Blog Post #3 Research Gap

Chang (2009) builds the foundation for autoethnography as a method that honors lived experience, and scholars like Jones (2014) and Jones, Moore, and Walton (2016) extend that work into collective reflection and social justice. Tham et al. (2020) and Stambler et al. (2024) show what collaboration can look like when autoethnography becomes a shared space for learning and transformation. But what none of these scholars really address is what happens when those same identities are placed under surveillance or restriction when DEI language is legislated out of existence and writing about lived experience carries real risk. A research gap in this is how researchers can still conduct ethical, identity-centered work when the systems around them are actively silencing it. Using autoethnography as both method and resistance, I want to show that reflexivity doesn’t stop when laws restrict expression, but it adapts (presenting in Texas about this). Autoethnography becomes a form of resistance where care and complexity are enacted.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Blog Post #1 Introduction to a Topic

Blog Post #2 Research Topic with 7 Tentative Sources

Blog #5 Closing Remarks