CALL TO ACTION: RESTRUCTURING TRADITIONAL RESEARCH CONFERENCES TO PROMOTE DIGNITY-AFFIRMING SPACES

WHEN GOOD INTENTIONS AREN’T ENOUGH

Rigorous, equitable, and collaborative education research carries enormous potential to effect systemic change and inspire innovation in the education space. This type of research approach invites a reimagining of traditional ways, demands intentional efforts to dismantle harmful power dynamics, and ultimately, can result in research that is more fully informed, impactful, and improved. Research conferences currently play an important role in sharing and interrogating research of all kinds. Although many research conferences nowadays intend to be inclusive spaces that pursue knowledge and justice, echoing some of the very same principles that underlie collaborative education research, we argue these good intentions aren’t enough: The lived experiences of those attending and presenting at conferences (and realities around who gets to do so) need to align with these intentions.

In this op-ed, we explore the nuances and complexities of this pursuit within the realm of traditional research conferences. We define traditional research conferences, entangled with White dominant power hierarchies, as scholarly gatherings that have historically been shaped by and perpetuate systems of privilege and exclusion that disproportionately favor Euro-centric perspectives in academia. Drawing on recent experiences and reflections from the American Educational Research Association (AERA) 2023 annual conference centered on interrogating consequential education research in pursuit of truth, we argue for a more critically conscious approach and structure to sharing research, one that not only emphasizes accountability but also actively challenges existing power structures that are heavily laden within academia, including who is represented at research conferences.

Our aim is not to provide a definitive answer but rather to paint a path forward, stimulate dialogue, and inspire action, propelling us toward a future where the pursuit of truth is truly intertwined with the pursuit of justice. As we delve into this discussion, we encourage readers to consider their own roles, positionalities, and responsibilities in this transformative journey.

REFLECTION

We are Heather, a Black woman and Executive Director of a community-based organization, and Lindsey, a White woman and collaborative education early scholar researcher. The Network for EdWork, in which our research-practice partnership (RPP) lives, focuses on designing and implementing anti-racist educational leadership learning interventions and collaborating with educational leaders in schools to confront deeply entrenched systems of inequity and collectively build racially just schools. In April, we had our first joint presentation at AERA. Our work, titled “A Critical Qualitative Approach: Humanizing RPPs Supporting Justice-Driven Educational Leadership,” was presented at a structured poster session, which Lindsey co-chaired. This presentation highlighted ways we’ve built trust and challenged hierarchical power within our RPP over the last four years. We used our presentation to underline the necessity of transparency, accountability, and reciprocity in RPPs and to advocate for collaboration rooted in trust.

In presenting at AERA, we hoped to contribute to and gain insights from other scholars, practice-based leaders, and community members, such as district leaders, teachers, and leaders of community-based organizations committed to equitable collaborative education research. We aspired to foster meaningful discussions around ways to disrupt racialized and politicized power structures embedded in RPPs, foster a sense of community, and learn from diverse perspectives. In an effort to create a counter-narrative to these structures within our presentation, we also invited participants to engage with the session and build upon the research we were presenting as a way of inviting this new community into our own.  Additionally, we sought to examine how our practices either challenge or inadvertently uphold these structures within our partnership.

Within the first few minutes of our structured poster session, a White man engaged Heather with an aggressive line of questioning regarding the legitimacy of our partnership and our perspective on it. This man proceeded to explain his understanding and interpretation of an RPP in a condescending manner. Concurrently, another White man witnessed this act and decided to avoid feelings of discomfort and engage Lindsey in a separate conversation.

When our discussion concluded, this second man acknowledged the mansplaining and patronizing behavior displayed by the first man and stated how unfortunate it was that Heather had to experience that. Heather graciously invited him to next time use his privilege to disrupt these power dynamics. This interaction made us reflect on our responsibilities in confronting, perpetuating, or challenging power imbalances and centering racially diverse epistemologies.

To conclude the poster session, presenters and attendees gathered back together to engage in a discussion about the ways we see educational scholars and practitioners interrogating research-practice partnerships in pursuit of truth and justice. As part of this discussion, Heather shed light on the underrepresentation of practitioners in this conference environment, which stands in contrast to the conference’s stated commitment to and advocacy for equitable RPPs. She advocated for broader inclusion, including the removal of financial obstacles that may hinder their participation. Furthermore, Heather questioned whether the structure of traditional research conferences and structured poster sessions perpetuates prevailing power structures that we’re striving to dismantle. Additionally, she recognized that even her ability to be present as a community partner may have been based on the fact that she, too, is a byproduct of the Academy, having received her doctorate from a prestigious university. Traditional research conferences are typically structured in a hierarchical way, where a few keynote speakers, discussant, and session chairs hold most of the speaking time, and attendees are mostly scholars, which can create an echo chamber where researchers are exposed only to information, ideas, or opinions that align with their own existing beliefs or biases. This dynamic can be seen as a reflection of existing societal and academic power structures, where a select few, often White folks, hold a majority of the influence. Moreover, the concept of a structured poster session itself can be seen as perpetuating traditional academic hierarchies. Poster sessions involve presenters, usually scholars, standing by their posters and explaining their research to passing scholarly attendees. The power dynamics in these interactions can often reflect and reinforce power hierarchies where scholars critique, and practitioners who engage in RPPs are often not a part of traditional research conferences. In addition, the way knowledge is presented and discussed can often center on dominant, Euro-centric perspectives, which can marginalize or overlook racially and ethnically diverse epistemologies and ontologies. Heather, therefore, encouraged researchers to consider alternative ways of interacting, sharing knowledge, and building community with practitioners and community members at research conferences.

After the poster session ended, Lindsey approached the first man for a private discussion. She shared how his behavior was perceived and urged him to reflect on his position as a White man in relation to traditional power dynamics. She also encouraged him to extend an apology to Heather. He thanked me for the constructive feedback, reflected on his actions, and apologized to Heather.

This incident underscores the importance of continuous self-reflection and action in our quest for truth and justice within research conferences, RPPs, and the larger educational context. It was especially sobering that this incident took place during a poster session dedicated to disrupting racialized and politicized power structures. Reflecting on the incident, as well as how we were able to respond to it in a way that brought at least some reconciliation, we strongly believe that we must question not only the conventional practices of research dissemination in conference spaces but also scrutinize our roles and identities in tackling power disparities and nurturing equitable dialogue – and that we can be successful in working towards epistemic justice.

A PATH FORWARD

We are at a critical juncture where we have the opportunity to radically rethink how traditional research conferences, including those like AERA, are organized to be humanizing sites that promote justice and address power structures head-on. Academia has long been considered crucial for the production of new knowledge. Nevertheless, how does this ideology, deciding who is suitable for generating new knowledge, reify the very issue we aim to disrupt in our quest for truth and justice in education and research? To paint a path forward, we need to make concerted efforts toward ensuring diversity and representation of practitioners in research conferences and RPP presentations and remove barriers to truly and authentically engage and center practitioners and racially diverse ways of knowing. When we refer to “practitioners,” our definition encompasses the “practice-side” –those working in school districts and other agencies and organizations primarily tasked with providing educational services and responsible for facilitating learning–, and the “community-side” –those working in organizations whose main purpose is to support community endeavors, as well as other community-based groups, such as families, youth, and community members. Curating research conferences that are dignity-affirming and culturally sustaining spaces is not an aspiration but a necessity. We must ask ourselves – why should we continue to reinforce these structures found in traditional conference spaces if they fail to embody these values? How can we design research conferences and facilitate sessions to be places of epistemic justice and humanizing spaces? Recently, AERA President Tyrone Howard called on researchers, practitioners, and policymakers to imagine boldly what education spaces free of racial injustice might look like. We also wonder how traditional research conferences, like AERA, might create the conditions necessary to support this call to action.

While AERA seeks to create space that will attract broad participation and explore how our work can become more relevant to diverse communities, there need to be structural changes to the way the conference is designed to adequately and effectively support this goal. Research conferences’ traditional ecosystem of ‘professionalism’ must be examined against the backdrop of ‘authenticity.’ The dichotomy between these two ideals begs for a reassessment of how we view professional spaces and how we can make them more inclusive and reflective of diverse identities and experiences.

As a call to conference organizers, chairs, and presenters, being mindful and intentional about these dynamics is paramount. Facilitators can shape these spaces for research dissemination that supports the pursuit of truth and justice. Lindsey has thought about her role as a co-chair during this session, and how chairs can be proactive and curate conditions for attendees to be critically reflective of their positionality, power, and privilege. Chairs can agitate power structures by providing participants with handouts that pose thought-provoking discussion questions for them to consider, such as unpacking one’s racial positionality and intersectionality. And, just as critical as ‘calling on’ folks to collectively be mindful of how we enter into spaces, we must also ‘call people in’ to conversations that promote critical reflexivity. 

While we acknowledge that this article is not meant to provide definitive answers and that it is our collective responsibility to figure this out, in what follows, we provide some initial suggestions and a starting point to disrupt White dominant power structures at research conferences. To work toward this call to action, every role in the conference, from organizers to attendees, has a part to play. Here are some nascent suggestions and reflection questions for each role.

As a reminder, these initial ideas are not exhaustive but merely starting points, intended to spark collective curiosity, introspection, imagination, and action. The hope is for you to join us in exploring, adding to, and implementing these ideas at your next research conference, regardless of your role. Embracing these concepts and any additional ideas you’ve generated from reading this can transform traditional research conferences. Instead of merely disseminating knowledge, conferences can serve as powerful catalysts for change, promoting diverse ways of knowing, cultivating community, and confronting dominant structures. This approach has the potential to redistribute power, pursue epistemic justice, foster a life-giving atmosphere, and encourage critical dialogues between researchers and practitioners in the collective quest for truth and justice.

Lindsey Kaiser is a PhD Candidate at the University of Washington and Heather Lechner is Executive Director of Education at Technology Access Foundation.

Suggested citation: Kaiser, L., & Lechner, H. (2023). Call To Action: Restructuring Traditional Research Conferences To Promote Dignity-Affirming Spaces. NNERPP Extra, 5(2), 28-35. https://doi.org/10.25613/CTMR-V219