2 Routledge Journal of Language, Identity & Education ISSN: 1534-8458 (Print) 1532-7701 (Online) journal homepage: hitps://ww.tandfonline conv/ithlie20 Discursive Dances: Narratives of Insider/Outsider Researcher Tensions Jacqueline Aiello & Shondel J. Nero To cite this article: Jacqueline Aiello & Shondel J, Nero (2019) Discursive Dances: Narratives of Insider/Outsider Researcher Tensions, Joumal of Language, Identity & Education, 18:4, 251-265, DOI: 10.1080/15348458.2019,1623035 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2019.1623035 BAY Published onne: 24 un 218, (F submicyour article to this journal CP [ltl article views: 808 BW view relate articles ® view crossmark data 2] cungarices:6 view cng anices Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at https:/www.candfanline.com/action/jaurnalinformation2journalCode=hlie20Routledge 2010, YL 18 NO. 4, 251-268 pei eg 08a Ss 2011623035, B cen era Discursive Dances: Narratives of Insider/Outsider Researcher Tensions Jacqueline Aiello @" and Shondel J. Nero "Universita degl Studi di Napol "LOrientale; New York University assraact xerworos In ths ate, two applied Inuit researchers who conducted qualitative Dsuive dances ngs Studies in educational eorex nay ana JamolarefexvelyntrogsteKen- Sages 2 tiy tensions among the esebed fe and evolving insidevoutsder dees esos: quate and pesons The jstaposiion of elected disurswely analyzed research ign. ewes reset éttes res simries and lifeences in our expences in wo very diferent Contos, but a convergence inthe complenity of ou lingusti/cltra ide ties, postions and intersubjectites as inside/ousider researchers. in bath ‘sey ne sought 9 recone tension ih poston within interviews about language attudes and language education poy, we performed “discursive dances" aimed at creating positional spaces as we collaboratively produced and -co-constructed our experiences, identities, and positioning with our participants. We arae thatthe approaches, presentation, and representation of Or research Bre itered through entity tensions Therefore n making these tensions exp Sit we became setive othe role of power and ositonality in our research process. Introduction In a casual conversation in a café on a hot summer day in New York City, we started sharing our experiences as qualitative researchers carrying out research in schools in two very different contexts, Italy and Jamaica. Each of us considered ourselves tobe simultaneously n insider and an outsider to the respective cultures of these two countries, one of us an insider by being born in Ital; the other by being bora and raised notin Jamaica, but in Guyana, a country similar to Jamaica in tems of 4 shared history of plantation slavery and British colonization, and a common West Indian identity But our having lived outside ofthese two cultures for extended periods of our lives positioned us as relative outsiders when we returned to conduct research in these spaces. Our narratives reflect similarities and differences in our experience but a convergence in the complexity of our pesitions as insider/ousider researchers, with language and language attitudes playing a significant role in that positioning. To negotiate our positions and reconcile identity tensions during our researc, we both engaged in “discursive dances” (Nero, 2014), or moment-by-moment discourse moves, “This article adds to a geowing body of research in applied linguistics that has taken a critically reflexive approach to examine the complexity of researcher identities, positions, and intersubjectv ites in qualitative work, especially among insder/outsder researchers (Giampapa, 2011; Hamdan, 2009; Hult, 2014; Lee & Simon-Maeda, 2006; Mullings, 199; Norton & Early, 2011). Our narratives, employ different research methodologies but both occur in educational contexts, assume a plural understanding of language and draw on theories of positioning (eg: Davies & Harré, 1990; Harré & CONTACT lacquetine Aiello © jacquelineaielo@gmailcom @) Universita degli Studi di Napoli “Oriental, though this article was a colaboratve efor, Jacqueline Ala was primary responsible fr the scone entitled “Theoret framework” "Wenties, postions, and the dcusve dance” autine’s native” ond “Unpacking interviews and researcher baggage and Shonde J Nero was penny responsible forthe sections ened voduction” “Shondel'snaratie™ tnd "Concison” © 01 Tar France Go LLCasa © Aeivo Ano NEKO van Langenhove, 1991), poststructuralism (Bucholtz & Hall, 2008), and identity (Norton & Toohey, 2011). Illustrated by discourse analysis of elected research vignettes, we argue that the approaches, presentation, and re-presentation of our research are filtered through the tensions among our ascribed, felt, and evolving insider/outsider identities and positions in these two very different contexts, Our reflexive interrogation of identity tensions in qualitative research revealed the “con: scious and unconscious baggage” (Scheurich, 1997, p. 73) tied 10 our personal and professional autobiographies that we carried into the research process, and illustrated the discourse moves that ‘occurred to create positional spaces to successfully conduct our research, Theoretical framework Positioning researcher identities Researchers who have explored their roles as “insiders” or “outsiders” have delved into the effect of proximity to the research context on research questions, access, and quality of data collection and analysis. Outsider researchers, unfamiliar with the research context, have been deemed more objective, curious, and likely to pose provocative research questions. On the contrary, an insider position, which involves commonalities with the researched culture, has been deemed advantageous for simplifying access both to the research site and to richer descriptions, due to a more intimate understanding of the participants studied (Hamdan, 2009; Merriam et al. 2001; Paechter, 2013). The Insider/outsider distinction has been contested in light of the tendency to reduce these positions to a simplistic subjectvity-objectivty dichotomy. Some scholars have convincingly maintained that the research process itself challenges the insider postion and renders all researchers outsiders (Obst 20125 Paechter, 2013). Further, Subreenduth and Rhee (2010) pose the apt question: “how do we find the dividing lines for insider and outsider?" (p. 334). Positioning theory has helped us to unpack the insider/outsider conundrum in a more nuanced way, as we have found the terms to be more complex and less absolute than discussed in the literature Positioning theory Davies and Harré (1990) define positioning as “the discursive process whereby selves are located in conversations as observably and subjectively coherent participants in jointly produced story lines (p. 48). It serves as a metaphor for how individuals are situated (interactive positioning) and situate themselves (reflexive positioning) within and during an interaction (Van Langenhove & Harré, 1994), Each ofthe participants in an interaction positions the other while simultaneously positioning herself, and constructs varied “possible selves” by shifting positions at times even contradictorily ding discourse (Harré & van Langenhove, 1991). Thus, we can view “insider” versus “outsider” not as roles but as ephemeral postions that “involve shits in power, acess, or blocking of access to certain features of claimed or desired identity” (Davies & Harté, 1990, p. 49). Poststructuralism and identity Poststructural thought has often drawn on positioning theory in the understanding and analysis of data and of researcher identity. Through the poststructual lens utilized in our respective research studies, identities are sociocultural phenomena that emerge and shift in interaction as “social actors claim, contest, and negotiate power and authority” (Bucholtz & Hall, 2008, p. 154). Individuals who share specific attributes do not necessarily share similar views or behaviors, and, in the research setting, factors such as class, gender, or race may outweigh the identity associated with “insider” or “outsider” status at different times during interactions (Merriam etal, 2001). Thus, proximity to the cultures under study is in flux and researchers (re)negotiate positions with participants.JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE, oN & EDUCATION @) 252 Norton and Toohey (2011) highlight three methodological understandings on which poststruc- turalist identity researchers frequently rely that are pertinent to our studies. Firstly, researchers’ conclusions are inevitably partial and situated, and reflexivity must be exercised to create research narratives that are more sensitive to issues of power and positionalty (see also: Hamdan, 2008; Mosselson, 2010) Secondly, identity researchers must account both for how they and their part pants are positioned by structures and practices, and how these positions are negotiated. Thirdly, the ways in which economic, political, and sociohistrial contexts impact human action and proceses, such as language learning and research, must be considered. Theorizing the qualitative interview Growing increasingly aware that qualitative interviews, albeit widely used in the field, have remained largely undertheorized, applied linguists have made noteworthy contributions to take aim at this issue. Pavlenko (2007), who challenges the utility of atheoretical analyses, suggests that the influences of both language choice and the micro/macro-level context be taken into account during the collection and analysis of autobiographic data, including interview data, ‘Talmy (2010) has argued for 1 reconceptualization of interviews in applied linguistics on the basis that they are not merely tools through which interviewers extract facts from participants but are socially-stuated speech events in which meaning is (co)constructed. In a similar vein, Mann (2011) encourages a greater focus on the Interviewer, the interactional context ofthe interview, and its co-construction, with the aim of developing “more sensitive, informed and data-led accounts for the ways in which interviews are constructed” (p. 21), Roulston (2011) takes on “problematic” interview interactions to encourage researchers “to look closely at their own interview interaction to examine how data are generated by speakers" and, in particular, “to mindfally consider (their) actions and interactions with others” (p. 93). Identities, positional s, and the discursive dance Applied linguists who have heeded this call to reconceptualize research methods have utilized positioning theory to explore researchers’ and participants’ identities, roles, and interactions in various contexts. For instance, Back (2012) focuses on researcher-participant interactions to uncover the dynamism of positions through and about language. The study draws on Talmy's (2010) Interview as a social practice framework and Bucholtz and Halls (2004) tactics of intersubjectivity to explore how researcher/participant subjectivities surrounding language proficiency are con- structed and resisted in multilingual interactions during email exchanges and interviews. Utilizing this reflexive, situated lens, Back (2012) displays the researcher's impact on the pattcipant’s defini- tion of proficiency and sheds light on how meanings and positions are co-constructed and nego- tiated through language in discourse, Related studies have explored researchers’ ethnic identities and positioning in their research. For example, in her interview study of company employees in Jamaica, Mullings (1999) draws upon her own experiences as a Black woman of British Jamaican heritage working at an American university to examine the ways in which intercultural perceptions and interactions influenced both the data collection and interpretation processes. Specifically, she describes how relationships of power and positionality played out through the interview process. Mullings worked at creating what she called “positional spaces,” that is, areas where she could engender a level of trust by drawing on the situated knowledge of both parties in the interview encounter—an effort that sometimes created tensions with her participants ‘A special issue of the present journal dedicated to researcher reflexivity in multilingual research settings assembled several compelling accounts of the negotiation of the positions, identities and power relations of critical ethnographers in different educational contexts. Relaiio Pastor's (2011) critical ethnographic study of undocumented Mexican-origin women in a bilingual program in Southern California made her acutely aware of being “part and parcel of the research process” (p.ase © neito Ano NEKO 200). She was narratively transformed in an interview as she juxtaposed her identity as a non- immigrant visa scholar with her collaborative construction of het participant's recreation of a harrowing border-crossing experience, Patino Santos (2011) reports on a three-year sociolinguistic ethnography of Latin American students at a high school in Madrid in which facets of the researcher's identity—being an educator and of Latin American origin—were brought into play Overtime, Patino Santos's role shifted from passive observer to member of the teaching staff which helped her gain the trust of participants and delve more deeply into her research questions, In identifying the effects of assuming an increasingly active role, Patio Santos (2011) illustrates how the researcher's adopted roles and time in the field can affect the research process. Inthe same issue, Giampapa (2011) explores the construction and contestation of researcher identities and position- Ings across varied spaces and discourses of “Italianness” in ‘Toronto, Giampapa zeroes in on critical _moments in her research to show how participants reconstructed, contested, and assigned identit to her. Giampapa (2011) describes that her “shifting identities and positionalities became part of a delicate dance across the research sites where participants exercised their power in ways that would ‘open or close doors in the feld” (p. 132), and this process influenced the research itself. ‘The present article builds on ths literature by drawing on our language-focused research in two different contexts: Italy and Jamaica. The above-cited studies have complicated the researcher role, illustrated the complexity of researchers’ and participants’ identities, and described shifts in positions lover time and across dillerent spaces. The present paper takes it a step further by theorizing how roles are enacted discursively in the moment. We argue that the dynamic construction and performance of researcher positions during interviews should be conceived as a discursive dance in which the “moves” are a product of the researcher's and participant’ “baggage” and motivations, as well as of the context and timing of the interview. In the following sections, we draw on our respective biographies and the discourse analysis of interview data from selected vignettes, with a focus on positioning theory and the tactics of intersubjectivity (Bucholtz & Hall, 2004), to further problematize the insider/outsider researcher role and illustrate the discursive moves to negotiate our positions, gain footing, and fulfil the aims of our research, Insider/outsider researchers from two different worlds Jacqueline’s narrative Biography Twas born in the Sorrentine peninsula, near the city of Naples in Southern Ttaly, the daughter of an American mother and an Italian father. In the early 1990s, when I was eight years old, my fami ‘moved permanently to New York. There, we almost immediately stopped using lalian in the home in favor of English, the language my parents used to communicate with one another. Yet, my family often traveled to my birthplace and I cultivated a profound interest in Italy, which culminated in my ‘majoring in Italian literature and cultural studies as an undergraduate in New York City. At that point, [interacted in Italian with speakers from across the Italian peninsula for the first time. Without fal, my interlocutors applauded me for maintaining native-like fluency but amusedly remarked that I had a slight yet salient Neapolitan accent, In my university courses, I learned that the stereotypical portrayal of Southern Italy asa “paradise inhabited by devils” dates as far back as the Middle Ages.” To this day, the disparities between the north and south dominate the cultural, economic and political discourse in Italy. Naples, as the largest Southern Italian city, is often the locus of these discussions.’ Thus, my accent positioned me as a Neapolitan, with its concomitant cultural baggage. According to Levis (2005), “accents are intimately tied to speaker identity and group membership” (p. 376). As a result, I constructed an Italian identity tied to the way I sounded while constantly (re)negotiating and often resisting assumptions about my Neapolitanness,JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE, oY & EDUCATION @) 255 ‘The viability of my constructed identity was tested when, in 2008, I became a Fulbright English Teaching Assistant in Naples. In my birthplace for longer than a summer holiday for the first time while acting as an American representative in Neapolitan schools, I spent the year negotiating my ‘American and Italian identities, as necessary, in various quotidian contexts in which the identities ascribed to me were often unaligned with my felt identity. Moreover, while in Neapolitan English language classrooms, I encountered phenomena that were perplexing and appeared paradoxical in spite of my Italian origins or my knowledge of the setting. For instance, youth were highly motivated to learn English but they displayed unsatisfactory learning outcomes in their target language. This ‘observation was consistent with European Union reports that revealed lagging English proficiency in Italy despite widespread acknowledgement among Italians that English grants access to myriad global domains, This surprising and distressing finding compelled me to question the sociocultural factors that influence language learning, particularly among Southern Italian students who under- perform academically compated to Italians in other areas of the country, and I was driven to pursue research on this issue for my doctoral dissertation, Upon returning to Italy four years later to conduct research, reflecting on my role asa researcher, | was uncertain whether I was an “insider” or an “outsider.” I felt that I had insider knowledge of the experiences of Italian students because of my Italian heritage, my experience teaching in Italy, and ‘my study of Italian history and culture. At the same time, having resided outside of Italy for most of, my formative education years, I was less familiar with the shifting tide of curriculum ideologies and practices, and the complexity of language attitudes towards English in Italy. Moreover, at the research sites, was an American who spoke English “natively.” These cultural and linguistic features served as patent emblems of difference in the Italian research context The study | collected data during the 2012-13 academic year in four high schools, two in Naples and two in Rome. The study employed a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design and had three over: riding aims: to describe the main dimensions of language altitudes, motivation and self-perceived English proficiency among Italian English language learners; to unveil the factors that affect these constructs; and to explore learners’ negotiations and attempts at (re)positioning themselves to circumvent impediments to English acquisition I collected questionnaire data in the first phase of the study, and the second phase was qualitative in nature. During the qualitative phase, two cas study participants were selected in each school based on questionnaire responses. I conducted three [5 minute interviews with each participant, observed their English classes weekly over a six ‘month period (January to June 2013), and supplemented observations with two interviews of theit English teachers. Power and (my) English ‘When [first entered all of the English classrooms that I observed, I was introduced as an American researcher. Every day, I greeted and conversed with teachers and students, and all of these interac tions occurred in English. English teachers told me that they were ecstatic to have access to a native speaker of their students’ target language that served as a non-judgmental English resource, and they ‘occasionally asked for my language input during their classes. I never concealed my linguistic ability or cultural background (manifest in my last name) but I hardly ever spoke in Taian or about my Italian heritage, Although | felt like an insider familiar with my setting, {also felt that I inadvertently positioned myself as an outsider because of my researcher role and the language I used. This ‘unintentional move raised a number of ethical dilemmas. For example, when I asked participants atthe start of each interview whether they wanted to speak in Italian or English and all interviewees chose the latter, a series of questions surfaced in my mind, including: was English chosen because of its greater prestige? As expressed in Back (2012), “given the perceived power of a multilingual Interviewer, the use of a particular language may not be resisted by respondents” (p. 16). I had also256 © _AeiLo ANo NEKO spoken predominantly in English, so I wondered if I unwittingly limited the research participants? language choice because of my language choice Sill, participants did not passively accept the perceived power of English or my identity as “native” English speaker, and some contested it outright. When my position(s) were challenged, | was urged to reflect on participants’ underlying attitudes towards (my) English, and how my identity (and the language that I spoke, in particular) impacted on the research itself. Because of my cultural and linguistic background, these issues transpired most compellingly in interviews about language with Neapolitan students, during which identities and positionings were tested and co- constructed. The two vignettes that follow illustrate these processes and focus on interviews with Giovanni, an eighteen-year-old Neapolitan student who relied on English to participate in online communities but voiced disapproval of its widespread use in Italy. Vignette 1: Positioning accents and identities During our second interview in March 2013, Giovanni expressed a fascination for English accents. When I asked him about it, the interaction in Excerpt 1 ensued: excerpt 7 cs youre ereted i ferences In pronunciation? 2 Govern Yes, becuse | not to bende, but | prefer a British acer. 3 Me Yea, #0 9 (gh) 4 Giovan Because Uh, your accents sill good but Brann, our ther tongue struct her 5 acon, bah! Tele Of couse she spoke perfect English, but when she 395 my ‘ name i Briana fea asalaed (ough) 7 Mes ((aughs) Wha other things did you notice about her accent that were 5 Giovan Hum .. wel dance, Farce theo asad) ° Me But her spec acent, why I er speci ccant why was it- 10 Govan Because. 2 British gy, thik would say Brana, Brianna [not nasal ” You would ay? 2 Me | woul 3y Briana a Govan: (kay, that’ beter. “ Me (Qaughs) So why do you think you peer the British acent? 5 Giovan (Coughs) Because when thee prefer am a grammar Na even in 6 English Inthis excerpt belore he declaesa preference fora British accent, Giovanni says “not to be rude," (ine 2) at once bringing my identity into play and positioning me as an English speaker with a non-prefered accent Giovanni articulates his distaste for American English accents despite my discomfort—indexed by my hesitancy, repetition and laughter (ine 3)—but he excludes me from his narative by claiming tht my accent is “sll good” (ine 4). Instead, he inserts Brianna, his American English-speaking instructor of a weekly English conversation clas, nto the interaction. sensed that Giovanni might have named Brianna as a way to deprecate American accents without insulting me, so, following his lad, I request more information about American English but do so indirectly, by asking Giovanni to describe Briana's speech {lines and 8). Giovanni points to nasalization asa characteristic of American English that he dss (ines 8, 10) and, with the statement “okay, tha’ better” (ine 13) after he hears how I pronounce the name Brianna, he suggests that this unfavorable feature does not characterize my speech sharp departure from the start of this exchange in which he positioned my accent as both non-Brtsh and non-preferred, Giovanni uss the tactic of adequation® (Sucholte & Hall, 2004) and situates my acent if not as analogous to his (British) English accent, atleast “better” than Briana’s (line 13) 1 spoke with Brianna duving my fieldwork and I knew her accent was similar to mine. Nonetheless, I do not challenge Giovanni’ claimsJOURNAL OF LANGUAGE, oe & EDUCATION @) 257 during the interview. On the contrary, I respond by laughing, tacitly agreeing with his depiction of Brianna’s speech (line 14) The use of Brianna as the object of conversation became a resource through which Giovanni and 1 created a positional space (Mullings, 1999) and harmoniously discussed a (potentially) face-threatening issue. In this momentary space, even as he expressed his disdain for American accents and devalued my English, from “outsider” speaker of a non-preferred English accent, ‘my role was co- and re-constructed into sympathetic listener of Giovanni's opinions Vignette 2: Shared language, distinct identities Late in the school year, during our last interview in May 2013, I asked Giovanni if English was part of his identity, to which he replied as shown in Excerpt 2 Excerpt 2 Govan Tin ot Engsh 301 peak your language but Es wat pref my entity, no, Mes iy dont you think t's par of your det? Glovn | tink that when one stdis 2 language, one studies also the culture, and mot against Engish culture, but R's At mine cle, my cute. So, fr example, the very fat tat you have egg and acon for breaks W's unbelievable ow can you wakeup? (laughs) The thought that you have o eat ego (laughs) (Gaughs) Mot everybody does tha, but understand {In this exchange, Giovanni concedes the ownership of English to me (“I speak your language” ~ line 1, ‘emphasis added), but using my language does not implicate his identity ("but it’s not part of my identity, no” —Line 1), He states that “English culture” is not his culture (line 4). Giovanni uses the “unbelievable” (line 5) practice of eating eggs and bacon for breakfast to substantiate the difference between his culture and “English” culture, thereby enacting the tactic of distinction (Bucholtz & Hall, 2004). His description ff an English breakfast and the hyperbolic assertion that eating an egg is necessary ("you have to eat egg!"—Line 6), along with his use of laughter, enact jocular mockery" (Haugh, 2014). Giovanni postions the object (breakfast) and the culture it represents as derisory, thereby challenging the powerful postion ofthe English culture, language, and speakers of “native” Englishes, Unlike the previous vignette in which the discussion about Brianna spared me from being implicated directly, here, through the use of the pronoun “you,” (lines 5-6), Giovanni situates me as someone who participates in this practice and the mockery i also directed at me. I become an “outsider” in the moment, Our shared language, English, is insuflicient for the construction of a shared identity ‘At that point, [wanted to resist what I perceived to be his positioning of me based on a stereotypical practice of “English” cultures that did not describe me (akin to many Italians, I enjoy espresso and seldom have a hearty breakfast thought). Even though I had positioned myself as an American researcher and English speaker in our previous encounters, I struggled to accept that Giovanni might not see me as an insider” based on our shared Italian, and particularly Neapolitan, identity. The tension between my feltand ascribed identities manifested themselves only internally inthis somewhat contentious exchange because | believed that external manifestations of this tension could have undermined my researcher agenda by Impacting on Giovanni's depiction of his attitudes. That is, imagined that, had I pursued this thread, the focus ofthe interaction could have shifted away from a central construct of my study (his attitudes), and/or Giovanni could have been alerted to my discomfort and altered his responses accordingly. Therefore, Ido ‘not (re)negotiate my position but treat Giovanni's mockery as non-serious, and indeed jocular, by laughing with himat the star of my response (line 7). Though I frst challenge his overstatement and suggest thal “not everybody does tht,” [ultimately say “understand” (line 7) and adequate to Giovanni's claim, With these discursive moves, sought to co- and reconstruct alignment with Giovanni to position myself asa receptive interlocutor, to maintain a good rapport with him, and to remain attuned to his attitudes and positions ‘towards English(es). Ina similar vein to the first vignette, how I navigated these interview moments as theasa © sito Ano NEKO cultural and linguistic dimensions of my identities were brought to the fore was in part guided by my background and knowledge ofthe context, but it was also determined by research-related motivations. Shondel's narrative Biography [was born and raised in Guyana, a former British colony where English is the offical language, but the mass vernacular is Creoles, an English-based Creole that shares some syntactic features with Jamaican Creole, but also has considerable differences. One of the most palpable legacies of British colonization isthe stigmatization of Creole as a non-language, marked as the vernacular ofthe lower class and unschooled, and, at best, a bastardized version of standardized English to be shunned at all cost, especially in school. Demonstrated knowledge of, and proficiency in, Standard (British) English was upheld as the gold standard of a refined and educated person. ‘My early education up until high school was based on a British colonial model, which meant studying a British curriculum, taking British exams, and being taught to privilege all things British, including British English, despite growing up as the first generation in the post-independence er. Stull, Creole use, intermingled with localized varieties of British-influenced English continues to be widespread in public discourse in my country, and was also the case in my childhood home. Such was the complex linguistic environment in which I was raised. My entire post-high school life has been spent in North America. During my doctoral stadies in applied linguistics in New York City, I began to research the linguistic and educational challenges of Caribbean Creole English-dominant speakers in schools, In doing so, I was unwitingly drawn into the contentious polities of language education policy and language attitudes with respect to this population in schools. arthermore, my doctoral program took a clear-cut pxition of validating Creoles as languages in their own ‘ght, and therefore aflirming the language of Creole-dominant speakers in schools. My erly socialization to language was thus tested against new knowledge and intellectual positions as a doctoral student, and challenged me to find a comfortable political and personal position asa researcher and asa West Indian vis: {-vis my own research. Over the years, I have tried to stake out a position somewhere in the middle ~ recognizing the validity of Creoles, but also accepting the parallel reality ofthe prevalence of what Lippi- Green (1997) calls standard language ideology in schools—a tenuous position at best. As I am simlta- neously an applied linguist a language educator, a teacher trainer and an inhabitant of West Indian culture (albeit as an expatriate), am constantly navigating the tension among being faithful to my linguistic training, addressing the needs of teachers and Creole-dominant speakers who must negotiate the politics of language education and assessment, and calibrating my researcher position within the West Indian community. This tension was brought into bold relief when T went to Jamaica asa Fulbright scholar during the 2011-2012 academic year to research their language education policy and practices with respect 0 Creole speakers from which the data for this study’ are drav, My going to Jamaica fora nine-month stay was my first time returning to the West Indies, notasa visitor, but asa researcher, oran extended period of time, Asa Guyanese, a researcher, and an expatriate, was very :much an “outsider” to Jamaicans. Although I had visited Jamaica twice for brief periods, [had neither lived nor studied there before. Yet, my self- identification asa West Indian although not Jamaican, gave me a fell sense of being an “insider.” Jamaica seemed intuitively familiar to me because ofits similarity to Guyana, that is, its tropical climate, culture, and legacy of British colonization, manifested in a rigidly socially stratified society, indexed in differential language use where Standard Jamaican English (SJE) is privileged and Jamaican Creole (C), the mass vernacular, is stigmatized, especially in schools. At the same time, felt remarkably strange having been away from the West Indies for more than thirty years and like Jacqueline, somewhat removed from the educational contest there. My researcher positioning would constantly negotiate these twin lenses of familiarity and strangeness throughout the course of my study.JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE, NT & EDUCATION @) 250 The study {arrived in Jamaica with the goal of conducting a critical ethnographic study of the implementation ofa Language Education Policy (LEP) drafted by the Jamaican Ministry of Education (MOE, 2001) in response to the persistently poor performance in language and literacy among many Jamaican children, However, upon my arrival, I learned thatthe draft LEP was not formally ratified owing to 2 refusal by the Jamaican Parliament o accep its central premise that Jamaica isa bilingual countey, 2 politically contentious postion. The draft LEP was therefore never offically disseminated to schools, but remains on the MOE's website, with litle to no knowledge of its existence among classroom teachers. However, in this study, it was used as a tool to help uncover teachers’ ideologies With regard to language teaching and learning in a Creole-speaking envionment, Data for the study were collected through weekly classroom observations, thre interviews with cach of six participating teachers, students, principals, and LEP developers, questionnaires, and curricular documents in three Jamaican schools (one primary, one primary junior high, and one traditional academic secondary) that represent the range of schools Jamaican students attend. In each school, I observed two English Language Arts teachers and six focal students for the entire ‘months ‘My (shifting) goals My first adjustment as a qualitative researcher was to shift my goals. Instead of looking to examine policy implementation (no longer possible without a formal policy in place), I decided to observe teachers’ instructional and language practices and attitudes towards JC and SJE, which created what | tetm a de facto LEP in the schools. I began by making a photocopy of the draft LEP for each of the six teachers to read, after which I interviewed them to ask their opinions on it. My interviews with the LEP developers, principals, and teachers along with my observation of the later’ instructional practices over the course of the school year created a number of scenarios that discursively constructed and tested my identities and positioning as a researcher, two of which are discussed below. Vignette 1: Testing my beliefs 11 was early in the school year—Late September. 1 was sitting in the stat room at the traditional academic high school speaking with Me. |, a ninth grade teacher whom I had just interviewed about his views ofthe draft LEP and about JC generally. Mr. J. ia “proper,” middleclass West Indian man, ‘who took pride in speaking British English and made no bones about stating his disdain for Creole in our recorded interview, consistent with the prevailing discourse on JC. With the recorder now turned off, signaling the end of our formal interview, Mr. J. turned to me and asked in a somewhat serious tone, “Dr. Nero, what do you really® think about Creole? I want your opinion not as a researcher but your honest feeling, And you are one of us, so I'm just curious” (9-28-11) [felt twapped by the question. Mr. J dscursively positioned me in a bifurcated manner—as the outsider (the researcher), and as “one of us” an interactive cue that I took to mean an insider, a fellow, “properly educated” West Indian.” By invoking the use of “us,” Mr. J. was employing Bucholt2 and Hall's (2004) tactic of adequation mentioned earlier. In the moment, [fl his situated positioning of sme (Van Langenhove & Harré, 1994) loaded, the bifrcation unsetling. It seemed to me as i my researcher identity was being pitted against my cultural (West Indian) identity, and Thad to choose one. Me. Js emphasis on the words “relly” and “honest” indicated to me that he discounted my researcher role during our recorded interview as a fake performance, even though I tried not to show my personal views of Creole during our interview (or so 1 though. 1 wondered if Mr. J. assumed that I had a scripted, somewhat ivory tower view of Creole asa linguistic researcher, which I was taught to perform, but that my true fecling (ie, one that he probably believed subscribed to the common “insider” view of disparaging Creole use in school) was lurking somewhere beneath the surface But what was the “right” answer to his politically loaded question? I wasn't sure. I felt that if | gave an outright defense of Creole, given Mr. J's stated disdain for it, would be potentially settingaso © _neivo Ano NEKO up an adversarial relationship with him-—an unhelpfal scenario for me as a researcher given that 1 was atthe beginning of my research study, and expected to be an observer in his classroom for ni ‘months. At the same time, I needed to unpack his assumptions. So, [reflexively repositioned myself asthe nuanced interlocutor, as I worked through the moment and my own internal coniict with British colonial anguage ideologies. wanted to push back against the monolithic assumption of us while acknowledging widely held views about JC, and at the same time respond to the implied charge against my being a less-than-honest researcher. I fumbled for an answer that went something ike this: “Well, know that many people fel strongly about Creole use in school, and I understand that; is the same here like back home.” But, you know, attitudes are changing, especially with young people, so I try to deal with all of these issues in my research.” Somewhat inartuly was trying to acknowledge Mr. J's and many others’ negative views on Creole, and even accept my ascribed insider postion (atleast temporarily) to show understanding of how those views came about (“it’s the same here ike back home”). At the same time, 1 wanted to point out to Mr. J tha those views are not stati (attitudes are changing”) and that T wrestle with the complexity of these issues in my research, So, my positions as insider and researcher are intricately intertwined and constantly being tested. I deliberately avoided telling Mr. J. that attitude change was documented in a study by the Jamaican Language Unit, University of the West Indies (2005) at the host university, because 1 was trying to avoid reference to linguistic research towards which he capressed skeplicism during our taperecorded interview. Ironically, I played into the very bifurcation that I found troubling. Mr. J's response to me was simply, “I see” which Tet me with litle 1 say, ending that particular exchange. However, I sensed that I would be engaged in many more such discursive dances throughout the course of my research study, and that I had to be prepared to negotiate them. Vignette 2: A convenient insider Its late November 2011, and I'm in the midst of an interview with Dr, Z, one of three developers of the LEP and also a professor at the host university where I was a visiting lecturer. In this part of the interview we're discussing the development and drafting of the LEP and its emergence as a final document in Excerpt 3. except 3 T a ‘ou knew i emerged to bea fa document that can be rad and fas some good 2 ‘options, but in terme of sy. wel thik we all needed femal taining in dang a 3 poly 4 Me poly development. 5 one But there was nobody in Jamia 6 Me But tke you said there was no precedent... where you gonna gett frm? unless 7 you brought outsiders rom overeas and then that has other lesuee because they 5 de not fair wth the stuaton 9 oe Fight, withthe landscape, and we in Jamaica are guity of importing things 0 wholesale fam abroad and jut " Me Tyla Cabbean program eat? ” be: implement it ad sometimes these ae things that they have rejected inthe 3 ours and they can tke Wt other counties and implement 4 Me Un huh. In this excerpt, Dr. Z,as one ofthe authors of the LEP, gives a fair self assessment of the document, but acknowledges the limitations of all its authors, including himself, for their lack of training in policy development ("I think we all needed formal training in drafting a policy”—lines 2-3). He excuses thatJOURNAL OF LANGUAGE, ENT & EDUCATION G) 261 shortcoming by noting that “there was nobody in Jamaica” ine 5 who could offer such traning, Ithen take up this comment by agreeing with him ("But ike you said, there was no precedent ... "—line 6), creating a positional space (Mullings, 1999) to introduce a possible solution, that is, bringing in “outsiders from overseas” (line 7), but I was careful to note that such external experts could potentially be problematic because oftheir unfamiliarity with the local context ("they are not familiar withthe situation”—lines 7-8) ‘My comments ereate an opening for Dr. Z. to critique the practice in Jamaica of importing ideas from abroad that are not always suitable for the local context (*Right... we in Jamaica are guilty of importing things wholesale from abroad”—lines 9-10). Dr. Z. positions himself here as part of a collective insider group (“we in Jamaica”) that has been complacent in accepting outsider ideas/ programs that are of poor or questionable quality ("things that they have rejected in their countries and they take it to other countries and implement i”—lines 12-13). 1 took Dr, Zs explicit critique of programs imported from abroad as his not seeing me asa representative of such programs (or maybe I wanted to sce myself that way) and soe felt safe ‘express his negative opinion of them ina tape-recorded interview. Moreover, Dr. Z. knew that Lamm West Indian, so in this exchange, he positioned me asthe insider with whom he could share his views honesty Taking up my feltand ascribed insider positioning, then, interrupted Dr. Z’s comment by saying, “Typical Caribbean program, right?” (line 11, a line that expressed! my agreement with his critique of Caribbean complacency in accepting questionable external programs, and one that I felt safe to say because of our co- constructed alignment. Had I perceived myself as an outsider or had the discursive space not been co- constructed in ths exchange, it is unlikely that I would have made such a comment. This excerpt i an example of Talmy’s (2010) notion of the research interview as social practice where “voice is stuationally contingent and discursvely co-constructed between interviewer and interviewee” (p. 132) Unpacking interviews and researcher baggage ‘The two studies on which we report in this article were carried out in very diferent contexts, had different aims and used different methods, yet converged around a common set of issues related to language, power, and identity tensions. Jacqueline narrative delved into the experiences and attitudes of individual participants and lid bare the impact that she (particularly asa researcher and a native speaker of American English) had on participant responses. Shondel’s narrative at once unmasked her patii- pants’ attitudes towards Creole language policies, and challenged the power she could leverage fom her ‘nsider/outsder identity to research those very polices. In both cases, our researcher identities oscillated along the insider/outsider spectrum throughout the research process. Both research topics concerned language, whichis particularly implicated in identity. In both settings, albeit to different extents, the research artcipants—heavily invested in issues of language and identity-—challenged our identities, and they did so most palpably during interactions about language attitude, ideologies, and policies. As emerged in the research in Italy, the need for, and role of, English as a global language was contested largely in terms ofthe preferred English varity and the power ofthe naive speaker. In Jamaica Shonde was a researcher examining Creole language issues a contentious subject that cus tothe hear of insider ‘identity. As a stigmatized language that isthe mass vernacular, Creole and its roe in education and educational policies were fiercely contested, and the controversial nature of Creole language politics was «Key component in positioning the researcher. Tn response to these emerging tensions, interactions with participants involved discursive dances to leverage insider positioning to accomplish the goals of the outsider researcher role. The moment- by-moment discursive construction ofthese roles during interviews suggests thatthe definitions and enacting of “insider” and “outsider” roles are more complex, multi-layered, and context-dependent than heretofore claimed. We came to realize through our research that insider and outsiderness go beyond our nationality or ethnic selF-identitication but also include researcher roles, relative levels of familiarity wth the evolution of issues inthe educational context, and the ideologies, atitudes, and practices within the larger culture in which the research takes place. Researcher identities and roles ‘were negotiated asthe relative power of “native” English-speaking, Engish-dominant, West Indian or researcher identities were challenged by participants. As we sought to reconcile tensions inasa © neito Ano NEKO positions, we aimed to create positional spaces and collaboratively produced and co-constructed our experiences, identities, and positioning within the interview. ‘Our analysis of researcher positionalities within the vignettes described above foregrounds key considerations for researchers, including the importance of being attuned to the sociohistorical, political and economic context of research (Norton & Toohey, 2011). As Eppler and Codé (2016) explain, an interview “is a communicative event between two or more interlocutors situated in particular linguistic, socioeconomic, historical and political regimes" (p. 307). Specifically, in Italy, and especially in Southern Italy, a “native” English-speaking researcher conducting qualitative research about English brings deep-rooted language ideologies about what constitutes mastery of language to the fore. Qualitative research on language in postcolonial contexts such as Jamaica is particularly charged because it highlights deeply embedded paradoxes around language use and language ideologies ~ a legacy of colonization. The researcher, then, must be nimble in balancing her training, identities, and positionings in response to the complexity of the context, and must be perceptive of the implications of the power inherent in her researcher role. Secondly, ethical considerations should underpin the choices that researchers make during all phases of research, including the aspects of data collection discussed in this paper. Kubanyiova (2008) uses microethics to refer to the “everyday ethical dilemmas” (p. 504) that researchers face in the field that arise from the “on-the-spot decisions” they make, on the ground, with respect to participants (p. 506). During our interview interactions, instances in which we co-constructed alignment with participants were scized as opportunities to create positional spaces for participants to share their language attitudes and ideologies as well as to advance our own research agenda as harmoniously as possible. However, the decisions that researchers make during turns in interview talk—including the way in which we react to the tensions between the felt and ascribed identities — ‘may affect the stories that participants tell and the way in which they ate tod, Indeed, this article has demonstrated that the rellexive and interactional positionings of the researcher, and the discursive dances they gave rise to, at times influenced the interview interaction. Researcher choices during interviews not only alec data collection but they may also critically influence analytical endeavors (eg Mann, 2011; Pavlenko, 2007; Roulston, 2011), so more attention should be paid to researcher ‘dentity/positioning in shaping the research process and reporting of the data, Interviews are not only shaped by previous questions asked over the course of the interview or series of interviews (Talmy, 2010), but also by preceding steps in the research process, the analysis of interview data, and their recontextualization, wherein utterances are extracted from the context and social world ofthe interview and inserted into rather diflerent sites, including academic publications (Briggs, 2007). One such component that affects recontextualization is memory. In both the research projects described in this article, we took detailed fieldnotes that were consulted in order to provide Insight into how we were feeling at the time of the interview. Yet, memory becomes part of the research process since the write-up of results often occurs years removed from the actual interview event. This isthe case here for both of our narratives, each told several years after the events, They are, by definition, memoried representations, replete with what Scheurich (1997) calls “the research ers interpretive baggage” (p. 74). Scheurich (1997) notes there is “considerable conscious and unconscious baggage” thatthe researcher carries into the research process, including their biographies, other related research, training, social positionality, the research framework and individual idiosyncrasies (p. 73). The vignettes discussed in this paper revealed that the researchers’ “baggage” interacted with participants’ identities, language ideologies, conceptions ofthe local context, and other baggage that participants carried to the interview. One aspect of our baggage that may have played a role in these vignettes, although it was not a focal variable in our study, was gender (we were female researchers interacting with male participants). How _much ofthis "baggage" one takes or leaves depends on other factors including the larger cultural context, timing of the interview within the data collection process, and the motivations of the researcher and the participant. Both these factors and the “baggage” ate central tothe in-the-moment discursive moves of Interviews, and, because they influence data analysis and inform the final written result, they should beJOURNAL OF LANGUAGE, NT & EDUCATION @) 262 ‘made explicit, at least in part, in order to acknowledge their role in the research process (Scheutich, 1997). We aimed to do so in this article by presenting our respective biographies, our narratives of researcher identity tensions, and the moment-by-moment discursive construction of roles and positions during interviews in two different contexts thereby illustrating that the researcher's identity/positioning and discursive dances are key parts ofthe data. Conclusion ‘This article captures the overall tension of researchers in Ialy and Jamaica, two drastically diferent contexts, returning "home" (to a place of perceived familiarity) to conduct research, only to find the familiar rendered “strange,” and our selfascribed insider identity challenged, most saliently during interviews. We brought the dynamic construction, enacting, and performance of roles during inter: views to the foreground and in doing so showed that we cannot always take the words exchanged in interviews at face value. Moreover, this article challenged extant dichotomies that leave litle room for researchers to be, at the same time, both insiders and outsiders, Italian or West Indian and ‘American, “native” and “non-native speakers,” and so on, by moving hybridity to the forefront of, four analysis through a focus on discursive dances. By making our interactive and reflexive position: ings during interactions with participants explicit, our sensitivity to the role of our identities, power and positionality inthe research process was heightened (Norton & Toohey, 2011). In this paper, we focused on only the facets of identity that emerged more prominently during researcher-participant Interactions, and therefore overlooked others, such as gender (Seidman, 2006), which may play a significant part of other researchers’ experiences. We hope that our theorization of the discursive co-construction/enactment of roles and our commentary on the multi-layered nature of these roles will inspire researchers to incorporate this critical dimension into future studies in this vein. The analysis of sites of identity tensions and positional spaces in interview data ultimately uncover rich and nuanced notions concerning language and identity, and allow us to recognize that our identities and our voices are a crucial part of our research projects, Notes 1. A West Indian (of Anglophone background) refers 10 someone boen and raise in any Caribbean island nation ‘swell asthe mainland countries of Guyana in South America, and Belize in Central America, where English x the official language and medium of instruction in school on account ofa shared history of Brits colonization (dey, 200). 2. Thin image established Southern Holy “as a and inhabited by brands, Izy peasants and corruption” (Chambers, 2015, p. 13). 5, Over the past decade, Naples as been Featured in the news for organized and petty crime, a waste management criss, and rcord unemployment rates sich tha, for some, Neapolitanness evokes imagery of crime, trash, indolencs, and poverty 4 Bucholtz and Hall (2004) characterize adequatin (one of their tactics of intersubjetvty) asa strategic pursuit fof socially recognized sameness within an interaction, 5. Haugh (2014) defines Jocular mockery 38 "social actions [..| whereby the speaker somehow diminishes something of eelevance to sl, other, or « non-co-present third party, but does so within a now-seious oF Playfl frame” (p78) 6, Bolded words ate Ms. F's emphasis 7. When [first met Mr. J we had a Tong untecorded conversation about my West Indian background, my upbringing, nd Brith colonial edacation in Guyana. 8. Here find myself, ironically, employing the tactic of adequation as wel. a strategie decision to build alignment with Me]. for reasons cited abovease © ave10 ano weno Funding Funding for Shondel. Nero's study provided by the Council for International Exchange of Scholars (CLES) Fulbright rant #9421111 in 2011 Jacqueline Al's study was supported by a New York Unversity Steiahardt Schoo! of Culture “Education and Human Development Challenge Grant oRciD Jacqueline Aiello © http:foridony/00-0002-1832-6207 Shonda J. Nero @ htp/forck.org/0000-O001-7132-3796 References Adder, K. (2000), West Indies. nD. Balderston,M. Gonzalez, & A. Lopéz (Els), Encyclopedia of contemporary Lat “American and Carian cultures (Val. 1 A-D, pp. 1384-1587), New York, N¥: Routledge Back, M. 2012). Positioning language proficiency: Interaction with a multlingual indigenous Ecuadorian, Journal of ‘Applied Linguistics and Profesional Practice, (1), 1-22. dot:10.1888)japhv6i.1 Briggs. C. (2007) Anthropology interviewing, and communicabilty in contemporary society. Curent Anthropology. “8, 551-567. dob 086/S18800 Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K (200). Language and dently. In A. Durant (Ed), A companion to linguistic anthropology (pp. 369-394). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Bucholt, M. & Hal, K. (2008). Finding identity: Theory and data. Mulilingus, 27, 151-163, doi0.1515/ ‘MULTL.2008.008| Chambers, L. 2015) The "Southern question”... again. In A. Mammone, E.G, Pani & G. A. Velie (Eds), The Routledge handbook of contemporary lay: History, pots society (pp. 13-22). New York, NY: Routledge. Davies, B, & Hareé, R(1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social ‘Behaviour, 20, 43-63. dot10.1111/).1468-59141990.b00174x Epplet, .D, & Codd, (2016) Challenges for language and identity researchers inthe collection and transcription of ‘spoken interaction. In S. Preece (Ed), The Rouladge handbook of language and identity (pp. 304-819). New York, NY: Routledge CGiampapa, F (2011) The polities of "being and becoming” a researcher: Mdentty power and negotiating the Sei Journal of Language, Identity, & Baucation, 10, 132-144, do 10 1080115348458 2011 585304 Hamdan, AK: (209), Rflesvity of discomfort in insider outsider educational research, McCil Journal of Education, 4, 377-404, d0.72021039946ar Harré, R, & van Langenhowe, L. (1991). Varieties of positioning. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 2, 398-407. doil0.1111).1468 59141991 100208 Haugh, M. (2014). Jocular mockery as interactional practice in everyday Anglo-Australian conversation, Australian Journal of Linguists, 34, 76-99. do: 1008007268602. 2014875456 ul, F. QOL, Covet bilingual and symbolic competence: Analytical reflections on negotiating iniderfoutsider Postionality in Swedish speech situations Appl Linguists, 35, 63-81. da0.1098/appinamas Jamaican Language Unit, University ofthe West nes (205). Language atitude sure of lama. Mona, Jamaica: UWI Kubanyiova, M, (2008). Rethinking research ethics in contemporary applied linguistics: The tension between macro ‘ethical and miroethical perspectives in stated research, The Mader Language Journal, 82, 503-518, dok0.1111/ 310-4781 2008078438 ee, Ey & Simon-Maeda, A. (2006). Racialize research identities in ESL/EFL, research, TESOL Quarters, 40, 573-594. dito 2307140264544 Levis, J. M. (2005). Changing contexts and shifting paradigms in promuncation teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 369-377. dos10.2307/3568185 Lipp-Gree, B. (1997). Engl thaw accent. New York, NY: Routledge. Mann, S. GOLD). A critical review of qualitative interviews in applied inguistis, Applied Linguists, 32), 6-24 oit01093/applin/anghes Merriam, SB. Johnson Bailey, J, Les, MY, Kee, Y., Ntseane, G, & Muhamad, M. (2001). Power and positional ‘Negotiating insier/ousier status within and across cares. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 25) 405-416, do10,1080/02601370120490, Ministry of Education (MOE), Jamaica. (2001). Language education policy. Retrieved from hip moes god policeslanguagepaicy pd “Masseson, J (2010). Subjectivity and retlesivty: Locating the self on research in ‘Qualitative Studies in Education, 23, 479-194, dol. 1080/09518398 2010492771, locaton. International Journal ofJOURNAL OF LANGUAGE, NT & EDUCATION @) 265 ‘Mailings, 8 (1999) Insider or outsides, both or neither: Some dilemmas of interscwing ina cros-cltral sting (Geforuns, 30, 397-350. do1010L6S0016.7185(93)00025-1 ‘Neto, S.1. (2014). De fact language education policy through teachers’ attitudes and practices: critical ethnographic study in three Jamaican schools Language Policy, 13, 21-242. do10.1007510995-013-9311-3 ‘orton, & Early, M, (2011), Reseach identity, narative inquiry, and language teaching research. TESOL Quarterly, 45, 415-439, dai S054/tg2011 261161 Norton, B, & Toohey. K. (2011) Idetity language learning, and socal change. Language Teaching, 44, 412-46, ‘dt01047/S026141481 1000309 (bas, C. (2012). Negotiating the insider/outsider continus: A black female perspective on reseatch with deaf women and black women. Qualitative Research, I, 61-78 dol0.1177/14687941 12465632 Paechter, C. (2013). Researching sensitive isues online: Implications of a hybrid insidrfoutsider postion in ‘a retrospective ethnographi stdy, Quatative Rear, 13, 71-86, do 101177/1468794112446107 Patio Santos, A. (2011), Negotiating power rations and ethnicity ina socolingsstic ethnography in Madrid. Journal of Language, Idemity & Education, 10, 145-163. do:10-1080/15348458.2011 585305 Pavleako, A. (2007). Autobiographic naratives as data in applied linguists. Applied Linguists, 28, 163-188 ‘di 101093/appin/ammons Relato Pastor, A.M (2011). Crossing language and identity as a erical border ethnographer in Soutuemn California. Journal of Language, Kdentay & Education, 10, 186-205. do:10.1080/15548458 2011-55309 Rouliton, K. (2011). Interview “problems” at topics for analy. Applied Linguists, 32, 77-94, d0.1093/appin/ ‘03s Scheurich, J.J (197). Research mathod inthe postmodern. London, UK: Falmer Pres Seidman, R (2006) Interviewing as qualitative researc A guide for researcher education and the socal sciences (3rd ‘New York, NY: Teachers College Pres Subreenduth, S, & Rhee J. F. 2010) A porous, moephing, and circulatory mode of se-ather: Decolonizing identity polities by engaging transnational reflexivity International Journal of Qualitative Stadies in Education, 23, 331-346. #10 080/09518390003156215, Talmy, 5. (2010). Qualitative interviews in applied linguistics: From research instrument to social practice. Annual Review of Applied Linguists, 30, 128-148 doi0.1017/50267190510000085 Van Langeahove, L. & Harré, (19%). Cultural stereotypes and positioning theory. Journal for the Theory of Social Bchavour, 24, 360-872, dok0.1111) 1468-5914 19944600260.