Rumbling on performativity_Frits Simon

The criteria will apply to the narratives, the analyses and the reflections as presented
in the chapters 3, 4, 5 and 6. The narratives, the analyses and the reflections together
are the constituent components of my research. These chapters reflect the content
and preliminary interpretations within my research. However, given the reflexive
character of the research the concluding chapter 7 is inextricably bound up with the
preceding chapters. The concluding chapter has apart from its synoptic purpose, the
purpose of synthetizing and gaining more in-depth reflection on all the findings, the
analyses and reflections regarding one of more major subjects which emerged during
the research process. As such the criteria also apply to the final chapter this thesis.
Recapitulating I come to a set of 5 criteria to evaluate my research:
1 The research should have an analytical and reflexive character. This implicates that
the taken for granted assumptions of me as a researcher should be made visible
and should be reflected upon with regard to the results of the research. Moreover,
my research should be done against a critical analysis and reflections on relevant
existing literature concerning the topics of the research. At least in the conclusions
concerning the research it must be made visible how and why analysis and reflexivity
lead to changing insights regarding the topics at hand. In the analysis and
reflection I must stay close to the narratives taking them seriously as the empirical
core of the research.
2 The research should be done as a full member of the community the research is
about. I cannot be a participating observer, but must be an observing participant in
and of the daily activities in that community. The research is situational, local and
written from a mindful I-perspective.
3 The research should deliver well written and interesting narratives. It should be
narratives which give a clear, challenging, careful and enriching perspective on the
situations, social interactions and/or activities as experienced by me as being the
researcher.
4 The research should be transferable. Transferability implies that the experiences,
the analysis, reflections and conclusions of my research must resonate, be recognised
and understandable by people who are working in more or less the same
circumstances. Authenticity must be secured by being sure that I have been in
these circumstances and may have had the experiences. By transferability the social
relevance of the research is underlined.
5 I should take responsibility for my research by paying attention to and reporting
about ethical matters of process and informed consent, and the ethics of consequences.
Moreover, I should make it possible to be controlled on fraud. Facing the
reader with the reader’s responsibility concerning the sensitivity of the research is a
final obligation.
In line with the suggestions of the Dutch committees on prevention of scientific fraud
(Commissie Levelt et al., 2012) researchers should be embedded in communities where
they are invited to reflect on these issues.
60