Perhaps it is our responsibility to protect the post-qualitative methodologies rather than trying to rush them or use them without any substantial reading or thinking; and as such exposing them and categorizing, and analyzing them. Perhaps there is a need for a radical renewal of methodological responsibility, of not wanting to discover and turn every stone, whether for curiosity or for academic credit. To do so, it is our responsibility to divest ourselves of our egotistical anthropocentrism, of our deep methodological habits of seeing ourselves as those who rule the paradigms and methodologies, and focus on openness and responsibility as we chart our methodological futures.
AlaimoS.HekmanS. (Eds.). (2008). Material feminisms. Indiana University Press.
2.
BraidottiR. (2013). The posthuman. Polity Press.
3.
CarlsonD. L.SweetJ. D. (2019). Syncopation, sensing and sense-making. In GershonW. (Ed.), Sensuous curriculum: Politics and the senses in education. Information Age.
4.
ColebrookC. (2017). What is this thing called education?Qualitative Inquiry, 23(9), 649–655.
5.
de FreitasE.PalmerA. (2016). How scientific concepts come to matter in early childhood curriculum: Rethinking the concept of force. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(4), 1201–1222.
6.
HackettA.HolmesR.MacRaeC.ProcterL. (2018). Young children’s museum geographies: Spatial, material and bodily ways of knowing. Children’s Geographies, 16(5), 481–488.
7.
HarawayD. J. (2008). When species meet. University of Minnesota Press.
8.
Hickey-MoodyA. C. (2017). Arts practice as method, urban spaces and intra-active faiths. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(11), 1083–1096.
9.
JacksonA. Y. (2017). Thinking without method. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(9), 666–674.
10.
KindS. (2018). Collective improvisations: The emergence of the early childhood studio as an event-full place. In SchulteC. M.ThompsonC. M. (Eds.), Landscapes: The arts, aesthetics, and education: Vol. 21. Communities of practice: Art, play, and aesthetics in early childhood (pp. 5–21). Springer.
11.
Koro-LjungbergM. (2016). Reconceptualizing qualitative research: Methodologies without methodology. SAGE.
12.
KubyC. R.SpectorK.ThielJ. J. (Eds.). (2019). Posthumanism and literacy education: Knowing/becoming/doing literacies. Routledge.
13.
KuntzA. (2018). The responsible methodologist. Routledge.
14.
Lenz TaguchiH. (2017). “This is not a photograph of a fetus”: A feminist reconfiguration of the concept of posthumanism as the ultrasoundfetusimage. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(9), 699–710.
15.
MazzeiL. A. (2016). Voice without a subject. Cultural Studies—Critical Methodologies, 16(2), 151–161.
16.
MurrisK. (2016). The posthuman child: Educational transformation through philosophy with picturebooks. Routledge Falmer Press.
OlssonL.DahlbergG.TheorellE. (2016). Displacing identity—Placing aesthetics: Early childhood literacy in a globalized world. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(5), 717–738.
19.
OsgoodJ.GiugniM. R. (2015). Putting posthumanist theory to work to reconfigure gender in early childhood: When theory becomes method becomes art. Global Studies of Childhood, 5(3), 346–360.
20.
RautioP. (2014). Mingling and imitating in producing spaces for knowing and being: Insights from a Finnish study of child–matter intra-action. Childhood, 21(4), 461–474.
21.
RenoldE.MellorD. (2013). Deleuze and Guattari in the nursery: Towards an ethnographic multi-sensory mapping of gendered bodies and becomings. In ColemanR.RingroseJ. (Eds.), Deleuze and research methodologies (pp. 23–41). Edinburgh University Press.
22.
SomervilleM.PowellS. J. (2019). Thinking posthuman with mud and children of the Anthropocene. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 51(8), 829–840.
23.
St. PierreE. A. (2016). Rethinking the empirical in the posthuman. In TaylorC.HughesC. (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 25–36). Palgrave Macmillan.
24.
TaylorA.Pacini-KetchabawV. (2015). Learning with children, ants, and worms in the Anthropocene: Towards a common world pedagogy of multispecies vulnerability. Pedagogy, Culture and Society, 23(4), 507–529.
25.
TesarM.ArndtS. (2019). Writing the human “I”: Liminal spaces of mundane abjection. Qualitative Inquiry. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800419881656
26.
TrumanS. E.SpringgayS. (2015). The primacy of movement in research-creation: New materialist approaches to art research and pedagogy. In LewisT.LavertyM. (Eds.), Art’s teachings, teaching’s art: Philosophical, critical and educational musings (pp. 151–162). Springer.
