I have my second peer reviewed article coming out in a couple of weeks. It’s the first scholarly article I’ve written since starting my job at UNM. The article is about creating OER at my previous workplace, and it uses an autoethnographic method of analyzing and interpreting research and experience. If you’re not sure what autoethnography is, the word’s roots make it clearer. The International Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods describes it this way:

Auto = personal experience

Graphy = writing, describing, interpreting

Ethno = cultural texts, experiences, beliefs, and practices

As a memoirist transitioning into scholarly writing, this method of research writing seemed like a perfect fit. I can write about personal experience and be academic? Sign me up!

Through this genre of research writing, I can analyze my experience, synthesize it with research, and interpret my ideas.

My experience is shifting into a new shape, as evidence. Maybe it feels only slightly like my writing has transitioned like a werewolf howling at the moon.

Really, this was a natural transition as I became accustomed to the peer review process.

The journal my work will appear in uses an open peer review process, which means that I know who my peer reviewers are, I saw their comments on my work, and the revision process felt like an open dialogue. It was a really positive experience. Working with this journal was incredible. I will share the piece when it goes live.

It feels only slightly like my writing has transitioned like a werewolf howling at the moon.

I am a little nervous about having this piece published because autoethnography is new to me. I’ve written in a scholarly mode before, but before, my work wasn’t being published in a web journal. And, it’s my first publication since becoming a librarian.

What is the last thing you tried that forced you out of your comfort zone?