Post-qualitative inquiry can be seen to challenge—not fix—at least four elements of what Elizabeth St. Pierre calls conventional humanist qualitative inquiry: the nature of data, the role of methods, the quest for increasing clarity, and the idea of an individual “voice.” In conducting post-qualitative research rather than offering replacements for these or completely renouncing them, I outline four key balancing acts. Unless understood as continuous acts of balancing, post-qualitative inquiry runs a risk of being identified as yet another isolated fortress of righteousness.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe half way: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press.
2.
DerridaJ. (2005). On touching—Jean Luc Nancy. Stanford University Press.
3.
DoughertyS. (2011). Post-deconstruction and the rhetorics of touch. Journal for Cultural Research, 15(1), 75–92.
4.
HarawayD. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the chthulucene. Duke University Press.
5.
Koro-LjungbergM. (2016). Reconceptualizing qualitative research: Methodologies without methodology. SAGE.
6.
KraftlP. (2018). A double-bind? Taking new materialisms elsewhere in studies of education and childhood. Research in Education, 101(1), 30–38.
7.
LatherP. (2006). Paradigm proliferation as a good thing to think with: Teaching research in education as a wild profusion. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(1), 35–57.
8.
MacLureM. (2006). The bone in the throat: Some uncertain thoughts on baroque method. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(6), 729–745.
9.
ManningE. (2007). Politics of touch: Sense, movement, sovereignty. University of Minnesota Press.
10.
PetersenE. P. (2018). “Data found us”: A critique of some new materialist tropes in educational research. Research in Education, 101(1), 5–16.
11.
PopkewitzT. (Ed.). (2015). The “reason” of schooling: Historicizing curriculum studies, pedagogy, and teacher education. Routledge.
12.
St. PierreE. (2006). Scientifically based research in education: Epistemology and ethics. Adult Education Quarterly, 56(4), 239–266.
13.
St. PierreE. (2011). Post-qualitative research: The critique and the coming after. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 611–625). SAGE.
14.
UlmerJ. B. (2017). Posthumanism as research methodology: Inquiry in the Anthropocene. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 30(9), 832–848. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2017.1336806
