This week we have a screencast from Seon Ja Chang, who is a PhD candidate in the Department of Language and Literacy Education at the University of Georgia. Her work focuses on secondary newcomer multilingual learners and their teachers in U.S. classrooms, drawing on insights from her 15 years of teaching in public high schools in South Korea, as well as philosophical perspectives informed by immanent thinkers such as Foucault and Deleuze. To view the screencast, click on the link below.
Thinking with Theory in Qualitative Research
Transcript
Hello everyone,
In this short video, I would like to introduce a qualitative methodological approach known as thinking with theory, and discuss what it means for qualitative research.
Before we dive in, here is a quick agenda.
First, I will briefly explain the difference between two-world ontology and one-world ontology.
Then, I will discuss why we might need to think with theory, or philosophical concepts, in qualitative research.
Next, I will provide a few examples of how this approach is used in inquiry.
Finally, I will conclude with the broader impact of this approach.
Let me begin with a simple question:
Can birds fly? Take a moment to think about your answer. At first, the answer seems straightforward: “Yes, birds can fly.”
We might categorize birds based on shared characteristics: Seagulls can fly, but Penguins cannot.
However, this question becomes more complex when we consider real situations.
An AI researcher raised this example in a New York Times article, pointing out the difficulty of teaching artificial intelligence about knowledge that is not neatly categorized.
Because in reality: Newborn birds cannot fly, Birds covered in oil cannot fly, Injured birds cannot fly, Birds in cages cannot fly
So, reality does not always fit into clean, stable categories.
This leads us to two different ways of understanding reality.
1. Two-world ontology (Transcendence)
If we believe that we can categorize birds based on shared traits, for example, “birds can fly”
then we are thinking within a two-world ontology, or transcendence.
This idea is rooted in Plato’s philosophy, where: There exists a world of pure, ideal forms, And the material world is a copy of those forms
Later, Descartes reinforced this division by separating: Mind and body, Subject and object, Human and non-human
So, reality is divided into distinct categories and levels.
2. One-world ontology (Immanence)
In contrast, if we agree with the AI researcher, such as injured birds or birds in cages, then we are thinking from a one-world ontology, or immanence.
Here: Reality is not divided into fixed categories, Everything exists in relation, Everything is constantly changing
Philosophers like Deleuze and Guattari describe this as a single plane of existence, where: There is no rigid boundary between subject and object, No separate world of pure ideas, Everything exists as events
For example, they suggest that a “bird” is not defined by a fixed category, but by its relations as events
And this is where the methodological approach of thinking with theory comes in.
In this approach, we do not simply apply theory to reality. Instead, we think with theoretical concepts as creative forces.
By doing so, we encounter what we might call intensive moments—moments that interrupt our habitual ways of thinking and invite us to think differently, even to think what was previously unthought.
To make this more concrete, let me share an example from my own research.
In this study, I worked in a high school classroom with newly arrived multilingual learners, and I approached the classroom through a Deleuzian concept of assemblage.
During my observations, I encountered many intensive moments. One of them involved the use of a calculator.
In this moment, the calculator was not simply a tool for computation. It became part of the learning process itself.
Because students were able to communicate through numbers rather than words, the calculator shifted how they engaged with the task.
It created new relationships among the students, the teacher, and the activity.
As a result, students were able to move away from struggling with language-heavy word problems and instead engage with mathematical ideas in new ways.
However, this effect was not universal.
As Spinoza reminds us, the same object can function differently depending on the context.
In another classroom—for example, one where all students are fluent English speakers—the calculator might produce very different learning experiences.
Let me share one more example from a published study.
In this work, the researcher examines a multilingual classroom through the concept of affect.
The study invites us to rethink what counts as language and learning.
Instead of viewing silence as a lack of participation, the author suggests that silence is actually full of meaning, energy, and possibility.
Learning, in this sense, does not only happen through spoken language.
It also emerges through unspoken interactions, shared moments, and embodied experiences within the classroom.
So silence is not absence—it is another way in which meaning is produced.
So, what does this mean for research and practice?
Thinking with theory opens what has been described as a “smooth space”, where we can begin to produce entirely different images of thought.
Rather than relying on familiar categories or fixed ways of knowing, this approach invites us to move beyond binary thinking—such as human versus nonhuman, or subject versus object.
It helps us see that these divisions are not natural, but constructed—and therefore, they can be questioned and reimagined.
At the same time, thinking with theory draws our attention to what often goes unnoticed:
the invisible, the inaudible, and the unspoken.
These are dimensions of experience that may escape representation within a two-world ontology, yet they still exist and matter in the world.
In this sense, thinking with theory expands what we can see, what we can think, and ultimately, what we can know.
So, this is all I prepared for this short video.
Thank you very much for watching, and I hope this introduction offers a helpful way to begin thinking with theory in qualitative research.
References
Burgess, J. (2020). Through a lens of affect: multiliteracies, English learners, and resistance. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 41(5), 799-811. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2020.1769940
Chang, S. J. (2025). Rethinking a sheltered Algebra I classroom as an assemblage on the plane of immanence. Journal of Curriculum and Pedagogy, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/15505170.2025.2588122
Descartes, R. (1993). Discourse on method and meditations on first philosophy (D. A. Cress (Trans.), 4th ed.). Hackett Publishing Company.
Deleuze, G. & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. (Brian Massumi, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 1980)
Deleuze, G & Guattari, F. (1994). What is philosophy? (Hugh Tomlinson & Graham Burchell, Trans.). Columbia University Press. (Original work published 1991)
Jackson, A. Y., & Mazzei, L. A. (2023). Thinking with theory in qualitative research (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Marchese, D. (2022, December 26). An A.I. pioneer on what we should really fear. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/12/26/magazine/yejin-choi-interview.html
Taguchi, H. L., & St. Pierre, E. A. (2017). Using concept as method in educational and social science inquiry. Qualitative inquiry, 23(9), 643-648. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417732634
QualPage 