Advertisement

Lessons in Research and Method from Abandoned Shopping Trolleys

  • Louisa Allen
Chapter
Part of the Queer Studies and Education book series (QSTED)

Abstract

How might we think about employing a feminist new materialist methodology within the field of sexuality education research? This chapter addresses St. Pierre’s (Rethinking the empirical in the posthuman. In C. Taylor & C. Hughes (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 5–24). Houndmills: Palgrave, 2016) questions for post-qualitative research, where she asks how researchers might ground academic work in a way that decentres the desire to know, how projects might have a purpose that is not knowledge production, and how research might resist methodology itself. In a playful attempt to step into the methodological unknown, it traces the author’s ‘wonder’ (MacLure, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 658–667, 2013) with abandoned shopping trolleys to see what they might teach her about method in sexuality education research. This fascination offers a reorientation to method in sexuality education, which involves experiencing research as an event of becoming, where doing rather than meaning-making is emphasised.

References

  1. Allen, L. (in press). Reconceptualising qualitative research involving young people and sexuality at school. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies.Google Scholar
  2. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durhman, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Clough, P. (2009). The new empiricism: Affect and sociological method. European Journal of Social Theory, 12, 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  6. Dewsbury, J. (2009). Performative, non-representational, and affect-based research: Seven injunctions. In D. DeLyser, S. Herbert, M. Aitken, M. Crang, & L. McDowell (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative geography (pp. 322–335). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  7. Hultman, K., & Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5), 525–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ingold, T. (Ed.). (2011). Redrawing anthropology. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  9. Kind, S. (2013). Lively entanglements: The doings, movements and enactments of photography. Global Studies of Childhood, 3(4), 427–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Koro-Ljungberg, M. (2016). Reconceptualizing qualitative research: Methodologies without methodology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Latour, B. (2004). The politics of nature: How to bring the sciences into democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  12. MacLure, M. (2013a). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 658–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. MacLure, M. (2013b). The wonder of data. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 13(4), 228–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Manning, E. (2013). Always more than one: Individuation’s dance. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Manning, E. (2015). Against method. In P. Vannini (Ed.), Non-representational methodologies (pp. 52–71). London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  16. Manning, E. (2016). The minor gesture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Manning, E., & Massumi, B. (2014). Thought in the act: Passages in the ecology of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  18. Mazzei, L. (2013). Materialist mappings of knowing in being: Researchers constituted in the production of knowledge. Gender and Education, 25, 776–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pierre, E. (2016). Untraining educational researchers. Research in Education, 96(1), 6–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Springgay, S. (2015). ‘Approximate-rigorous abstractions’: Propositions of activation for posthumanist research in education. In N. Snaza & J. Weaver (Eds.), Posthumanism and educational research (pp. 76–87). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Springgay, S., & Truman, S. (2017). On the need for methods beyond proceduralism: Speculative middles, (in) tensions, and response-ability in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1–12.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417704464
  22. St. Pierre, E. (2011). Post qualitative research: The critique and the coming after. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Sage handbook of qualitative inquiry (pp. 611–635). Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  23. St. Pierre, E. (2015). Practices for the ‘new’ in the new empiricisms, the new materialisms, and post qualitative inquiry. In M. Giardina & M. Denzin (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry and the politics of evidence (pp. 75–95). California: Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
  24. St. Pierre, E. A. (2016a). Rethinking the empirical in the posthuman. In C. Taylor & C. Hughes (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 5–24). Houndmills: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  25. St. Pierre, E. A. (2016b). Untraining educational researchers. Research in Education, 96(1), 6–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stewart, K. (2007). Ordinary affects. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Taylor, A., & Pacini-Ketchabaw, V. (2015). Learning with children, ants, and worms in the Anthropocene: Towards a common world pedagogy of multispecies vulnerability. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 23(4), 507–529.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Taylor, C. (2016). Edu-crafting a cacophonous ecology: Posthumanist research practices for education. In C. Taylor & C. Hughes (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 5–24). Houndmills: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  29. Truman, S., & Springgay, S. (2015). The primacy of movement in research-creation: New materialist approaches to art research and pedagogy. In T. Lewis & M. Laverty (Eds.), Art’s teachings, teaching art, contemporary philosophies and theories in education (pp. 151–162). Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Vannini, P. (2015). Non-representational methodologies: Re-envisioning research. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  31. Weaver, J., & Snaza, N. (2016). Against methodcentrism in educational research. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 1–11.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2016.1140015

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Louisa Allen
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Education and Social WorkUniversity of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations