Uses of a Post-Qualitative Autoethnographic Approach to Analyse Transboundary Learning Culture in Asia-Pacific Contexts: Conceptual and Methodological Discussions

Abstract

The post-pandemic era poses unprecedented global challenges for higher education institutions, requiring them to move beyond traditional approaches. This article proposes that transboundary learning and research cultures (TLRC) can capture the contemporary education landscape in Asia-Pacific contexts by providing cross-cultural and cross-disciplinary knowledge in a postmodern era, underpinned by globalization. We present a trans-paradigmatic conceptual model, based on post-qualitative methods to advance scholarship in transboundary studies. In doing so, we illustrate the rigour of autoethnography as a post-qualitative methodology that enables subjective interpretations of meaning from local contexts, reflecting the issues of modernity in the Asia-Pacific educational practices. We aim to disrupt traditional academic scholarship's positivist and ethnocentric tendencies and suggest new research methodology directions framed in the post-structuralist and post-colonial TLRC framework by suggesting some new research agendas and directions.

Introduction

Globalization and the COVID-19 pandemic have challenged higher education institutions and educational research worldwide. In the post-pandemic era, we should explore new research possibilities and directions relevant to local contexts and issues beyond traditional paradigms and methodologies based on positivism and ethnocentrism (Tesar et al., 2022). We propose that transboundary learning and research cultures (TLRC) can offer such a framework. TLRC capture the complexity, fluidity and interconnectivity of educational phenomena in the Asia-Pacific region from transcultural, transdisciplinary, transnational and trans-paradigmatic perspectives and practices. In this article, we aim to introduce the concept and features of TLRC, illustrate how it can be applied in educational research and practice, and discuss its potential contributions and challenges for advancing educational knowledge and innovation in the Asia-Pacific region.

This diverse and dynamic region encompasses different countries, regions, languages, religions, histories and traditions. It is also influenced by the postmodern era, characterized by globalization, digitalization, diversity, sustainability and social justice. To understand and evaluate this region's TLRC, we need a post-qualitative discourse that challenges the conventional assumptions and practices of qualitative research. We draw on contemporary philosophical debates to support post-qualitative approaches to develop a trans-paradigmatic conceptual model for transboundary educational research directions.

To go further, we use autoethnography as a particular post-qualitative approach to illustrate the subjective and multiple meanings of educational experiences concerning social, cultural, historical and material contexts. Autoethnography is a qualitative method that allows investigating researchers’ personal experiences and stories (or narratives) (Wall, 2006). This article discusses the methodology of autoethnography, which involves self-reflection, cultural analysis and writing. Autoethnography has roots in anthropology but gained prominence as a qualitative methodology in the 1990s. It allows authors to intertwine their personal experiences with cultural norms and expectations, promoting reflexivity and self-reflection. Autoethnographic writings present personal, emotional and influential research that captures the authors’ experiences within a particular cultural context (Pretorius & Cutri, 2019).

Our main argument is that post-qualitative autoethnography is a valuable and disruptive methodology that enables educational researchers to experiment with new concepts and perspectives and address the complexities and uncertainties of the contemporary world. Through TLRC, we contend that disrupting traditional paradigms in educational research can promote new methodologies that align with local contexts (Aberasturi-Apraiz et al., 2020). Indeed, TLRC can drive educational philosophical futures and provide cross-cultural and cross-disciplinary knowledge. Integrating autoethnographic inquiry into post-qualitative research paradigms ontologically and epistemologically for Asia-Pacific education research contexts can offer new possibilities for creativity, experimentation, collaboration and intervention worldwide. It can also enable researchers to critically examine their own cultural assumptions, values, beliefs and practices within education, and to explore alternative learning and teaching methods responsive to learners’ and educators’ diverse needs, interests, experiences, and aspirations in different contexts (Østern et al., 2023; Wall, 2006).

TLRC research is one feasible approach to doing post-qualitative inquiry, as it involves transcultural, transdisciplinary and trans-paradigmatic research in different contexts and regions pinpointed by Kwok (2022) in mapping new types of research paradigms, evolved from the traditional ones. Post-qualitative inquiry is an umbrella term for various approaches that challenge the traditional assumptions and practices of qualitative research, such as representation, interpretation, subjectivity and reflexivity. Post-qualitative inquiry draws on post-structural, post-human and new materialist theories to explore the ontological and epistemological implications of doing research differently (Tan et al., 2021).

Structurally, the paper's first section introduces the background and rationale of Asia-Pacific TLRC. The second section examines the post-qualitative paradigm, and autoethnographic method approaches for doing transboundary educational research. The third section presents an integrated conceptual framework, which illustrates how post-qualitative autoethnography can be applied to transboundary academic research in Asian-Pacific contexts. Finally, we conclude by discussing the implications and limitations of post-qualitative autoethnography for transboundary educational research in Asian-Pacific contexts and suggesting some new directions for future research.

A Synergy of Philosophical and Sociological Approach to Educational Research in the Asia-Pacific Rim

The COVID-19 pandemic has posed unprecedented challenges to tertiary students and teachers and shaped new forms of learning and teaching. In this post-pandemic era, tertiary education institutions worldwide must operate in a dynamic and complex environment influenced by various factors, such as globalization, digitalization, diversity and sustainability. These factors affect the research and learning cultures in the Asia-Pacific region, a diverse and vibrant area encompassing different countries, regions, languages, religions, histories and traditions.

The Asia-Pacific region represents a diverse landscape that varies across ‘culture, political systems, population, equity and ethnic diversity’ (Lam & Park, 2016, p. 1). Lam and Park (2016) identify education as the most significant aspect of social, economic and political progress, thus focusing on the fundamental sociological and philosophical concerns related to long-standing educational issues within this region. Building on the seminal writing of Lam and Park (2016), we draw insight by synergizing philosophical and sociological approaches of utilizing qualitative research methodology to further educational research within the Asia-Pacific context.

On one hand, the philosophy of education is a critical inquiry that examines the assumptions, language, discourses and logical argumentation in education. It asks what education should be based on moral and ethical principles (Tesar et al., 2022; Usher, 2002). The sociology of education is an empirical inquiry that examines education's structures, processes, and interactions concerning the historical, cultural and social factors that influence them. It asks what education is based on scientific theories and methods. These two educational approaches have different perspectives and purposes, but they are both critical for understanding and improving education in the Asia-Pacific region.

On the other hand, the philosophy of education focuses on the principles and ideas behind education, while research methodology deals with the practical aspects of collecting and analysing data for educational purposes. Traditional education philosophy and methodology have driven educational research in the Asia-Pacific region by providing normative and conceptual frameworks and empirical and practical methods for understanding and evaluating educational phenomena in this region. Kwok (2022) identifies how traditional views grounded in ontology, epistemology and axiology contribute to frequent engagement in traditional methodological approaches comprised of quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. These branches and paradigms have influenced the aims, values, ethics, methods, techniques and tools of educational research in the Asia-Pacific region.

Exploring philosophical and sociological issues and trends in education in this region from various domains and perspectives transcends the narrow boundaries of individual lives and cultures. It sees the world from a broader context of history and society. They also recognize the tension and interplay between individual actions and social forces shaping the world and personal educational choices. A philosophical perspective should complement a sociological perspective. According to Ozmon and Craver (2008), a philosophical perspective helps understand the interactions among students, curriculum, administration, aims and goals in education and for enhancing one's personal and professional development as an educator. However, they also note that a philosophical perspective is not enough for education; it needs to be combined with a sociological perspective that can provide a realistic and critical analysis of the current state of education and the factors that affect it. Likewise, a sociological perspective is not enough for education; it needs to be combined with a philosophical perspective that can provide a normative and ethical vision of what education should be. Therefore, there is a mutual dependence between the sociological and the philosophical perspectives on education. We argue that the future of education in the Asia-Pacific region will depend on which philosophical perspectives are adopted and institutionalized into public policy.

To explore the philosophical landscape of education within the Asian demographic region, we seek to challenge the traditional boundaries of educational research and cultures to provide an innovative perspective and implications for educational practice and policy. Informed by the collective works of Tesar et al. (2022), we draw our understanding of how the evolving nature of educational philosophy in East Asia reflects the interplay and dissonance between traditional and modern ideology. Philosophy of education in a new key goes beyond ancient wisdom and engages with pressing and timely issues. Traditionally, Confucian and Buddhist philosophies have shaped educational practices in the region. These philosophies emphasize hierarchical relationships, moral education and the cultivation of virtue. However, Tesar et al. (2022) argue that East Asia is now experiencing a transition towards a new educational philosophy that incorporates elements of Western ideas, such as individualism, critical thinking and creativity. This shift is driven by globalization and the desire to compete in the global knowledge-based economy.

The dynamic incorporation of complex and traditional philosophies of Confucianism and Buddhism to a new educational paradigm that incorporates elements of Western post-structuralism and addresses the challenges of globalization and the COVID-19 pandemic. Understanding the production and publication of academic disciplines in the Asia-Pacific context requires an exploration of concepts such as differences, singularity, and the incorporation of culture, history, religion and genealogy of thoughts. Important topics to consider involve aesthetic awakening, education, self-cultivation and the relationship between Western post-structuralism and Japanese philosophy. Hung et al. (2021) emphasize the practicality and relevance of East Asian philosophical traditions, promoting mutual learning between the East and the West. Thus, it is important to stress the importance of historical exploration and ontological understanding in envisioning a future for educational philosophy and acknowledge the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on education. We encourage a nuanced understanding of educational philosophy's historical context and cultural influences in East Asia while recognizing the need to adapt and address pressing issues in the field.

It is essential to locate the field within the influence of globalization to address pressing educational issues. By exploring the contemporary Asia-Pacific landscape, we argue that such a landscape is located in transboundary and transcultural scholarship. In doing so, we focus inward on the localities of Asia-Pacific cultures and endeavour to draw new knowledge and insights. Engaging with philosophical and sociological methods at the locale allows us to break away from Eurocentric framings of Enlightenment, modernity and colonial expansion (Kester et al., 2023). According to Marginson and Xu (2022), the West has heavily influenced China and East Asia's higher education and research systems due to Western colonization, modernization, internationalization and globalization. This influence is particularly evident in social sciences research, including education studies. This perpetuates a neo-colonial mindset that reinforces white supremacy and Anglo-European hegemony in the region, favouring Western knowledge, methodologies, theories, models, traditions, universities, students and academics over local equivalents (Xu, 2022).

Transboundary Education Research

Transboundary educational research challenges the traditional boundaries and cultures of educational research based on fixed and binary categories, such as East and West, modern and traditional, and local and global. Instead, transboundary educational research acknowledges the complexity, fluidity and interconnectivity of educational phenomena in the Asia-Pacific region, which is a diverse and dynamic area encompassing different countries, regions, languages, religions, histories and indigenous cultural traditions. This approach allows us to recognize the intricacies of scrutinizing cultural assumptions in transnational experiences and emphasize the importance of a profound understanding of the concepts and practices involved. We scrutinize how traditional philosophies interact with contemporary ideas, stressing the need to harmonize cultural legacy with changing educational paradigms.

Given the shift into exploring new philosophical and sociological directions for the localized research context, we acknowledge that scholars may feel a sense of unease. However, as noted by Springgay and Truman (2018), we remind researchers that the research aims to create a different lifeworld and explore alternative futures. Therefore, researchers must be prepared to experience the friction, strain and discomfort of conducting research differently. We endeavour to provide a relevant methodological apparatus that will enable an insightful analysis of the Asia-Pacific region's philosophical assumptions, issues and trends and how they are related to transboundary and transcultural educational research concepts.

In transboundary learning cultures and schooling (TLCS), the particular educational focus has been heavily studied in shadow curricula (Kim & Jung, 2019) and shadow education (Kim & Jung, 2022). East Asian education systems are known for their high performance and achievement and for relying on shadow education or private tutoring and learning outside formal school hours (Kim & Jung, 2022). However, scholarship is lacking beyond this region, such as Western educational contexts, and Anglophonic academics do not sufficiently understand this area. Consequently, there is a danger of a missed opportunity for exploring and learning from Asia-Pacific knowledge systems, which have undergone significant curricular reforms and 21st-century skills development (Bentaouet Kattan & Bend, 2018). Moreover, the experiences of East Asian international students in English-speaking countries reveal the challenges and opportunities of inter-cultural education and communication (Martinez & Colaner, 2017). Therefore, through a transboundary, transcultural approach, scholarship acknowledges the locale and how it is shifting in response to global events through a trans-paradigmatic perspective.

A trans-paradigmatic conceptual model for transboundary educational research can be illustrated by Deleuze & Guattari's rhizomatic analysis (1972/1977, 1987/2003), which is a form of post-human philosophy and post-qualitative approach that explores the subjective and multiple meanings of educational experiences about the social, cultural, historical and material contexts. Such a rhizomatic analysis can be seen as a poststructuralist approach that informs post-qualitative autoethnography. It enables researchers to map the complex and multiple connections and fluidic transformations of phenomena concerning their contexts without imposing fixed and binary categories or hierarchies. It also enables researchers to generate new insights and possibilities for informing practices and policies by following the lines of flight that escape from the dominant structures and systems. To understand and evaluate this region's learning and research cultures, we need a postmodern perspective that can capture educational phenomena’ diversity, fluidity and interconnectivity. To capture this trend in the Asia-Pacific region, we propose offering a trans-paradigmatic perspective grounded in the sociology of post-qualitative inquiry. Post-qualitative research paradigms challenge traditional paradigms by proposing new ways of thinking about reality, knowledge and research that are not bound by dualisms or hierarchies. Post-qualitative research paradigms also offer new possibilities for creativity, experimentation, collaboration and intervention worldwide (Østern et al., 2023).

This disruptive and innovative methodology challenges conventional humanist social science methodologies in education. Post-qualitative inquiry acknowledges the influence of emerging ontological and material perspectives within the humanities and social sciences. Rather than being driven by specific methods, the post-qualitative inquiry is guided by conceptual frameworks such as Karen Barad's entanglement (2007, 2010) and Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari's assemblage (1972/1977, 1987/2003). These concepts enable new ways of non-linear and unconventional thinking and practicing research that can vary across different projects. Post-qualitative inquiry encourages educational researchers to step outside the normalized structures of humanist epistemology, ontology and methodology and explore alternative approaches (St. Pierre et al., 2016).

Post-Qualitative Autoethnography as a New Viable Research Method in TLRC

We argue that post-qualitative autoethnography is a suitable methodological approach for transboundary and transcultural educational research in Asian-Pacific contexts. Post-qualitative autoethnography is a form of self-narrative inquiry that challenges the conventional assumptions and practices of qualitative research. It draws on post-human philosophy and post-qualitative approaches to explore the subjective and multiple meanings of educational experiences in social, cultural, historical and material contexts. Post-qualitative autoethnography can enable researchers to transcend the boundaries and cultures of educational research and generate new insights and possibilities for educational practice and policy.

According to St. Pierre (2021a, 2021b) and Young et al. (2022), post-qualitative inquiry is a deliberate attempt to challenge and transcend the conventional humanist qualitative methodology that is incompatible with postmodernism, post-structuralism, post-humanism and other post-theories, by imagining and performing experimental research that differs from conventional humanist social science research methodologies. Young et al. (2022) narrate their personal stories of supervising or conducting post-qualitative doctoral studies that departed from conventional qualitative research methods. They also recognize the influence of academic gatekeepers who often demand linear, outcome-focused research designs, making it difficult to break away from entrenched training.

The transformative nature of transitioning from a qualitative to a post-qualitative stance in educational research is exciting. Such a shift emphasizes the vulnerability experienced by researchers, which may present an initial challenge. Inspired by Aberasturi-Apraiz et al. (2020), with collaborative autoethnography to help mitigate feelings of discomfort and vulnerability experienced in uncertain research territory, we advocate for researchers to engage with autoethnographic methods. The reflective aspect of autoethnography will support researchers’ transition into the sociological realm of the post-qualitative praxis for educational research within the Asian-Pacific context.

Autoethnography is a unique research methodology encompassing three core aspects: self, culture and writing. It involves personal experience, cultural practice and description and interpretation. Autoethnography gained prominence in academia during the 1970s, primarily influenced by the works of Hayano (1979), Heider (1975) and Goldschmidt (1977). Initially rooted in the anthropological tradition, they viewed autoethnography as a research approach to studying one's people. Contemporary ethnographers, such as Adams et al. (2017), Jones et al. (2016) and White (2003), have expanded on this idea and moved away from a positivist epistemology towards postmodern reflexivity. This contemporary methodology allows researchers to intertwine their personal experience with the political and cultural norms of the research context, necessitating reflexivity. This reflexivity enables scholars to produce auto-ethnographies that reflect their self-reflection within a specific cultural context. By interrogating the intersections between the self and social life, autoethnography can understand their own experiences and the cultural experiences they are immersed in (Pretorius & Cutri, 2019).

As a whole, post-qualitative autoethnography is a more recent development that seeks to expand the possibilities of qualitative research. It is characterized by rejecting traditional research boundaries and focusing on the research's dynamic and evolving nature (Lather & St. Pierre, 2013). Post-qualitative autoethnography emphasizes the importance of reflexivity, creativity and collaboration in research (Ellis et al., 2011).

Researchers using post-qualitative autoethnography often engage in experimental and innovative research practices that challenge traditional notions of research methods and the role of the researcher(s). Post-qualitative autoethnography is a form of qualitative research that uses self-reflection and writing to explore personal and cultural experiences and meanings. Scholars can effectively connect with readers by expressing truths and vulnerability in their research, especially within a specific cultural context. It differs from traditional qualitative research, which relies on predetermined categories, methods and outcomes. Post-qualitative autoethnography is influenced by poststructuralist philosophy that challenges the assumptions and norms of dominant discourses and systems. It offers a unique and valuable approach to post-qualitative research that can help researchers to uncover new insights and perspectives.

Noteworthy, Deleuze and Guattari's rhizomatic analysis (1972/1977, 1987/2003) is one example of a poststructuralist approach that can utilize post-qualitative autoethnography. It enables researchers to map the complex and multiple connections and transformations of phenomena concerning their contexts without imposing fixed and binary categories or hierarchies. It also enables researchers to generate new insights and possibilities for practice and policy by following the lines of flight that escape from the dominant structures and system.

Post-qualitative challenges dominant narratives and explores educational settings’ complex and dynamic nature. It emphasizes reflexivity, creativity and experimentation in the research process and seeks to expand the possibilities of qualitative research. Researchers using post-qualitative autoethnography in education research have used their own experiences and stories to explore various issues, such as teacher identity, power and equity, curriculum and pedagogy, school reform and student experiences. They have used their own stories to challenge dominant narratives about these issues and explore how social, cultural and institutional factors shape them. Post-qualitative autoethnography has become an increasingly important approach in education research as scholars seek new insights into complex educational phenomena by using their own experiences and stories. By doing so, they have expanded the possibilities of qualitative research and opened up new avenues for understanding educational issues. Unlike regionalizing methodological studies like taking Asia as method (Chen, 2010) and thematizing methodological studies like (Salazkina, 2020), post-qualitative autoethnography as a method does not attempt to over-emphasize decolonization or de-imperialization of methodological studies without inter-cultural collaborations or transfer. Instead, post-qualitative autoethnography helps explore distinctive cultural features with researchers’ own reflections whilst allowing multiple and communicative perspectives to co-create emergent knowledge with researchers’ collaborations.

A Conceptual Model for TLRC Research Through Post-Qualitative Autoethnographic Approach

Transboundary spaces for educational research can represent a range of modalities, such as the integration of assessment, curriculum standards and learning materials, the combination of the notions of good learners, and the co-existence of two formal and informal academic success paths in education. This implies that transboundary space challenges the conventional modes and structures of education based on rigid and linear patterns, such as school time and non-school time, face-to-face and online modes of delivery, synchronous and asynchronous learning and formal and informal education systems. Transboundary space recognizes the diversity, flexibility and hybridity of learning and teaching modes and curriculum structures (Jung, 2016; Kim et al., 2022) in the Asia-Pacific region, which is a dynamic and innovative area that adapts to the changing needs and demands of learners, teachers and society.

Transboundary research in education contexts involves investigating educational phenomena that traverse national, cultural, or linguistic boundaries within Asia. This research trend examines the intricate interactions between diverse cultural and linguistic communities and the influence of globalization and other transnational forces on education. In the Asian education context, transboundary research can manifest in various forms, such as analysing the experiences of migrating students and teachers, assessing the effects of global educational policies on local practices, exploring the management of cultural and linguistic diversity in educational settings, or investigating the impact of technology on education in the region. Noteworthy, students’ transboundary learning spaces shuttling between daytime and shadow education systems in Asia are important directions for evaluating their academic success paths (Kim & Jung, 2022). Correspondingly, curriculum developers and researchers should pay more attention to the assemblage of daytime school and shadow curricula as the latter curricula seem to complement, supplement, or even supplant the former, facing the changing landscape of student learning culture (Kim & Jung, 2019).

Furthermore, the boundaries between online, offline and hybrid learning modes become so blurred that transboundary learning research helps explore the actual learning spaces during the COVID-19 pandemic attack and the post-pandemic era. For instance, hybridized forms of learning in Internet-based tutoring in basic education (Jung et al., 2022), lifelong learning (Evans et al., 2023), and teacher education (Xu & Yung, 2023). Transboundary educational research aims to decentre the cross-cultural, cross-national, cross-regional and cross-theoretical analysis in educational and social research and explore new research agendas and implications for education in the postmodern era by crossing national, cultural and research borders. The post-qualitative methodology can be helpful in this research as it emphasizes reflexivity.

By incorporating Kim and Jung’s (2022, pp. 62–63) TLCS framework through Deleuze and Guattari's (1972/1977, 1987/2003) rhizomatic analysis, we theorize the fluidic relationships between traditional and post-qualitative research paradigms. Four salient features of TLRC are found. Firstly, we articulate the complex and inter-connected research spaces of conducting cross-cultural, cross-national, cross-regional and cross-theoretical studies in educational and social research. Secondly, research consilience of humans and non-human agents/contexts/processes are equally important for making meanings in post-qualitative autoethnographic inquiry. This is because epistemological relations are the smallest components of inseparable material-discursive entanglements in post-qualitative inquiry. Methodologically, post-qualitative or post-human inquiry gains a new understanding of the process of ‘becoming’ (Braidotti, 2012, 2013) instead of ‘being’ in interpretive or naturalist research paradigms. Thirdly, post-qualitative researchers generally ‘centre’ themselves in an awareness of their bias and values and ‘decentre’ by scrutinizing the interactive roles of other agents and their interrelationships (Sidebottom, 2019). This infers a fusion of the values without sharp distinctions between biased and objective research values. Fourthly, the co-existence of formal and informal learning is found in distance and open education, teacher education and tertiary / higher education in the realm of TLCS (c.f. Hernández-Hernández, 2020; Hernández-Hernández et al., 2018; Taylor, 2016, Taylor & Hughes, 2016). The boundaries between lifelong and life-wide education, online and offline / blended learning modes, education and training become blurred under information globalization during the pandemic and post-pandemic era (c.f. Evans et al., 2023). The lived experiences of tertiary curricula are fused with those who devise, teach and investigate the curricula to advance the latter's understanding of the currere against possible cultural crises in education through transcultural studies (c.f. Pinar, 2022). The major reasons for focusing on the four TLCS features are their simplicity criteria and their universal applicability.

New Research Agenda for Further Implications

Transboundary education research often involves the study of educational phenomena that cross national or cultural borders, such as the experiences of migrant or refugee students, the impacts of global educational policies, or the use of digital technologies for distance learning. The post-qualitative methodology can be helpful in transboundary education research because it emphasizes the importance of reflexivity, collaboration and creativity in the research process and seeks to expand the possibilities of qualitative research. One way in which post-qualitative methodology can be used in transboundary education research is through the use of creative and collaborative research methods. For example, researchers might use arts-based methods, such as photography or storytelling, to explore the experiences of transnational students or teachers (e.g., Taylor & Hughes, 2016). These methods can help capture the complexity and diversity of transnational educational phenomena and provide a more nuanced understanding of the social, cultural and political dynamics.

Another way in which post-qualitative methodology can be used in transboundary education research is through the use of critical and decolonial approaches. Researchers might use these approaches to challenge dominant educational narratives and explore how power operates in transnational contexts. This article explores how post-qualitative methodology can be used to challenge dominant educational narratives and explore how power operates in transnational contexts. By drawing on the post-colonial critique of Western social science knowledge and centring the voices and perspectives of marginalized groups, see Kester et al. (2023). By centring the voices and perspectives of marginalized groups and engaging in collaborative research practices, researchers can challenge traditional research hierarchies and promote more equitable and just educational practices.

The post-qualitative methodology can offer a valuable framework for transboundary education research by opening up new possibilities for exploring complex and dynamic phenomena and promoting reflexivity, collaboration and creativity in the research process. Using a post-qualitative approach, researchers can challenge dominant narratives and promote more inclusive and equitable educational practices in transnational contexts. Post-qualitative autoethnography can be a powerful method for transboundary research because it emphasizes the researcher's role in the research process and encourages critical reflection on the intersection of personal experience, cultural context and social structures. This approach can help capture the complexities of transboundary phenomena by exploring the researcher's experiences and perspectives.

The post-qualitative turn in transboundary and transcultural educational research builds on the broader post-qualitative turn in educational research. However, it emphasizes the unique challenges and opportunities presented by research that crosses national, cultural, linguistic and disciplinary boundaries. Transboundary and transcultural educational research acknowledges that global and local forces shape education and that research must consider the diverse contexts and perspectives that shape educational practices and policies.

Noteworthy, post-qualitative autoethnography in transboundary research can be used to explore the experiences of researchers working across borders or cultures or the experiences of individuals who have migrated or otherwise crossed boundaries. This approach can help illuminate the challenges and opportunities that arise when people navigate multiple cultural contexts and can provide insights into how cultural and social structures shape people's experiences. One key feature of post-qualitative autoethnography is its focus on reflexivity and critically examining the researcher's role in the research process. For instance, in the transboundary learning cultures connecting formal and shadow education, new research agendas using post-qualitative autoethnography cover tutors’ and tutees’ reflective identities during their nomadic movements; value conformity or transformation in researchers’ and policymakers’ self-reflections on policy changes over time; the learning path how tutees exercise their agency in their reflexive learning when choosing formal or shadow education; and power dynamics among state and non-state Asian actors in the nation-based network governance.

In transboundary research, this can involve reflecting on how the researcher's cultural background and assumptions might shape their understanding of the research topic. By critically examining their positionality, researchers can work to uncover the underlying power dynamics that shape transboundary phenomena and create a more nuanced understanding of the research context. Another critical feature of post-qualitative autoethnography is its emphasis on creativity and experimentation in research methods. In transboundary research, this might involve using creative methods to explore the experiences of people who have crossed borders, such as photography or art, to capture the complexities of intellectual and geographic migration. Using innovative and non-traditional research methods, researchers can create a more nuanced and engaging understanding of transboundary phenomena. For instance, new research directions include creativity and cognitive changes in adult learners and their digital leadership in knowledge construction using blended modes of distance education and value tensions between state and non-state actors in lifelong and life-wide policies at regional and national levels in Asia-Pacific contexts.

At the core of the post-qualitative turn in transboundary and transcultural educational research is a commitment to decentreing Western perspectives and knowledge production and embracing a more relational and collaborative approach to research. This approach recognizes that knowledge is not fixed or static but produced through ongoing dialogues and dialectical interactions between researchers and participants. Post-qualitative research methods in transboundary and transcultural educational research may involve a range of approaches, including collaborative research methods, participatory action research and arts-based research methods. These methods emphasize the importance of engaging with multiple perspectives and experiences and may involve working closely with local communities, educators and policymakers. For example, in school and teacher education, new research directions will focus on multiple self-reflexive perspectives undertaken by frontline teachers, curriculum developers and senior leaders during school-based curricular or policy reforms and resolutions of ideological or value conflicts among school practitioners, educational researchers and government officials during holistic school reforms.

TLRC research as post-qualitative inquiry is believed to offer an innovative approach to educational research, with potential benefits such as creativity, experimentation, collaboration and intervention in the education sector. Specifically, in the Asia-Pacific region, this approach can help researchers explore new possibilities and directions in understanding educational phenomena in diverse contexts while challenging traditional qualitative research's Western or colonial perspectives. Kim et al. (2022) highlight that this approach can encourage researchers to critically examine their own cultural assumptions, values, beliefs and practices regarding education and investigate alternative ways of teaching and learning that are responsive to the needs, interests, experiences and aspirations of diverse learners and educators.

Overall, the post-qualitative turn in transboundary and transcultural educational research represents a growing recognition of the need for more inclusive, collaborative and context-specific approaches to educational research. Post-qualitative autoethnography can be a powerful method for transboundary research because it allows researchers to explore the complexities of transboundary phenomena creatively, reflexively and critically. By using this approach, researchers can create a more nuanced understanding of the experiences of people who cross borders and can work to promote more inclusive and equitable educational practices in transnational contexts. It challenges researchers to engage with diverse perspectives and knowledge systems and recognize how power, politics and cultural context shape educational practices and policies.

Conclusions and Implications

To sum up, the article delves into the new philosophical trends and challenges in education in the Asia-Pacific rim, which push the limits and customs of educational research. It presents a fresh and critical outlook on the philosophy of education and its impact on educational policies and practices in the region and beyond. It also emphasizes the significance of post-qualitative inquiry as a departure from conventional qualitative research methods. By highlighting the importance of disruption to traditional research traditions, we acknowledge the dynamic nature of educational spaces needing a nuanced understanding of modern philosophies and sociologies. Incorporating these insights into post-qualitative research enables scholars to engage in critical, reflexive and innovative approaches to education. They can challenge existing paradigms, contribute to ongoing discussions, and envision inclusive, ethically grounded and socially just futures. This article emphasizes the value of autoethnography as a research methodology that combines personal experiences with academic analysis, providing deeper insights into cultural and societal issues while acknowledging the subjective nature of research experience. More importantly, post-qualitative autoethnography help extend beyond methodological boundaries of traditional qualitative, quantitative or mixed-methods research paradigms to give more authentic pictures of the complexity of the educational or social phenomena under investigation.

Last but not least, future applications of post-qualitative autoethnography into TLRC include (collaborative) autoethnographers’ critical reflections when shuttling between two or more learning cultures, their values changing over time, impacts of major cultures onto minor ones (vice-versa) and so forth in daytime and shadow education, lifelong and life-wide learning, teacher education, inter-cultural studies and so forth. Methodologically, it is intellectually interesting to know how to develop a sound framework balancing etic and emic perspectives when we conduct an autoethnographic approach in TLRC research.