This article presents a “top ten+ list” of lessons learned from the ontological turn. Across various terms and insistences, the article surveys theories of social change, the subject and agency, the canons constructed, the methodologies materialized, the “more and other than reflexivity” researcher subjectivity endorsed, and the edges of both policy analysis and quantitative research that already instantiate such lessons. It concludes with a meditation on how to think this latest turn within something other than a temporality of successor regimes, end-isms, and apocalyptic breaks.
AgambenGiorgio. (1993). The coming community (HardtM., Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
2.
BaradKaren. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
3.
BaradKaren. (2012). Matter feels, converses, suffers, desires, yearns, and remembers: Interview with Karen Barad. In DolphijnR.van der TuinI. (Eds.), New materialism: Interviews and cartographies (pp. 48-70). Ann Arbor, MI: New Humanities Press.
4.
BeharRuth. (1996). The vulnerable observer: Ethnography that breaks your heart. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
5.
BerlantLauren. (2011). Cruel optimism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
6.
BraidottiRosi. (2013). The posthuman. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
7.
BritzmanDeborah. (2009). The very thought of education. Albany: State University of New York Press.
8.
ChildersSaraRheeJeong-EunDazaStephanie (2013). Promiscuous (use of) feminist methodologies: The dirty theory and messy practice of educational research beyond gender. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 507-523.
9.
DavisHeatherSarlinPaige. (2012). “On the risk of a new relationality”: An interview with Lauren Berlant and Michael Hardt. Reviews in Cultural Theory, 2, 7-27.
10.
DeLandaManuel. (2002). Intensive science and virtual philosophy. London, England: Continuum.
11.
DeLandaManuel. (2010). Deleuze: History and science. New York, NY: Atropos Press.
12.
DosseFrancois. (1999). Empire of meaning: The humanization of the social sciences (MelehyH., Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
13.
FenwickTaraEdwardsRichard. (2010). Actor-network theory in education. London, England: Routledge.
14.
FenwickTaraEdwardsRichard (2011). Considering materiality in educational policy: Messy objects and multiple reals. Educational Theory, 61, 709-726.
15.
GraeberDavid. (2007). The twilight of vanguardism, Chapter 9. In Possibilities: Essays on hierarchy, rebellion and desire (pp. 301-312). Oakland, CA: AK Press.
16.
GunkelHenrietteNigianniChrysanthiSoderbackFanny. (Eds.). (2012). Undutiful daughters: New directions in feminist thought and practice. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
17.
HouleKaren. (2009). Deconstruction and feminist standpoint theory. Frontiers, 30, 172-193.
18.
JacksonAleciaMazzeiLisa (2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research. London, England: Routledge.
19.
KirbyVicky. (2011). Quantum anthropologies: Life at large. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
20.
LatherPatti. (2007). Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double(d) science. Albany: State University of New York Press.
21.
LatherPatti. (2010). Engaging (social) science: Policy from the side of the messy. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
22.
LatherPatti. (2012). “Becoming feminist”: An untimely meditation on football. Cultural Studies/Critical Methodology, 12, 357-360.
23.
LatherPatti. (2013). Methodology-21: What do we do in the afterward?International Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 26, 634-645.
24.
LawJohnJohn HassardJ. (Eds.). (1999). Actor network theory and after. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
25.
Lenz-TaguchiHillevi. (2012). A diffractive and Deleuzean approach to analyzing interview data. Journal of Feminist Theory, 13, 265-281.
26.
MacLellanMathewTalpalaruMargrit. (2012). Remaking the commons. Reviews in Cultural Theory, 2, 1-6.
27.
MahmoodSaba. (2001). Feminist theory, embodiment, and the docile agent: Some reflections on the Egyptian Islamic revival. Cultural Anthropology, 16, 202-236.
28.
MahmoodSaba. (2005). Politics of piety: The Islamic revival and the feminist subject. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
29.
NancyJean-Luc. (1983). The inoperative community (ConnerP.GarbusL.HollandM.SawhneyS., Trans.). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
30.
NealonJeffrey T. (2008). Foucault beyond Foucault: Power and its intensifications since 1984. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
31.
PillowWanda. (2014). Pregnant & parenting youth in foster care: Linking education to well being through intentional and caring praxis. New York, NY: Administration of Children’s Services, Division of Family Permanency Services.
32.
PovinelliElizabeth. (2011). Economies of abandonment: Social belonging and endurance in late liberalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
33.
RajanTilottama. (2002). Deconstruction and the remainders of phenomenology: Sartre, Derrida, Foucault, Baudrillard. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
34.
RanciereJacques. (2009). The emancipated spectator (ElliottG., Trans.). London, England: Verso.
35.
RifkinAdrian. (2003). Inventing recollection. In BowmanP. (Ed.), Interrogating cultural studies (pp. 101-124). London, England: Pluto Press.
36.
RonellAvital. (2010). Fighting theory. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
37.
SomervilleMargaret. (2013). Water in a dry land: Place learning through art and story. New York, NY: Routledge.
38.
SpivakGayatri. (1999). A critique of postcolonial reason: Toward a history of the vanishing present. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39.
St. PierreElizabeth. (2011). Post-qualitative research: The critique and the coming after. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 611-625). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
40.
van der TuinIris. (2014). “Without an analytical divorce from the total environment”: Advancing a philosophy of the humanities by reading Snow and Whitehead diffractively. Humanities, 3, 244-263.
41.
van der TuinIrisDolphijnRick. (2010). The transversality of new materialism. Women: A Cultural Review, 21, 153-171.
