Duoethnography is an approach to qualitative research in which two researchers engage in dialogue to understand how a particular phenomenon has manifested differently in their lives, and in so doing, aim to come to a new understanding of that phenomenon. In this paper, two applied linguists from different research backgrounds, and with different priorities, engage in a metaduoethnography to explore what they each find of value of the method for their separate research programs. Through dialogue, they uncover what first drew each of them to duoethnography, and go on to both praise and problematize the accessibility of the method. Following this, they use the concept of the “research ecosystem” to investigate the role duoethnography plays, or may play, in their separate and evolving research programs, particularly focusing on the concepts of reflexivity and praxis. It is hoped that this exploratory dialogue may resonate with other researchers, and assist them in evaluating the benefits of duoethnography for their work.
CampbellE. (2017). “Apparently being a self-obsessed c**t is now academically lauded”: Experiencing twitter trolling of autoethnographers. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum for Qualitative Social Research, 18(3), 16. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-18.3.2819
7.
CreswellJ. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Sage.
8.
DelamontS. (2007). Arguments against auto-ethnography. Qualitative Researcher, 4, 2–4.
9.
DeleuzeG.GuattariF. (2013). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Bloomsbury Academic.
10.
DenzinN. (2010). The qualitative manifesto: A call to arms. Routledge.
FineM.TorreM. E. (2021). Essentials of critical participatory action research. American Psychological Association.
14.
FitzpatrickK.MayS. (2022). Critical ethnography and education: Theory, methodology, and ethics. Routledge.
15.
GraeberD.KacemM. B.DubrovskyN.Turquier-ZaubermanA. (2020). Anarchy-In a manner of speaking. Diaphanes.
16.
GundersonR. (2015). A defense of the “grand hotel abyss”: The Frankfurt school’s nonideal theory. Acta Sociologica, 58(1), 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001699314559526
17.
HeldD. (1980). Introduction to critical theory: Horkheimer to habermas. University of California Press.
18.
HollidayA. (2016). Doing and writing qualitative research (3rd ed.). Sage.
19.
HooperD.IijimaA. (2019). Examining the “invisible wall” of native-speakerism in Japanese ELT: A duoethnography of teacher experience. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 28, 1–27.
20.
HorkheimerM. (1972a). Traditional and critical theory. In HorkheimerM. (Ed.), Critical theory: Selected essays (pp. 188–243). Continuum. (Original work published 1937).
21.
HorkheimerM. (1972b). Postscript. In HorkheimerM. (Ed.), Critical theory: Selected essays (pp. 244–252). Continuum. (Original work published 1937).
22.
JonesM. (2020). English Language Teachers’ Stated Beliefs and Practices Regarding Task-Based Language Teaching and Listening. Konin Language Studies, 8(4), 369–390.
23.
JonesM.BruzzanoC. (2023). Reflecting dialogically on listening pedagogy: A duoethnography. The Language Scholar, 11, 7–25.
24.
JonesM.NobleM. (2023). “What about teachers?”: a duoethnographic exploration of ADHD in ELT. Explorations in Teacher Development, 29(1), 34–45. http://td.jalt.org
25.
JonesM.StevenJ. (2020). Duoethnography of Two EFL Teachers Developing Their Own Classroom Teaching Materials. The Language Scholar, 8, 7–20.
26.
KelesU.YazanB. (2020). Representation of cultures and communities in a global ELT textbook: A diachronic content analysis. Language Teaching Research, 27(5), 1325–1346. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820976922
27.
Kemaloglu-ErE.LoweR. J. (2023). Language teacher identity, World Englishes, and ELF: A duoethnography between a ‘native speaker’ teacher and a ‘non-native speaker’ teacher. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education, 22(5), 478–491. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2022.2141244
28.
LawrenceL.LoweR. J. (2020). An introduction to duoethnography. In LoweR. J.LawrenceL. (Eds.), Duoethnography in English language teaching: Research, reflection, and classroom application. (pp.1-26). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788927192-003
29.
LawrenceL.NagashimaY. (2020). The intersectionality of gender, sexuality, race, and native-speakerness: Investigating ELT teacher identity through duoethnography. Journal of Language, Identity and Education, 19(1), 42–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2019.1672173
30.
LoweR. J. (In press). The role of duoethnography in critical ELT research: Reflexivity, ideology critique, and praxis. In HabibieP.SawyerR. (Eds.), Self-study and dialogic approaches in Applied Linguistics research. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
31.
LoweR. J.KiczkowiakM. (2016). Native-speakerism and the complexity of personal experience: A duoethnographic study. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1264171. DOI:10.1080/2331186X.2016.1264171
32.
LoweR. J.LawrenceL. (Eds.). (2020). Duoethnography in English language teaching: Research, reflection, and classroom application. Multilingual Matters.
MillsC. W. (2000). The sociological imagination. Oxford University Press.
38.
MulvihillT.SwaminathanR. (2022) Critical duoethnography: A social justice research methodology for educational researchers. In ThroneR. (Ed.), Social justice research methods for doctoral research (pp. 47–67). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-8479-8.ch003
39.
NagashimaY.LawrenceL. (2022). To translanguage or not to translanguage: Ideology, practice, and intersectional identities. Applied Linguistics Review, 13(5), 735–754. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2019-0040
40.
NorrisJ.GreenlawJ. (2012). Responding to our muses: A duoethnography on becoming writers. In NorrisJ.SawyerR. D.LundD. E. (Eds.), Duoethnography: Dialogic methods for social, health, and educational research (pp. 89–114). Left Coast Press.
41.
NorrisJ.SawyerR. (2012). Toward a dialogic methodology. In NorrisJ.SawyerR.LundD. E. (Eds.), Duoethnography: Dialogic methods for social, health, and educational research (pp. 9–40). Left Coast Press.
42.
NorrisJ.SawyerR. D. (2004). Null and hidden curricula of sexual orientation: A dialogue on the curreres of the absent presence and the present absence. In CoiaL.BrooksN. J.MayerS. J.PritchardP.HeilmanE.BirchM. L.MountainA. (Eds.), Democratic responses in an era of standardization (pp. 139–159). Curriculum and Pedagogy.
43.
Oda-SheehanS. (2022). An autoethnography of teaching English in Japan: Bridging life and academia. Candlin and Mynard ePublishing.
44.
PinnerR.UshiodaE. (2020). Personalisation and professionalism : Managing the relationship between teacher and learner as people. In LoweR. J.LawrenceL. (Eds.), Duoethnography in English language teaching: Research, reflection and classroom application (pp. 71–88). Multilingual Matters.
45.
RoseH.MontakantiwongA. (2018). A tale of two teachers: A duoethnography of the realistic and idealistic successes and failures of teaching English as an international language. RELC Journal, 49(1), 88–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688217746206
46.
SaldañaJ. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.
47.
SawyerR. D.NorrisJ. (2013). Duoethnography. Oxford University Press.
48.
SchaeferM.BreretonP. (2020) Developing understandings of reflective practice and teacher training. In LoweR. J.LawrenceL. (Eds.), Duoethnography in English language teaching: Research, reflection and classroom application (pp. 133–152). Multilingual Matters.
ZareJ.Aqajani DelavarK.DerakhshanA. (2023). The impact of altruism on the emotions and English summary writing skills of L2 learners: An intervention study in light of positive psychology. Language Teaching Research, 0(0), Online first. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688231151632
