“Reflexivity of reflexivity” with Roma-related Nordic educational research

Abstract

In this article, I reflect on the various uses of reflexivity in Roma-related educational research focusing on the Nordic context, in my own and other authors’ writings. I respond to the call of the recently founded Critical Romani Studies journal for reflexivity, which has been raised since mostly non-Romani scholars produce Roma-related research. I purposefully selected 34 academic texts, which I closely read in relation to various research paradigms and their typologies of reflexivity, after which I further reflected on my own readings. The article contributes to recent debates arguing for reflecting on uses of reflexivity, or for a reflexivity of reflexivity, as a strategy to address the reproduction of epistemic privileges in research.

Swedish surnames, British accents: passing among post-Soviet migrants in Helsinki

“…Within the region itself, racial hierarchies and claims to whiteness, often visà-vis Roma people, have been used to assert full Europeanness (Boatcă 2007;Ivasiuc 2017;Țîștea 2020). Thus, the boundaries of Europeanness are racially policed from within to demarcate belonging to Europe "proper" (Boatcă 2007;Dzenovska 2014).…”

Decolonizing Higher Education in Norway: Critical Collaborative Autoethnographic Reflections on a University Pedagogy Course

“…Dankertsen, 2019Dankertsen, , 2021Kuokkanen, 2000;Minde, 2005). Furthermore, recognizing how language-use matters in decolonizing attempts and how the conversations enabled Fredrik and Jørgen to initiate critical metacognitive self-reflections on terminology, such as the term "awareness", ensured not only a double research process (Delamont, 2009;Eriksen, 2020;Pillow, 2015;Țîștea, 2020), but also a LTHE peda gogical process, hopefully leading them towards more decolonial transformative LTHE practices (Blalock & Akehi, 2018), including vocabulary from other knowledge systems.…”

“…This methodology allows us to be both researchers and researched, to self-reflect on our emotions, thoughts, and beliefs related to our personal experiences (Keleş, 2022) of decolonizing LTHE, and to enable metacognitive critical reflections of those experiences. Thus, the methodology can to a greater extent ensure a double research process (Delamont, 2009;Eriksen, 2020;Pillow, 2015;Țîștea, 2020), potentially leading to decolonial transformative LTHE practices in our work on the module (Blalock & Akehi, 2018). In the process of working with this methodology, we draw heavily on the framework of Andreotti et al (2015) which describes four spaces of enunciation as a response to coloniality: (1) "everything is awesome" space; (2) soft-reform space; (3) radicalreform space; and (4) beyond-reform space.…”

“Because they have technology”

“…Eriksen (2022) argues that the very notion of such epistemological purity is problematic, as these issues cannot be "solved," and neutrality is difficult or even impossible. Reflexivity is a way of making these limitations visible, and entails "staying with the troubles" (Stein et al, 2020) or embracing discomfort (Gannaway, 2020), whilst being mindful of how the research could potentially reproduce epistemic injustice (Tistea, 2020).…”