I sent emails to two qualitative email discussion lists that I have found helpful before, namely the Autoethnography Yahoo Group and the Qualitative Research for the Human Sciences (QUALRS-L) listserv, to request autoethnographer participants for my research. Thankfully, several people stepped forward to offer to help. I wonder if this is something particular to autoethnographers or to qualitative researchers in general? Perhaps that may be its own study later.

Next steps include reaching out to them to tell them a little more, discussing scheduling, sending the informed consent, and then proceeding. With my paper draft due by September 7, there is no time to delay!

I am working on a short research project for my PhD course of study at Lancaster University (UK), and am looking for 2 people who have engaged in autoethnographic research to be interviewed (for approximately 30 minutes via phone or Skype) to discuss their experiences or lack of experiences of being a member of or being supported by some community (broadly defined) while they engaged in their research.

The purpose of this research is to try to understand, in some way, if Wenger’s Community of Practice framework makes a difference within the research or experiential lives of those who conduct autoethnographic research, especially given that many in the larger research community still see this as a contested strategy of inquiry.

The only qualification for participation in this research is that you should have completed and published at least one autoethnographic work, with publishing used in a broad sense to mean publicly presented it to others, such as at a conference, in a journal, online, or even submitted for a degree program.

Please let me know if you know of anybody willing to participate or learn more, and I can provide further information.  There is a tight timeline for this research, and it is hoped the interviews will take place by August 15th.

As a research project at Lancaster University, ethical approval has been given for this project, and all considerations and a consent form will be thoroughly discussed and reviewed prior to any data collection.

I am reading Laurel Richardson’s (2000) article Writing: A Method of Inquiry, in the 2nd Edition of the Denzin and Lincoln Handbook of Qualitative Research.

It has been some time since I read this, and is the first reread since I met her when she facilitated a session at the 5th International Qualitative Congress. Her words are so powerful:

I consider writing as a method of inquiry, a way of finding out about yourself and your topic . . . . Writing is also a way of ‘knowing’–a method of discovery and analysis (p. 923).

I will certainly need to include this as I explain my reasons for using narrative inquiry in my research.

The fundamental ideas in my outline for my Autoethnographer Communities of Practice research design was approved yesterday from my faculty tutor at Lancaster University. Next steps for this week include:

1. Specifying the interview questions
2. Writing the consent form
3. Submitting them both (with a tweaked overview) for ethical approval (I was told this should be a quick process as my research design is low risk)

I am still excited about this research outline, as I have not seen much research in this area.

Further developing my research idea, I now realize I did not quite list the population, or participants, I will seek to research and from whom I will gather my data.

I suppose they will be discussed in the Data Collection area of my research outline (which leads me to another question–is the outline I posted called a research outline, or is it referred to as something else?).

Given that we have 4 weeks for this (August 7-September 6), there is really no time to waste at all going down the wrong path, so I want to do something that is workable, doable, and also worth doing.

Given these limitations, I think interviewing 2 people may be sufficient. Given that I want to do a narrative inquiry of them, I will also read their autoethnographic work to see if there is any evidence to support or otherwise address my research questions. As a qualification for this research, it would seem that the 2 people should have completed and published their autoethnographic work, with publishing used in a broad sense to include presenting it at a conference, published in a journal or online location, or even published it as a paper submitted for a degree program.

I will try to locate participants by posting my request to a Yahoo Group that deals with autoethnography, as well as directly emailing some colleagues who work in this area to see if they know anybody who may be interested in this. I do not have any colleagues in mind to directly ask if they are willing to assist with this interview, which I expect will be about 30 minutes most likely via phone, though I will not be opposed to working with people who I already know (as I do not know much about the topic of this research). I am planning to record the interviews and transcribe them (I just bought a digital recorder and phone recording wire, and am about to purchase a USB pedal for the actual transcription).

Will appreciate some feedback on this, as I will use this as the basis for my ethical form that I need to complete and submit by the end of this week.

I have gotten some feedback from some colleague who I shared these ideas with, and there was some general encouragement for me to explore the option related to the community of practice idea (for my next Lancaster PhD module research project). Surprisingly, there was also some encouragement to try a different strategy of inquiry for the benefit of experiencing something new as well as to experience the meaning-making process from another perspective.

Taking this to heart, this is the idea I am now developing for my research project. I know it needs to be further developed and elaborated upon, though I think it is clear enough for at least some initial feedback:

Introduction
1. Research Problem
Autoethnographic research is growing in usage, though is still not widely accepted in traditional academic research circles. With the dispersion of advocates of this research, there would seem to be a need for a the engagement and support of (dispersed) communities of practice around those who engage in this work. Without knowing anything about these communities,including whether they exist and what technologies they may employ, it may be more of a challenge to understand the process of engaging and creating this research strategy. We need to know more about the role of communities of practice in the lives of autoethnographic researchers.
2. Studies Addressing the Problem
(TBD) – very little, thus far
3. Deficiencies in the Literature
(TBD) – a lot, thus far
4. Significance
(TBD) – already included above, will be further developed after brief literature review above

Purpose
What is the role of communities of practice play in the lives of those who engage in autoethnographic research?

Review of the Literature
This will revolve around autoethnography, communities of practice, and dispersed (technology usage in) communities of practice

Research Design
1. Philosophical Worldview
I am approaching this from a constructivist / critical theorist paradigm
2. Strategy of Inquiry
I am seeking to use Narrative Inquiry
3. Research Method
Review of published autoethnographic research documents or audio-visuals of informants, and interviews

Research Questions
(TBD) – I am still working on these

Data Collection
See Research Method above. Will tape interviews and transcribe recording. Will read documents / view audio-visual.

Analysis and Interpretation
(TBD) – Iam still working on these

Reliability, Validity, and Generalizability
(TBD) – I am stillworking on these

Results

Next Steps

I appreciate any thoughts . . . .

I am gathering ideas for my next research paper that I have to write in the next month and a half for my doctoral program, and have come up with these ideas after trying to flesh out the initial ones I discussed.

These are the four ideas I am floating; I hope to have something narrowed down by the end of the week so I can start to work on the design. As a recurring theme in my work, these are all within the area of autoethnographic methodology / writing or processing one’s experience in autobiographic / life history methods:

1. Interview some people who engage in autoethnographic research (cf. Ellis) to see what role, if any, communities of practice play in their lives in this research.
2. Engaging in narrative inquiry (cf. Clandinin and Connelly) to explore how people engaged in autoethnographic research engage in publicly defining or frame their own identities (cf. Goffman? Bedford and Snow?).
3. Explore how these researchers navigate their own professional identities through using this contested methodology.
4. Try to understand if autoethnographic inquiry led to any transformative learning (cf. Mezirow), or if perhaps a transformative experience led to autoethnography (Freire?).

Any thoughts are most appreciated.

I just received my provisional feedback on my first doctoral assignment at Lancaster University. My traditional research paper (completed in 5 weeks: research design and all!) was entitled Educational Explorations of Autoethnographic Inquiry: A Case Study of the Goals and Experiences of Three Educators, and in it I interviewed three individuals who are involved in higher education and who engage in autoethnographic inquiry.

What I particularly liked about the paper’s feedback was what my tutor targeted toward my final section, Personal Learnings, where I described my experience and processed what I learned  using the same autoethnographic methodology I previously studied in my interviewees. I really appreciated the statement that it was “quite unlike anything I’ve read before.”

I like this original research . . .

This is my first foray into sharing my doctoral journey, specifically through my decision to share my 5-10 minutes a day of writing about my process and thinking as per my program’s recommendations in our current module (and which I discussed here and here). I hope that reflecting aloud may be helpful for others who are considering this for themselves—either as a model for what can be done, or as a suggestion for what to avoid (the challenges or the process of sharing here itself).

I have to begin thinking about my research ideas for this module, which is entitled Development of Professional Practice. I really like this concept, and think it is more than fitting that I am developing this practice, and exploring it in my own life, here, where my colleagues (both current and future) can join me on the journey.

As I am beginning to formulate my ideas for this mini-project (around 3800 words, +/- 10%), I am going to consider some of the concepts that interest me, as I think some brainstorming is in order:

• identity and learning
• autoethnographic inquiry (both as a researcher and as studied in others who engage in this)
• exploring various personal identities, and the transition from one to another
• transformative learning
• reflective practice related to constructivist / critical frameworks
• individual identity development and self-definition within communities of practice
• juggling of identities as a process of personal learning

Will have to play around with these, and see what feedback my cohort offers.