Best Foot Forward, Watching Your Step, Jumping in with Both Feet, or Sticking Your Foot in it? ‐ The Politics of Researching Academic Viewpoints

Abstract

This article presents our experiences of conducting research interviews with Australian academics, in order to reflect on the politics of researcher and participant positionality. In particular, we are interested in the ways that academic networks, hierarchies and cultures, together with mobility in the higher education sector, contribute to a complex discursive terrain in which researchers and participants alike must maintain vigilance about where they 'put their feet' in research interviews. We consider the implications for higher education research, arguing that the positionality of researchers and participants pervades and exceeds these specialised research situations.

Komplekse hensyn – mesoetiske udfordringer og håndteringer

“…De forskerstuderende er vidende, handledygtige aktører, der mere eller mindre bevidst forhandler deres fremtraeden og status i fokusgrupper og i interviews (Bryman & Cassell 2006;Halkier 2016). De må derfor ses som 'insiders' (Saltmarsh et al 2011;Wiles et al 2006), samtidig med at de også kan vaere 'outsiders' pga. faglige forskelle og organisatoriske tilhørsforhold (Saltmarsh et al 2011).…”

“…De må derfor ses som 'insiders' (Saltmarsh et al 2011;Wiles et al 2006), samtidig med at de også kan vaere 'outsiders' pga. faglige forskelle og organisatoriske tilhørsforhold (Saltmarsh et al 2011). Disse forhold har skullet forhandles på måder, der var til gavn for eller som minimum ikke skadede deltagerne, samtidig med at undersøgelsens formål blev imødekommet.…”

“…De udførte interviews kan med inspiration fra Bryman og Cassell (2006) betegnes som semistrukturerede forskerinterviews, idet de havde til formål at belyse forskeres praksis og vurderinger af forskningsrelaterede emner, hvorom der kun findes sparsom viden. De var samtidig inspireret af metodologisk forskning om ekspertinterviews og andre typer af interviews praeget af potentielt skiftende magtforhold (Saltmarsh et al 2011;Wiles et al 2006). Det semistrukturerede format tillod i tråd med Kvale og Brinkmann (2015) en kombination af forberedte temaer og spørgsmål og en åbenhed ift.…”

Researching elite education: affectively inferred belongings, desires and exclusions

“…The relationship grew to include conversations about the deputy headteacher's own sons' experiences of attending a local state school and the positive and negative experiences of her ongoing engagement in a Masters degree in Education at a local university. Our experience in this school, and at St. George's, suggests that the initial negotiation of access and the kinds of relationships with gatekeepers at that moment go on to shape later research encounters in that space and the ways participants commit to, and engage, with the study (see also Reeves, 2010;Saltmarsh et al, 2011). Crucially, in our case, a shared interest in having an intellectual dialogic around the focus of the intended research, and an openness to reflect on, and learn from their institution's engagement with the research process facilitated a more effective working relationship for the both parties -the researcher and the institution/participants.…”

Negotiating conflicts of interest: working with multiple stakeholders

“…Within critical, contemporary social research, qualitative research is seen as a socially situated activity formed in interaction with research participants. It often concerns personal and politically sensitive topics in areas subject to public attention (Vedel-Petersen, 1996; Kristensen, 2018), that is contested policy domains (Saltmarsh et al , 2011; Lancaster, 2017). It is neither seen as value neutral (Nyberg and Delaney, 2014) nor seen as conducted in a vacuum (Wallace and Sheldon, 2015).…”