Toward a Methodology of Healing: Promoting Radical Healing Among Student Survivors Through Research

Abstract

To resist hegemonic campus sexual violence research trends rooted in postpositivist paradigms, I advocate for the centering of healing in research, particularly in the research methodologies that scholars employ. In this article, I invite researchers to (re)consider the purpose of research as a process that actively prioritizes and promotes radical healing among student participants. By envisioning culture as an asset for healing, centering relationality and community, and embodying trauma-informed practices, researchers can employ methodologies that support radical healing among minoritized survivor participants. I describe my conceptualization of a methodology rooted in healing, integrating discussion of my positionality and professional pursuits that have informed my definitions of healing and understandings of the possibilities of a healing methodology. I then share some examples of potential methods that align with a healing methodology, such as thé talks, virtual semi-structured interviews, and photo-elicitation. Through attention to the physical environment and interpersonal context, engaging in contemplative practices, promoting principles of trauma-informed care, and centering relationality, embodying a methodology of healing can foster healing among participants through the very act of engaging in specific methods and the research process. I demonstrate the potential transformative nature of these methods by sharing participant narratives from two critical qualitative studies centering Women and Femme Student Survivors of Color in which I employed these methods. I conclude by illustrating the significance of a healing methodology—its ability to invite higher education scholars to question the very purpose of research and shift to center participant communities as the primary audience of scholarship, ultimately fostering radical healing. By employing a healing methodology, scholars can promote equity and justice for individual participants while working toward broader social change.

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

¹ As Smith (2012) situated the history of research in imperial projects of “collection,” where colonizers stole sacred artifacts, living beings, and Indigenous peoples through research, I move toward the term “data generation” instead of “data collection.” In addition to recognizing this history of “collecting” as linked to colonialism, I understand data generation as centering participants’ active role in creating knowledge (Kortegast et al., 2019).

Additional information

Funding

An American Fellowship from the American Association of University Women supported this work.