The Ups and Downs of Ethnography

It seems to me that ethnographies have great value as qualitative research when a researcher wants to study a behavior and then look at why, how, and to what extent that behavior occurs.

When we did our observations last week, I thought of myself as an observer only, but after reviewing my notes and sharing my paper with a peer editing group, I realized I had become a participant-observer. I felt compelled to ask questions of a few of the subjects I was observing and OH what a difference it made. Without going into the details, I would have drawn an inaccurate conclusion if I had not asked those questions. That little experience made me realize the value of the participant role. So, based solely on my very brief encounter with observation, I can see the value in multiple observations, questioning, surveys, etc. which leads me to my second point.

On page 40 L&A discuss triangulation as "...varying their observations, and gaining multiple perspectives by mapping the setting, selecting observers, and developing a relationship with them, and establishing a long period of investigation." What is considered a "long period"? Several days? Weeks? Months? I'm sure the longer the period of observation, the more valid the study may be, but is this always possible?

L&A state that one of the problems the ethnographer faces is coding the data. I'm still fuzzy on this. I need some further examples.

The role of the observer or observer-participant and what Kirsch and Sullivan term the "informant" is a precarious one. In L&A one of the conclusions that Florio and Clark came to was that "the use of technical terms disturbed the relationship between the consultants and the teacher" (45). This was similar to the problem that Beverly Moss in K&S encountered when she discussed "shared knowledge" (165) with one of the African American preachers she was using in a study. She found herself in a Catch-22 when the preacher said, "You know what I mean..." (166). So shared information, or the lack thereof, can be a sticky wicket. Even observing in your own community isn't going to solve these problems, and in fact, may create them.

I appreciate the detail that L&A put into their description of difficulties and problems with ethnographies. One that caught my eye was the fifth concern, "interval consistency, redundancy, and novelty of information" (47). When I was doing my observation, I was not drawn to what I consider the mundane, i.e. groups of men sitting at a bar, watching basketball and drinking beer. I was drawn to the noise, where the action was. I ended up watching the people playing the video games. In the classroom setting, I need to focus on the mundane, or rather those behaviors that get repeated over and over again so that I can do something about them. This is something I'm going to have to watch out for. I would say that there lies another difficulty in being the teacher living in the community where you teach. We get so used to seeing certain behaviors in student writing that it doesn't shock us or even surprise us. Perhaps that's the beauty of having a team, or at least someone who is completely divorced from that community come in and observe that same community.

Beverly Moss' piece in K&S was enlightening. I loved the excerpt she took from Gloria Naylor's Mama Day. I think what I learned from this discussion was tread lightly and be sensitive to informants and subjects alike.

This chapter also brought something from my past to light. Several years ago, our last superintendent brought in Max Thompson, a best practice guru from what he called "90-90-90" schools. These schools were populated by students who fall into these three categories: 90 percent scored below basic in reading and math, 90 percent got free or reduced lunches, 90 percent were minorities. We were supposed to use the same practices that had been successful in the 90-90-90 schools. We embraced them, like we always do, but saw only marginal improvement. My guess is that these two populations of students are so inherently different that another ethnography needs to be done in predominantly white rural schools like mine and a completely different theory needs to be tested. The ethnography study can be valuable but the theories generated from one population don't always transfer to another population. Isn't that the whole point of doing an ethnography study? Sounds like a no-brainer, right? It seems to me this administration should have done their homework on research practices before spending taxpayers' money on a system that was never going to work.