oa Refrains for inquiring otherwise

References

1. Ahmed, S. (2012). On being included: Racism and diversity in institutional life. Durham: Duke University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Ahmed, S. (2017). Living a feminist life. Durham: Duke University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bachelard, G. (2014). The poetics of space. New York: Penguin Books.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus. Capitalism and schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Deschner, C.J., Dorion, L., & Salvatori, L. (2020). Prefiguring a feminist academia: A multi-vocal autoethnography on the creation of a feminist space in a neoliberal university. Society and Business Review, 15(4), 325–347. doi:10.110/sbr-06-2019-0
   [Google Scholar]
6. Dijkgraaf, R. (2023, September6). Antwoorden Kamervragen over bericht dat Universiteit van Amsterdam belastingadvies zou geven aan Netflix. Ministerie van Onderwijs, Cultuur en Wetenschap. Retrieved from https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/kamerstukken/2023/09/06/antwoord-op-schriftelijke-vragen-over-het-artikel-universiteit-van-amsterdam-geeft-netflix-belastingadvies-vermomd-als-wetenschappelijk-onderzoek-op-onderzoeksplatform-follow-the-money (accessed December21, 2023).
   [Google Scholar]
7. Essanhaji, Z., & Van Reekum, R. (2022). Following diversity through the university: On knowing and embodying a problem. The Sociological Review, 70(5), 882–900. doi:10.1177/00380261221083452
   [Google Scholar]
8. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. The Continuum Publishing Company.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, Inc, 14(3), 575–599. doi:10.2307/3178066
   [Google Scholar]
10. Haraway, D. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Haraway, D. (2019). It matters what stories tell stories; it matters whose stories tell stories. A/b: Auto/Biography Studies, 34(3), 565–575. doi:10.1080/08989575.2019.1664163
    [Google Scholar]
12. Harney, S., & Moten, F. (2013). The undercommons: Fugitive planning and black study. Wivenhoe: Minor Compositions.
    [Google Scholar]
13. hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Lather, P. (2012). Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double (d) science. Albany: State University of New York Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Loorbach, D., & Wittmayer, J. (2023). Transforming universities. Sustainability Science, 19, 19–33. doi:10.1007/s11625-023-01335-y
    [Google Scholar]
16. Lorde, A. (2018). The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house. London: Penguin UK.
    [Google Scholar]
17. ManningE. (2015). Against method. In P.Vannini (Ed.), Non-representational methodologies: Re-envisioning research (pp. 52–71). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Manning, E. (2016). The minor gesture. Durham: Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
19. NWO (Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek). (2023, April). Erkennen en waarderen. Retrieved from https://www.nwo.nl/erkennen-en-waarderen#:~:text=In%20april%202023%20is%20er,de%20volle%20breedte%20te%20beoordelen (accessed 21December2023).
    [Google Scholar]
20. St. Pierre, E.A. (2021). Post qualitative inquiry, the refusal of method, and the risk of the new. Qualitative inquiry, 27(1), 3–9.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Schildermans, H. (2019) Making a university. Introductory notes on an ecology of study practices (Doctoral dissertation). KU Leuven, Leuven.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Shore, C. (2008). Audit culture and illiberal governance: Universities and the politics of accountability. Anthropological theory, 8(3), 278–298. doi:10.1177/1463499608093815
    [Google Scholar]
23. Springgay, S., & Truman, S. E. (2018). On the need for methods beyond proceduralism: Speculative middles, (in)tensions, and response-ability in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 24(3), 203-214. doi:10.1177/1077800417704464
    [Google Scholar]
24. Stengers, I. (2008). Experimenting with refrains: Subjectivity and the challenge of escaping modern dualism. Subjectivity, 22, 38–59. doi:10.1057/sub.2008.6
    [Google Scholar]
25. Stengers, I. (2018). Another science is possible: A manifesto for slow science. Cambridge: Polity Press.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Tio, C., & Van Oorschot, I. (2022). Intersectionaliteiten in actie: Articulaties van een reizend concept in de activistische praktijk. Tijdschrift Sociologie, 3, 103–127. doi:10.38139/TS.2022.05
    [Google Scholar]
27. Tuck, E. & Yang, K. (2014). R-words: Refusing research. In D.Paris & M.T.Winn (Eds.), Humanizing research: Decolonising qualitative inquiry with youth and communities (pp. 223–248). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Van Oorschot, I. (2014). Negotiating knowledges abroad: Non-Western students and the global mobility of knowledge. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 44(6), 895–915. doi:10.1080/03057925.2013.824782
    [Google Scholar]
29. Wekker, G. (2016). White innocence: Paradoxes of colonialism and race. Durham: Duke University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Westerveld, L. (2023, October24). Onrust op de Technische Universiteit Eindhoven over de groeiende invloed van het bedrijfsleven op onderzoek aan de universiteit [Schriftelijke vragen]. Tweede Kamer der Staten-Generaal. Retrieved from https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/kamervragen/detail?id=2023Z18155&di=2023D43909
    [Google Scholar]
31. Wiegman, R. (2020). Introduction: Autotheory Theory. Arizona Quarterly: A Journal of American Literature, Culture, and Theory, 76(1), 1–14. doi:10.1353/arq.2020.0009
    [Google Scholar]