Critical Autoethnography and the Vulnerable Self as Researcher

  • Gresilda A. Tilley-Lubbs
Chapter
Part of the Imagination and Praxis book series (IPCC)

Abstract

This chapter presents critical autoethnography as an innovative approach to conducting research in marginalized, vulnerable communities. Combining autoethnography, ethnography, and critical pedagogy, the researcher becomes a participant in the study, turning inward to examine the Self and the complexities of cultural perspectives through the lens of critical pedagogy. Intense reflexivity and introspection undergird this study of Self as participant, going beyond recounting facts as objectively as possible, as occurs with autobiography, to acknowledging that the researcher is interpreting the facts through cultural perspectives formed through years of sociocultural, socio-historical, socio-political, and socioeconomic events and circumstances. Subsequently, the researcher, more than likely a member of the dominant culture in some categories, is able to understand herself as an oppressor.

Keywords

Cultural Perspective Critical Consciousness Virginia Tech Dominant Culture Personal Narrative 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References/Bibliography

  1. Banks, J., & Banks, C. (Eds.). (2012). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (8th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  2. Behar, R. (1996). The vulnerable observer: Anthropology that breaks your heart. Boston, MA: Beacon.Google Scholar
  3. Bénard Calva, S. (2014). Atrapada en provincia: Un ejercicio autoetnográfico de imaginación sociológica. Aguascalientes, Ags: Universidad Autónoma de Aguascalientes.Google Scholar
  4. Blanco, M. (2012). ¿Autobiografía o autoetnografía? Desacatos, 38, 169–178.Google Scholar
  5. Denzin, N. K. (2006). Analytic autoethnography, or déjà vu all over again. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 35(4).Google Scholar
  6. Eliot, T. S. (1971). Little Giddings. In T. S. Eliot (Ed.), The complete poems and plays 1909–1950. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World.Google Scholar
  7. Ellis, C. (2004). The ethnographic I: A methodological novel about autoethnography. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.Google Scholar
  8. Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. (2001). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733–768). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Foucault, J. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings. Brighton, UK: Harvester.Google Scholar
  10. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
  11. Freire, P. (2005/1997). Teachers as cultural workers: Letters to those who dare to teach. New York, NY: Continuum.Google Scholar
  12. Holman Jones, S. (2005). Autoethnography: Making the personal political. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 763–792). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. Kincheloe, J. L., & McClaren, P. (2000). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 923–949). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Richardson, L. (1998). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (pp. 345–371). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  15. Richardson, L. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., (pp. 923–949). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Spry, T. (2001). Performing autoethnography: An embodied methodological praxis. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(6), 706–732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Street, S. (2003). Representación y reflexividad en la (auto)etnografía crítica: ¿Voces o diálogo? Nómadas, 18, 72–79.Google Scholar
  18. Tarrés, M. L. (2001). Observar, escuchar y comprender: Sobre la tradición cualitativa en la investigación social. Porrúa, Mexico: Facultad Latinoamericana de Ciencias Sociales, El Colegio de México.Google Scholar
  19. Tilley-Lubbs, G. A. (2003). Crossing the border through service-learning: The power of cross-cultural relationships. In J. A. Hellebrandt, J. Arries, & L T. Varona (Eds.), JUNTOS: Community partnerships in Spanish and Portuguese (pp. 36–56). Boston: Heinle.Google Scholar
  20. Tilley-Lubbs, G. A. (2009). Good intentions pave the way to hierarchy: A retrospective autoethnographic approach. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 16(1), 59–68.Google Scholar
  21. Tilley-Lubbs, G. A. (2009). Troubling the tide: The perils and paradoxes of service-learning in immigrant communities. International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 2(1), 67–87.Google Scholar
  22. Tilley-Lubbs, G. A. (2011a). The coal miner’s daughter gets a Ph.D. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(9). doi: 10.1177/1077800411420669
  23. Tilley-Lubbs, G. A. (2011b). 4/16: Public tragedy collides with personal trauma. Qualitative Inquiry, 17(2), 144–147. doi: 10.1177/1077800410392334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tilley-Lubbs, G. A. (2012). Border crossing: (Auto)Ethnography that transcends imagination/immigration. International Review of Qualitative Research, 4(4).Google Scholar
  25. Tilley-Lubbs, G. A. (2013). The baptism. Qualitative Research in Education, 2(1), 272–300. doi: 10.4471/qre.2013.02Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gresilda A. Tilley-Lubbs
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Teaching and Learning, School of EducationVirginia TechBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations