Journal of Transformative Praxis

Journal of Transformative Praxis, Volume 4, Issue 1, 2023, 1-8, https://doi.org/10.51474/jrtp.v4i1.659

Online publication date: Aug 11, 2023

Publication date: Dec 31, 2023

Views: 106 | Downloads: 85

Collaborative Autoethnography (CAE) arises from an anthropological-critical research tradition that aligns with cultural-historical and constructivist onto-epistemologies. In CAE, two or more researchers collaborate to write about their personal experiences related to a specific topic (Gal et al., 2013) and writing is based on collaborative, autobiographical, and ethnographic principles (Chang et al., 2013). Indeed, CAE is characterized by sharing stories, collective reflections, and hermeneutical meaning-making to identify un/common themes and insights. This editorial is based on our experiences and principles we abided with CAE as facilitators, researchers, and practitioners.  In this editorial, we examine constructivist and critical perspectives on the CAE, including individual, collaborative, reflective, and analytic processes. We argued that sharing experiences, reflecting on them, and making meaning collaboratively are all essential components of the CAE processes. We acknowledge that the epistemic process can be emotionally draining for researchers to write about their personal experiences. Nevertheless, we believe that researchers must reflect on their own experiences to gain a deeper understanding of their own practices, thereby working towards improving their own actions via self-reflection. In addition, we believe that it is essential for researchers to collaborate with others to share their experiences and gain new perspectives. So, in this editorial, we would like to highlight CAE as a collaborative reflection as a timely alternative research approach (Roy & Uekusa, 2020). This editorial discusses the key ideas of collaborative participatory research, social constructionist principles, critical research, culture studies, emancipatory principle, and research for all, which are processes that improve collaborative practices for enhancing emancipatory research. The editorial concludes with a brief summary of the articles and book review that are covered in Volume 4 Issue 1.

Collaborative Autoethnography Emancipatory Research Constructivist Experiences

1. Antonio, R. J. (1989). The normative foundations of emancipatory theory: Evolutionary versus pragmatic perspectives. American Journal of Sociology, 94(4), 721–748. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2780856
2. Blyler, N. (1998). Taking a political turn: The critical perspective and research in professional communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 7(1), 33-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572259809364616
3. Burr, V. (2015). Social constructionism. Routledge.
4. Chang, H., Ngunjiri, F., & Hernandez, K. A. C. (2013). Collaborative autoethnography (Vol. 1). Routledge.
5. CQ. (2021, September 28). What is ‘Critical’? https://ccqhr.utoronto.ca/about-cq/what-is-critical
6. Dahal, N. (2023). Is doing research for people or on people? A book review of Emancipatory and Participatory Research for Emerging Educational Researchers: Theory and Case Studies of Research in Disabled Communities. The Qualitative Report, 28(1), 69-74. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2023.6136
7. Dahal, N., & Luitel, B. C. (2022). Understanding and encountering the ethics of self and others in autoethnography: Challenging the extant and exploring possibilities. The Qualitative Report, 27(12), 2671-2685. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5572
8. Davies, E. (2015). Meanings and mess in collaborative participatory research: Meanings and mess in participatory research. Literacy (Oxford, England), 49(1), 28-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/lit.12051
9. Duke, M. (2020). Community-based participatory research. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Anthropology. https://oxfordre.com/anthropology/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190854584.001.0001/acrefore-9780190854584-e-225.
10. Freire, P. (1970). The banking concept of education. In Thinking about schools: A foundations of education reader (pp. 117-127). Routledge.
11. Gale, K., Pelias, R., Russell, L., Spry, T., & Wyatt, J. (2013). Intensity: A collaborative autoethnography. International Review of Qualitative Research, 6(1), 165-180. https://doi.org/10.1525/irqr.2013.6.1.165
12. Given, L. M. (Ed.) (2008). (Vols. 1-0). SAGE Publications, Inc., https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909
13. Jull, J., Giles, A. & Graham, I.D. (2017). Community-based participatory research and integrated knowledge translation: Advancing the co-creation of knowledge. Implementation Sci 12, 150. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0696-3
14. Larkins, C., & Satchwell, C. (2023). Learning how to know together: Using barthes and aristotle to turn from ‘Training’ to ‘Collaborative learning’ in participatory research with children and young people. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 160940692311646. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231164607
15. Lit, S. W., & Shek, D. T. (2007). Application of social constructionist principles in field practice teaching in a Chinese context. Social work education, 26(4), 359-375. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615470601081670
16. Luitel, B. C., Dahal, N., & Pant, B. P. (2022). Critical pedagogy: Future and hope. Journal of Transformative Praxis, 3(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.51474/jrtp.v3i1.599
17. McArdle, K., Briggs, S., Forrester, K., Garrett, E., & McKay, C. (2020). Collaborative and Participatory Approaches. In The Impact of Community Work: How to Gather Evidence (pp. 163–178). Chapter, Bristol University Press. http://doi.org/10.46692/9781447343950.012
18. McLaren, P., & Leonard, P. (1993). Paulo Freire: A critical encounter. Routledge.
19. Obiageli, C. (2016). Democratic principles for a model of emancipatory education of minds for the future. The International Journal of Humanities Education, 14(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.18848/2327-0063/CGP/v14i03/1-10
20. O'Leary, Z. (2007). Social constructionism. SAGE Publications Ltd, https://doi.org/10.4135/9780857020147
21. Osborn, A., & Brewe, J. (2022). Research for all. PCI Journal, 67(6), 19 - 20. https://doi.org/10.15554/pcij67.6-04
22. Pakaja, M. (2023). Relevance of language, thought and culture: Systematic literature review. International Journal of Innovations in Engineering Research and Technology, 10(5), 46–51. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YZCJ9
23. Pinar, W. F. (1975). Currere: Towards reconceptualistaion. In W. F. Pinar (Ed.), Curriculum theorizing: The reconceptualists (pp. 396–414). McCutchan Publishing Corperation.
24. Roy, R., & Uekusa, S. (2020). Collaborative autoethnography: “self-reflection” as a timely alternative research approach during the global pandemic. Qualitative Research Journal, 20(4), 383-392. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-06-2020-0054
25. Vaughn, L. M., & Jacquez, F. (2020). Participatory Research Methods – Choice Points in the Research Process. Journal of Participatory Research Methods, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.13244
26. Washington, W. N. (2004). Collaborative/participatory research. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved 15(1), 18-29. https://doi.org/10.1353/hpu.2004.0015

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.