R. (1998). User centered technology: A rhetorical theory for computers and other mundane artifacts. Albany: State University of New York.
Jones, N. N. (2014). Methods and meanings: Reflections on reflexivity and flexibility in an intercultural ethnographic study of an activist organization. Rhetoric, Professional Communication, and Globalization, 5(1), 14–43.
Keller, E. F. (1996). Feminism and science. In E. F. Keller & H. E. Longino (Eds.), Feminism and science (pp. 28–39). New York: Oxford University Press.
Lindlof, T. R., & Taylor, B. C. (2011). Qualitative communication research methods (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Lovitt, C. R., & Goswami, D. (1999). Exploring the rhetoric of international professional communication: An agenda for teachers and researchers. Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing Company.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2005). Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Saldana, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Seigel, M. (2013). The rhetoric of pregnancy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, B. (2012). Reading and writing in the global workplace: Gender, literacy, and outsourcing in Ghana. Lanham: Lexington Books.
Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Sullivan, P., & Porter, J. E. (1997). Opening spaces: Writing technologies and critical research practices. Greenwich: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Sun, H. (2004). Expanding the scope of localization: A cultural usability perspective on mobile text messaging use in American and Chinese contexts. Troy, NY: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
Sun, H. (2006). The triumph of users: Achieving cultural usability goals with user localization. Technical Communication Quarterly, 15(4), 457–481. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427625tcq1504_3.
Sun, H. (2009). Toward a rhetoric of locale: Localizing mobile messaging technology into everyday life. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 39(3), 245–261. https://doi.org/10.2190/TW.39.3.c.
Sun, H. (2012). Cross-cultural technology design: Creating culture-sensitive technology for local users. New York: Oxford University Press.
Thatcher, B. (2010). Editor introduction: Eight needed developments and eight critical contexts for global inquiry. Rhetoric, Professional Communication, and Globalization, 1(1), 1–34.
Thatcher, B. (2011). Intercultural rhetoric and professional communication: Technological advances and organizational behavior. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Thrush, E. A. (1993). Bridging the gaps: Technical communication in an international and multicultural society. Technical Communication Quarterly, 2(3), 271–283.
Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851.
Walton, R. (2014). Editor’s introduction to the special edition on methodology. Rhetoric, Professional Communication, and Globalization, 5(1), 1–13.
Young, I. M. (1990). Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Dorpenyo, I.K. (2020). Decolonial Methodology as a Framework for Localization and Social Justice Study in Resource-Mismanaged Context. In: User Localization Strategies in the Face of Technological Breakdown. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26399-7_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26399-7_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-26398-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-26399-7
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)