Conducting research as a member of a cross-cultural team offers numerous methodological challenges, not the least of which is negotiating insider / outsider statuses. In reflecting upon these issues, this article draws from experiences encountered by an insider / outsider team interviewing Malaysian older adults. From gaining access to participants, to the “communal” setting of the interview, to askingmeaningful questions through translation, we experienced the slippage and fluidity, the advantages and disadvantages of being both insider and outsider. Our experiences are analyzed first through thetraditional definitions of insider and outsider, then through more contemporary critical and postmodern frameworks. From these perspectives, concepts of positionality power, and knowledge constructionare discussed for their value in mirroring the cross-cultural dimension of this research, and our insider / outsider positions within the process.

Through case studies of women from Muslim cultures, we explore the impact of cultural interaction in an adult learning program. Teaching these students has challenged our usual methods, provoking questions about our student-centered pedagogy, which values critical reflection and personal narrative. While their religion restricts women in public life, these students are educational innovators andentrepreneurs, eager to introduce more progressive practices back horne, yet as Muslims they respect their culture and do not advocate the abolition of traditional customs. We explore both the impact ofthese women on our learning community as weIl as their perception of their educational experience. Our paper raises questions about the hegemonic implications of student-centered, feminist teachingmodels that valorize voice and critical thinking. By tracing the educational experiences of these students we explore the advantages and the costs of our own pedagogy.

This text uses an analysis of the problem of “intertextuality” to deconstruct Foucault’s critique of bourgeois rationality as a suggestion for metaphors in the social sciences, education included. It accepts“intertextuality” as a space that dissolves the distance between subject, object, and text. In so doing “intertextuality” takes the postmodern suggestion that “fiction” can be as informative as “fact” seriouslyand evidentially uses examples from fiction to “show” the dangers of postmodern discourse. In closing this text suggests questions that must be resolved before postmodernism can be useful for the construction of metaphors in the social sciences.