The Researcher’s Voice

This research study is framed as a qualitative study using interviews and field notes to fill a gap in the literature. It is imperative that this gap be filled as there is a loud call for research that enables people and communities to “tell their stories” (Smith, 2005, p. 89). This research study is about telling stories. I am a Qallunaat researcher researching Inuit educators. This is precisely what Smith (2005) meant when she called this “tricky ground” (p. 84). I need to tread incredibly carefully. To consider this tricky ground more carefully I turned to Fine’s (1994) work on othering.

Fine (1994) discusses the concept of othering and working the hypen in her landmark text, “Working the Hypens: Reinventing the Self and Others in Qualitative Research.” Fine discusses how cross-cultural research is, at best, tricky. The desire and ability to work with another cultural group has had historically damaging outcomes. I did not want to contribute to the damage; I wanted to take my developing understanding and ask questions that would support Inuit educators. I wanted to open discussions about my prior understandings and the ideological change that occurred within me when I began to question the status quo.

Haig-Brown (2010) speaks clearly of the appropriation of Aboriginal Peoples’ culture, and how taking Aboriginal cultural icons (e.g., headdress and Inuksuk), has stolen the identity of Aboriginal groups by diminishing the importance of cultural artefacts. The concept of taking from one culture and assimilating it into another culture is hardly new. Well-meaning researchers who have attempted to share the stories of others often continue the binary of “us” and “them” where the researcher becomes the author of someone else’s story. hooks (1990) speaks unmistakably of this:

79

No need to hear your voice when I can talk about you better than you can talk about yourself. No need to hear your voice, only tell me your pain. I want to know your story. Then I will tell it back to you in a new way. Tell it back to you in such a way that it has become mine, my own. Rewriting you, I write myself anew. I am still author, authority. I am still colonizer, the speaking subject, and you are now at the centre of my talk. (pp. 151-152)

It is my goal to listen to and hear the voices and to tell stories: These are not my stories and they do not belong to me, so telling them requires participation, collaboration, and a sense of community rather than the all too familiar binary of researchers and participants.

While I have stated that I am someone who listens to and works with Inuit educators, it is critically important that I position myself and who I am as a researcher (Creswell, 2007; Etherington, 2004; Smith, 2002). I am unequivocally not an “insider,” as I do not share language, culture, identity, and experiences with the participants (Breen, 2007). However, I am also not fully an “outsider” as I have shared experiences and knowledge of the

participants and a deep understanding of the educational milieu in which this study occurs. I acknowledge that my profound desire to complete this study comes from my experiences living in the North and learning from the Inuit. These experiences shape who I am, the questions I ask within the confines of this study, and the methodological and theoretical choices I utilize.

A catalyst for my use of CRT as my main theory was to define myself as a researcher. I needed to consider if there was a place for a middle class, White woman in CRT. Yosso (2005) clarifies this central, driving issue by sharing her belief that White scholars can extend CRT by seeking ways to expose White privilege, and by doing so, challenge the racism that

80

is seen as the norm. Using CRT, I come to this study with eyes that are open wide enough to see the layers of racism that I believe exist, and impact not only the learning of the Inuit students, but the teaching practices of both the Inuit and Qallunaat educators.

Fine et al. (2003) states that, “we all write what we write in a world not (necessarily) prepared to hear” (p. 199). To guide and support me, and help me stay focused, I have considered some of the questions posed by Fine et al. and continually reviewed questions such as: What does it mean to uncover? Whose voice do I use when I write? What do I have to contribute? Who am I responsible to?

I continually reviewed these principles as I “connected the ‘voices’ and ‘stories’ of the individuals back to the set of historical…realities [in which] they are situated” (Fine et al., 2003, p. 199) and ensured that the methods I used in this study allowed for a “very different kind of analysis” ( p. 199). I took steps to ensure that the research belonged to the participants, and gave opportunities for them to “challenge my interpretations” (Fine et al., 2003, p. 200) and consider carefully how this data will be used. The finished text, being much more than a thesis, challenges the “common discourse” (Fine et al., 2003, p. 201) and works towards a greater purpose for the participants.

In this section I will consider why qualitative research and decolonizing

methodologies are imperative to this work. I will share the methods I used to collect and analyze data and why these choices were supportive of my research questions and the Inuit participants.