Methods for Dialoguing with the Algorithm: Researcher Positionality

This is the second section, Researcher Positionality, of the Methods Chapter for: Dialoguing with the Algorithm: An Autoethnographic Study of Midlife Voice, Uncertainty, and Teacher Identity in a ChatGPT Exchange.

by: Maria Lisak EdD (How to cite)

Researcher Positionality: Navigating Cultural and Institutional Contexts

This positionality statement situates my autoethnographic account within the intertwined cultural, institutional, and personal contexts that shape my engagement with generative AI in Korean EFL higher education. The first section introduces the historical, social, and pedagogical features of the Korean EFL landscape, highlighting the hierarchical, relational, and policy-driven forces that influence classroom life. The second section positions me—an aging, white, foreign woman with long-term professional experience in Korea—within these dynamics, tracing how my cultural hybridity, gender, and age inform my pedagogical practice. The third section examines how institutional precarity and contractual structures intersect with cultural expectations to shape my technological adoption and adaptation. The final section reflects on the ethical considerations of representing culture from a foreign researcher’s perspective, clarifying how my work navigates the responsibilities and limitations of voice in cross-cultural scholarship.

The Korean EFL Educational Landscape

This study unfolds within the specific cultural and institutional context of South Korean English as a Foreign Language (EFL) education, a system shaped by distinct historical, social, and pedagogical forces that must be understood to situate my AI encounter meaningfully. Korean EFL education operates within what Jeon (2009) describes as a "neo-Confucian educational paradigm" where hierarchical relationships, collective harmony, and respect for authority create particular dynamics around knowledge transmission and classroom interaction.

The Korean university system maintains rigid hierarchical structures rooted in Confucian principles where age, institutional rank, and educational credentials determine social positioning and speaking rights (Kim & Marginson, 2018). Within this context, the role of foreign English teachers occupies a complex liminal position—valued for linguistic authenticity yet often marginalized in curriculum decisions and institutional governance (Jeon & Lee, 2006). Foreign educators, particularly women, navigate what Song (2018) identifies as intersecting hierarchies of nationality, gender, and age that can render their pedagogical expertise simultaneously essential and peripheral.

The concept of nunchi (눈치)—the ability to read social situations and respond appropriately to maintain harmony—permeates Korean educational interactions, creating implicit expectations for foreign educators to adapt their pedagogical approaches to align with Korean cultural values while maintaining their perceived "Western" expertise (Park, 2009). This cultural dynamic becomes particularly complex for aging foreign educators, who may find their accumulated cultural knowledge valued even as their technological adaptability is questioned.

Korean EFL pedagogy has historically emphasized grammar-translation methods and test preparation for high-stakes examinations like the TOEIC and TOEFL, creating institutional pressures that can conflict with communicative or critical pedagogical approaches favored in Western EFL contexts (Li, 1998). Recent government initiatives promoting "English-medium instruction" (EMI) and technological integration have intensified these tensions, creating what Byun et al. (2011) describe as a "mismatch between policy aspirations and classroom realities."

The introduction of AI tools into this context occurs against the backdrop of Korea's broader technological nationalism—a national commitment to digital innovation that positions technological adoption as both economic necessity and cultural identity marker (Kim, 2020). This creates particular pressures on educational institutions to demonstrate technological sophistication, often without corresponding support for educators to develop meaningful pedagogical integration strategies.

My Positioning Within These Dynamics

My identity as a white, foreign woman in her 50s+ teaching within this system shapes every aspect of my pedagogical practice and every exchange with AI tools. Having lived and worked in South Korea for almost three decades, I occupy what Anzaldúa (1987) would recognize as a borderlands position—neither fully insider nor outsider, but existing in the productive tension between cultural systems.

My age positions me within Korean cultural frameworks that traditionally accord respect to seniority (yeonjangjadeul 연장자들) while simultaneously subjecting me to contemporary pressures that valorize technological fluency and adaptability. As a foreign woman, I navigate what Cho (2007) describes as the teum (틈)—the gaps or breathing spaces within rigid social structures where alternative forms of agency might emerge. These positioning dynamics mean that my engagement with AI tools cannot be understood as simply individual choice but as culturally and institutionally situated practice.

My pedagogical approach has been shaped by sustained engagement with Korean educational values while maintaining commitment to critical, culturally responsive pedagogy. This has required what I understand as ongoing cultural humility—recognizing the limitations of my outsider perspective while honoring the insights that marginality can provide, a kind of epistemic privilege (Campano, et al, 2016). My teaching practices integrate Korean concepts like jeong (정)—the deep emotional bonds that develop through sustained relationship—with Western critical pedagogical traditions, creating hybrid approaches that resist simple East/West binaries.

The ESP (English for Specific Purposes) course that provided the context for my AI encounter serves students in administration welfare programs, many of whom are preparing for careers in Korean public service or social work. These students bring particular cultural frameworks around authority, hierarchy, and collective responsibility that require pedagogical approaches sensitive to Korean social values while developing English language competencies for increasingly globalized professional contexts.

Institutional Precarity and Cultural Positioning

My status as a foreign instructor on yearly renewable contracts situates me within what Adamson and Muller (2018) identify as the "precarious positioning" of expatriate EFL teachers in East Asian contexts. This contractual uncertainty intersects with Korean institutional hierarchies in ways that make technological adaptation both professionally necessary and culturally fraught. The pressure to demonstrate continued relevance and competence operates within Korean cultural frameworks that traditionally respect accumulated wisdom while increasingly prioritizing technological innovation.

My cultural positioning as a long-term expatriate means that my AI encounters occur within multilayered translation work—not only linguistic translation but cultural, pedagogical, and institutional translation. The ChatGPT exchange analyzed in this study must be understood as occurring within these complex positioning dynamics, where my prompts carry traces of Korean institutional expectations, student cultural backgrounds, and my own hybrid pedagogical identity.

Ethical Considerations of Cultural Representation

As a foreign researcher studying my own experience within Korean EFL contexts, I face ongoing questions about representation, voice, and cultural authority. While my three decades of engagement with Korean culture provides substantial contextual knowledge, I remain aware of the limitations and potential blind spots of my outsider perspective. This study focuses primarily on my own identity negotiations rather than making claims about Korean culture or students, though it necessarily occurs within and is shaped by these cultural contexts.

The autoethnographic methodology allows me to examine my own positioning and responses without claiming to represent Korean perspectives or experiences. However, the "ethno" dimension requires acknowledging that my individual experience emerges from and contributes to larger cultural dynamics within Korean EFL education. My AI encounter thus functions as what Spry (2001) calls a "critical performative pedagogy"—revealing broader tensions and possibilities within the cultural context while remaining grounded in particular, positioned experience.

For this paper, click here.