Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article ponders two questions:

What does “postqualitative” mean to you?

Why do you think the “postqualitative” movement is important to the field of qualitative inquiry?

In response, it poses a method/ology of errancy—a flipping methodology—that locates postqualitative research as an ethico-onto-epistemological political project of opening theory-practice spaces for differential matterings. Postqualitative flipping is not an individual undertaking, it is an ecology of practices, a resonation across bodies, a navigating of movement for a politics of change, in which even barely perceptible shifts possibilize new modes of thinking and unthinking, doing and undoing.

Keywords

postqualitative errancy flipping methodology hospitality visitation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Deleuze

(2006). The fold. Continuum.

Derrida

(2000). Hostipitality. Angelaki: Journal of Theoretical Humanities, 5(3), 3–18.

El Khayat

Khatibi

. (2010). Open correspondence: An epistolary dialogue ( Babana-Hampton

Orlando

Vogl

, Trans.). University of New Orleans Press.

Guattari

(1995). Chaosmosis: An ethico-aesthetic paradigm. Indiana University Press.

Haraway

(1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14, 575–599.

Haraway

(2016). Staying with the trouble. Duke University Press.

Koro-Ljungberg

(2016). Reconceptualizing qualitative research: Methodologies without methodology. SAGE.

MacLure

(2010). The offence of theory. Journal of Education Policy, 25(2), 277–286.

Massumi

(2015). Politics of affect. Polity Press.

10.

Stengers

. (2018). Anther science is possible: A manifesto for slow science. Wiley.

11.

St. Pierre

. (2017). Haecceity: Laying out a plane for post qualitative inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(9), 686–698.

12.

Taylor

C. A.

(2019). Unfolding: Co-conspirators, contemplations, complications and more. In Taylor

C. A.

Bayley

(Eds.), Posthumanism and higher education: Reimagining pedagogy, practice and research (pp. 1–27). Palgrave Macmillan.

13.

Taylor

C. A.

Fairchild

Koro-Ljungberg

Benozzo

Carey

Elmenhorst

(2019). Improvising bags choreographies: Disturbing normative ways of doing research. Qualitative Inquiry, 25(1), 17–25.

14.

Taylor

C. A.

Gannon

(2018). Doing time and motion diffractively: Academic life everywhere and all the time. Qualitative Studies in Education, 31(6), 465–486.

15.

Taylor

C. A.

Tobias-Green

(2018, June 8). Walking with/and string figure/ing: SF provocations with hand and voice [Workshop]. PhEmaterialism 2: Matter-realising Pedagogical/ Methodological Interferences into terror and violence, Middlesex University, London, England.

16.

Taylor

C. A.

Ulmer

(2020). Post-industrial methodologies for post-industrial cities. Somatechnics, 10(1), 7–34.

17.

Taylor

C. A.

White

(2018). Putting pen to (toilet) paper. In Lift the lid—Around the toilet zine. https://issuu.com/aroundthetoilet/docs/zine_finished_web_optimized

18.

Tuck

Yang

K. W.

(2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.

19.

Zembylas

(2017). Love as ethico-political practice: Inventing reparative pedagogies of aimance in “disjointed” times. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 14(1), 23–38.

Flipping Methodology: Or,Errancy in the Meanwhile and the Need to Remove Doors

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References