Community Autoethnography: Compiling the Personal and Resituating Whiteness

Abstract

Examining whiteness (in) education is a journey of identity and materiality. In this article, the authors adopt an approach to research that highlights the role of performance in constituting identity. They believe that theorizing identity in this way is facilitated through autoethnographic storytelling, which allows one to theorize material performances of identity, along with the culture in which those performances are situated. In the following, the authors dialogically theorize whiteness education through their stories. They draw upon themselves as individuals and one another as partners in humanity in order to make sense of education within a context of whiteness. They develop community autoethnography as a method with which to engage in such dialogical theorization.

The Art of Collaborative Autoethnography: Exploring the Evolution of a Self-Organizing, Non-Traditional Doctoral Cohort

“…In the case of this study autoethnography is also a form of narrative inquiry further legitimatizing the personal stories and experiences we shared as we formed our own cohort within a community of doctoral learners. As a result, the concept of collaborative autoethnography ultimately defines this study as it is an intimate version of autoethnography where a group of researchers co-construct the culture and reality, which engenders "a sense of community amongst the researchers"… and where "…the process becomes as much of team-building activity as it is an approach to the production of knowledge" [23] (p. 58). The collaborative efforts we shared as researchers in this study became both the process and product of our own ensemble performance.…”

Negotiating the challenge of collaborative writing: learning from one writing group's mutiny

“…The collaborative self-study of our writing group borrowed tools from collaborative autoethnography, which emphasises collaboration and community building among researchers as participants (Toyosaki, Pensoneau-Conway, Wendt, & Leathers, 2009). It enables researchers to study 'the personal experience of researchers-in-collaboration to illustrate how a community manifests particular social/cultural issues' (Ellis, Adams, & Bochner, 2011, p. 7).…”

Les données autoethnographiques comme base à une théorisation des pratiques pédagogiques dans l’enseignement des approches inductives

“…Il existe plusieurs nomenclatures pour désigner les méthodes d'autoethnographie impliquant plus d'un chercheur, notamment la duoethnographie (Sawyer & Norris, 2009), la co-ethnographie (Ellis & Bochner, 1992) et l'autoethnographie communautaire (Toyosaki, Pensoneau-Conway, Wendt, & Leathers, 2009). Nous discuterons toutefois de notre démarche méthodologique selon la désignation d'autoethnographie collaborative (Chang et al, 2013;Garbati & Rothschild, 2016) puisque les écrits relatifs à celle-ci sont englobants tout en permettant une prise en compte nuancée de la complexe dualité chercheur-participant et de la profondeur 14 explore afin de mieux comprendre une dynamique sociale.…”