Thinking with Trickster: sporadic illuminations for educational research

Abstract

Moments of restriction or impasse – situations that are seemingly intransigent, offering no alternatives or poor alternatives, predicaments leading to less than satisfactory resolutions or unhappy compromises – abound in the practice of educational research. This paper speculates on the possibilities offered by thinking with ‘Trickster’ – a shadowy, unconventional figure of myth and folklore – in such moments of impasse, and asks if this source of inspiration may allow for flashes of illumination and thus, room for newness to enter the world. Drawing on some ‘difficult’ moments from two rather different research projects, the paper reflects on what thinking with Trickster might have to offer to the praxis of educational research, especially in terms of methodology and ethics.

Keywords:

• Trickster
• impasse
• praxis
• educational research
• risk

Notes

1. The list of often unreported ‘insitu ethics’ is telling: ‘purposely ambiguous entrée letters, glancing at or acquiring documents lying on desks that subjects would not have wanted seen or sometimes covertly acquiring them from other subjects, overhearing privileged conversations during observations because researcher status was not announced, and pretexting informants “about what others said.” … undisclosed affiliation and agreements with subjects; using covert partners who fail to disclose themselves to fellow insiders; flat out misrepresentation about a study’s exact purpose; and not complying with observational permission limits to foil institutional cover-ups (e.g., appearing at unplanned moments or playing ignorant)’ (Shulman, 1994, p. 249).