Researching female professors: the difficulties of representation, positionality and power in feminist research

Abstract

This article draws on findings from my doctoral research to exemplify some of the difficulties I encountered when interviewing 20 female professors¹ and subsequently writing about their life histories. In this article, I discuss how I addressed the issues of representing and positioning my participants, and I reflect on the power dynamics present in the research process. The article contends that by drawing on Bourdieu and Wacquant's [An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press] understanding of reflexivity and feminist interpretations of their work including McNay [“Gender, Habitus and the Field: Pierre Bourdieu and the Limits of Reflexivity.” Theory Culture Society 16: 95] and Adkins [“Reflexivity Freedom or Habit of Gender?” Theory Culture Society 20: 21], valuable research can be produced, despite the difficulties. A related aim of this paper is to reflect back after four years in an academic post on my position as a novice researcher, and some of the associated issues facing doctoral students, particularly the problems with researching upwards [Walford, G. 2011. “Researching the Powerful. British Educational Research Association On-line Resource.” Accessed March 17, 2014. www.bera.ac.uk/system/files/Researching%20the%20Powerful.pdfWalford 2011].

Keywords:

• social class
• gender
• habitus
• power
• representation
• positionality

Notes

1. In the UK context, the title of ‘professor’ is reserved for full professors only – that is, those with either an established or personal chair.

2. The complex class positions taken up by the participants are not explored in depth in this article, but see Hoskins (2012) for a further discussion.

3. These differences are not examined here, but see Hoskins (2012) for a discussion.

4. The uses and limitations of applying Bourdiean habitus theory to my research topic are not discussed in this paper, but see Hoskins (2013) for a discussion.

5. The typology of objective, subjective and relative success I developed for my doctoral thesis is not discussed here, but see Hoskins (2012) for a discussion.

6. As of 1992 many institutions that had been polytechnics or colleges were renamed universities, sometimes after mergers, and writers often now refer to ‘pre’ and ‘post’, or ‘old’ and ‘new’ universities. Pre-1992 institutions tend to be more research-intensive and of higher status and are more likely to receive research funding.

7. The RAE started in 1986 and occurs at regular intervals every three to five years. It is carried out on behalf of the four UK higher education funding councils in the UK to evaluate the quality of research undertaken by British universities. The RAE has been renamed the Research Excellence Framework.