Introduction

There is a lack of first-hand accounts from dyslexic Higher Education (HE) tutors within the literature. This investigation will add to a body of research, offering insight and understanding into the experience of a dyslexic tutor working in HE. Being an autoethnographic inquiry, the work derived from this study is not intended to be universal; experiences shown in this project should exist for others to respond to in the wake of a lack of accounts. Moreover, the findings of this investigation possess the power to resonate with others where intersections of their lives may be similar, including national and international colleagues. The rationale for using my own first-hand account stems from a lack of autoethnographic accounts of dyslexic tutors in HE. Several studies in the literature detail the experience of dyslexic trainee teachers (Glazzard & Dale, 2013; 2015; Jacobs, Collyer, Lawernce, & Glazzard, 2021); dyslexic students (Robinson, 2017; Shaw & Anderson, 2018; Gant & Hewson, 2022); and dyslexic tutors teaching at various levels of study (Riddick, 2003; Griffiths, 2012; Patrícia, Borges, Pinto, 2022). However, most of these works do not utilise autoethnographic approaches. Additionally, none of the accounts mentioned reflect on tutors who develop a dyslexic identity whilst teaching.

The ontological and epistemological stances taken in this work are social constructivism (SC). I will conduct this work with the notion that reality is the product of agreed-upon concepts (Cresswell & Poth, 2016). Autoethnography is suited to be framed via SC, as I am embracing that in a world where agreement by society dictates what we know of a given thing, under this framework, I know intimately about the thing I am researching – my experience. I am seeking to demonstrate the relationship between being an educator and being dyslexic so that others may understand my experience in their views. The findings of the study are not meant to be generalisable, however, these may be relatable and encouraging to others who find themselves in a similar position or those who desire to understand the authentic experience of dyslexic tutors; an important consideration given the lack of representation for dyslexic educators in HE (Hiscock & Leigh, 2020).

Background
My own experience of teaching and dyslexic identity covers a period of five years. Firstly, I taught in a college during my undergraduate degree, with no firm conception of what dyslexia/ being dyslexic was. I then studied for a teacher training degree immediately after learning of my dyslexic status; finally, currently, I am a Graduate Teaching Assistant (GTA) at a UK HE institution, whilst writing my PhD on dyslexic experiences, and self-identify as dyslexic. The sections and intersection of these stages of my life chart the development of my professional practice and dyslexic identity. Whether or not learning more about those aspects of myself that can be called dyslexic has had any impact or influence on the way I teach is unclear. This investigation will offer insight into my own lived experience, where readers may relate or empathise, in response to the research question: In what ways has the development of my dyslexic identity impacted my professional practice?

Methodology Being inductive in nature, autoethnography is a congruent methodology for inquiry, as I will critically analyse my experience concerning the literature showing instances that complement and contrast. Autoethnography offers an avenue to “[converse] with the literature” (Wall, 2008, p.40), allowing for a zoomed-in view of practice at the granular level, paying attention to nuances of details in embodied examples of practice (Adams, Ellis, & Jones, 2017). Considering my aim is to develop my practice, I need to reflect on what I do and why I do it (Lee, 2020). Through using an autoethnographic approach, I will add concrete examples to the body of literature by sharing my account relating to the literature (Ellis, Adams, & Bochner, 2011). While some deem autoethnography only a method for illustrating personal accounts (Ellis & Bochner, 2000; Walford, 2004), I intend to link themes within the literature to my experience. Using a rigorous approach in my reflexivity when investigating the complements and contrast of my account to other works, as bias is unavoidable in ethnographic work and should be embraced by the researcher (Duncan, 2004). Reflexivity is a core element within autoethnographic research. Rather than prising objectivity in this study, the inevitable subjectivity of my approach to the question should be embraced and made transparent. Being part (and chiefly, the narrator) of the world that I am seeking to illustrate will require me to pay close attention to my position towards the data. The evolving relationship between the data and myself will be highlighted in a reflexivity journal, enabling me to highlight my assumptions and biases when sharing insights. Methods I will create entries in a dedicated research journal as the main method, whilst also using artefacts (e.g., previous personal diary entries over the past five years) to support relevant themes as they develop. The resultant data will be analysed using reflexive thematic analysis ((TA) Braun & Clarke, 2006; 2019; Clarke & Braun, 2013)). Using reflexive TA will enable me to identify resonant themes from the insights and accounts (Wilkinson, 2020).

The expected outcomes of this inquiry may focus on self-concept, agency, identity and inclusion. Whilst the research is ongoing, emergent themes have highlighted the importance of self-concept when navigating the development of a new identities. through the course of the research I will continue to analyse the data and disseminate findings, aligning finding to research in the literature.

Adams, T. E., Ellis, C., & Jones, S. H. (2017). Autoethnography. The international encyclopedia of communication research methods, 1-11. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77101. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative research in sport, exercise and health, 11(4), 589-597. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. Successful Qualitative Research, 1-400. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications. Duncan, M. (2004). Autoethnography: Critical appreciation of an emerging art. International journal of qualitative methods, 3(4), 28-39. Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733-768). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ellis, C., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P. (2011). Autoethnography: an overview. Historical social research/Historische sozialforschung, 273-290. Hiscock, J., & Leigh, J. (2020). Exploring perceptions of and supporting dyslexia in teachers in higher education in STEM. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 57(6), 714-723. Lee, K. (2020). Autoethnography as an authentic learning activity in online doctoral education: An integrated approach to authentic learning. TechTrends, 64(4), 570-580. Walford, G. (2004). Finding the limits: Autoethnography and being an Oxford University proctor. Qualitative research, 4(3), 403-417. Wall, S. (2008). Easier said than done: Writing an autoethnography. International journal of qualitative methods, 7(1), 38-53. Wilkinson, C. (2020). Imposter syndrome and the accidental academic: An autoethnographic account. International Journal for Academic Development, 25(4), 363-374.