- Library Home /
- Search Collections /
- Open Collections /
- Browse Collections /
- UBC Faculty Research and Publications /
- “Good for Whom?” : Unsettling Research Practice
Open Collections
UBC Faculty Research and Publications
“Good for Whom?” : Unsettling Research Practice Nathan, Lisa P.; Kaczmarek, Michelle; castor, maggie; Cheng, Shannon; Mann, Raquel
Abstract
Through this paper, we join others concerned by the rhetoric that research and technology design contribute to a common good. We argue that framings of commonality obfuscate the detrimental effects of accepted research practice, particularly for disenfranchised communities. Claims of a common good are in alignment with a colonial perspective—a single all knowing entity, in this case personified by the researcher, who has the expertise and experience necessary to identify what is of benefit to all. Our argument is informed by our engagement with four Indigenous community|academic partnerships. We describe our efforts to avoid perpetuating problematic (yet common) research dynamics through questioning, critiquing and adjusting our practices as a research team. We offer understandings gained through attempts to unsettle our approach to research, grounded by the diverse experience and envisioned futures of our partners. We argue for the continued need for spaces where the short and longer-term implications of research practice can be articulated, discussed and acted upon.
Item Metadata
Title |
“Good for Whom?” : Unsettling Research Practice
|
Creator | |
Publisher |
Association for Computing Machinery
|
Date Issued |
2017-06
|
Description |
Through this paper, we join others concerned by the rhetoric
that research and technology design contribute to a common good.
We argue that framings of commonality obfuscate the detrimental
effects of accepted research practice, particularly for
disenfranchised communities. Claims of a common good are in
alignment with a colonial perspective—a single all knowing
entity, in this case personified by the researcher, who has the
expertise and experience necessary to identify what is of benefit to
all. Our argument is informed by our engagement with four
Indigenous community|academic partnerships. We describe our
efforts to avoid perpetuating problematic (yet common) research
dynamics through questioning, critiquing and adjusting our
practices as a research team. We offer understandings gained
through attempts to unsettle our approach to research, grounded
by the diverse experience and envisioned futures of our partners.
We argue for the continued need for spaces where the short and
longer-term implications of research practice can be articulated,
discussed and acted upon.
|
Subject | |
Genre | |
Type | |
Language |
eng
|
Date Available |
2021-05-31
|
Provider |
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
|
Rights |
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
|
DOI |
10.14288/1.0398209
|
URI | |
Affiliation | |
Citation |
Lisa P. Nathan, Michelle Kaczmarek, maggie castor, Shannon Cheng, and Raquel Mann. 2017. Good for Whom?: Unsettling Research Practice. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communities and Technologies (C&T ’17), 290–297.
|
Publisher DOI |
10.1145/3083671.3083685
|
Peer Review Status |
Unreviewed
|
Scholarly Level |
Faculty; Graduate
|
Rights URI | |
Aggregated Source Repository |
DSpace
|
Item Media
Item Citations and Data
Rights
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International