Abolition Is My Method: An Autoethnography of Scholarship, Activism, and the Necessity of Their Integration

This autoethnography argues that abolition is not simply a political stance but a process-oriented methodological framework for social science. Drawing on my transition from completing a PhD to beginning a tenure-track faculty role, I examine how academic expectations surrounding neutrality, objectivity, and scientific legitimacy often position justice-oriented scholarship as analytically suspect. Through autoethnographic reflection, I analyze how abolition shaped my research practice across three interconnected sites: abolitionist organizing through the Network to Advance Abolition in Social Work, teaching on prison abolition and structural violence, and research with Black siblings of incarcerated youth. Across these encounters, I show how abolition operates as a methodological compass, guiding question formation, interpretation, reflexivity, and accountability. Rather than offering abolition as a fixed procedure, this article demonstrates how abolitionist praxis makes visible the relational, ethical, and political dimensions of knowledge production. I conclude that integrating scholarship and activism can deepen, rather than diminish, methodological rigor in movement-accountable social work and social science research.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Applied Social Science
Published
2026-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/19367244261497687
Primary Topic
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abolition Is My Method: An Autoethnography of Scholarship, Activism, and the Necessity of Their Integration

Durrell M. Washington
Journal of Applied Social Science
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
article

Abolition Is My Method: An Autoethnography of Scholarship, Activism, and the Necessity of Their Integration

Durrell M. Washington
article en

Abstract

This autoethnography argues that abolition is not simply a political stance but a process-oriented methodological framework for social science. Drawing on my transition from completing a PhD to beginning a tenure-track faculty role, I examine how academic expectations surrounding neutrality, objectivity, and scientific legitimacy often position justice-oriented scholarship as analytically suspect. Through autoethnographic reflection, I analyze how abolition shaped my research practice across three interconnected sites: abolitionist organizing through the Network to Advance Abolition in Social Work, teaching on prison abolition and structural violence, and research with Black siblings of incarcerated youth. Across these encounters, I show how abolition operates as a methodological compass, guiding question formation, interpretation, reflexivity, and accountability. Rather than offering abolition as a fixed procedure, this article demonstrates how abolitionist praxis makes visible the relational, ethical, and political dimensions of knowledge production. I conclude that integrating scholarship and activism can deepen, rather than diminish, methodological rigor in movement-accountable social work and social science research.

Journal of Applied Social Science
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Qualitative Research Methods and Ethics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon