Abstract

This article, written in the context of the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, draws on extensive discussions that took place during and after the author’s work on developing a course titled “Social Research in Tribal Studies.” This course was designed for the Bachelor’s in Social Work program at the Tata Institute of Social Sciences. The article opens with an overview of the context and framework guiding this course, followed by a detailed examination of its conceptual structure and core teaching components, all within the broader landscape of social work education and practice. Next, it addresses key theoretical and methodological issues unique to this area, concluding with the author’s reflections on the challenges and insights gained from developing a social work curriculum centered on tribal communities.

 

Introduction

Following the enactment of the National Education Policy (NEP) in 2020, significant changes were introduced to the structure of higher education in India. This paper focuses on one such change impacting the Bachelor’s program structure. Previously, a three-year Bachelor’s program followed by a two-year Master’s was the standard. However, NEP 2020 has shifted this to a four-year Bachelor’s program with an integrated research component and a one-year Master’s. This structural change required a complete reformulation and repositioning of courses across disciplines. Social Work, which is not formally recognized as a professional education in India, had to adhere to the same rules applied to other social sciences. With research now a mandatory component of the Bachelor’s curriculum, the Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) program sought courses that would strengthen students’ research skills, particularly in their fourth year. It was in this context that the course Social Research in Tribal Studies was proposed.

The course took several months to prepare and was presented to the Board of Studies at the School of Social Work on June 12, 2024. Following approval from the school board, it was then submitted to the Academic Council of the Tata Institute of Social Sciences on August 2, 2024. On the same day, the Academic Council approved the course as a research elective for Bachelor of Social Work (BSW) students.

Debates surrounding social research in Tribal Studies are evolving significantly with the development of what scholars like Bodhi (2019, 2022, 2024) and Tripura (2023, 2024) describe as the Post-Xaxa framework in Tribal Studies. This framework intersects with the global Decolonial Turn in social research, as articulated by scholars such as Maldonado-Torres (2018), Sabelo (2020), and Zondi (2021). Together, these frameworks—Post-Xaxa Tribal Studies and the Decolonial Turn—are becoming essential for scholars who seek deeper insights into the social realities of tribal communities.

At the intersection of these two frameworks, key arguments emerge that focus on research approaches and the critical role of research ethics. A significant shift has occurred from extractive methodologies to dialogical ones, prioritizing collaborative approaches over those that traditionally extract knowledge from communities. This shift has led to a re-evaluation and redefinition of research ethics, now a central concern for many scholars. These new ethical considerations are largely driven by Indigenous and Tribal scholars who apply the decolonial framework to knowledge production, advocating for approaches that respect and reflect the social realities of the communities being studied.

The Conceptual Structure of the Course

This course is offered to fourth-year students in their final semester, a time when they have completed data collection and are ready to analyze and write their thesis. While the course is particularly beneficial for students who have chosen research projects focused on Tribal studies, it remains open and accessible to all students interested in the subject. According to the NEP framework, the course is positioned at the level of Advanced Courses ranging from 500-599. It is important to take note of the structure in which the UGC has coded courses based on the learning outcomes, level of difficulty, and academic rigor. It states

“The coding structure is as follows: 0-99: Pre-requisite courses; 100-199: Foundation or introductory courses; 200-299: Intermediate-level courses; 300-399: Higher-level courses; 400-499: Advanced courses; 500-599: Courses at first-year Master’s degree level for a 2-year Master’s degree programme; 600-699: Courses for second-year of 2-year Master’s or 1-year Master’s degree programme; 700-799 & above: Courses limited to doctoral students.” (Secretary, University Grants Commission, 2022).

Having developed the course around the historical evolution of social research in Tribal Studies, it suffices to argue that anything below the 500-599 scale would be too difficult for bachelor’s students, while anything beyond the said scale would also be too advanced for them. As one will realised as one read through the course content, the same is primarily theoretical while incorporating critical skills related to three essential components of research: the explorative component, the investigative component, and the justification component. The explorative component deals with the identification of the research area based on literature, the setting of research boundaries and the framing of the research project. The investigative component helps students focus on the methods and tool s of data collection, while the justification component will introduce students to various frames of reference plus methodologies of social research. For the sake of greater clarity, the justification component, engages students to various frames of reference or sometimes called epistemological orientations. These includes Empiricism, Rationalism, Logical Positivism, Pragmatism, and Constructivism. As students explore each of these epistemological frames through lectures and discussions, they will also delve into the braoder framework of the Philosophy of Methodology, with a particular emphasis on epistemology and the ongoing debates concerning knowledge.

The course will primarily explore debates and perspectives from indigenous tribal scholars and real-world tribal experiences globally, with a specific focus on the experiences of indigenous tribal communities in India. Since research is a complex and sometimes controversial topic within Tribal Studies, the content will be kept at an introductory level. At the same time, the course aims to inform students about key debates and issues in social research, providing deeper insights into areas such as understanding oneself as a knowledge seeker, defining research subjects, clarifying methods of justification, producing knowledge, and recognizing the role of knowledge in empowerment.

 The course learning objectives include: (i) developing an understanding of various perspectives and concepts in Tribal Studies, (ii) enhancing critical thinking and understanding of the history, origins, and ongoing development of Tribes through a research-focused lens, (iii) learning different research methodologies and building research skills related to engaging with Tribes, and (iv) demonstrating the ability to use knowledge as a tool for empowerment within the field of social work.

The expected outcomes of the course are as follows: (i) students will gain knowledge of cutting-edge debates in Tribal Studies, particularly in terms of frameworks, perspectives, and specific areas of study; (ii) students will comprehend historical debates on methodologies in social research; (iii) students will understand various social research methodologies and learn to adapt them when working in tribal contexts; (iv) students will acquire research skills needed for social work, along with the ability to use influence, power, and organizational resources effectively while working with communities; and (v) students will develop the ability to generate knowledge through research and apply it to empower tribal communities in social work settings.

The Course Content

 The course introduces students to essential concepts such as Frame of Reference, Points of View, Experience, Idea, Praxis, Field, and Context, establishing a foundational framework for understanding social research. In addition, it delves into theoretical frameworks, exploring themes like Truth, Fact, Symbol, Interpretation, Reason, Rationality, Sensation, Subject, Object, Observation, and Discourse. This conceptual foundation provides students with a comprehensive overview of research as it applies to Tribal Studies. While designed as an introductory course, it seeks to deepen students’ grasp of the debates surrounding knowledge and research in relation to tribal experiences and realities. A case study approach is employed to enhance students’ understanding of the research process and the dynamics of knowledge production. The course is organized into three key sections: Tribal Studies in India, Problematizing Methodology and Social Research, and Social Research Skills in Tribal Studies.

Section One provides an overview of Tribal Studies in India, starting with an exploration of the field before the work of Virginius Xaxa. This involves examining how five key categories—Modernity, Colonialism, Development, Governance, and Epistemology—have been understood within Tribal Studies in both Western and Indian contexts. The second part of this section looks at Tribal Studies through a Post-Xaxa lens, where these same categories are re-examined, now with an emphasis on perspectives rooted in the lived experiences and theoretical assertions of tribal communities themselves.

Section Two engages with critical debates on methodology and social research. It begins by examining the history of research methodology in a Western context, providing an overview of key frameworks such as Empiricism, Rationalism, Logical Positivism, Pragmatism, and Constructivism. The section then delves into the philosophy of methodology within Western knowledge systems, exploring the interconnections between concepts like cosmology, cosmogony, ontology, epistemology, and axiology.

Following this, the focus shifts to a collective examination of the philosophy of methodology from the perspective of tribal peoples, particularly in light of the Decolonial Turn in social research. It explores the emergence of Indigenous Methodologies worldwide, including frameworks such as Decolonizing Methodologies (Smith, 1999), the Decolonial Approach (Cusicanqui, 2012), the Decolonial Method (Grosfoguel, 2016; Sabelo, 2020), Epistemology of the South (Boaventura, 2014), and the Decolonial-Historical Approach (Bodhi, 2019).

Section Three consists of practical sessions focused on perspectives and skills for conducting social research in Tribal Studies. The key components of this section are as follows:

(i) Historical Research, with an emphasis on archival studies and historiography. This includes a close examination of different historiographical approaches: Colonial, Nationalist, Regional, Subaltern, and Dialogical Historiography. (ii) A critical exploration of Ethnography, examining both Colonial and Decolonial perspectives. This component also covers approaches to Oral History research, aiming to understand its relevance and application in tribal contexts. (iii) An overview of Descriptive Research, including examples and a brief introduction to correlational, quasi-experimental, and experimental studies as they are applied within Tribal Studies. Together, these sessions aim to equip students with practical research skills and an understanding of diverse research methodologies relevant to the tribal context.

Reflections on Theoretical and Methodological Issues

Building on the above outline of the course content, I will provide a more detailed discussion of each of the three key components: (i) an overview of Tribal Studies in India, (ii) an introduction to the philosophy of methodology, and (iii) an exploration of key research methodologies relevant to Tribal Studies. While these discussions will not be exhaustive, they will offer a foundational framework that sketches the structure, content, and scope of the theories within each domain.

Component One: An Overview of Tribal Studies in India

In the field of Tribal Studies, critical scholars are raising fundamental questions in the context of social research. These questions focus on points of view and researcher location, rather than on specific theoretical content within the field. Drawing on the author’s 20 years of experience teaching Tribal Studies and conducting research about, with, and through tribal communities, this discussion aims to unravel some of the methodological complexities in social research and highlight critical issues in theory building within Tribal Studies.

In exploring the domain of theory, we might begin by asking: What is distinct and unique about mainstream theories concerning tribes in India? There are various ways to approach this question. For the purpose of this article and in alignment with my proposed framework, I will examine the subject by distinguishing between two interpretive approaches: Pre-Xaxa Tribal Studies and Post-Xaxa Tribal Studies (Bodhi, 2022).

In light of the above, it is important to note that debates surrounding tribal studies in India have taken an indigenous turn. With more scholars from tribal communities contributing to knowledge production and engaging in cross-community intellectual discussions, a new paradigm has emerged, which Bodhi (2019) refers to as Post-Xaxa tribal studies. This framework marks a significant shift in the theorization and understanding of five key categories: colonialism, modernity, development, governance, and epistemology. While a detailed examination of each category is beyond the scope of this paper, a brief overview of the framework, as outlined below, will suffice to support the broader focus of this work.

In the Post-Xaxa framework, colonialism is understood as a series of waves rather than a singular historical event. This “waves of colonialism” approach contrasts with conventional ideas of colonialism, semi-colonialism, and post-colonialism. Modernity, closely linked to colonialism, is redefined around the concept of an “alternative path to modernity,” which challenges the homogenous, unilinear understanding of modernity. Similarly, the idea of development is problematized by introducing the notion of “development with equity,” emphasizing equal opportunities for tribal communities as opposed to the traditional, top-down, state-centric approach to development. Governance is also re-examined, leading to the concept of “engaged governance,” where tribes are positioned as active agents, rather than passive objects, in the governance process. Epistemology is somewhat more complex; the Post-Xaxa framework highlights both the political implications of epistemic agency and the role of knowledge in shaping tribal social realities, in contrast to non-tribal realities.

Students enrolled in the course are introduced to this theoretical framework at the outset, providing them with an early intellectual grasp of the ontological foundation and the key categories central to debates in tribal studies. Establishing the academic scope and focus of the course from the beginning is seen as crucial before moving into the next phase, which covers research methodologies in tribal studies.

Component Two: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Methodology in a Research Context

In the philosophy of methodology, the teaching of research methods has traditionally relied heavily on mainstream conceptions rooted in Greek thought. The philosophical triad of ontology, epistemology, and axiology forms the core foundation on which the idea of knowledge is built. Popularized by Western scholarship since the emergence of modern philosophy, this framework is crucial for any in-depth engagement with knowledge production. A nuanced understanding of the interconnections between these three categories is essential to grasp what research is, why it is pursued, and how to conduct it effectively.

Ontology deals with the nature of reality, exploring what constitutes being and existence. This component is fundamental within the philosophy of methodology, providing the foundation upon which research titles are framed, research domains are defined, and existing knowledge within these domains is identified. The way a researcher conceives social reality leads directly to the related category of epistemology—the theory of knowledge, including its nature and scope. Epistemology is vital as it reveals the structure of knowledge and the processes through which truth or a desirable goal is pursued, allowing the researcher to understand what it means to “know” the subject under investigation. However, understanding the nature of reality (ontology) and how to acquire knowledge (epistemology) is incomplete without the third essential domain: axiology. Axiology, the study of value and worth, often relating to ethics and aesthetics, is crucial to any knowledge enterprise. This component ensures that both the research project and process are grounded in a strong ethical foundation.

Building on this introduction to the philosophy of methodology, we move to three essential frames of reference in research: rationalism, empiricism, and constructivism. At the bachelor’s level, particularly within tribal studies, these three frameworks are critical for students to engage with. Often referred to as epistemological orientations, they help students situate themselves within the research process by offering a comparative understanding of how knowledge is formed. Each of these orientations offers distinct perspectives on the knowledge enterprise. Empiricism emphasizes that knowledge is derived from direct experience and observation. Rationalism, on the other hand, argues that logic and reason form the foundation of knowledge and truth. Constructivism, in contrast, maintains that knowledge is not pre-existing but is created through the research process itself. Exposure to these contrasting views equips students with the tools to critically assess and position their own approaches to research.

For rationalists, knowledge is seen as a priori, meaning it exists independently of human perception. The foundation of rationalism lies in the abstraction and theorization of the phenomena being researched, with researchers relying on either deductive or inductive logic to form their reasoning. In this sense, rationalism is a method of philosophical inquiry that holds the human mind can best apprehend truths about the world through abstract thought, where reason and logic play a central role in the knowledge acquisition process.

For empiricists, the process of conducting research and forming knowledge is guided by sensory perceptions of the phenomena being studied, with generalizations drawn from observations and experiences. Empiricism, as a method of philosophical inquiry, holds that the human mind can only understand the world through sensory experience and observation.

Constructivism, which evolved from the empiricist framework, views knowledge as neither constituted by unchangeable truths nor as a priori. Instead, it holds that the researcher actively constructs knowledge and truth. Human beings, who are the focus of research, generate various forms of truth and knowledge through their actions. In this view, structures and phenomena are constantly shaped through social and linguistic interactions, using signs and symbols. As such, constructivism rejects the idea of a priori truth, asserting that knowledge and truth are socially and culturally constructed.

Component Three: Discussing Research Methodology and Methods in Tribal Studies

In social research, a wide array of methodologies is available. However, I have selected only a few that are essential for Bachelor’s level Social Work students. The choice of methodologies is guided by the types of studies and field engagements typically encountered by Social Work students in their fieldwork context. The selected methodologies for this course include Historical Research (with a focus on Archival Research), Ethnography, Oral History, and Descriptive Research. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental designs have been excluded, as the program structure does not readily support numerical research. Within this framework, I will discuss the theoretical intricacies of each selected methodology through the lenses of the Post-Xaxa Tribal Studies framework and the Decolonial perspective.

For Post-Xaxa and Decolonial theorists in India, social theory and research methods are highly contested topics, particularly due to the colonial roots embedded in academic institutions and the unquestioned adoption of “Western” social research methods in non-Western contexts. This legacy, often summarized by the notion of the “Theoretical West and the Empirical Rest,” is maintained and defended by many academics, influencing both the structure and psyche of knowledge production in societies that experienced colonization. Among Indigenous and Tribal scholars, mainstream approaches like historical research, ethnography, and oral history are often approached with caution, especially by those with a decolonial perspective. These scholars seek to critically assess and, where necessary, transform these methods to align more closely with Indigenous worldviews and contexts.

In contemporary debates on historical research within Tribal Studies, the focus has shifted from the content of history to the process of writing history—historiography. Two distinct frameworks have emerged in this field: the Universal-Particular framework and the Diversity-Coexistence framework.

Within the Universal-Particular framework, four types of historiographies are identified: Colonial Historiography, Nationalist Historiography, Regional Historiography, and Peoples/Subaltern Historiography. These approaches often prioritize dominant narratives and perspectives. Conversely, the Diversity-Coexistence framework introduces Dialogical Historiography, an approach grounded in dialogue and mutual respect for diverse experiences and perspectives, as highlighted by Bodhi (2022). Dialogical Historiography is increasingly preferred in Post-Xaxa Tribal Studies, as it promotes a more inclusive and multivocal approach to recording history.

The difference between these two historiographical frameworks lies in their foundational premises, which in turn shape distinct approaches to writing history. Scholars within the Post-Xaxa and Decolonial frameworks naturally gravitate toward the Diversity-Coexistence approach, engaging in a dialogical historiography that emphasizes history as a collaborative, inclusive process.

This shift away from the Universal-Particular framework stems from two primary objections. First, these scholars reject the way colonial narratives positioned themselves as the “universal” norm while designating all other perspectives as “particular.” Second, they challenge the often-unconscious privileging of the colonial gaze over the perspectives of the colonized, particularly tribal communities, within the knowledge creation process.

These two acts of epistemological disobedience form the core of dialogical historiography: first, destabilizing the “Universal West and Particular Rest” premise to recognize the “universal” as inherently diverse and multivocal; and second, problematizing and removing the colonial gaze as the privileged perspective within social knowledge. This approach allows for a more equitable and inclusive historical narrative.

Ethnographic research, while generally accepted both within and outside of Tribal Studies, includes Participant Observation as its core method—often regarded as the most methodologically and academically legitimate approach within ethnography. However, this method raises concerns and resistance among Post-Xaxa and decolonial scholars. Originating with Malinowski (1922) and later universalized by his academic successors, Participant Observation is deeply rooted in colonial disciplines like anthropology and sociology. Its epistemological assumptions and its historical role in representing Indigenous communities through an external gaze continue to be points of contention, as decolonial scholars seek methodologies that better align with Indigenous perspectives and values.

In response to these concerns, Indigenous decolonial theorists in India have actively challenged Participant Observation, viewing it as part of the ongoing “colonization by knowledge” project perpetuated through successive “waves of colonialism.” To offer an alternative, this paper discusses Engaged Observation, an approach developed within Indigenous Tribal scholarship.

Engaged Observation is defined as a conscious and intentional commitment by the researcher, or “subject,” to become deeply involved with the community, or “subject,” being studied. This method is grounded in egalitarian principles and aims for a co-production of knowledge that is both empowering and mutually respectful. Engaged Observation moves away from extractive practices, positioning research as a collaborative socio-cultural project that values the perspectives and agency of all participants.

Engaged Observation opposes extractivist practices, challenges objectification, and resists the theoretical manipulation of the “other.” Instead of reducing communities to static entities for comparison, it acknowledges the dynamic and evolving nature of social reality. This method emphasizes the inter-subjective nature of both the observer and the observed, affirming the subjecthood and agency of both parties in the knowledge creation process.

Unlike the colonial approach of Participant Observation, Engaged Observation aligns with the decolonial framework. It aims to break free from the colonial gaze that objectifies, categorizes, and controls, rejecting the imperial drive to dominate knowledge production. Instead, Engaged Observation fosters a collaborative and respectful partnership, grounded in mutual recognition and a commitment to shared understanding.

Oral History, closely connected with both Dialogical Historiography and Engaged Observation, remains an essential method in Tribal Studies. This is particularly relevant due to the oral-centric knowledge systems of many tribal societies, which rely on spoken history as a primary means of preserving and transmitting knowledge. As Kammen & Prendergast (2000) describe, oral history is “the material by which history is known,” while Baum (2007) emphasizes its goal as producing “a good historical account, firsthand, preserved, and available.” Collecting oral histories enables the voices of historically marginalized groups to reconstruct and shape a narrative often dominated by the perspectives of dominant groups.

Oral history offers a unique window into the collective memory of a community, capturing both recent and ancestral histories as experienced by its members. Alester Thomson (2007) identifies four critical aspects of oral history: (i) the recognition of memory as “people’s history,” (ii) the need to understand the inherent subjectivity of memory, (iii) the role of the oral historian as an interviewer, and (iv) the transformative impact of digital technology on preserving and sharing oral histories. These aspects underscore the value of oral history in accessing the rich, often overlooked insights held within a community’s “memoryscapes.”

From a Tribal perspective, at least four points needs consideration, “one, tribal history is important for tribes. Tribal people’s life encapsulates their way of life and their ways of thinking. Not just the one that are recorded in oral traditions or in texts but also in ordinary life also. Secondly, methodologically, history writing exercise has been taken over by a very particular profession and discipline, who largely serves the history writing of the dominant and not of the tribal peoples. Their particular sources like texts, artefacts, and other materials does not care for tribal peoples’ history and oral narratives. Third, tribes have a particular history that does not fit well with the grand narratives, hence, there is minimal chances that tribal history get recognised as legitimate history, rendering it to be lost or forgotten. And lastly, again as a method, most of the tribal communities are still very oral communities. Tribal elders are the main source of the tribal past memories through their lived experiences and they pass it to the younger generations orally. In this context, oral history is an important and empowering method of recording tribal history.” (Conversation with Tadu Rimi, 2024; Also see Tadu, 2022).

The final component, Descriptive Studies, introduces students to foundational quantitative research skills. At the Bachelor’s level, students are expected to identify and collect categorical data, then summarize it effectively through graphs. Such data presentations help students understand and convey the quantities, frequencies, distributions, and classifications of various phenomena, providing essential insights into social patterns and trends within the field of study.

Concluding Remarks

I have had the valuable opportunity to be an active member of a team responsible for shaping and developing a program for Bachelor’s students in Social Work. This work began as early as 2020, following the implementation of the UGC’s National Education Policy (NEP). If there is one concept that stands out in designing a BSW program in today’s competitive landscape, it is innovation, complemented by creativity and meaningfulness. This innovation extends beyond course content to encompass how curricula are organized, including fieldwork, experiential learning, and teaching pedagogy.

Since the implementation of the NEP, the BSW curriculum appears inconsistent across universities and social work schools throughout the country. Discrepancies exist in course offerings, program structure, fieldwork focus, and the emphasis on research skills and projects. However, I believe that, with time, these inconsistencies will likely be resolved as social work schools collaborate and work toward harmonizing their curricula across regions.

On a personal note, despite having over 20 years of experience teaching social work, I have never taught BSW students. My primary focus has been on the Master’s in Social Work program. Consequently, when drafting the above course on social research in tribal studies, I needed to position it at level 5 on the UGC scale to ensure it was appropriately challenging.

Tribal communities have been a focus of social work engagement in India since the 1970s. Most social work programs, particularly at the Master’s level, integrate both teaching and fieldwork components into their curricula. However, incorporating research specifically in tribal studies is relatively new. This novelty presents challenges in determining suitable course content and identifying essential skills to embed in a research course tailored for BSW students.

The indigenous turn referenced in the section on tribal studies is still in an interregnum stage. Though its foundation, exemplified by the Post-Xaxa framework, has begun to take shape, it has yet to develop substantive content. This delay can be attributed to several factors. First, traditional frameworks in tribal studies remain dominant across universities, shaping the primary lens through which tribes are studied. Second, even those inclined to challenge these frameworks often hesitate to do so, as career advancement within academia is frequently tied to adherence to established views. Third, indigenous tribal scholars are only now beginning to cultivate the confidence to think independently—both outside the frameworks of dominant groups and with the self-assurance needed to produce organic theories rooted in their lived experiences.

Innovations in research methodology are also beginning to emerge. Indigenous tribal scholars are presenting theoretical challenges to traditional methods like ethnography, advocating for shifts such as replacing participant observation with engaged observation. These changes are occurring not only in India but across regions with indigenous populations as part of a broader decolonial scholarship. The decolonization of knowledge has become a global endeavour, drawing the participation of numerous scholars across disciplines and engaging a substantial and growing readership.

Reference

1. Baum, W (2007). The Other Uses of Oral History. The Oral History Review 34:1 Winter/Spring 2007. pp. 15
2. Boaventura S.S (2014) Epistemologies of the South, Justice against Epistemicides. London: Routledge.
3. Bodhi, S.R. (2019). The Khasi Political System and Its Dynamics. A Study of the Federation of Khasi States. Doctoral Thesis, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai.
4. Bodhi, S.R. (2022). Tribal Studies in India: Pre and Post Xaxa. Journal of Tribal Intellectual Collective India. Vol.6. Issue 1. No.5, TN, Part 1, pp.70-89.
5. Bodhi, S.R. (2022). The Decolonial-Historical Approach in Social Research: Its Methodological Contours. Journal of Tribal Intellectual Collective India. Vol.6. Issue 1.No.1,TN, Part 2, pp.1-12.
6. Bodhi, S.R. (2024). Lectures on Tribal Studies in India Pre and Post Xaxa: A Decolonial-Historical Approach. New Vehicle Productions, Nagpur.

7. Bodhi, S.R and Bipin, J. (2019). (Edited) The Problematics of Tribal Integration: Views from India’s Alternative Centres. The Shared Mirror, Hyderabad.
8. Smith, L.T. (1999) Decolonizing Methodologies Research and Indigenous Peoples. London: Zed Books.
9. Cusicanqui, S.R. (2012). Ch’ixinakax utxiwa: A Reflection on the Practices and Discourses of Decolonization. The South Atlantic Quarterly 111:1, Winter. English Translation by Duke University Press. pp.95-109.
10. Grosfoguel, R. (2016). The Dilemmas of Ethnic Studies in the United States: Between Liberal Multiculturalism, Identity Politics, Disciplinary Colonization, and Decolonial Epistemologies. In Grosfoguel, R. Hernández, R. & Velásquez E.R (2016). (ed). Decolonizing the Westernised University. Interventions in Philosophy of Education from Within and Without. Lexington Books. pp. 27-38.
11. Kammen, C. & Prendergast, N. (2000). eds., Encyclopedia of Local History. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press,2000. pp. 383
12. Malinowskii, B. (1922). Argonauts of western Pacific: An Account of Native Enterprise and Adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New Guinea. Routledge.
13. Maldonado-Torres, N. (2018). The Decolonial Turn in Poblete J.(Ed). New Approaches to Latin American Studies: Culture and Power. Routledge. pp.111-127.
14. Sabelo, J. N-G. (2020). Worlding beyond the West. Decolonization, Development and Knowledge in Africa. Turning over a New Leaf. Routledge. pp.17-44.
15. Secretary, University Grants Commission (2022). Curriculum and Credit Framework for Undergraduate Programmes. pp.25-26.
16. Tadu, R. (000). Doing Oral History among Indigenous and Oral Communities. Journal of Tribal Intellectual Collective India.
17. Tadu R. (2024). Excerpts form a conversation held on 26^th October, 2024

18. Thomson, A (2007). Four Paradigm Transformations in Oral History. The Oral History Review 34:1. Winter/Spring 2007. pp. 49–70.
19. Tripura B. (2023). Decolonizing Ethnography and Tribes in India: Towards an Alternative Methodology. Frontiers in Political Science. Vol.5, 2023.
20. Tripura B. (2024). Indigenous People’s Negotiations, Everyday State and Development Experiences in Contemporary Tripura, Northeast India. Doctoral Thesis. Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany.
21. Zondi S. (2021). An Argument for Revisiting African Voices in Search of a Decolonial Turn. In Zondi S. (2021) (Ed). African Voices in Search of a Decolonial Turn. African Institute of South Africa. pp.1-11.

Have you like this article?