Becoming Neighbors in a Mexican American Community: Power, Conflict, and Solidarity

Appendix. The Politics of Research

Appendix The Politics of Research It is November —La Puente’s annual K run. The mainly Latina/o runners have just completed the hardest mile of the race. We are greeted by community residents who have risen early this Sunday morning. Standing in front of their homes, they cheer us on—‘‘Come on. Good job. Keep going. ¡Vamos!¡Vamos! ¡Andale! ¡Andale!’’ From the group of runners, we hear someone yell, ‘‘Speak in English. This is America.’’ Suddenly I hear myself respond, ‘‘This is La Puente. We speak in Spanish and in English.’’ My heart beats faster, and I run ahead.  , November  Feminists, scholars of color, and progressives have extensively critiqued the assumptions underlying traditional social science methodological approaches that assert that scholars should maintain distance and a ‘‘valuefree ’’ stance from their research topics and the people being studied (hooks ; Collins ; Frankenberg ). Such critics have argued that research questions, research design, data collection, analysis, and conclusions are influenced by a researcher’s social location and his or her views of the world as a raced, classed, and gendered individual. Thus, all research, whether explicitly stated or not, is based on political perspectives and political decisions (Nyden et al. ). There is no ‘‘disinterested position to be adopted in scholarship’’ (Frankenberg, ). Also, maintaining distance may reinforce power differentials and objectify individuals and communities (hooks; Collins). As with other forms of research, certain politics are involved in conducting a qualitative study of a working-class community of color (Baca Zinn ; Zavella ; Blea ). As a self-identified Latina, a bi-ethnic Nicaraguan and Italian-American woman, born in La Puente and raised in a lower-middle-class household doing research in a predominantly working-class, Mexican-origin community, it has been important to reflect both on the research process and my own position. As a feminist and Chicana/o studies scholar concerned with achieving social justice, I was not a neutral researcher. I agreed with many of the issues raised by parents regarding the quality of schools and the unequal power 233 dynamics of a Hacienda Heights–controlled school board that does not suf- ficiently represent the entire school district. When the decision to eliminate bilingual education arose, I, like many vocal residents, raised my concerns. I assisted in some of these struggles by speaking at a school board meeting in support of La Puente parents and teachers and by supporting progressive candidates with their campaigns for City Council and the school board. As I reflect on the relationships between my identity and experiences and the research process, my position as a simultaneous insider and outsider among the Mexican-origin community in La Puente appears most salient. Though I spent the early years of my life in La Puente and am currently living in the city, I was raised primarily in Hacienda Heights, often referred to by La Puente residents as ‘‘the other side’’ (of the tracks). When people hear that I attended Glen A. Wilson High School, they often reply with a simple ‘‘Oh’’ and a roll of their eyes—indicating to me that they too are aware of the inequality in resources between La Puente–area and Hacienda Heights schools. Thus, class and racial differences between the two communities combined with my current educational background clearly mark my class privileges. Despite differences in community, educational, and racial/ethnic background , a few individuals shared with me how other factors of my identity and experience were helpful in the research process. Knowing that I am Latina, that I live in La Puente, that I was interested in doing a study on the city, and that my mother has taught middle school students in La Puente for nearly thirty years seemed to facilitate the research process. Also, the fact that many of the people whom I interviewed were recommended by other respondents was helpful. Thus, before the actual interviews, individuals were already familiar with my work, and they expressed an interest in participating. Since I was interviewing people on group attitudes and interactions, I attempted to present as open-minded an image as possible by attentively listening to people, encouraging them to ask me questions, and honestly revealing aspects of myself. At most times during the interview, this was easy. However, in situations where individuals revealed experiences of discrimination or their own prejudiced views, it was difficult not to be affected. I could not have remained expressionless or emotionless when people shared personal experiences of discrimination or...