Classic and Contemporary Ethnography - Literature review Example

Ethnography Name: Date: Affiliation: Ethnography Introduction According to O’Reilly, (2012), ethnography refers to the collection of the qualitative methods that are used and applied in the field of social sciences, and they focus on close observation of the interactions and social practices. The qualitative methods are paramount in ensuring that the researcher can interpret and build the theories concerning the occurrence of a social process. Qualitative research methods are inductive, and they generate hypothesis that helps the researcher in making educated guesses concerning the occurrence of a particular phenomenon. On the other hand, quantitative research is deductive in nature, and hypothesis testing determines the truth of the educated across the population. Ethnography uniquely contributes to qualitative research method through examining the activities that occur in a particular context. An ethnographer normally describes a situation through asking several questions about a particular event. Moreover, through analyzing several documentation such as historical records and policies the ethnographer may be able to describe a particular question. Through the process, the ethnographer can make fine distinctions and see the ambiguities in the way the situation may be interpreted. The ethnographic methods normally include the semi-structured interviews, elicitation of the photo, and participation observation in the library among other approaches. Similarly, Atkinson et al. (2001) asserts that the ethnography is the process of studying people in their own environment through methods such as participation observation, carrying face-to-face interviews among other interaction-based approaches. Definition and discussion of ethnography Atkinson et al. (2001) asserts that the ethnography is the process of studying people in their environment through methods such as participation observation, carrying face-to-face interviews among other interaction-based approaches." The study is aimed at getting particular information that might be useful for the purpose of business, community integration among other uses of research. Ethnography as a discipline is holistic since it looks critically at the past, the present and the future of a given community. Ethnography as first hand, it looks at the detailed accounts of a given community or a particular society. It attempts to look at the circumstances of the people who are studied comprehensively hence making it a crucial in research. Ethnographers normally look at the record of the people’s way of life, and the anthropologist and the people see it and use such parameters to describe the people and their way of life. The classic ethnographer normally involves a detailed description of the whole culture that is outside the country of the researcher. Initially, the people who used to engage in ethnographic research spent years in a particular place of study known as the “field.”Consequently, the time that was spent living in the communities have helped ethnographers to be able produce thick descriptions which are commonly known as ethnographies, and they normally communicate the information in that particular field (Atkinson et al,2001). Contemporary ethnographic research has included the dimension where one is not required to look at the people who are outside the community of the researcher, instead seeking to understand those who are living in the same country. Contemporary ethnography looks at issues that may be considered ordinary and mundane especially to those who are living the society. For instance, the shopping malls, towns, corporations, cyberspace among other structures that may appear to be insignificant. It differs from the classic ethnographic in terms of the time that is required to conduct the research. However, the limited times do not affect the quality of the work that is produced. Classic and contemporary ethnographic are interpretive and descriptive since the details are very crucial. The ethnographer must determine be able to determine the significance of what or she wants to observe without necessarily gathering broad information concerning the same. In describing the methodology of an ethnographer, Clifford Geertz played a great role in the coining of term “thick description” which is the method used by the ethnographers. Atkinson et al. (2001) adds that the ethnography is among the approaches that are found within the social research in the world today. Additionally, the term is not entirely used as the standard fashion, instead its meaning keep on varying from point to point. Consequently, there is overlap with other labels especially the qualitative inquiry, interpretive method, case study among others hence having a semantic boundary. There is no clear distinction between ethnography and the case where one studies the lives of people (history of other people). Similarly, there is a case where one can study his or her life hence calling the practice autoethnography (Atkinson et al., 2001). Moreover, there is a challenging case of “virtual ethnography” where the data is restricted to the material that is on the internet (Stewart, 2000). The historical foundation and development of the term is quite long since it started in the 19th during the study of cultural practices. It was used in anthropology and more especially in the western part of the world. During the 19th century, ethnography contrasted with ethnology, and it was seen, as it is complementary. Ethnology was depicted as the key anthropological study and the missionaries and the travelers initially spearheaded it. However, the term ethnology fell out of favor because anthropologists preferred ethnography. From the anthropologists, they defined ethnology as the process through which integration of first empirical investigations and the theoretical and the comparative interpretation of the social organization and culture. Because of the changes in the early twentieth century ethnographic has been highly affiliated with anthropology. Ethnography and educational research Participant observation that is part of ethnography is very crucial when carrying out research be it undergraduate, doctoral or even masters. The data that may be recorded in the writing of the thesis may be “mere talks” and are instrumental in compiling that particular data. The talks may be even being very informal, but they are instrumental when it comes to the research. A fundamental aspect of the research is the authenticity that a particular finding brings to the research. For instance, as a researcher visiting the aborigines and having a mere talk might be very instrumental in the research. The actual words may be instrumental when formulating a statement since it is authentic and original. Therefore, ethnographic study is paramount in research. It is worth noting that participatory observation is part of ethnography, and it does not necessarily mean that one was observing; even the cases of dialogue and interviews are part of the ethnographic approach. This particular realization does not cause any particular concern, and it is interesting to note that there are very many challenges that scholars encounter whenever they are carrying out research (Forsey, 2010). Considering, the approach, one can equate with anthropology but in the real sense, it is not practically possible. However, there are various issues that arise from the critical case of relating the ethnography and participant observation. In an attempt to emphasize the differences, a short story from the daily life is paramount. It involves the research paper presentation to the colleagues at a local conference. The title of the paper carried by the researcher was “ethnography as participant listening” and it piqued the interested of a graduate student who could not manage to attend the seminars because she was in the preliminaries of her fieldwork in the Jakarta region. The postgraduate student requested the researcher to send the document through the mail. The research paper was instrumental in her research, and it gave her reassurance of what she was undertaking. The student was studying the relationships between the different workers in the transitional corporation that is located at the centre of megalopolis in Jakarta. For her to get substantial information, she had to spend quite sometime time in the offices, and she was becoming uncomfortable since the notebook was filled with what she heard in the fieldwork. She noted that the content that she got through observation was very little hence feeling uncomfortable about the whole issue (Forsey, 2010). The student went ahead and commented that the ethnographic manuals affirmed that the power of the method was centered in the observational work. Therefore, this has steered the thinking that participant observation is a form of human behavior (Forsey, 2010). Moreover, she observed that when writing the field notes they should not be highly detailed as Spardley affirmed. She concluded that the approach is highly suited to neither her nor the social scene that was immersed. Instead, her notebook was filled with what people are saying and very few details concerning what is observed. The student was very happy, and she wrote, “The paper helped me in seeing that the researcher has different strengths of approaching the work. It offers a different perspective, a different way of understanding the “participant observation” especially when one is writing the fieldwork notes. The research that I was carrying out did not seem to be okay and that I was doing ethnographic study." Hockey(2002,p.209) asserts that most postgraduate students in a variety of disciplines are reluctant to name their rich qualitative research as ethnographic because their methods might be judged by the external examiner inadequate considering that the term is apparently powerful. The power arises from the emphasis that is given to the act of observation that is made through extensive and extended management within a particular group of people. However, not all the ethnography manuals place the same emphasis on observation. For instance, Hammersley and Atkinson (2007, p.2) asserts that the ethnography involves a combination of watching and listening what is happening, listening to what people are saying, asking questions through the formal and informal interviews among other activities. The most fundamental point to note is that the main task of the ethnographers is listening. However, the practitioners have been equating ethnography with participatory observation that should not be the case (O’Reilley, 2009, Crang&Cook, 2007). For example, Crang and Cook have been describing ethnography as participant observation and a variety of other techniques. Similarly, Atkinson and Hammerson, 2007 adds that participant observation and ethnography are cognate terms. However, it is crucial noting that the two terms are in no way similar, and they should not be joined as one. Participant observation is dominant, and it enjoys the ethnographic hierarchy that is undoubtedly powerful if not hegemonic emphasis that is placed on the western scientific culture(Bull and Back,2003). This gives participant observation a mythic status hence making it difficult for them to avoid assessing the worth of an ethnographic project according to the power of what is observed in the field. However, the power is often felt more than the actual and talked more than seen. Sherry Ortner, who is an anthropologist, has been having difficulties in embracing the worth of an interview-dominated research. Her reflections on the interview –based study that she conducted among her former classmates in the Weequahic high school in the New Jersey (2003), she helps in highlighting the disquiet that is felt by many ethnographers when they cannot get close to the community enough to conduct a “proper study.” She describes herself as a” dyed wool participant observer." She continues to point out that the loss of richness and the depth of an interview-based research when it is compared to the full-scale participant observation. Through the study, she feels more of a sociologist than an anthropologist that should be the case, and it makes her feel uncomfortable. The argument matches with Hockey’s (2002,pp.209-210) cross –examination that states that many anthropologists are involved in research “at home” hence feeling that their disciplinary identity is slipping away due to the interview led studies rather than “enhanced and proper ethnography." This shows that the ghost of Malinowski have continued to haunt people in the university corridors since the fieldwork archetype that he formulated has continued to be used by the ethnographers and the anthropologists. Ethnology and education have been a crucial in the academic arena, and many authors have published different books concerning the same. Paul Atkinson and Sara Delamont are among the best writers who have handled the issue of ethnography methods and education. Sociology of education is one of the fields that have applied the principle and concept of ethnography, and they have heavily embraced the methodological issues. The handbook of ethnography has a chapter on ethnographic research in the educational setting (Gordon et al, 2001).ethnography for education posits that ethnography has translated to be one of the widely used methods of educational research, and it has a chapter on naturalistic and ethnographic research. Gordon (2001) affirms that educational ethnologists have tended to focus more on the social interaction that is influenced ethno methodology, phenomenology and ultimately symbolic interactionism. As a reaction to the depoliticized nature of the approaches, they have taken the cultural studies, and critical feminist approaches. The critical and feminist approaches have undertaken have taken the postmodern ethnographies in the educational settings. The critical and the feminist approaches have a high possibility of formulating theories of the interrelationship of the structure and agency in an attempt to consider the empowerment of the researched. These are the educational ethnographies and are most likely to fit with the approach of ethnography as a recommended practice. Educational research is a broad field, and it involves distinctive approaches that ensure that it is successful by the end of the day. The cluster of the terms can be easily being termed as interpretive, phenomenological, naturalistic, interactionist and ethnographic and their weaknesses, strengths are brought together for the purpose of educational research, and they are thoroughly examined. The paradigm of the mixed methods of research is later introduced, and it is accessed the contribution that it will have on education research (Cohen et al, 2011). The critical theory as a paradigm of the educational research is normally discussed, and its implications for the research are indicated in various ways hence resonating with the curriculum research, feminist research and the participatory research. The concern does not concern only understanding a situation or phenomenon but also it involves changing it often with explicit political agenda. Critical theory normally links the conduct of the educational research with politics and policymaking, and it is reflected in the discussions of research and evaluation. Therefore, some educational research has turned out to be evaluative in nature meeting the general purpose of educational research (Cohen et al., 2011). A recent perspective that is discussed here is the complexity theory that originally came from the natural sciences. In all, the part normally introduces readers to different research traditions with the advice “fitness for a purpose” and it was the main guiding principle. The nature and foundations of the research methods stressed in part one that nature of the foundations of the educational research has continued to witness a proliferation of paradigms for a given time. Initially, the days of either qualitative and quantitative research have continued to rise, and several approaches have been introduced in this part. The normative and interpretative perspectives are presented in the complementary light in an attempt to try to lessen the tension that exists between them (Cohen et al., 2011). The main role of the ethnographers Normally, there two main aspects that handle the myths of participant observation that are observation and participation. Moreover, the next section goes further in accessing the validity of the claims of ethnography are at the heart of observational through closely looking at the ethnographers and their work. Ethnographers must scrutinize everything that is said to be true and self- evident. The research reported examines the claims of ethnographers as the major methodological principle of the chosen method against the actual practice. Testing the assertions of participant observation normally lies at the heart of the ethnographic practice and research postulates that it might be more accurate to suggest that ethnography is a process of engaged listening; observing that people say and what they hear(Atkinson,2012). The method provides a context that is needed for access mediation and to glimpse the understandings that underlie it. It is all about knowing how a mediator perceives himself and how the parties perceive him and the process. Ethnography as a topic must seek to know the relationship between the mediator and the process and the mediator and the parties involved. It manages to achieve that through the voice of the participants themselves. Through the words of the mediator, it is possible to hear what he or she says to the parties about mediation and her role in the process. It manages to do that through the voices of the participants themselves. Moreover, through the mediator's own words, one will manage to hear what is saying to the parties and about mediation and the role in the process. More also, through the words, one will learn the opinion of the parties and opinion process about the mediator (Atkinson, 2012). According to Forsey (2011), ethnography is perceived as an engaged listening and more especially in the contemporary ethnography. However, categorical research is paramount before categorical conclusion is drawn. However, without resorting to this particular empiricism, there are various good philosophical reasons that call for allowed engaged listening that have an equal standing with participant observation. The part of the impetus for identifying the impending difficulties associated with the participant observer normally arises from the realities of conducting research in the so-called “western world." Taking the concept from a historical perspective the social spaces are captured in most of the classic ethnographies that are produced by the anthropologists and reflects cultural and physical climate that is conducive to the extended conversations that are in the outdoor settings. In Stocking (1983, p.111) Malinowski called it the open air anthropology.”The settings whereby the contemporary western researchers normally conduct anthropology at the home setting and they are not different from the Malinowskian archetype. Therefore, considering, the above statements, its notable that ethnographer mainly deal with research and the methodology is the main task. Qualitative inquiry and ethnography Critical approaches to the qualitative inquiry within the sociology have continued to situate themselves variously within the field. Evaluating many lines of thought that we draw today under the sign of “critical,” and several tenets have emerged and are directly related to the understanding of the logic of the critical modes of inquiry. First, the main goal of the modes is changing the world through exposing, social, economic and political forces that have socially and historically contributed to the inefficient distribution of power in the society. Epistemologically, the critical modes of inquiry are normally based on the rejection of the instrumental notions of rationality and arguing that such notions will focus on the correct methods rather than the desirable and justified end (Kamberelis, & Dimitriadis, 2005). The main difference between fact and the values is normally rejected due to the fact that are emanating from the values of the dominant groups in the society and they are naturalized with the discourses of the various ideological state apparatus. Redistribution of power can produce a new set of facts. Related to this point the relationships between signs and their referents are normally contingent and unstable since they have been produced and mediated within the specifics of social, cultural and the economic relations (Kamberelis, & Dimitriadis, 2005). Language and discourse normally function in this way, and the new languages and the new discourses can contribute to the redistribution of power, knowledge and the material goods hence new articulation of reality. Just as they may reject the distinction between the fact and value and the unproblematic relations between signs and concepts of their referents, critical modes of inquiry are suspicious of the phenomenological accounts of experience. The researchers may be working using the hermeneutic or the interpretive modes of inquiry hence embracing the counts of lived experience as genuine and authentic. Researchers who are working with models that are more critical are normally suspicious of the accounts since they see the experience itself as enabled and constrained by the discourses that produce the conditions of possibility and for certain kinds of experience in the first place. Similarly, they may see individuals who are construed by and within these individuals. Experiences and the individuals that are normally posited from them to be the constructions of specific social, economic and cultural forces(Kamberelis, & Dimitriadis, 2005). Critical modes of inquiry are motivated by politics of responsibility whereby researchers work within the research participants towards emancipation and self-empowerment. Research practice is normally radically dialogic and this means that researchers share the cultural practices of the people they are researching hence suggesting ways in which their lives may be re-imagined and transformed and in the process, they are transformed themselves. In this regard, the critical modes always require attention not only to the pragmatic sense of the praxis but to the political sense too. Developing and maintaining the reciprocal relationships is extraordinary and difficult. Conclusion In conclusion, it is evident that an ethnography is a diverse research method that is used in the academic arena. Anthropology and ethnography have a common ground, but they are distinctive just as participatory and ethnography have a common ground though different meanings. It is widely used in qualitative research, and its significance cannot be ignored amongst educationists and other researchers. It has proved to be effective in educational research, and it has led to the publication of many journals and articles in that particular field. Continued use of ethnography as a way of carrying out research in language has led to formulation coherent theories that explain the process of language literacy. References Anfara, V.A., Jr. & Mertz, N.T. (Eds.) (2006). Theoretical frameworks in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Ch. 1 Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., Delamont, S., Lofland, J.,& Lofland, L.(Eds.). (2001).Handbook of ethnography. London: Sage. Cohen, L., Manion, L., 7 Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods ineducation (7th Ed.). London: Routledge. Ch. 1 Forsey, M. G. (2010). Ethnography as participant listening. Ethnography, 11(4), 558-572. Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice (3rd ed.).New York, NY: Routledge. Walford, G. (Ed.). (2007). Methodological developments in ethnography (1st Ed.). Amsterdam, Netherlands: JAI Press. O’Reilly, K (2012). Ethnographic methods (2nd Ed.). London: Rutledge. Ch.2 Kamberelis, G., & Dimitriadis, G. (2005). On qualitative inquiry: Approaches to language and literacy research. New York: Teachers College Press. Ch. 1 Savin-Baden, M. & Major, C.H. (2013). Theoretical and conceptual frameworks in Qualitative research: The essential guide to theory and practice, pp. 131-147. London: Routledge. Read More