This article discusses the role of refusal in the analysis and communication of qualitative data, that is, the role of refusal in the work of making claims. Refusal is not just a no, but a generative stance, situated in a critical understanding of settler colonialism and its regimes of representation. Refusals are needed to counter narratives and images arising (becoming-claims) in social science research that diminish personhood or sovereignty, or rehumiliate when circulated. Refusal, in this article, refers to a stance or an approach to analyzing data within a matrix of commitments, histories, allegiances, and resonances that inform what can be known within settler colonial research frames, and what must be kept out of reach.
GordonA. (1997). Ghostly matters: Haunting and the sociological imagination. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
8.
HalberstamJ. (2005). In a queer time and place: Transgender bodies, subcultural lives. New York: New York University Press.
9.
hooksb. (1990). Marginality as a site of resistance. In FergusonR.GeverM.Minh-haT. T.WestC. (Eds.), Out there: Marginalization and contemporary cultures (pp. 241-243). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
HurstonZ. N. (1928, May). How it feels to be colored me. The World Tomorrow, 11, 215-216.
11.
KelleyR. D. G. (1997). Looking for the “real” nigga: Social Scientists Construct the Ghetto. In KelleyR. D. G. (Ed.), Yo’ Mama’s disfunktional! Fighting the culture wars in urban America (pp. 15-42). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
LipsitzG. (2007). The racialization of space and the spatialization of race: Theorizing the hidden architecture of landscape. Landscape Journal, 26, 10-23.
14.
MotenF. (2003). In the break: The aesthetics of the Black radical tradition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
15.
SaidE. W. (1978). Orientalism. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
SimpsonA. (2007). On ethnographic refusal: Indigeneity, “voice,” and colonial citizenship. Junctures, 9, 67-80.
20.
SmithL. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. Dunedin, NZ: Zed Books.
21.
St. PierreE. A.PillowW. (2000). Introduction: Inquiry among the Ruins. In St. PierreE. A.PillowW. (Eds.), Working the Ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (pp. 1-21). London, England: Routledge.
22.
TerranceL. L. (2011). Resisting colonial education: Zitkala-Sa and native feminist archival refusal. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 24, 621-626.
23.
TsedenP. (Writer & Director). (2011). Old Dog [Khyi rgan] [Film]. China: Dragons and Tigers.
24.
TuckE. (2009). Suspending damage: A letter to communities. Harvard Educational Review, 79, 409-427.
25.
TuckE. (2010). Breaking up with Deleuze: Desire and valuing the irreconcilable. Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23, 635-650.
26.
TuckE.GuishardM. (2013). Scientifically based research and settler coloniality: An ethical framework of decolonial participatory action research. In KressT. M.MalottC.PorfilioB. (Eds.), Challenging status quo retrenchment: New directions in critical qualitative research (pp. 3-27). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
27.
TuckE.YangK. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education and Society, 1, 1-40.
28.
TuckE.YangK. W. (2014). R-words: Refusing research. In ParisD.WinnM. T. (Eds.), Humanizing research: Decolonizing qualitative inquiry with youth and communities (pp. 223-248). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
