While qualitative research has been among the more open of academic disciplines, processes for analyzing qualitative data have remained dogmatic. Most qualitative data are “coded” by breaking it into pieces of information that stand alone or through contextualizing it as researchers see fit. Data analysis thus remains a process of deconstructing participant voices and reconstructing stories through sound bites, creating an acceptable form of “fake news” to obtain a seat at the research high table. This continues established traditions of denying “subalterns,” already less agentive in higher education spheres, the ability to speak as the voice of the participant is subjugated to the discourse community of the master. In this paper, we demonstrate how protocols for analyzing qualitative data represent the master’s voice as they draw from Euro-Western ways of knowing the world. Possibilities that foreground indigenous and critical epistemologies are presented as alternatives.
AdjepongA. (2019). Invading ethnography: A queer of color reflexive practice. Ethnography, 20(1), 27–46.
2.
AndersonV. (2017). Criteria for evaluating qualitative research. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 28(2), 125–133.
3.
AnzalduaG. E.KeatingA. L. (2015). Light in the Dark/Luz en lo Oscuro: Rewriting Identity, Spirituality, Reality. Duke University Press.
4.
ArchibaldJ. D. (2014). Aristotle’s ladder, Darwin’s tree: The evolution of visual metaphors for biological order. Columbia University Press.
5.
Beeman-CadwalladerN.QuigleyC.Yazzie-MintzT. (2012). Enacting decolonizing methodologies: The doing of research in educational communities. Qualitative Inquiry, 18, 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411426414
6.
BernardH. R. (1994). Methods belong to all of us. In BorofskyR. (Ed.), Assessing cultural anthropology (pp. 168–179). McGraw-Hill.
7.
BernardH. R.PeltoP. J.WernerO.BosterJ.RomneyA. K.JohnsonA.EmberC. R.KasakoffA. (1986). The construction of primary data in cultural anthropology. Current Anthropology, 27(4), 382–396.
8.
BhabhaH. K. (1994). Location of culture. Routledge.
9.
BhambraG. K.GebrialD.NişancıoğluK. (2018). Decolonising the university. Pluto Press.
10.
BhattacharyaK. (2007). Consenting to the consent form: What are the fixed and fluid understandings between the researcher and the researched?Qualitative Inquiry, 13(8), 1095–1115.
11.
BhattacharyaK. (2009). Othering research, researching the other: De/colonizing approaches to qualitative inquiry. In SmartJ. C. (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 105–150). Springer.
12.
BhattacharyaK. (2016). The vulnerable academic: Personal narratives and strategic de/colonizing of academic structures. Qualitative Inquiry, 22(5), 309–321.
13.
BhattacharyaK. (2020). Nonsense, play, and liminality: Putting postintentionality in dialogue with de/colonizing ontoepistemologies. Qualitative Inquiry, 26(5), 522–526.
14.
BhattacharyaK.KimJ. H. (2018). Reworking prejudice in qualitative inquiry with Gadamer and de/colonizing onto-epistemologies. Qualitative Inquiry, 26(10), 1174–1183.
15.
CannellaG. S. (2015). Introduction: Engaging critical qualitative science: Histories and possibilities. In CannelaG. S.PerezM. S.PasqueP. A. (Eds.), Critical qualitative inquiry: Foundations and futures (pp. 7–28). Routledge.
16.
CannellaG. S.ViruruR. (2004). Childhood and post-colonization. Routledge.
17.
CastleberryA.NolenA. (2018). Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 10, 807–815.
18.
ChilisaB. (2019). Indigenous research methodologies. SAGE.
19.
CouldryN.MejiasU. A. (2019). The costs of connection: How data is colonizing human life and appropriating it for capitalism. Stanford University Press.
20.
CreswellJ. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson.
21.
DeleuzeG. (2007). “Eight years ater: 1980 interview.” In HodgesA.TaorminaM. (Eds. & Trans.), Two regimes of madness: Texts and interviews—1975–1995 (revised edition, pp. 175–180). Semiotext(e).
22.
DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (2008). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 1–43). SAGE.
23.
DillardC. B. (2000). The substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen: Examining an endarkened feminist epistemology in educational research and leadership. Qualitative Studies in Education, 13(6), 661–681.
24.
DillardC. B. (2012). Learning to (re) member the things we’ve learned to forget: Endarkened feminisms, spirituality, and the sacred nature of research and teaching. Black studies and critical thinking (Vol. 18). Peter Lang.
25.
ElliottV. (2018). Thinking about the coding process in qualitative data analysis. The Qualitative Report, 23(11), 2850–2861.
26.
Evans-WintersV. (2019). Black feminism in qualitative inquiry: A mosaic for writing our daughters body. Routledge.
27.
FeaginJ. R. (2006). Systemic racism: A theory of oppression. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
28.
GandhiL. (2019). Postcolonial theory: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Columbia University Press.
29.
GerlachA. (2018). Thinking and researching relationally: Enacting decolonizing methodologies with an indigenous early childhood program in Canada. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17, 1–8.
30.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Adline de Gruyter.
31.
GoetzJ. P.LeCompteM. D. (1981). Ethnographic research and the problem of data reduction. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 12(1), 51–70.
32.
GrangerE. H. (1984). Aristotle on genus and differentia. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 22(1), 1–23.
33.
GreneM. (1974). Is genus to species as matter to form? Aristotle and taxonomy. In GreneM. (Ed.), The understanding of nature (pp. 108–126). Springer.
34.
GrosfoguelR. (2007). The epistemic decolonial turn. Cultural Studies, 21(2–3), 211–223.
35.
GubaE. G.LincolnY. S. (1981). Effective evaluation. Jossey-Bass.
36.
GullionJ. S.TiltonA. (2020). Researching with: A decolonizing approach to community-based action research. Brill Sense.
37.
HalkortM. (2019). Decolonizing data relations: On the moral economy of data sharing in Palestinian refugee camps. Canadian Journal of Communication, 44, 319–329.
38.
HoweK.EisenhartM. (1990). Standards for qualitative (and quantitative) research: A prolegomenon. Educational Researcher, 19(4), 2–9.
39.
HubermanA. M.MilesM. B. (1983). Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: Some techniques of data reduction and display. Quality and Quantity, 17(4), 281–339.
40.
JacksonA. Y.MazzeiL. A. (2018). Thinking with theory: A new analytic for qualitative inquiry. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 717–737). SAGE.
41.
JohnsonJ. T.MurtonB. (2007). Re/placing native science: Indigenous voices in contemporary constructions of nature. Geographical Research, 45(2), 121–129.
42.
JohnsonM. (2020). Toward a genealogy of the researcher as subject in post/decolonial Pacific histories. History and Theory, 59(3), 421–429.
43.
KaomeaJ. (2004, July). Indigenous studies in the elementary curriculum: A cautionary Hawaiian example [Paper presentation]. PECERA, University of Melbourne.
44.
KitchinR. (2014). Big data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data and Society, 1(1), 1–12.
45.
KosterR.BaccarK.LemelinR. H. (2012). Moving from research ON, to research WITH and FOR Indigenous communities: A critical reflection on community-based participatory research. The Canadian Geographer/le Géographe Canadien, 56(2), 195–210.
46.
LatherP. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. Psychology Press.
47.
LesterJ. N.ChoY.LochmillerC. R. (2020). Learning to do qualitative data analysis: A starting point. Human Resource Development Review, 19(1), 94–106.
48.
LevyI. P.HessC.ElberA.HaydenL. (2020). A community-based intervention: A hip hop Framework toward decolonizing counseling space. Journal of Creativity Mental Health, 16, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/15401383.2020.1762816
49.
LincolnY. S.GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
50.
MaclureM. (2013). Classification or wonder: Coding as an analytic practice in qualitative research. In ColemanR.RingroseJ. (Eds.), Deleuze and research methodologies (pp. 164–183). Edinburgh University Press.
51.
MaratheM.ToyamaK. (2018, April). Semi-automated coding for qualitative research: A user-centered inquiry and initial prototypes [Conference session]. CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1–12).
52.
McIntoshP. (1989). White Privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Peace and Freedom, July/August 1989, 10–13.
53.
MikaC. (2017). Ako: A Maori example of worldedness. In MikaC. (Ed.), Indigenous education and the metaphysics of presence (pp. 73–98). Routledge.
54.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1984). Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: Toward a shared craft. Educational Researcher, 13(5), 20–30.
55.
MilesM. B.HubermanM. A.SaldanaJ. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. SAGE.
56.
MirR. A.MirA.UpadhyayaP. (2003). Toward a postcolonial reading of organizational control. In PrasadA. (Ed). Postcolonial Theory and Organizational Analysis: a critical engagement. (pp. 47–74). Palgrave Macmillan.
57.
MoyoL. (2021). Toward a theory and pedagogy of resistance: Epistemological labor and decoloniality in media and communication studies in South Africa. In AtayA.ChenY. (Eds.), Postcolonial turn and geopolitical uncertainty: Transnational critical intercultural communication pedagogy (pp. 151–170). Lexington Books.
58.
NinomiyaM. E. M.HurleyN.PenashueJ. (2020). A decolonizing method of inquiry: Using institutional ethnography to facilitate community-based research and knowledge translation. Critical Public Health, 30(2), 220–231.
59.
NussbaumM. C. (1991). Aristotle, feminism, and needs for functioning. Texas Law Review, 70, 1019–1028.
60.
PeräkyläA.RuusuvuoriJ. (2018). Analyzing talk and text. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 669–691). SAGE.
61.
RijswijkH. V. (2021). Interrogating legal world making through genre: Alexis Wright’s The Swan Book and colonial reparations In FademM. E. RO’SullivanM. (Eds.), The economics of empire: Genealogies of capital and the colonial encounter (pp. 73–91). Routledge.
62.
RoccoT. S. (2010). Criteria for evaluating qualitative studies. Human Resource Development International, 13(4), 375–378.
63.
SaldañaJ. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). SAGE.
64.
Santamaria-GraffC.BoehnerJ. (2019). Forming a mutually respectful university-community partnership through a “Family as Faculty” Project. ENGAGE! Co-Created Knowledge Serving the City, 1(1), 46–63.
65.
SmithL. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zedbooks Ltd.
66.
SmithL. T. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zedbooks Ltd.
67.
SpivakG. C. (1988). “Can the subaltern speak?.” In WilliamsP.ChrismanL. (Eds.), Colonial discourse and postcolonial theory: A reader (pp. 67–111). Columbia University Press.
68.
SpivakG. C. (2010). “Can the Subaltern Speak?” revised edition, from the “History” chapter of critique of postcolonial reason. In MorrisR. (Ed.), Can the subaltern speak?: Reflections on the history of an idea (pp. 21–78). Columbia University Press.
69.
Storberg-WalkerJ. (2012). Tips for publishing and reviewing qualitative studies in applied discipline. Human Resource Development Review, 11(2), 254–261.
70.
St. PierreE. A.JacksonA. Y. (2014). Qualitative data analysis after coding. Qualitative Inquiry, 20(6), 715–719.
71.
ThorneS. (2000). Data analysis in qualitative research. Evidence-Based Nursing, 3(3), 68–70.
UlmerJ. B. (2018). Composing techniques: Choreographing a postqualitative writing practice. Qualitative Inquiry, 24(9), 728–736.
74.
ViruruR.NasserR. (2017). Wa’allah, the woman she should go direct to Paradise: Perceptions of motherhood in Qatar. Global Studies of Childhood, 7(2), 148–158.
75.
VisweswaranK. (1994). Fictions of feminist ethnography. University of Minnesota Press.
76.
WyattJ.GaleK.GannonS.DaviesB. (2018). Creating a space in between: Collaborative inquiries. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (5th ed., pp. 738–756). SAGE.
77.
YoungR. J. C. (2001). Postcolonialism: An historical introduction. Blackwell.
