![]() ![]() Following the tradition of much feminist scholarship, we wanted to reflect on the research process as not remaining untouched by our own 'intellectual autobiography' (Maynard, 1994: 16). As we spoke about the research encounters we had each experienced, we agreed that it would be interesting to extend our dialogue about how each of us had experienced the production of race and ethnicity in our research encounters, given our different positionalities vis-à-vis race, as we both felt we could learn more from such a dialogue. As we discussed the morning's presentations on the first day of the conference, and made our way to lunch, our conversation turned to our respective experiences of conducting interviews with people who were, a priori, positioned as 'different' from or the 'same' as us in terms of race or ethnicity. Introduction We (Helene and madeleine, the authors of this article) met at a conference in Sigtuna in Sweden in the autumn of 2010. " We need to talk about what race feels like! " Using memory work to analyse the production of race and ethnicity in research encounters. Please cite this article as: kennedy-macfoy, m. We suggest that memory work is a useful tool for learning about the production of race and ethnicity, and comparative or contrastive memory work in collaboration with other researchers differently positioned from oneself is a useful approach when engaging in 'researching differences'. Our analysis makes clear how we cannot assume any fixation of where, in whom, or in which topics race or ethnicity is located. We also suggest that by looking for instances in which we have felt (or been made to feel) our own 'difference' or 'sameness', power or a sense disorientation, we may contribute to destabilising the categories and categorisations, which might otherwise go unquestioned in research encounters. We suggest that adding memory work to the analysis of research experiences is one way of exposing the production of race and ethnicity in research interactions, and that a comparative approach to memory work can help clarify how positionalities may not always be good predictors of processes of racialisation in research situations. It is based on a type of retrospective, comparative memory work, through which we analyse, compare and contrast our respective experiences of moments when race and ethnicity have been produced during our interactions with research participants. This article is about the production of race and ethnicity in research encounters. As an analytical framework, countertopography opens important possibilities for critical and comparative qualitative inquiry, with specific promise for highlighting how seemingly dissimilarly educational spaces may be imbued with similar social meanings, and how these meanings are constituted by recurring unequal social relations between individuals and groups therein. Cindi Katz’s notion of ‘countertopography’ is critical to our argument that Islamophobia is productive of similar practices of surveillance and exclusion across disparate educational settings. Our cases illustrate how assumptions held by school staff toward the youth in our studies were rooted in both Islamophobic tropes and deeply held nationalist beliefs about the benevolence of the US and Denmark. Our analysis brings together two ethnographic studies of how minoritised Muslim youth navigate secondary schooling in Denmark and the US. In this article, we explore how locally situated educational practices and policies aimed at inclusion and integration may contribute to racialised exclusion for students.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |