The aim of this manuscript is to (re)think and (re)imagine social as we work with(in) a more-than-human ontology so something(s) different can be thought/done. Language is limiting, (re)(con)straining, and yet we are still bound to it especially in academic publishing. However, I hope to at least open the conversation about social in a move toward overturning the normalized ways we have conceptualized and used the term. I propose socialing, which animates the lively relations of human, nonhuman, and more-than-humans producing socials. The article ends by discussing how and why it matters that researchers (re)conceptualize the notion of social.
ZapataA.KubyC.R.ThielJ.J. (2018). Encounters with writing: Becoming-with posthumanist ethics. Journal of Literacy Research, 50, 478-501.
2.
AlaimoS.HekmanS. (Eds.). (2008). Material feminisms. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
3.
AlexanderD.WyattJ. (2016, May). In(tra)fusions: Kitchen research practices and collaborative writing. Paper presented at International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Champaign-Urbana, IL.
4.
BaradK. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28, 801-831.
5.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
6.
BaradK. (2008). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. In AlaimoS.HekmanS. (Eds.), Material feminisms (pp. 120-156). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
7.
BaradK. (2013). Ma(r)king time: Material entanglements and re-memberings: Cutting together-apart. In CarlileP. R.NicoliniD.LangleyA.TsoukasH. (Eds.), How matter matters: Objects, artifacts, and materiality in organization studies (pp. 16-31). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
8.
BennettJ. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
9.
BennettL. (2016). Thinking like a brick: Posthumanism and building materials. In TaylorC. A.HughesC. (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 58-74.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
10.
BlaiseM.HammC.IorioJ. M. (2017). Modest witness(ing) and lively stories: Paying attention to matters of concern in early childhood. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 25, 31-42.
11.
BraidottiR. (2013). The posthuman. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
12.
ColebrookC. (2002). Gilles Deleuze. New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
CooleD.FrostS. (Eds.). (2010). New materialisms: Ontology, agency, and politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
14.
DaviesB. (2014). Listening to children: Being and becoming. New York, NY: Routledge.
15.
De FreitasE.SinclairN. (2014). Mathematics and the body: Material entanglements in the classroom (Foreword by B. Rotman). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
16.
DeleuzeG.GuattariF. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (MassumiB., Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
17.
DeleuzeG.GuattariF. (1994). What is philosophy?New York, NY: Columbia University Press. (Original work published 1991)
18.
DolphijnR.van der TuinI. (2012). New materialism: Interviews & cartographies. Ann Arbor, MI: Open Humanities Press.
19.
HarawayD. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
20.
HeinS. F. (2016). The new materialism in qualitative inquiry: How compatible are the philosophies of Barad and Deleuze?Cultural Studies ↔Critical Methodologies, 12, 132-140.
21.
HolmesR.JonesL. (2016). Flickering, spilling and diffusing body/knowledge in the posthuman early years. In TaylorC. A.HughesC. (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 108-127). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
22.
HultmanK.Lenz TaguchiH. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23, 525-542.
23.
JacksonA. Y.MazzeiL. A. (2012). Thinking with theory in qualitative research: Viewing data across multiple perspectives. New York, NY: Routledge.
24.
JonesA.HoskinsT. K. (2016). A mark on paper: The matter of Indigenous-settler history. In TaylorC. A.HughesC. (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 75-92). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
25.
Koro-LjungbergM.MacLureM. (2013). Provocations, re-un-visions, death, and other possibilities of “data.”Cultural Studies ↔Critical Methodologies, 13, 219-222.
26.
KubyC. R.Rucker GutshallT. (2015). Everyone has a Neil: Possibilities of literacy desiring in writers’ studio. Language Arts, 92(5), 314-327.
27.
KubyC. R.GutshallT. L.KirchhoferJ. M. (2015). “Go Be a Writer”: Intra-activity with materials, time, and space in literacy learning. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 15(3), 394-419.
28.
KubyC.R.Rucker GutshallT. (2016). Go be a writer!: Expanding the curricular boundaries of literacy learning with children. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
29.
KubyC.R.Rucker GutshallT.DaroliaL.H. (2017). Persistence(ing): Posthuman agency in a Writers’ Studio. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 17(3), 353-373.
30.
KubyC.R. (2017a). Poststructural and posthumanist theories as research methodologies: Tensions and possibilities. In ZaidiR.RowsellJ. (Eds.). Literacy Lives in Transcultural Times (pp. 157-174). New York, NY: Routledge.
31.
KubyC.R. (2017b). Why a paradigm shift of ‘more than human ontologies’ is needed: Putting to work poststructural and posthumanist theories in Writers’ Studio. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 39(9), 877-896.
32.
KubyC.R.CrawfordS. (2018). Intra-activity of humans and nonhumans in Writers’ Studio: (Re)imagining and (re)defining ‘social’. Literacy, 52(1), 20-30.
33.
KubyC.R.Fontanella-NothomO. (2018). Reimagining writers and writing: The end of the book and the beginning of writing. Literacy Research: Theory, Method, and Practice, 67, 310-326.
34.
KubyC.R.SpectorK.ThielJ.J. (Eds). (2019). Posthumanism and Literacy Education: Knowing/Becoming/Doing Literacies. New York, NY: Routledge.
35.
LatherP. (2015). The work of thought and the politics of research: (Post)qualitative research. In DenzinN. K.GiardinaM. D. (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry and the politics of research (pp. 97-118). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
36.
LatherP.St PierreE. A. (2013). Post-qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 629-633.
37.
LeanderK. M.BoldtG. (2013). Rereading “a pedagogy of multiliteracies”: Bodies, texts, and emergence. Journal of Literacy Research, 45, 22-46.
38.
Lenz TaguchiH. (2010). Going beyond the theory/practice divide in early childhood education: Introducing an intra-active pedagogy. New York, NY: Routledge.
39.
Lenz TaguchiH.St. PierreE. A. (2017). Using concept as method in educational and social science inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, 23, 9643-9648.
40.
MassumiB. (2002). A shock to thought: Expressions after Deleuze and Guattari. New York, NY: Routledge.
41.
MurrisK. (2016). The posthuman child: Educational transformation through philosophy with picturebooks. New York, NY: Routledge.
42.
Pacini-KetchabawV.KindS.KocherL. L. M. (2016). Encounters with materials in early childhood education. New York, NY: Routledge.
43.
Pacini-KetchabawV.TaylorA.BlaiseM. (2016). Decentering the human in multispecies ethnographies. In TaylorC. A.HughesC. (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 149-167). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
44.
ReinertsenA. B. (2016). A wild multiple apparatus of knowing discussion: Waiting pentimento intra-observation. Qualitative Inquiry, 22, 263-273.
45.
RosiekJ. (2015, May). Hidden curriculum of race as non-human agent: An illustration application of Karen Barad’s agent ontology. Paper presented at International Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, Urbana, IL.
46.
St. PierreE. A. (2008). Deleuzian concepts for education: The subject undone. In SemetskyI. (Ed.), Nomadic education: Variations on a theme by Deleuze and Guattari (pp. 183-196). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
47.
St. PierreE. A. (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). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
48.
St. PierreE. A. (2013). The appearance of data. Cultural Studies ↔Critical Methodologies, 13, 223-227.
49.
St. PierreE. A. (2014, April). Poststructural theories of language and the limits of coding. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Philadelphia, PA.
50.
St. PierreE. A. (2015). Practices for the ‘new’ in the new empiricisms, the new materialisms, and post qualitative inquiry. In DenzinN. K.GiardinaM. D. (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry and the politics of research (pp. 75-96). Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
51.
St. PierreE. A.JacksonA. Y. (2014). Qualitative data analysis after coding. Qualitative Inquiry, 20, 715-719.
52.
St. PierreE. A.JacksonA. Y.MazzeiL. A. (2016). New empiricisms and new materialisms: Conditions for new inquiry. Cultural Studies ↔Critical Methodologies, 16,99-110.
53.
St. PierreE. A.PillowsW (Eds.). (1999). Working the ruins: Feminist poststructural theory and methods in education (1st ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
54.
SellersM. (2013). Young children becoming curriculum: Deleuze, Te Whariki and curricular understandings. New York, NY: Routledge.
55.
SmithD. (2012). Essays on Deleuze. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
56.
SnazaN.AppelbaumP.BayneS.CarlsonD.MorrisM.RotasN.. . . WeaverJ. (2014). Toward a posthumanist education. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 30, 39-55.
57.
SnazaN.SonuD.TrumanS. E.ZaliwskaZ. (Eds.). (2016). Pedagogical matters: New materialisms and curriculum studies. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
58.
SnazaN.WeaverJ. A. (Eds.). (2014). Posthumanism and educational research. New York, NY: Routledge.
59.
SomervilleM.GreenM. (2015). Children, place and sustainability. New York, NY: Palgrave-Macmillan.
60.
TaylorC. A. (2016). Edu-crafting a cacophonous ecology: Posthumanist research practices for education. In TaylorC. A.HughesC. (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 5-24). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
61.
TaylorC. A.HughesC. (Eds.). (2016). Posthuman research practices in education. New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
62.
ThielJ. (2015a). “Bumblebee’s in trouble!” Embodied literacies during imaginative superhero play. Language Arts, 93, 38-49.
63.
ThielJ. (2015b). Vibrant matter: The intra-active role of objects in the construction of young children’s literacies. Literacy Research: Theory, Method and Practice, 64, 112-131.
64.
TuckE. (2015, April). Re-visioning social, re-visioning context, re-visioning agency. Paper presented at Chicago, IL: American Education Research Association.
65.
Wall KimmererR. (2013). Braiding sweetgrass: Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge, and the teachings of plants. Minneapolis, MN: Milkweed Editions.
