This article reports on the development of a local methodological innovation that supports the co-production of knowledge side-by-side with community-based research partners. In addition to conducting critical ethnography, Shea reports on how educators within an after-school community science program and a researcher developed practices to surface community educators’ values, demystify the data analysis process, conduct collective analysis, and produce critical layers of data through storytelling. The discussion offers scholars interested in co-producing knowledge an imagination for how to revise existing and taken-for-granted research practices to shift knowledge production.
ArchibaldJ. A. (2008). Indigenous storywork: Educating the heart, mind, body, and spirit. UBC Press.
2.
AtkinsonP.HammersleyM. (1994). Ethnography and participant observation. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 248–262). Sage.
3.
Bandola-GillJ.ArthurM.LengR. I. (2022). What is co-production? Conceptualising and understanding co-production of knowledge and policy across different theoretical perspectives. Evidence and Policy, 19(2), 275–298.
4.
BangM.FaberL.GurneauJ.MarinA.SotoC. (2016). Community-based design research: Learning across generations and strategic transformations of institutional relations toward axiological innovations. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 23(1), 28–41.
5.
BangM.VossoughiS. (2016). Participatory design research and educational justice: Studying learning and relations within social change making. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 173–193.
6.
BangM. (2020). Learning on the move toward just, sustainable, and culturally thriving futures. Cognition and Instruction, 38(3), 434–444.
7.
BeckerH. S. (1998). Tricks of the trade: How to think about your research while you’re doing it. University of Chicago Press.
8.
BiettiL. M.TilstonO.BangerterA. (2019). Storytelling as adaptive collective sensemaking. Topics in cognitive science, 11(4), 710–732.
9.
Bonilla-SilvaE. (2015). The structure of racism in color-blind, “post-racial” America. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(11), 1358–1376.
10.
Calabrese BartonA.GreenbergD.KimW. J.BrienS.RobyR.BalzerM.TurnerC.ArcherL. (2021). Disruptive moments as opportunities towards justice-oriented pedagogical practice in Informal Science Learning. Science Education, 105(6), 1229–1251.
11.
CampanellaM.KirshnerB.MendyJ.Landa-PosasM.Terrazas HooverK.LopezS.Porras-ElenaP.-H.Estrada MartínM. (2022). Co-constructing knowledge for action in research practice partnerships. Social Sciences, 11(3), 140.
12.
CarspeckenF. P. (2013). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and practical guide. Routledge.
13.
de los RíosC. V.MolinaA. (2020). Literacies of refuge:“Pidiendo posada” as ritual of justice. Journal of Literacy Research, 52(1), 32–54.
14.
DenzinN. K. (1989). Interpretive biography (Vol. 17). Sage.
15.
EisenhartM. (2001). Educational ethnography past, present, and future: Ideas to think with. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 16–27.
16.
EricksonF. (2006). Definition and analysis of data from videotape: Some research procedures and their rationales. In GreenJ. L.CamilliG.ElmoreP. B.SkukauskaitiA.GraceE. (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (3rd ed., pp. 177–192). Taylor & Francis.
17.
EsmondeI.BookerA. N. (2016). Power and privilege in the learning sciences: Critical and sociocultural theories of learning. Routledge.
18.
EspinozaM. L.VossoughiS. (2014). Perceiving learning anew: Social interaction, dignity, and educational rights. Harvard Educational Review, 84(3), 285–313.
19.
Fals-BordaO. (1987). The application of participatory action-research in Latin America. International Sociology, 2(4), 329–347.
20.
FanonF. (1952). The fact of blackness. In NayarP. K. (Ed.), Postcolonial studies: An anthology (pp. 15–32). Wiley.
21.
FineM.TorreM. E.BoudinK.BowenI.ClarkJ.HyltonD.MartinezM.Missy RobertsR. A.SmartP.UpeguiD. (2003). Participatory action research: From within and beyond prison bars. In CamicP. M.RhodesJ. E.YardleyL. (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives in methodology and design (pp. 173–198). American Psychological Association.
22.
Gamoran SherinM.Van EsE. A. (2009). Effects of video club participation on teachers’ professional vision. Journal of teacher education, 60(1), 20–37.
23.
GeorgisD.MatthewsS. (2023). The trouble with research-creation: Failure, play and the possibility of knowledge in aesthetic encounters. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 36(6), 1039–1055.
24.
GinwrightS. A. (2005). On urban ground: Understanding African-American intergenerational partnerships in urban communities. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(1), 101–110.
25.
Gordon da CruzC. (2017). Critical community-engaged scholarship: Communities and universities striving for racial justice. Peabody Journal of Education, 92(3), 363–384.
26.
GutiérrezK. D.PenuelW. R. (2014). Relevance to practice as a criterion for rigor. Educational Researcher, 43(1), 19–23.
27.
GutierrezK. D.JurowS. (2014, June). Designing for possible futures: The potential of social design experiments. Paper presented at the 11th International Conference of the lEarning Sciences, Boulder, CO.
28.
Hondagneu-SoteloP.GaudinezG.LaraH.OrtizB. C. (2004). “There’s a Spirit That Transcends the Border”: Faith, Ritual, and Postnational Protest at the US-Mexico Border. Sociological Perspectives, 47(2), 133–159.
29.
HornI. S.KaneB. D. (2015). Opportunities for professional learning in mathematics teacher workgroup conversations: Relationships to instructional expertise. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(3), 373–418.
30.
IshimaruA. M.BangM. (2016). Toward a transformative research and practice agenda for racial equity in family engagement. White paper: University of Washington.
31.
IshimaruA. M.BangM. (2022). Solidarity-driven codesign. In PeurachD. J.RussellJ. L.Cohen-VogelL.PenuelW. R. (Eds.), The foundational handbook on improvement research in education (pp. 383–402). Rowman & Littlefield.
32.
JasanoffS. (Ed.). (2004). States of knowledge: The co-production of science and the social order. Routledge.
33.
JordanB.HendersonA. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39–103.
34.
JurowA. S.SheaM. (2015). Learning in equity-oriented scale-making projects. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(2), 286–307.
35.
JurowA. S.TeetersL.SheaM.Van SteenisE. (2016). Extending the consequentiality of “invisible work” in the food justice movement. Cognition and Instruction, 34(3), 210–221.
Ladson-BillingsG. (2021). Critical race theory—What it is not! In LynnM.DixsonA. D. (Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in education (pp. 32–43). Routledge.
MedinD. L.BangM. (2014). Who’s asking? Native science, western science, and science education. MIT Press.
40.
MuellerJ. C. (2017). Producing colorblindness: Everyday mechanisms of white ignorance. Social Problems, 64(2), 219–238.
41.
OakesJ.RogersJ. (2006). Learning power: Organizing for education and justice. Teachers College Press.
42.
OrtnerS. B. (1991). Reading America: Preliminary notes on class and culture. In OrtnerS. B. (Ed.), Anthropology and social theory: Culture, power, and the acting subject (pp. 19–41). Duke University Press.
43.
PatelL. (2015). Decolonizing educational research: From ownership to answerability. Routledge.
44.
PenuelW. R.FishmanB. J.YamaguchiR.GallagherL. P. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American educational research journal, 44(4), 921–958.
45.
PenuelW. R. (2017). Research–practice partnerships as a strategy for promoting equitable science teaching and learning through leveraging everyday science. Science Education, 101(4), 520–525.
46.
PhilipT. M.BangM.JacksonK. (2018). Articulating the “how,” the “for what,” the “for whom,” and the “with whom” in concert: A call to broaden the benchmarks of our scholarship. Cognition and Instruction, 36(2), 83–88.
47.
RosaJ.DíazV. (2020). Raciontologies: Rethinking anthropological accounts of institutional racism and enactments of white supremacy in the United States. American Anthropologist, 122(1), 120–132.
SaldañaJ. (2021). Coding techniques for quantitative and mixed data. The Routledge Reviewer’s Guide to Mixed Methods Analysis, 151–160.
50.
SchensulS. L.SchensulJ. J.LeCompteM. D. (1999). Essential ethnographic methods: Observations, interviews, and questionnaires. AltaMira Press.
51.
SheaM. V.SandovalJ. (2020). Using historical and political understanding to design for equity in science education. Science Education, 104(1), 27–49.
52.
SheaM. V. (2022). Organizing for material possibility in a community-led science program. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 29(2), 123–142.
53.
SheaM. V.JurowA. S.SchifferJ.EscudéM.TorresA. (2023). Infrastructural injustices in community-driven afterschool STEAM. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 60(8), 1853–1878.
54.
SimpsonL. B. (2017). As we have always done: Indigenous freedom through radical resistance. University of Minnesota Press.
55.
SmithL. T. (2021). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Bloomsbury.
56.
SolórzanoD. G.YossoT. J. (2002). Critical race methodology: Counter-storytelling as an analytical framework for education research. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 23–44.
57.
SpradleyJ. P. (1979). Ethnography and culture. In SpradleyJ. P. (Ed.), The ethnographic interview (pp. 3–17). Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
58.
TaylorK. H.SheaM.V. (Revise and Resubmit). Designing for Data-Wisdom: Learning with One Foot Forward and One Foot Back. The Journal of the Learning Sciences.
59.
TeetersL. A.JurowA. S. (2019). Generating equity-oriented partnerships: A framework for reflection and practice. Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 11(1), 27–37.
60.
TimmermansS.TavoryI. (2022). Data analysis in qualitative research: Theorizing with abductive analysis. University of Chicago Press.
61.
TrouillotM. R. (1991). Anthropology as metaphor: The savage’s legacy and the postmodern world. Review (Fernand Braudel Center), 14(3–4), 29–54.
62.
TrouillotM. R. (2003). Anthropology and the savage slot: The poetics and politics of otherness (pp. 7–28). Palgrave Macmillan.
63.
TuckE. (2009). Suspending damage: A letter to communities. Harvard Educational Review, 79(3), 409–428.
64.
TzouC.BellP.BangM.KuverR.TwitoA.BraunA. (2018). Building expansive family STEAM programming through participatory design research. In LeeV. R.PhillipsA. L. (Eds.), Reconceptualizing libraries: Perspectives from the information and learning sciences (pp. 72–93). Routledge.
65.
WattsM.EbbuttD. (1987). More than the sum of the parts: Research methods in group interviewing. British Educational Research Journal, 13(1), 25–34.
66.
ZavalaM. (2016). Design, participation, and social change: What design in grassroots spaces can teach learning scientists. Cognition & Instruction, 34(3), 236–249.
