This interview project began with a daughter’s innocent desire to ask “Why?” but we find ourselves in an ever-looping liminality that recognizes both the impossibility of such innocence and the power of an “ability to live on the boundaries” of wanting-to-know and never-knowing. This article concludes by considering the implications of maintaining such a space within the context of a qualitative inquiry course and within the scholarly and personal engagements between a qualitative inquiry instructor and student. We examine the ways that this liminal space has shaped our co-writing, our course-based co-learning, and our interactions and has helped to support a “pedagogy of vulnerability” based on (intentional and unwanted) liminalities within Stephanie’s qualitative inquiry courses.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
2.
BaradK. (2013). Ma(r)king time: Material entanglements and re-memberings: Cutting together-apart. In CarlileP. R.NicoliniD.LangleyA.TsoukasH. (Eds.), How matter matters: Objects, artifacts, and materiality in organization studies (pp. 16-31). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
3.
BaradK. (2015). Transmaterialities: Trans*/matter/realities and queer political imaginings. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 21, 387-422.
4.
BerilaB. (2016). Mindfulness as a healing, liberatory practice in queer anti-oppression pedagogy. Social Alternatives, 35, 5-10.
5.
BhattacharyaK. (2016). The vulnerable academic. Qualitative Inquiry, 22, 309-321.
6.
BrantmeierE. J. (2018). Pedagogy of vulnerability: Definitions, assumptions, and applications. In LinJ.OxfordR.BrantmeierE.J. (Eds.), Re-envisioning higher education: Embodied pathways to wisdom and transformation (pp. 95-106). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
7.
ButlerJ. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York, NY: Routledge.
8.
DenzinN. K. (2008). The new paradigm dialogs and qualitative inquiry. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 21, 315-325.
9.
DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (2018). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 1-26). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
EisenhartM.JurowA. S. (2011). Teaching qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 699-714). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
11.
GamsonJ. (2000). Sexualities, queer theory, and qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 347-365). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
KubyC. R.ChristR. C. (2017). Productive aporias and inten(t/s)ionalities of paradigming: Spacetimematterings in an introductory qualitative research course. Qualitative Inquiry, 24, 293-304. doi:10.1177/1077800416684870
13.
KubyC. R.ChristR. C. (2018). An ethico-onto-epistemological pedagogy of qualitative research: Knowing/being/doing neoliberal academy. In BraidottiR.BozalekV.SheferT.ZembylasM. (Eds.), Socially just pedagogies: Posthumanist, feminist, and materialist perspectives in higher education (pp. 131-150). London, England: Bloomsbury.
14.
OlesenV. (2005). Early millennial feminist qualitative research: Challenges and contours. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 235-278). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
PeshkinA. (1988). In search of subjectivity—One’s own. Educational Researcher, 17, 17-22.
16.
PillowW. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16, 175-196.
17.
PreissleJ. (2008). Subjectivity statement. In GivenL. M. (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 845-846). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
PreissleJ.deMarraisK. (2011). Teaching qualitative research responsively. In DenzinN. K.GiardinaM. D. (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry and global crises (pp. 31-39). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
19.
St PierreE. A.JacksonA. Y.MazzeiL. A. (2016). New empiricisms and new materialisms: Conditions for new inquiry. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 16, 99-110.
20.
WaiteD. (2014). Teaching the unteachable: Some issues of qualitative research pedagogy. Qualitative Inquiry, 20, 267-281.
21.
WestC.ZimmermanD. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1, 125-151.
