Search

Visual methods are often marginalised in educational research and have not been employed to collect information about sexuality at school. This paper examines the viability and effectiveness of conducting research about the 'sexual cultures' of schools in New Zealand using photo-diaries and photo-elicitation. 'Effectiveness' is judged by what the visual methodologies literature purports are the benefits of these methods. These advantages include providing participants with greater autonomy over what and how data is collected. The paper argues it is feasible to employ visual methods to research sexuality in schools. Such methods offer participants alternative means of recounting their stories, can help illuminate an esoteric object of investigation like 'sexual cultures' and engage participants less likely to volunteer for sexuality research. The use of visual methods is not without challenges however. Securing ethics approval and school participation along with problems with camera retrieval and protecting participant agency were some difficulties encountered in the current study. For those wishing to pursue less conventional research methodologies in educational settings, this discussion highlights potential benefits and struggles. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides a critical account of conducting focus groups with gay and lesbian youth. Drawing on the insights of queer theory it attempts to reframe issues around sexual diversity by examining the heteronormalizing processes at work during these focus groups. This analysis is undertaken through a ‘study of the limits’ of the author’s own thoughts and practice while implementing a research methodology that endeavored to destabilize heterosexuality. The aim of this examination is to better understand the way in which heteronormativity operates to discursively constitute heterosexual normalcy and render anything but thinking ‘straight’ unintelligible. In the course of such analysis the way in which sexual identity politics are played out between gay and lesbian participants and a straight researcher is addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]