11-24, 13:20–13:35 (Australia/Melbourne), Zoom Breakout Room 1
Social researchers often explore complex, messy, real-world questions that are not amenable to simple or easy answers. Yet in the contemporary academic context, we are increasingly pressured to be ‘productive’, to maximise research outputs, and rewarded for this. The benefits are simplistically obvious – more publications, better job prospects, etc. But what about the costs, and what is lost? The mental health impacts of contemporary neoliberalised (and, for ECRs, precarity) are well established. Movements like ‘slow academia’ have pointed to knowledge consequences, as well.
In this presentation I will draw from my experiences as a qualitative PhD student deeply embedded in my analytic process, to explore the value of slowing down, and to demonstrate the importance of taking breaks in the research journey. My thesis work involved using reflexive thematic analysis to develop understanding of, and construct a story about, how child development knowledge is used in child protection policy and practice in Aotearoa. Reflexive thematic analysis necessitated reflection on all aspects of my work, and during the analysis stage of the project I had to recognise that I had ‘hit a wall’ and needed to take time out. When I returned to study, I realised that this this time out period – far from being a loss of momentum or failure, had been a gift, and that it had allowed (mental) space and time for ideas to percolate, brew and strengthen before returning refreshed to the data.
I use this experience to challenge the common-sense notion that breaks are unproductive time and instead posit that they can be a ‘generative interregnum’ time whereby ideas (and analysis) can develop in a space (somewhat) bracketed away from ‘productive’ pressures.
I argue for a rethinking of how time is planned and imagined in qualitative research – but situate that in an understanding that many graduate students and researchers are structurally prevented from being able to take such generative interregnums. Given these contextual constraints, what possibilities might there be to organise or stretch time in ways that facilitate generativity through non-productive (non)engagement.
The rich potential offered through qualitative research like reflexive TA is not well-served by the knowledge-delivery model of the neoliberal university. The reflexivity required by my chosen analytic method ultimately included considering whether I, as the researcher, was in the right space to be able to construct the analytic story. I had to knowingly assess my ability to construct that story at any given point in that process. If we are to retain the rich and full potential of qualitative research, we must challenge neoliberal notions of productivity in academia and work to dismantle the barriers – at a micro personal and a macro structural level - that prevent us from taking generative interregnums.
Eileen Joy is a Registered Social Worker who has recently finished writing her PhD in social work. As part of that PhD research Eileen has a keen interest in the way that knowledges are structured and used in child welfare work. In particular, her PhD topic involves exploring how child development knowledges and sciences have been operationalised in the policy and practice of child protection social workers in Aotearoa New Zealand through the 2010s. Eileen also lectures in Social Work at the University of Auckland, is a Research Fellow at the University of Waikato, and has a long history of working and volunteering in women’s health and advocacy. She is passionate about issues involving epistemic (in)justice, gender and sexuality, children, families, and structural oppressions.