Collaborative autoethnography involves two or more researchers exploring a topic through self-reflection and discussion to gain a deeper understanding of their experiences. It was the focus of a recent workshop facilitated by CRADLE at Deakin University, where participants from various faculties discussed how collaborative autoethnography could support reflection on teaching practices and research in higher education. The workshop helped those new to the method understand it better and allowed those with experience using it to share insights into its benefits, challenges, and ethical considerations for generating meaningful self-study.

1. As method, collaborative autoethnography makes dialogue intentional and
critical and has the potential to deepen the process of research between two or
more individuals and to invite transformative learning to occur.
Collaboration and conversation: CRADLE
collaborative autoethnography workshop
https://blogs.deakin.edu.au/cradle/2019/10/25/collaboration-and-conversation-cradle-collaborative-
autoethnography-workshop/
CRADLE’s A/Prof. Margaret Bearman and I recently facilitated a workshop on
Collaborative Autoethnography (CAE) with Deakin staff from the Faculty of Arts
and Education, the Faculty of Business and Law, and staff from Deakin Learning
Futures (DLF) and CRADLE from the Portfolio of the Deputy Vice-Chancellor
Education. It was a fabulous opportunity for participants to share their knowledge
and learn from others across Deakin about their own practice and research, their
interests in the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), and to collaborate on
their learning about CAE.
Workshop participants chat around a large tableThe workshop aimed to provide
participants with a basic understanding of the methodological approach, an
opportunity to simulate discussion-based self-study, and to build insight into how
CAE can intersect with the SoTL.
CAE involves collaboration and conversation that explore complex and nuanced
questions in a safe and collegiate space. Academics become participant-
researchers to support reflection on their own practice, while simultaneously
reflecting on their colleagues’ experiences collectively. This method ensures
participant-researchers are not being researched on, nor researching on
colleagues; rather, they are researching with their colleagues to make meaning of
their individual and combined experiences (Heron & Reason, 2006; Chang,
Ngunjiri & Hernandez, 2016).
The workshop was successful in bringing together Deakin staff in conversation not
only about what CAE is, but why they are interested in the methodology and how
they might go about doing it in their own practice/research. It allowed those
already involved in CAE research to voice their experience and answer questions
for participants interesting in beginning research utilising CAE.
Workshop participants chat beneath a slide reading "Let's do a self-study
together"The discussion around the table generated insight into the methodology
as participants voiced questions and personal knowledge on the benefits and
challenges, the ethical considerations, and the meaning of rigour in self-study
research.
The conclusion of the workshop left participants with a better understanding of
the potential for CAE in higher education in regards to supporting academics
across faculties and institutions at Deakin and in SoTL. Moreover, it was a great

2. opportunity for participants to foster deeper learning through collaborative and
collective exploration of themselves, their colleagues and their contexts
re are additional characteristics thatdistinguish authethnography from other kinds of personal work.
These include(1) purposefully commenting on / critiquing of culture and cultural practices, (2) making
contributions to existing research, (3) embracing vulnerability with purpose, and (4) creating a reciprocal
relationship with audiences in order to compel a response (Holman Jones, Adams, and Ellis,2013:22).
However, there is a distinction between the tellingof a personal story (autobiography) and a story that
is both reflective relativeabout the situation and also positioned within discussionsaboutthatsituation:
not all personal writingisautoethnographic;there areadditional characteristicsthatdistinguish
authethnography from other kinds of personal work. These include(1) purposefully commenting on /
critiquing of culture and cultural practices, (2) making contributions to existing research, (3) embracing
vulnerability with purpose, and (4) creating a reciprocal relationship with audiences in order to compel a
response (Holman Jones, Adams, and Ellis,2013:22).
The use of auto-ethnography is particularly suitable for studies involving cultural
contexts. The use of an ethnographic wide-angle lens on the broader scope of cultural
practice is combined with a constant reflection and inward look at the vulnerable sel
Our process of vulnerably sharing our stories of wokeness and identifying
common themes across our experiences is collaborative autoethnographic
research in action. As such, this paper is a form of critical activism that
challenges and destabilizes racist and patriarchal educational practices. We
hope that our writing will empower criticality and spur a community of support
for womxn of color graduate students in higher education.
Our close bond as a sista scholar familia serves as the relational foundation that
enables us to authentically and vulnerably share our most intimate reflections
on becoming and staying woke. To
I was encouraging them to expose their trepidations about race and race
discussion, while simultaneously imagining the possibilities of racial dialogue
with vulnerability and candidness present.” (p. 173).
What is Collaborative Autoethnography
1.

3. Collaborative autoethnography is characterized by two or more authors focused on a
phenomenon of inquiry from the respective of self through a concurrent or sequential systemic
research approach that typically combines the perspectives, findings, and conclusions.