PRISM Journal PRISM (2022) https://doi.org/10.24377/prism.ljmu.0402212 https://doi.org/10.24377/prism.ljmu.0402212 1 © 2022 PRISM, ISSN: 2514-5347 Leaving the chasm behind? Autoethnography, creativity and the search for identity in academia Peter Atherton School of Education, Liverpool John Moores University, UK (P.F.Atherton@ljmu.ac.uk) Received: 19/01/2022 Accepted for publication: 14/02/2022 Published: 04/08/2022 Abstract This paper examines visual narratology as a way of presenting qualitative primary data. The paper is an autoethnographic study with the overall goal of helping educators understand their digital literacies in a time of uncertainty and flux. The researcher deployed thematic analysis as the organising methodological framework. This performative autoethnographic method provided creative freedom and the satisfaction of a renewed perspective for the author (Jay and Johnson 2002). This primary qualitative data was given legitimacy and structure by the use of thematic analysis as a methodology. The findings support Bochner’s (1994) idea that social science research can benefit from deliberately value-laden stories alongside empirical data and theories. The findings also developed the author’s previous autoethnographic paper, which drew on his own social media posts as qualitative and quantitative data Atherton (2020b). Keywords: Autoethnography; thematic analysis; visual narratology; EdTech; Initial Teacher Education 1. Introduction, background & structure of the paper Autoethnography sits at a crossroads between the self, the culture and data analysis (Ellis, Adams and Bochner, 2011). The paper uses reflexive thematic analysis as a research methodology to interrogate the primary data (Braun and Clarke, 2019). The piece is essentially reflective practice from a teacher educator, based on qualitative evidence (Pinner, 2018). A qualitative method of social research, authethnography can take on hybrid forms, for example by combining narrative writing with more traditional research methods. The author here is using creative imaging to help him find a voice. He is also aware of the need to produce a piece of credible social research that could be of value to the wider academic context. The paper explored the challenges of locating autoethnographic work within a body of literature that is in a state of flux. The reasons for this are that autoethnography is a relatively novel method of social research and its definitions can be fluid This is further problematized by the blurring of the distinctions between researcher and participant (Eldridge, 2012). Autoethnography is contested and contentious (Allen-Collinson and Hockey, 2008). There are sometimes perceptions of a lack of https://doi.org/10.24377/prism.ljmu.0402212 https://doi.org/10.24377/prism.ljmu.0402212 https://openjournals.ljmu.ac.uk/index.php/prism/ mailto:P.F.Atherton@ljmu.ac.uk https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3258-0436 PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 2 Early View intellectual rigour; bias and subjectivity are occupational hazards (Hayano, 1979; Ellis and Bochner, 2000; Le Roux, 2017). The paper that preceded this one (Author, 2020b) used narrative writing and Twitter analytics as data. This is an autoethnographic paper, however, not an autobiography. I will start, however, with some context, which is autobiographical and in the first person. The extract below explains the autobiographical context behind this study’s visual narratology (Hunter, 2020). The circumstances described below have changed significantly for the better since the time of writing: How I define myself is similarly complex and has sometimes changed from one day to the next. I am currently an author, a lecturer a researcher; a personal tutor, a teacher educator; an EdTech expert; a podcaster, a blogger, a vlogger. I have, until very recently been a social media and education consultant, a web designer, an events-organiser, a community expert, a business owner, a manager, and a quality officer. Author (2020b. pp48). In some ways, my qualitative inquiry was akin to the work of an anthropologist, whose status is a curious outsider (Sampson, 2004). Though autobiographical detail may be of limited value, the combination of stories and autoethnographic research methods is intended to resonate with the experiences of others; the addition of theory adds the necessary objectivity (Anderson, 2006; Chang, 2009, cited in Holman Jones, Adams and Ellis, 2016; Author, 2020b). I had been solely a teacher for many years. I have experienced long periods of fulfilment and relatively short periods of uncertainty, even toxicity. As I made the long transition from teacher to academic, there have been many challenges. One such challenge has been in navigating the often exciting but sometimes choppy waters of being a portfolio careerist. Another has been in terms of fusing an increasingly diverse skill set into a coherent whole. At the heart of these tensions is the issue of digital literacy, or literacies. Since I started writing about educational technology (or EdTech). I have expressed a deep ambivalence: evangelical about EdTech on one hand, agnostic on the other (Clark, 2020; Author, 2018a). At the same time, I have become passionate about the disconnect between students’ digital skills, their access to technology in school and what is required to thrive in employment. I have relished building my digital literacy and helping others develop theirs but have always felt like an English teacher at heart. It is these tensions that have driven my practitioner writing and research. The paper uses multimedia images as primary data (Figures A-E) to illuminate the ideas explored in the literature. The images help create a visual narratology as part of the visual autoethnography (Hunter, 2020). The paper will follow the traditional structure of abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, discussion and analysis and conclusions and further research. The visual narratology develops from that of Hunter (2020); the images, captions and graphics served as qualitative data and develop the mock novel and analysis of Twitter data from Author (2020b). 2. Theoretical objectives of the paper The purpose of exploring this data is to create knowledge grounded in human experience. In doing so, the author may explore the reflexive self, in which an internal dialogue positions them as both subject and object (Frank Falk and Miller, 1998 p153; Sandelowski, 2004, cited in Nowell, Norris, White and Moules, 2017; Gubrium and Holstein, 1998; Ellis and Bochner, 2011). The mock novel in Author (2020b) was an account of real experiences but aspired to be transformative (Morrow, 2005; Mcilveen, 2008). The visual narratology in this paper (Hunter, 2020) was informed by a need to make sense of my diverse skillset as an emerging academic and portfolio careerist. My research interest concerns the educational technology that we use, how it helps people learn and how it works (Author, 2020b). A supplementary objective of the work will be to begin to consider how autoethnography could help others understand the importance of exploring their own creativity in order to create pieces of social research. I will attempt to communicate the duality of my experiences through the visual narratology (Hunter, 2020). The narrative writing explored in PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 3 Early View Author (2020b) expressed this duality by heading the narrative writing as ‘Day X’ and ‘Day Y’. ‘Day X’ expressed the elation, hope and exhilaration associated with working as a portfolio careerist. On ‘Day Y’, the reader will view the flip side of this, when the researcher feels lost, neglected, confused and enmeshed in the academic ‘gig economy’ or ‘gigademia’ (Author, 2020b). This method echoes the duality identified by Denzin and Lincoln (2011), in which the subject position is at times engaged in a politics of resistance on one hand and a politics of possibility on the other (Spry, 2000; Campbell, 2017, Author, 2020b; Denzin and Lincoln, 2011). This method offers resistance to positivist methodological conventions and embraces multiple truths (Pilllow, 2003). The next section will discuss the various categories of autoethnography that underpin the qualitative data. 3. Literature review Background the literature review Education is one of many sectors in which employees can feel a disconnect between sometimes contradictory or selective statistics about teachers, their profession and their lived experience (Richardson, 1997). This is where autoethnography can offer an alternative to empirical data. In doing so, the intention is to provide an illuminating case study of one person’s real experience, to illuminate social phenomena and contribute in a small way to the wider body of social research. Autoethnographic papers have a tendency to employ innovative methods of data collection and can encourage more creative freedom than traditional empirical research methods (Gubrium and Holstein, 1997; Denzin, 2017; Spry, 2009; Denscombe, 2007). This review is intended to be a selection of ideas that have informed the research questions, as opposed to a comprehensive overview of the multifarious forms of autoethnography. The intention is that the review will achieve a deeper synthesis and will also help narrow the focus. I will synthesise the literature and qualitative data in the Analysis section. The literature has uncovered the followed research questions: • What are the issues with categorising types of taxonomies of autoethnography? • How does autoethnography draw on postmodernist challenges to traditions in academic research and claims of ontological and epistemological truths (Ellis and Bochner, 2011; Spry, 2001)? • How effective is autoethnography is helping authors search for social justice through telling stories (Adams & Holman Jones, 2008; Ellis and Bochner, 2011)? In terms of attempts to address these research questions, I will begin by reviewing literature that tackles the issues of definition and taxonomy. Problems of definition Some authors have proposed that the hybrid nature of autoethnography can make it a little hard to define. This hybridity can encourage academics to dismiss it as indulgent (Roth, 2008) or lazy and egotistical (Delamont, 2007; Coffey, 2009, both cited in Doloriert and Sambrook, 2012; Campbell, 2017). Moreover, some autoethnographers have chronicled their own vilification, sometimes even profane abuse (Campbell, 2017; Spry, 2000). Doloriert and Sambrook (2011) distil autoethnographies into three epistemological positions: firstly, emotional, evocative autoethnography; secondly, analytical, realist autoethnography and thirdly, a postmodern, radical, polemical autoethnography (2011). How useful are these taxonomies? Taxonomies of autoethnography: analytic autoethnography Some of the most influential authors about autoethnography have emphasised its frequent use of mixed methods. These methods, usually with a narrow dataset, provide access to otherwise inaccessible data. Examples of such data are the feelings and experiences of the researcher as part of the field (Bochner, 2013). For Anderson (2006, 2010), analytic autoethnography makes the researcher visible at the centre of the research setting and their narratives offer ‘the gift of living testimony’ (Ellis and PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 4 Early View Bochner, 2006 pp 430). The researcher is also committed to their contribution to the broader social debates (Anderson, 2006, 2010; Wall, 2008) but in a way that opens up debates, rather than closing them down (Ellis and Bochner, 2006). Ellis and Bochner (2006) posit the view that analytical autoethnography is excessively predicated on the desire to reach a conclusion. What constitutes a text can be the self (Wall, 2008; Ellis, Adams and Bochner, 2011); sometimes, the body is itself a text, for example within the context of dance or other performance art. (Spry, 2000, 2009). When the autoethnographer uses their art or their body as a text, this can then become a piece of performative autoethnography. That said, these categories are fluid: not all autoethnographies linked to the body are performative. An example of this is Enriquez-Gibson’s (2018) study of the mobile body as subject matter. Here, the body is a feature of the researcher’s ‘embodied subjectivity’ (Enriquez- Gibson, 2018. p. 303). Evocative autoethnography The literature has explored thematic distinctions between analytic and evocative autoethnographies. Ellis and Bochner (2006) posit the view that, while analytical autoethnography is excessively predicated on the desire to reach a conclusion, evocative autoethnographers favour the journey (Ellis and Bochner, 2006). While language itself invites categorisation, evocative autoethnography, therefore, is more of an exploratory, iterative goal than a category of creative expression (Clark, 2020). Education is one of many sectors in which employees can feel a disconnect between sometimes contradictory or selective statistics and their lived experience (Richardson, 1997; Josselson and Liebech, 1995). This is where autoethnography can provide an illuminating case study of one person’s reality. Furthermore, language can even help create or shape our lived experiences in a way that transcends the illusion of objectivity generated by empirical research methods (Rorty, 1982). Language, then, could help make sense of an ever-evolving self (Heehs, 2013). Indeed, autoethnography can sometimes be deployed as a forum for expressing the emotions associated with the refracted, disparate, marginalised, plural self (Spry, 2000; Campbell, 2017). In analysing emotions, however, the process is in danger of becoming indulgent. That said, there can be something edifying about deploying theory to help understand difficult situations (hooks, 1994; Anderson, 2006; Chang, 2008; Pillow, 2003). The connections between emotions and rigorous reflexivity will be developed in the Methodology and analysed in the Discussion. Performative autoethnography The literature here reflects the ways in which aspects of performance - theatrical, musical, poetic, balletic and so on - can be deployed as ways of generating theoretical papers that explore issues of democracy, social justice and morality (Sughrua, 2017). The literature on performative autoethnography is, perhaps, problematised by the increasing diversity and lassitude adopted by autoethnographers in telling their stories (Wall, 2008; Denzin and Lincoln, 2011). Some of the literature on performative autoethnography focuses on art and expression as the researcher taking control of their own representation. Indeed, Denzin and Lincoln (2011) propose that nothing exists beyond representation. This element of autoethnography is seen by some as more likely to be analysed in an exploratory, not confirmatory manner (Denzin, 2012), which distinguishes it from analytic autoethnography’s concern with the destination, rather than the journey (Ellis and Bochner, 2006). The performative autoethnographer frequently searches for an extended metaphor to frame the themes of the piece. The use of a metaphor, though, should be treated with caution, as they can sometimes break down and start to cloud the overall purpose and coherence of the autoethnography (Clandinin and Connelly, 2000). This form of autoethnography enables the researcher to engage a form of cartography - a mapping of the self, emotions and experiences. For this author, there is a central tension between the physical self - presenting at conferences, lecturing, supporting students and the online self - performative, mediated by the means of communication and potentially refracted by users PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 5 Early View and interactants (Gatson, 2011, in Denzin and Lincoln, 2011). The autoethnographer is mindful of the need to create qualitative research that has aesthetic merit and findings that could contribute to debates on social justice (Tracey, 2016; Adams & Holman Jones, 2008; Ellis and Bochner, 2011; Sughrua, 2017). At the same time, the form combines the macro of social justice with the micro of individual narratives that explore the self as a form of qualitative inquiry (Spry, 2000; Campbell, 2017; Wall, 2006). In that sense, then, every search for social justice in qualitative inquiry may be viewed as a critique of authors’ micro performances and injustices (Holman Jones, Adams and Ellis, 2016). Realist autoethnography Much of the literature on the categories of autoethnography is dominated by the more prominent thinkers in the field. Ellis and Bochner (2006), for example, would argue that realist autoethnography can have value by successfully positioning the reader but it frequently treats story as data to be analysed (2006 pp 44). Anderson’s (2006) five key features of autoethnography in the realist tradition are: Complete member researcher status, analytic reflexivity, narrative visibility of the researcher’s self, dialogue with informants beyond the self and a commitment to theoretical analysis, In terms of the first of Anderson’s features - complete member researcher status - it could be argued that producing an autoethnographic piece attempts to challenge pervasive positivist notions (Ellis et al, 2011) and claims of universal truths (Struthers, 2014). Furthermore, autoethnography recognises the role of personal experience of a situation; the researcher as social actor therefore strives to illuminate the broader context (Anderson, 2006). The researcher’s interpretation is a valuable knowledge source and this reflexive method allows for an element of creative freedom and innovation (Ellis et al, 2011). Moreover,, analytic flexibility calls for the researcher to develop analytical insights through recounting their own reflections on their experiences (Anderson, 2006, 2010). Though the opinions of others are welcome, the third category - dialogue with informants beyond the self - demands data to be generated through dialogue with others. Though my autoethnography moves away from the evocative and instead embraces the exploration of theoretical notions, I will resist the temptation to interview others, as this may help the paper have more focus. This paper, therefore, will aim to eschew one of Anderson’s categories - that of dialogue with informants beyond the self (2006, 2010). A focus on one person’s fractured experiences may lead to a more coherent theoretical analysis (Anderson, 2006, 2010). Indeed, this idea has occupied a body of literature post-2010, as the promiscuous form of autoethnography research started to embrace the contribution of emerging digital literacies. Digital autoethnography and connectivism Earlier literature in this field explored online autoethnographies as exploring versions of the self that may have a basis in reality but are augmented, hyperbolical (Ellis and Bochner, 2010; Author, 2020b). Digital autoethnography has become more commonplace since the 2010s with the ubiquity of digital recording devices. Recent studies have used digital methods such as self-interviews and self-shot video as data to deconstruct a constructed self (Neil, 2017). Some emerging literature interrogates the notion of digital autoethnography, in which educators use the form to ‘help them understand their place in the digital ecosystem’ (Author, 2020b, p51). Here, there is a link to the notion of connectivism, in which knowledge is a connected, negotiated process (Siemens, 2005; Downes, 2020; Shukie, 2019; Author, 2018a; b). Indeed, digital autoethnographies can update the theory of connectivism by celebrating the portability and connectivity of recording devices to help create knowledge that is both created and curated (Atay, 2020; Dunn and Myers, 2020; Hunter, 2020; Clark, 2020). Downes (2020) warned of the potential anarchy of such an ecosystem as whose body of knowledge is fluid. Knowing how to harness this knowledge is more important than static facts (Siemens, 2005; Downes, 2020; Shukie, 2019). Conclusions from literature review Autoethnography develops from postmodern philosophy (Author, 2020b). As a result, autoethnography challenges positivist claims of truth and objectivity in social science research, sometimes PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 6 Early View in a rebellious, iconoclastic way (Wall, 2008; Ellis and Bochner, 2006). One of the of opportunities of this challenge to positivism is to produce qualitative research with academic rigour. To achieve this, Le Roux (2016) recommends that the autoethnographer is self-consciously subjective, achieves self-reflexivity through critiquing their own subject position and invites the reader to engage in the narrative (Le Roux, 2016). In terms of selection and exclusion criteria, this literature review de-selected the wider theoretical debates about educational technology and digital literacy (Author, 2020b). The broader context of educational technology is already reviewed in Author (2018a;b;2019a;b). There is a growing body of emerging literature originating from autoethnographies whose raison d’etre is to challenge the hegemonic status of specific groups of people, for example white, male, middle/upper class, heterosexual, able-bodied, Christian academic writing and so on (Ellis and Bochner, 2001). The reason for the exclusion of these autoethnographies from this review was the risk of losing focus and attempting to harness a potentially unwieldy field of knowledge. Further research could be a systematic review of autoethnographic writing about issues of identity, which are inseparable from the desire for social justice. An exploration of selected aspects of autoethnography has helped narrow the focus of my research questions. The challenge will be to re-figure or re-specify the traditional definitions of and approaches to the topic (Hart, 2018, pp15-16) This challenge should be illuminated by a rigorous methodology and a meaningful qualitative database, which will be explored in the Conclusion section. The next section will address the selected research methodology. 4. Methodology This section summarises the methodology employed for creating, collating and analysing the visual narratology (Hunter, 2020). The methodology section will outline the process of ethical approval, piloting, data collection, coding and how reflexive thematic analysis will help focus the data collection and generate a more original, rigorous and credible analysis (Charmaz, 2006; Braun and Clarke, 2006; 2019; Nowell, Norris and White, 2017). The process of ethical approval was liberating insofar as there were no named persons in the visual narratology. In that sense, the ethical approval process was uncomplicated (BERA, 2011); in place of situational ethics, the paper’s ethical code is drawn from relational ethics, through which the qualitative researcher stays true to themselves and their values (Ellis, 2007). In terms of how the methodology is informed by the literature, this paper embraces the notion that data collection methods, coding and analysis are given a form of lassitude that could be perceived as chaotic, amorphous or unnecessarily emotive (Adams, Jones and Ellis, 2015). Such an unconventional methodology could suit the paper’s exploration of complex themes, such as identity (Clark, 2020; Wall, 2008). At the same time, it should be stressed that the study follows the conventions of autoethnographers’ tendency to eschew a positivist epistemology in favour of social constructionism (Doloriert and Sambrook, 2011; Ellingson and Ellis, 2008). The methodology is aiming less at epistemological truths and more towards ontological meanings (Turner, 2001). The methodological purpose, then, will be the creation of a generalisability through vicarious identification with the paper’s themes (Allen-Collinson and Hockey, 2008). Put more simply, the contribution of this paper may be to enable people to put their own experiences into context and engage in a tacit dialogue, thus forming a co-constructed meaning. Indeed, Hunter (2020) argues that visual narratology may begin through the lens of the creator but it lends itself to open, polysemic, negotiated meaning. Pilot study & sampling The initial pilot was a transcription of an interview about working conditions in education that I recorded for a friend’s dissertation. The transcript cannot be included here, in light of ethical considerations. I did consider relational ethics (Ellis, 2009) as a way of navigating my way around ethical concerns but the PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 7 Early View data was too personal and potentially identified too many people. The visual images were created on a desktop publishing app called Canva and were used to create a new rudimentary theory, arising from the qualitative data ( Culshaw, 2019). The work followed the convention of conducting a pilot study to help refine the follow up data (Biggam, 2015; Punch, 2014; Boynton, 2005). A pilot study is designed to test the feasibility of the research. To do this, it is recommended that the researcher uses authentic situations and real participants (Denscombe, 2007). The initial theories could then start to interrogate the broader social context through qualitative data (Cohen, Manion and Morrison, 2002). Sampling is an essential component in the development of empirical research. This project used purposive sampling (Denscombe, 2007). The reason for this is that the researcher as subject was, at the time, a casualised member of staff in Higher Education and therefore a member of a typical group (Denscombe 2007). This typicality invites further consideration (Denscombe, 2007; Rubin and Babbie, 2012). A potential weakness of this approach, however, is that the work could descend into indulgent navel-gazing and provide a selective autobiography, not an autoethnography. This is one of the reasons for applying reflexive thematic analysis - to help discriminate between redundant and relevant data, restrict the lines of inquiry, then make generalisations (Punch, 2014; Denscombe, 2007; Ellis and Bochner, 2010; Braun and Clarke, 2019). Data collection: from crystallising the narrative writing The pieces of narrative writing discussed in Author (2020b) were essentially a research diary and field notes. I had omitted anything potentially harmful to myself or others. This helped produce some empirical evidence (Punch, 2014; Duncan, 2004; Wall, 2008), which could be crystallised via the visual narratology (Hunter, 2020; Eldridge, 2012). The autoethnographic process, however, would remain iterative and meandering (Clark, 2020). Once familiar with the narrative writing, I could then transition from amorphous narrative writing (Gubrium and Holstein, 1997) into a meaningful arena for inquiry (Clandinin and Connelly, 2000). This was essentially an act of familiarising myself with potentially unwieldy qualitative data (Denscombe, 2007), so I could focus on dominant themes for the process of visual narratology (Hunter, 2020). Reflexive thematic analysis and the absence of a specific theoretical framework As the literature explored was disparate, a deeper, more focused but flexible research design was needed - one which was not wedded to a specific theoretical framework (Braun and Clarke, 2019). This way, the researcher can, for example, arrive at theories from inductive analysis of the data (Charmaz, 2006, 2014). In terms of a justification of deploying reflexive thematic analysis as a methodology instead of grounded theory, one response is that grounded theory was applied to a recent autoethnographic study of mine (Author, 2020b). In addition to this, though, the flexibility of reflexive thematic analysis empowers the researcher to make active choices in how they treat the data (Braun and Clarke, 2019). This study chooses reflexive thematic analysis because of its organic nature allows more creative freedom and the potential for theories to be at the end of an iterative journey (Braun and Clarke, 2006; 2019; Clark, 2020). That said, this methodology is inductive, data-driven and still explores the epistemological and ontological assumptions arising from the data (Braun and Clarke, 2019; Rubin and Babbie, 2012;Punch, 2014). One of the assumptions that this paper is aware of is that reflexive thematic analysis is not theoretically neutral, as they reflect the values of a qualitative paradigm (Braun and Clarke, 2019). The first section of the following chapter on findings will consider coding. As the data is subjective and creative, I will fuse the description of finding with the analysis. Coding & thematic analysis Autoethnography is prone to eschewing positivist notions of allowing ‘clear and fixed meaning’ to emerge from the qualitative data (Braun, Clarke and Weate, 2016 p3). To achieve this perceived empiricism, the researcher would apply rigorous PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 8 Early View coding frameworks. Instead, I will be adopting Braun, Clarke and Weate’s (2016) more active approach. Here, the researcher engages with the data firstly by identifying surface meanings. Braun, Clarke and Weate (2016) call the surface meanings semantic codes and the implicit meanings latent codes. This coding will be carried out in a deductive way, in which the meaning is underpinned by conceptual framework about autoethnography as a qualitative research methodology (2016). In order to assess the extent to which reflexive thematic analysis was a success, it would be prudent to reiterate Clarke and Braun’s (2019) notion that theories never emerge from the data; instead, they are generated, formulated. Moreover, the researcher is an active agent in the production of themes, and this can sometimes be coloured by researcher bias (Clarke and Braun, 2019). Furthermore, Tracey (2016) emphasises the importance of the autoethnographer writing evocatively and eloquently, in order that the research has aesthetic value (Tracy, 2016). Indeed, Bochner and Ellis (2002) proposed that autoethnographic writing should blur the boundaries between literature and social science. To be faithful to this notion, I will employ the first person during this section, as I will be exploring themes that I have generated through analysis and reflection. The themes are explored through the discussion of the following: • Visual metaphors • Verbal metaphors • Semiotic analysis The author embraced coding as an iterative and organic process (Clark, 2020). Coding should provide a vivid evocation of the data (Braun and Clarke, 2019; Rolfe, et al, 2011). This paper followed the established paradigms of coding in qualitative research. The structure of this would-be a thorough familiarisation of the data, coding, then development of themes (Braun and Clarke, 2019). The following section will provide both a presentation of findings and an analysis and discussion. I have made this decision to minimise the risk of creating an indulgent and egotistical piece of autoethnographic writing (Spry, 2000; Doloriert and Sambrook, 2012; Campbell, 2017). Findings and Discussion For all texts, I used a template on Canva to create a deliberately polysemic text. I have prefaced each text with a series of questions for the reader, to help them identify with their own subject position in relation to each text. I initially intended to make my analysis self- reflexive. As the texts are polysemic, I also wished the process of making meaning to feel collaborative. One of the reasons for this is that it became clear that my own subject position was changing frequently. The intention of this is to invest the piece with resonance and therefore academic rigour (Le Roux, 2016). I refined my data in a methodical fashion to help me demonstrate a central organising concept and to avoid relaying a broad, domain summary (Braun and Clarke, 2019). To do this, I initially identified semantic or surface codes, then latent or underlying codes (Rolfe, et al, 2011; Braun and Clarke, 2019). The most effective way of identifying surface codes would be through visual narratology (Hunter, 2020), which will be the first part of the presentation of findings relating to each text. I will analyse these findings in relation to the literature on autoethnography. Text A Questions for the reader: How much choice do you have? Would you like more choice? How much more? What would be too much choice? PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 9 Early View Text A: surface codes Text A provides evidence of my developing skillset as a teacher educator and my ambivalent feelings towards being a portfolio careerist. Though I am not a technology evangelist (Clark, 2020), I relish the practice of developing new technical skills, creating easy but effective content and sharing my new found knowledge. Texts such as these were disseminated at conferences only and differ from social media posts, which provide a performative public face (Hunter, 2020; Author, 2020b; Clark, 2020). Latent codes In this case, I feel that I was using the interplay of image and text to communicate a sense of helplessness, mixed with an exhilaration at the thought of having opportunity and control. The graphic of the hot air balloon unites these two themes. The text exists as an interplay between words and text. It establishes an unconscious pattern, in which I formed a rhetorical, bipartite structure to help express an emotion. It could be argued that this text is an example of how autoethnography can be egotistical and self-obsessed (Doloriert and Sambrook, 2012; Campbell, 2017). At the same time, Text A points to my ambivalence towards technology; less a technology evangelist, more a technology agnostic or double agent (Author, 2020b). Viewed through the subjective lens of hindsight, the balloon could be a symbolic manifestation of my identity as an academic taking flight. The interplay of words, images and graphics helps construct an identity (Hunter 2020; Culshaw, 2019; Author 2020b). These building blocks of identity consist of disparate elements and are essentially polysemic (Author, 2020b; Baker & Nelson, 2005, in Di Domenico et al, 2010; McIlveen, 2008; Hebdige, 1979; Hunter (2020). Text B Questions for the reader: How much do you feel you count? Are you increasingly a piece of data, at the expense of the self? Text B: surface codes Text B is more in line with ‘Day X’ in the initial mock novel - which expresses the more negative feelings about my work as a portfolio careerist (Author, 2020b). I am reduced to a number, a piece of data, as I struggle with the alienation of being on the outside looking in. I have invested the juxtaposition of graphics and text with more complex meanings since I created the text. The more I peered into academia from the side- lines, desperate to be allowed in, the more I started to make mental links between the increasing significance of data and the dehumanisation of people. The more data I saw, the more frustrated I felt and therefore less human. Latent codes The deliberately polysemic nature of the graphic in Text B suggests that meaning will be an iterative journey (Braun and Clarke, 2006; 2019; Clark, 2020; Ellis and Bochner, 2006). Moreover, the subjective interpretation of the surface codes is fluid but so are education and academia (Hunter, 2020). The intentionally rhetorical nature of the words and graphic suggests a piece of qualitative data for an evocative autoethnography. The danger here, of PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 10 Early View course, is that the researcher becomes indulgent (Doloriert and Holbrook, 2012; Spry, 2000; hooks, 1994). Despite the risk of indulgence, Text B constitutes a visual representation of an evolving self (Heehs, 2013). The self here is singular but if more people are empowered with creative freedom, one person's autoethnography could gather momentum if multiplied. These multiple accounts could potentially be more powerful than the arguably illusory nature of some empirical data (Rorty, 1982). It could also be argued that the application of theory to texts such as these could help elucidate otherwise hidden truths (Anderson, 2006). Text C Questions for the reader: Do you know who you are? What aspects of your identity are you comfortable and uncomfortable with? Text C: surface codes Text C denotes a montage of stills from a video of me that I posted on social media. The stills have been cropped to appear in close up and to remove the author’s face. The accompanying graphics - created on Canva - list answers to the repeated question, ‘Who am I?’ The answers denote the work that I was doing, whether paid or unpaid, fixed or permanent, self-employed or university-employed. The post gained significant traction and engagement (Author, 2020b). The montage expresses the mixed emotions behind the fact that, at the time, I didn’t know what role I was due to perform from one day to the next (Clark, 2020; Author, 2020b). In terms of the text’s emotional resonance, these graphics and stills from a self-shot video are a cry for help about my feelings of alienation and dislocation. They are also a celebration of the exhilaration of my diverse skills and varied experiences in work. I had never felt so excited and energised by my work. I had never felt so lost in my work; It was the best of times; it was the worst of times. Latent codes Such expressions of dislocated emotions and fractured identities are common features of autoethnography. In common with Texts A and B, Text C is a piece of primary qualitative data that was authentic, and performative (Gatson, 2011, in Denzin and Lincoln, 2011). I was chronicling but also attempting to make meaning from my evolving sense of self (Heehs, 2013). This sense of self was redolent of marginalisation but infused with plurality, creative energy and opportunity (Spry, 2000; Campbell, 2017). The crucial difference between Text C and the others is that I elected to reveal my own face redacted ), which is juxtaposed to a date and a role. This act of naming has been an essential ontological development (Hunter, 2020; Eldridge, 2012). Once a name had been given to each role, I could then reflect more deeply on how authentic each role felt to my evolving self (Heehs, 2013). Though the taxonomies of autoethnography are fluid, this text perhaps sits in the realist tradition, in which the researcher as participant literally has narrative visibility (Anderson, 2006). Furthermore, the prominence of one person’s story offers a challenge to positivist claims of empirical truth (Ellis et al, 2011; Struthers, 2014; Anderson, 2006). Text D Text D Questions for the reader: What various roles do you have? Do these roles form a coherent whole? What might make these roles feel more coherent? Surface codes The use of the adjective ‘schizoid’ in Text D is absolutely not a literal reference to schizophrenia. The use of the word ‘schizoid’ is a rhetorical device and therefore problematic. Th graphics to the right direct the meaning more closely. The emotion behind the text was that it was a daily challenge to unite my diverse roles into something that created a coherent PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 11 Early View identity. While my current role is coherent and rewarding in its diversity, this text depicts the pain of part of the journey. A full-time, permanent contract has since provided a cure to this malaise. Latent codes On reflection, I would argue that elements of this text echo the conventions of the evocative autoethnography. Here, the researcher as participant favours the journey over the destination (Ellis and Bochner, 2006). The renewed perspective here (Jay and Johnson, 2002) arises from the confirmation of the causes of these feelings of dislocation and fragmentation. Text D conforms to the codes of the potentially indulgent form of realist autoethnography. One of the potential issues arising from this is the problematical meaning of the adjective, ‘schizoid’, once it has been read by others and its meaning recontextualised. Its themes of marginalisation and plurality (Spry, 2000; Campbell, 2017; hooks, 1994) have more in common with Text E (below). Text E Questions for the reader: What are your feelings towards this image? What would you like to confess about your feelings that you never have a chance to? How might you find a space to communicate how you feel? Surface codes Text E was created to crystallise the overarching themes of the mock novel - Confessions of Portfolio Careerist (Author, 2020b). The Canva template was for a mainstream, salacious novel. The imagery matched the emotion I wished to convey. The reason why this was that calling myself a portfolio careerist did not feel right and its multiple realities bought a sense of shame on one hand and pride on the other. The imagery is intended to mirror this confessional tone. The shame was from the fractured identity and the pride was from the independence, good rates of pay and diverse skillset. I wanted to actually create a complete and real novel of the same name, as a reassuring and empowering ‘how to’ guide for new and potential portfolio careerists. The playfulness of the imagery reflected how my situation may have been precarious and fractured at worst, it was also invigorating and exciting. Latent codes The cover for a mock novel in Text D is performative and exploratory, rather than confirmatory (Denzin, 2012). This and the remaining texts had been displayed as part of a presentation, which I had delivered at conferences. I was interested PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 12 Early View in the ways in which the potential meanings of this texts would be debated and refracted by those who viewed them (Gatson 2011, in Denzin and Lincoln, 2011; Hunter, 2020; Eldridge, 2012). I was also intrigued by the potential ways in which the simple act of constructing a piece of visual narratology could enable me to interrogate my own subject position (Pillow, 2003). In this sense, Text D draws on the connectivist notions that knowledge is co-constructed, collaborative and negotiated Siemens, 2005; Downes, 2020; Shukie, 2019; Author, 2018a; b). In a connectivist culture, Text D raises several questions all of which exist in a state of fluidity: what is a portfolio careerist? Is this a good thing? What does the image mean? What ideological messages do novels with covers like this one contains? What does the image mean and how relevant is my own subject position; to what extent is the image phallocentric, ethnocentric, fetishistic, flippant, offensive? How can texts such as these be subverted, recontextualised and negotiated by readers? The active choice that I have made in including provides the self-reflexivity that Le Roux (2016) believes can invest autoethnography with academic rigour. The inclusion of this problematic text and the accompanying questions are essentially a provocation for the general reader. Moreover, the text helps continue the internal dialogue that is essential for true reflexivity (Frank Falk and Miller, 1998). 5. Legitimate social inquiry? From examining and coding the data, I was able to identify several themes that captured shared meanings, all of which are situated, located and contextualised (Braun and Clarke, 2019). This means of categorising themes lends itself to the analysis of visual narratology (Hunter, 2020). Before I list these, it is important to state that these themes are not merely codes (Braun and Clarke, 2019). Additionally, it has been difficult to minimise the risk of participant bias or to view the meaning as buried in the data (Punch, 2014; Denscombe, 2007; Braun and Clarke, 2019). What also became apparent is that the creative artefacts that I created lent themselves to a style of analysis that was similar to that of the collage. Here, the artefact is viewed as part of a visually- dominated culture. This culture embraces non-linear and polysemic texts that are open to multiple interpretations and can be refracted through hindsight bias (Culshaw, 2019; Author, 2020b; Anderson 2006). In this sense, the qualitative data could be seen to resemble an evocative autoethnography, which aims for resonance through potentially indulgent emotional identification (Ellis, 2004; Anderson, 2006). This deliberate subjectivity can be viewed as lacking academic rigour. Furthermore, one of the ongoing challenges of autoethnography could be seen as a potential denigration of the arena of qualitative inquiry (Anderson 2006; Author, 2020b I echo Le Roux’s (2016) argument that the fluid, interactive and polysemic nature of this study’s qualitative data is part of a body of work that can widen the lens of the social world by eschewing rigid definitions of academic research. Moreover, the self- conscious subjectivity has made the author and context visible (Le Roux, 2016). This verisimilitude is potentially resonant with the reader, though I have no control over how readers will interpret or relate to my qualitative data. In the context of rising stress levels, turbulence and uncertainty, the therapeutic potential of autoethnographies presents a case for their resonance and generalisability (Rolfe, 2011; Ellis, Adams and Bochner, 2011; Le Roux, 2016). 6. Conclusions Triangulating research methods This term is derived from the empirical process of viewing data from various angles, in order to validate it. I am now able to establish that I have compared a variety of forms of qualitative data: narrative writing and Twitter analytics from a related paper, visual narratology, using imagery and text. I am now confident that these multiple perspectives have helped validate the data from this and the previous study (Denzin, 1978). A renewed perspective? In reviewing the literature and critiquing the methodology and data, this paper poses important questions for future research. One of these future questions is likely to be how the storytelling inherent PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 13 Early View in podcasting helped chronicle the challenges of education and EdTech during the Covid-19 crisis. I am the author of my own story and have invited the reader into the realism of the researcher as social actor (Anderson, 2006). The study has resisted analytic autoethnography’s desire for narrative resolution and has favoured the iterative journey (Ellis and Bochner, 2006). Yet, in some ways, my own narrative writing bears a strong similarity to some of the elements of more conventional research. The narrative writing is primary data, which is raw, honest, truthful and open to a variety of interpretations. The related images served as a prelinguistic rhetorical device that fits the conventions of evocative autoethnography (Spry, 2000; Campbell, 2017, Anderson, 2006). The images are left to resonate with the reader and open up debates (Ellis, 2004). This is a departure from more structured readings of visual imagery; my images are intended to be encoded with semiotic, symbolic, analytical and interpretive meanings that are the product of creative freedom (Gubrium and Holstein, 1997; Denzin, 2017; Spry, 2009; Denscombe, 2007; Culshaw, 2019).) The accompanying literature review in this paper is, of course the work of others, standing on the shoulder of giants, as it were. Conventional research, then, is necessarily collaborative, promiscuous, kleptomaniac. Through my autoethnographic story, I hope to be part of a large and growing movement whose work is tangential to the tyranny of hard data (Punch, 2014; Author, 2018, 2019b). The use of narrative writing and non-linear visual metaphors are part of this process (Culshaw, 2019). In embracing and amplifying the individual voices of those telling their stories with creative freedom, we could enrich our collective body of academic knowledge (Fuchs, 2017). This process can be enhanced and facilitated by adopting digital autoethnography’s celebration of the portability and connectivity of digital technology (Atay, 2020; Dunn and Myers, 2020; Hunter, 2020; Clark, 2020). There is an argument for using a hybrid methodology, particularly combining reflexive thematic analysis and discourse analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2019). Conversely, this could risk communicating an unfocused set of generalisations and conclusions. It is necessary to explore the extent to which this paper has helped develop a theoretical framework. I initially proposed that my qualitative inquiry was akin to the work of an anthropologist, whose status is a curious outsider (Sampson, 2004). Ideas such as these, however, are not theoretically or ideologically neutral. Secondly, any theory that has been arrived at is not through a simple reification of concepts (Braun and Clarke, 2019). Through reflexivity, I have critiqued the data and demonstrated an awareness of the risk of researcher bias. Performative elements In the act of mapping of the self, in a form of online cartography, I have clarified my place in a potentially infinite space. My physical self - in my case presenting at conferences, lecturing, supporting students - and the online self - are more in harmony through embracing the performative elements. mediated by the means of communication and potentially refracted by users and interactants (Gatson, 2011, in Denzin and Lincoln, 2011). Addressing the research questions In qualitative research, the research question is often prone to change during the process (Braun and Clarke, 2019). The process of data collection, coding, analysis and conclusion has further narrowed the focus of and reconfigured the research questions. The qualitative dataset and analysis lead me to the conclusion that the research question that is best suited to my findings is this: • How effective is autoethnography is helping authors search for social justice through telling stories (Adams & Holman Jones, 2008; Ellis and Bochner, 2011)? The above is what I feel to be one of the most generalisable elements of this study and that is the way in which visual narratology and reflexivity can help the researcher reconstruct the self (Ellis and Bochner, 2011). This reconstruction through reflexivity has helped me understand, harness and contextualise my diverse skillset (Author, 2020b; Frank Falk and Miller, 1998). PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 14 Early View Bridging the chasm? Connectivism. One person’s story can make a valid contribution to knowledge but that knowledge is collaborative and fluid. This paper develops the notion of connectivism discussed in some of my recent papers Author (2018a; b;2019a). The findings in this paper echo Shukie’s (2019) view that connectivism shows that the power- base of knowledge is an increasingly decentralised and individualistic learning culture (Shukie, 2019). Downes (2020), however, warns of the potential anarchy of a mode of education in which access to the fluid nature of knowledge is more important than static facts (Siemens 2005). Siemens, 2005; Downes, 2020; Shukie, 2019). To develop this paper, I will draw on autoethnography to examine my subject position by using podcasting to try to chronicle the development of educational technology since Covid-19. In that sense the next stage of the research will propose that one way to bridge the chasm – between education and technology, between teacher education and EdTech – is to curate individual stories as resonant qualitative data. The next stage of this study therefore be a collaborative autoethnography, using podcasting as data. The first stage will be crowdsourcing audio stories on Vocaroo – an audio recording app. The interviews that follow will be structured through the use of phenomenological interviewing. PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 15 Early View 7. Disclosure statement The author(s) declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 8. Open Access Policy This journal provides immediate open access to its content with no submission or publications fees. This journal article is published under the following Creative Commons Licence: This licence allows others to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to this article (and other works in this journal), and/or to use them for any other lawful purpose in accordance with the licence. PRISM is also indexed in the world largest open- access database: DOAJ (the Directory of Open Access Journals). DOAJ is a community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals. https://doaj.org/toc/2514-5347?source=%7B%22query%22%3A%7B%22filtered%22%3A%7B%22filter%22%3A%7B%22bool%22%3A%7B%22must%22%3A%5B%7B%22terms%22%3A%7B%22index.issn.exact%22%3A%5B%222514-5347%22%5D%7D%7D%2C%7B%22term%22%3A%7B%22_type%22%3A%22article%22%7D%7D%5D%7D%7D%2C%22query%22%3A%7B%22match_all%22%3A%7B%7D%7D%7D%7D%2C%22size%22%3A100%2C%22_source%22%3A%7B%7D%7D https://doaj.org/toc/2514-5347?source=%7B%22query%22%3A%7B%22filtered%22%3A%7B%22filter%22%3A%7B%22bool%22%3A%7B%22must%22%3A%5B%7B%22terms%22%3A%7B%22index.issn.exact%22%3A%5B%222514-5347%22%5D%7D%7D%2C%7B%22term%22%3A%7B%22_type%22%3A%22article%22%7D%7D%5D%7D%7D%2C%22query%22%3A%7B%22match_all%22%3A%7B%7D%7D%7D%7D%2C%22size%22%3A100%2C%22_source%22%3A%7B%7D%7D https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ https://doaj.org/ PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 16 Early View 9. References Adams, T. E., Jones, S., H. & Ellis, C. (2015) Autoethnography. Oxford University Press, New York, NY Allen-Collinson, J. & Hockey, J. (2008) Autoethnography as ‘valid’ methodology? A Study of disrupted identity narratives, The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 3 (6): 209-217 Anderson, L. (2006). Analytic Autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, [online] 35(4), pp.373- 395. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/089124 1605280449 [Accessed 31 October. 2019]. Atay, A. (2020) What is Cyber or Digital Autoethnography? International Review of Qualitative Research, Available at: https://10.1177/1940844720934373 (Accessed:16 February 2021) Atherton, P. (2018). 50 ways to use technology enhanced learning in the classroom. 1st ed. London: Sage Publications Ltd. Atherton, P. (2019a). Autoethnography: How I became a tech double agent. In The Annual Conference for Research in Education – ACRE Beyond the Neoliberal University: Re-Thinking Higher Education 16th-17th July 2019, UK. (Unpublished) Atherton, P.(2019b). ‘Bridging the chasm –a study of the realities of Edtech use among trainee teachers, TEAN journal, 11(4), pp. 80-95. [ONLINE] Available at: http://ojs.cumbria.ac.uk/index.php/TEAN/article/view/ 575 [Accessed 21 January 2020]. Atherton, P., (2020a). How I became an edtech double agent. Eassessment Conference. Eassessment Association. UK. (Unpublished) Atherton, P. (2020b) ‘My social autoethnography: how one teacher educator used digital communication to help tell his own stories’, TEAN journal, 12(1), pp. 48- 64. Atherton, P. (2020c). Why do teachers need to embrace technology in the classroom? In: J. Lord, ed., Studying Education: an introduction into the study and exploration of education. Exeter: Learning Matters. BERA (2011) Revised Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research. Biggam, J (2015). Succeeding with your Master’s Dissertation. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Bochner, Arthur P. (1994). Perspectives on inquiry II: Theories and stories. In Handbook of interpersonal communication, ed. Mark L. Knapp and Gerald R. Miller, 21-41. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Bochner, A. P. (2012). On first person narrative scholarship: Autoethnography as acts of meaning. Narrative Inquiry, 22, 155-164. [ONLINE] Available at: https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.22.1.10boc [Accessed 31 October 2019]. Bochner, Arthur P. (2013). Putting Meanings into Motion: Autoethnography’s Existential Calling, in Stacy Holman Jones, Tony E. Adams, Carolyn Ellis (eds.), Handbook of Autoethnography. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press, pp. 50-56. Bochner, A., Bochner, A. and Ellis, C., (2002). Ethnographically Speaking. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Boynton, P. (2005). The Research Companion: A Practical Guide for the Social and Health Sciences. Edition. Abingdon: Psychology Press. Braun, V., Clarke, V. & Weate, P. (2016). Using thematic analysis in sport and exercise research. In B. Smith & A. C. Sparkes (Eds.), Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise (pp. 191-205). London: Routledge Braun, V. and Clarke, V., (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, [online] 11(4), pp.589-597. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806 [Accessed 19 August 2020]. Campbell, E. (2017). "Apparently Being a Self-Obsessed C**t Is Now Academically Lauded": Experiencing Twitter Trolling of Autoethnographers. [online] Qualitative-research.net. Available at: http://www.qualitative- research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2819/4151 [Accessed 21 January 2020]. Clandinin, J and Connelly, F. (2000). Narrative Inquiry. San Francisco. Jossey Bass. Clark. D. (2020). Tech and me: an autoethnographic account of digital literacy as an identity performance. Research in Learning Technology, 28. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v28.2389 Culshaw, S. (2019) ‘The unspoken power of collage? Using an innovative arts-based research method to explore the experience of struggling as a teacher’. London https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0891241605280449 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0891241605280449 https://10.0.4.153/1940844720934373 http://ojs.cumbria.ac.uk/index.php/TEAN/article/view/575 http://ojs.cumbria.ac.uk/index.php/TEAN/article/view/575 https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.22.1.10boc https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806 http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2819/4151 http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/2819/4151 https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v28.2389 PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 17 Early View Review of Education, 17 (3): 268–283. DOI https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.17.3.03. Dawkins, R. (1982). The Extended Phenotype. Oxford. Oxford University Press. Denscombe, M. (2007). The Good Research Guide. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Denzin, N. (1970) The Research Act: A Theoretical Orientation to Sociological Methods. New York: McGraw -Hill. Denzin, N and Lincoln, Y. (2011). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage. Denzin, N. (2017). Critical Qualitative Inquiry. Qualitative Inquiry, [online] 23(1), pp.8-16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416681864 [Accessed 21 Jan. 2020]. Doloriert, C. and Sambrook, S., (2012). Organisational autoethnography. Journal of Organizational Ethnography, [online] 1(1), pp.83-95. Available at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.110 8/20466741211220688/full/html [Accessed 6 January 2021]. Duncan, M. (2004), “Autoethnography: critical appreciation of an emerging art”, International Journal of Qualitative Methods, Vol. 3/4, Article 3, pp. 1-14. [online] available at: www.ualberta.ca/iiqm/backissues/3_4/pdf/duncan.pdf [Accessed: 30/6/20] Dunn, T. and Myers, W. (2020) ‘Contemporary Autoethnography Is Digital Autoethnography’, Journal of Autoethnography, 1(1), pp.43-59. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1525/joae.2020.1.1.43 [Accessed: 15 February 2021). Eldridge, L. (2012). A Collaged Reflection on My Art Teaching: A Visual Autoethnography. The Journal of Social Theory in Art Education (32) (K. Staikidis, Ed.). 70-79. Ellingson, L. L., & Ellis, C. (2008). Autoethnography as constructionist project. In J. A. Holstein, & J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Handbook of constructionist research (pp. 445- 465). New York: Guilford. Ellis, C. & Michael G. Flaherty, (1992) (Eds.), Investigating subjectivity: Research on lived experience (pp.79-102). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Ellis, C., Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity. In Denzin, N. K., Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733–768). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ellis, C. and Bochner, A. (2006). Analyzing Analytic Autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, [online] 35(4), pp.429-449. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carolyn_Ellis/pu blication/249714199_Analyzing_Analytic_Autoethnogr aphyAn_Autopsy/links/5554c55908ae6943a871adeb.p df [Accessed 2 Oct. 2019]. Ellis, C., (2007). Telling Secrets, Revealing Lives. Qualitative Inquiry, [online] 13(1), pp.3-29. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406294947 [Accessed 21 August 2020]. Ellis, C and Bochner A. (2010) On Autoethnography. “We Can Tell You Stories: Politics, Pleasure and Pain in Qualitative Inquiry” The Fourth Israeli Interdisciplinary Conference of Qualitative Research February 17-18, 2010 Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Ellis, C; Adams, T E. & Bochner, A P. (2011). Autoethnography: An overview. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, [online] 12(1), Art. 10. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-12.1.1589 [Accessed: January 21, 2020]. Enriquez-Gibson, J., (2018). Rhythms of academic mobility. Applied Mobilities, [online] 4(3), pp.293-306. https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2017.1416828 R. Frank Falk & Nancy B. Miller (1998) The reflexive self: Asociological perspective , Roeper Review, 20:3, 150- 153, https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199809553881 Fuchs, C. (2017). From digital positivism and administrative big data analytics towards critical digital and social media research!. European Journal of Communication,32(1), [online] pp.37-49.Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116682804 Gubrium, J. and Holstein, J. (1997). NARRATIVE PRACTICE AND THE COHERENCE OF PERSONAL STORIES. The Sociological Quarterly, 39(1), pp.163-187. [online]. Available at: https://www.sfu.ca/cmns/courses/2012/801/1- Readings/Gubrium%20Holstein%20Narrative%20practi ces.pdf [Accessed 21 January 2020]. Hart, C., (2018). Doing A Literature Review. London: SAGE Publications Ltd, pp.17-18. Hayano, D. (1979), “Auto‐ethnography: paradigms, problems and prospects”, Human Organization, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 99‐103. Hebdige, (1979). Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Routledge https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.17.3.03 https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800416681864 https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/20466741211220688/full/html https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/20466741211220688/full/html http://www.ualberta.ca/iiqm/backissues/3_4/pdf/duncan.pdf https://doi.org/10.1525/joae.2020.1.1.43 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carolyn_Ellis/publication/249714199_Analyzing_Analytic_AutoethnographyAn_Autopsy/links/5554c55908ae6943a871adeb.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carolyn_Ellis/publication/249714199_Analyzing_Analytic_AutoethnographyAn_Autopsy/links/5554c55908ae6943a871adeb.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carolyn_Ellis/publication/249714199_Analyzing_Analytic_AutoethnographyAn_Autopsy/links/5554c55908ae6943a871adeb.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Carolyn_Ellis/publication/249714199_Analyzing_Analytic_AutoethnographyAn_Autopsy/links/5554c55908ae6943a871adeb.pdf https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800406294947 http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/fqs-12.1.1589 https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2017.1416828 https://doi.org/10.1080/02783199809553881 https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116682804 https://www.sfu.ca/cmns/courses/2012/801/1-Readings/Gubrium%20Holstein%20Narrative%20practices.pdf https://www.sfu.ca/cmns/courses/2012/801/1-Readings/Gubrium%20Holstein%20Narrative%20practices.pdf https://www.sfu.ca/cmns/courses/2012/801/1-Readings/Gubrium%20Holstein%20Narrative%20practices.pdf PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 18 Early View Heehs, P. (2013).Writing the Self: Diaries, Memoirs and the History of the Self. London: Bloomsbury Academic. Holman Jones, S., Adams, T., & Ellis, C. (2016). Handbook of autoethnography. London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. hooks, b. (1994b). Teaching to transgress: Educating as the practice of freedom. Abingdon: Routledge. Hunter, A. (2020) Snapshots of selfhood: curating academic identity through visual autoethnography, International Journal for Academic Development, 25:4, 310-323, https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2020.1755865 Jay, J. and Johnson, K., 2002. Capturing complexity: a typology of reflective practice for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(1), pp.73-85. Josselson, R. & Liebech, A. (Eds.). (1995). Interpreting experience: The narrative study of lives. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Le Roux (2017) Exploring rigour in autoethnographic research, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20:2, 195-207, https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1140965 McIlveen, P. (2008). Autoethnography as a method for reflexive research and practice in vocational psychology. Australian Journal of Career Development, 17(2), 13-20. Available at: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10 .1.1.585.4287&rep=rep1&type=pdf [Accessed 21 January 2020]. Morrow, S. L. (2005). Quality and trustworthiness in qualitative research in counseling psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 250-260. Neil, J., (2017). Digital Auto-Ethnography Interview with Self. Prism Journal, 1(1), pp.46-72. https://doi.org/10.24377/LJMU.prism.vol1iss1article29 9 Nowell, L., Norris, J., White, D. and Moules, N., (2017). Thematic Analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, [online] 16(1), p.160940691773384. Available at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/160940691 7733847 Accessed 30 November 2020]. Pillow, W. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodological power in qualitative research. International Journal Of Qualitative Studies In Education, 16(2), 175-196. doi: 10.1080/0951839032000060635 Pinner, R., (2017). Re-learning from experience: using autoethnography for teacher development. Educational Action Research, 26 (1), pp.91-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2017.1310665 Punch, K. (2014). Introduction to Research Methods in Education. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications. Richardson, L. (1997). Fields of play: Constructing an academic life. New Brunswick, N. J.: Rutgers University Press. Rolfe, G., Jasper, M. and Freshwater, D. (2011). Critical reflection in practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Rubin, A & Babbie, E. (2012). Brooks/Cole Empowerment Series: Essential Research Methods for Social Work (SW 385R Social Work Research Methods). 3 Edition. Cengage Learning. Sampson, H., (2004). Navigating the waves: the usefulness of a pilot in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, [online] 4(3), pp.383-402. Available at: https://doi.org.uk/10.1177/1468794104047236 [Accessed 7 January 2021]. Cortes Santiago, I., Karimi, N. and Arvelo Alicea, Z., (2016). Neoliberalism and higher education: a collective autoethnography of Brown Women Teaching Assistants. Gender and Education, [online] 29(1), pp.48-65. Available at: https://doi.org.uk/10.1080/09540253.2016.1197383 [Accessed 8 January 2021]. Shukie, P. (2019). Connectivism, Chaos and Chaoids. PRISM: Casting New Light on Learning, Theory and Practice, 2(2), 39–61. https://doi.org/10.24377/LJMU.prism.vol2iss2article28 2 Siemens, G. 2005. A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Available at: http://devrijeruimte.org/content/artikelen/Connectivis m.pdf. [Accessed 7 January 2021F]. Spry, T. (2000). Writing and Performing Autoethnography. London: Routledge. Spry, Tami. (2001). Performing autoethnography: An embodied methodological praxis. Qualitative Inquiry 7 (6): 706-732. Spry. T. (2009). "Bodies Of/as Evidence in Autoethnography." International Review of Qualitative Research 1, no. 4 : 603-10. Accessed January 30, 2020. www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/irqr.2009.1.4.603 Struthers, J. (2014), "Analytic autoethnography: one story of the method", Theory and Method in Higher https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2020.1755865 https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1140965 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.585.4287&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.585.4287&rep=rep1&type=pdf https://doi.org/10.24377/LJMU.prism.vol1iss1article299 https://doi.org/10.24377/LJMU.prism.vol1iss1article299 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1609406917733847 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1609406917733847 https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2017.1310665 https://doi.org.uk/10.1177/1468794104047236 https://doi.org.uk/10.1080/09540253.2016.1197383 https://doi.org/10.24377/LJMU.prism.vol2iss2article282 https://doi.org/10.24377/LJMU.prism.vol2iss2article282 http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/irqr.2009.1.4.603 PRISM (2022) Atherton (2022) PRISM 19 Early View Education Research II (International Perspectives on Higher Education Research, Vol. 10), [online] Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 183-202. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-3628(2014)0000010015 [Accessed 31 October. 2019]. Sughrua, W., (2019). The Core of Critical Performative Autoethnography. Qualitative Inquiry, 26(6), pp.602- 632. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800419830132 [Accessed 26 August. 2020]. Tracy, S. J. [Get Your Qual On]. (2016). Making a difference with qualitative research [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/bq_5mDOoNKM Turner, J., 2001. Positivism: Sociological. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, pp.11827-11831. Vardine K. Simeus. (2016). My Dance with Cancer: An Autoethnographic Exploration of the Journey. Doctoral dissertation. Nova Southeastern University. Retrieved from NSUWorks, College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences – Department of Family Therapy. (20) Wall, S. (2008). Easier Said than Done: Writing an Autoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 7(1), 38-53. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690800700103 https://doi.org/10.1108/S1479-3628(2014)0000010015 https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800419830132 https://youtu.be/bq_5mDOoNKM https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690800700103