Maureen Porter 5M36 Forbes Quad 648-7041 (afternoons) mporter+@pitt.edu http://www.pitt.edu/~mporter

OFFICE HOURS for this semester are by appointment.  I dedicate the morning to writing, therefore morning visitors and phone calls may not be answered and/or receive an immediate response.  Feel free to submit questions and ideas via e-mail; I usually check my e-mail at least once most days, usually first thing in the morning.

 I expect that students come to the course with some prior coursework that addresses the multiple intersections of  education and anthropology.  Students also need to have grappled with the challenges of documenting and analyzing ethnographic data and need to have produced a written or multimedia project.  Normally, successful completion of Anthropology and Education (ADMPS 2352/EDUC 2203/ANTH 2728) will fulfill the basic requirements.  However, the more coursework in related areas, experience applying qualitative methods, and hands-on fieldwork the participant has, the better.

 Because of the individualized nature of this course, it is appropriate for students at many levels.  This course is particularly designed for those who are beginning to identify an area for advanced, independent research.  Many will be in the process of further refining their studies and concurrently working on a formal overview, completing their comprehensive exam, or conducting supervised research.  While this course is designed to dovetail with either of these projects, it is also appropriate for students who are still in more exploratory stages.  It also provides enough challenge and flexibility for the ethnographer who is in the middle of, or has completed most of the, fieldwork and is in the process of writing up.

In addition to the above criteria, participants need to enter the seminar with the following:
• regular access to and familiarity with a computer capable of e-mail, web searches, word processing, data management, EndNote (bibliographic data management and qualitative data analysis)
• an active, working advisor-advisee relationship with at least one faculty member
• the willingness and commitments to meet for all classes and to participate in extra-curricular collaborative work and constructive criticism

 This course is not the end of a long string of systematic learning experiences.  Instead, it marks a pivotal midpoint, even a new beginning.  This course is intended to prepare students to embark upon their dissertations (or another significant project) with renewed and refined purpose, enhanced organization and data management skills, and expanded critical analysis and reflective writing skills.  While not a formal prerequisite for overview or dissertation writing, it can be considered a key step in the iterative process of developing, analyzing, and revising an ethnographic project of dissertation caliber.  For students actively engaged in dissertation or thesis development, this course will provide an important theoretical and methodological complement and a forum for collegial support for an often isolating process.

 Students should not consider this their last formal experience with design and writing.  Writing well is a lifelong process.  Therefore use this course as a springboard to identify and refine your needs and foci.  Take advantage of the other courses that are offered throughout the university.  I encourage you strongly to become a part of future writing courses and working groups until the day you turn in your own dissertation - and well beyond.
 

RESOURCES

• Becker, H. (1986). Writing for social scientists. How to start and finish your thesis, book, or article. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.  ISBN: 022604108
• Fetterman, D. (1993). Speaking the language of power: Communication, collaboration, and advocacy. New York, NY: Falmer Press. ISBN: 0750702036
• Johansen, G. Metaphor and Thinking. Lanham, NY: The University Press of America.  ISBN: 0819190217
• Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.  ISBN: 0226468011
• LaMott, A. (1994). Bird by bird. Some instructions on writing and life. New York, NY: Anchor Books.  ISBN: 0385480016
• Murray, D. (1991). The craft of revision. 3rd. Ed. Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc.  ISBN: 0155154465
• Seitz, V.R. (1992). Women, development and communities for empowerment in Appalachia. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.  ISBN: 0791423786
• Wolf, M. (1992). A thrice -told tale. Feminism, postmodernism, and ethnographic responsibility. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. ISBN: 0804719802

COURSE OBJECTIVES

 This course was developed in part in response to student methodology sections in which the student simply and vapidly proposes to “ use ethnography to do a qualitative analysis” of the stated problem.. This course builds on concurrent and collaborative learning to achieve both group and individualized goals.  Students have the opportunity to work with others while they complete their individualized paper assignments.  By the conclusion of the course, students will be able to:

Regarding ethnographic methods and ethics:

• critically assess the perspective and usefulness of qualitative methods handbooks and to communicate their view succinctly and clearly to others
• describe common ethical fieldwork and writing dilemmas and to provide reasonable and responsible alternatives
• appreciate the challenges and satisfactions inherent in ethically and thoroughly conducting fieldwork in educational settings
• appreciate some of the advantages and quandaries in ethnographic evaluation

• understand the unique characteristics of ethnography, its limits and significance
• appreciate diverse genres of ethnographic writing
• understand the importance of audience and how to revise for audience
• critically assess both the structure and content of an exemplary ethnographic account
• refine their own focus through individually-designed papers
• gain experience with bibliographic and other technological tools for data management and analysis

• better recognize the multiple ways that “problems” are socially constructed
• understand and present a complex problem in terms that generate useful questions and which merit the particular strengths of a fitting ethnographic research strategy
• define education in an inclusive yet specific and useful sense
• state their own purposes for embarking upon such a challenging and complex study
• appreciate the ways in which they and others use metaphors, symbols, and other linguistic devices to express experience and thought
• appreciate the ways in which they and others develop, define, and convey a sense of place in daily life and in good writing
• use technological tools (computer, world wide web, multi-media) and information resources to locate, synthesize, and communicate information effectively
• work constructively with others to share criticism, encouragement, and creative insight for the mutual benefit of producing both good writing and healthy writers
• gain a greater awareness of their own and their colleagues’ cultural backgrounds and the ways these continue to shape their choices and perspectives
• lead discussions on complex and detailed readings
 

COURSE FORMAT

 What is a seminar? It is a time for advanced students to meet as colleagues and to work collaboratively to fulfill mutual goals and explore related interests.  It is traditionally a forum for discussion and analysis rather than a faculty-centered lecture-dominated format.   With these goals in mind, the students and instructor share responsibility and credit for the success of the seminar.

 This course is designed to integrate many modes of learning - reading, reflective individual exercises, oral discussions, active listening, hands-on computer work, etc.  We will make the most of our time together; I aim to begin and end on time.  Usually we will take a break, but the sequencing of seminar time needs to remain flexible.

 Students are expected to attend all course meetings and to participate fully.  If you must be absent from a scheduled meeting, I appreciate being informed in advance.  However, if really nasty weather precludes you from safely reaching campus, let safety prevail.  Students remain responsible for contacting their colleagues to find out about assignments, changes to the syllabus, and the discussions that they missed out on by not being present.

 There are no armchair ethnographers; ours is a full-contact sport.  Therefore, all seminar participants are needed; there can be no spectators.  If you want to learn what ethnography is all about you have to do the work.  Auditors may be allowed to partake in the class with the consent of the instructor.  Anyone who wishes to audit must meet specifically with me to gain consent.   However, auditors will differ from the other students only in their arrangements with the Registrar, they will be expected to be full participants in the seminar.
 

GRADES

Of a total of 200 points:

 Overall Participation in the seminar - 20 points

 Group presentations of Chapters
  Fetterman - 20 points
  Seitz - 20 points

 Papers 1 and 2
  Drafts - 10 points each
  Completed Paper - 30 points each
  Evidence of Feedback given - 10 points each

 Critique of Methodology Resource - 40 points

Criteria for Paper One

In this paper you will demonstrate that you have critically grappled with ethnography as both process and product.  In other settings e.g. dissertation proposals, students have written that they intend to “use ethnography to do a qualitative study of x” and have left the matter at that.  They have not made a compelling case for either the merits or challenges of the method or addressed why it is suited to their intended area of research.  The purpose of this paper is to present the problematics of ethnography as a process and usable product.  As graduates of this seminar you should be able to argue the following coherently, convincingly, and creatively:

1) what the core elements of ethnography are
2) what some ends of ethnography are (evaluation, collaboration, advocacy, investigation, policy, poetics, etc.) and in what contexts ethnography is conducted
3) how education as cultural transmission can/should be studied well by ethnography
4) what some of the challenges of designing, carrying out, and writing ethnography are
5) how the intended audience of an ethnography shapes how it is done and written up
6) how collaborative and constructive criticism from colleagues and research partners shapes the final product, why these are essential parts of the process of writing

You may use examples of ethnographies from other sources and/or reference your own research.  You are limited to 10 pages (double spaced, reasonable font 11 pt or larger).  You must use at least 10 references in a meaningful, significant, critical, and constructive way. (No name dropping!) All references and the bibliography must be in accurate APA style (or another approved, academic style).

When we do the group critical commentary please bring in your draft and 4 copies (double spaced), one for me, and three to share.

Please turn in all of the following on 2/18:
1. Your original draft
2. Your final paper
3. Evidence that you have sought and responded to peer feedback
4. Evidence that you have provided peer feedback to others

Suggested supplemental readings for the week(s) of:
 
1/21 and 1/28 What is ethnography?  Desinging problem statements, asking good questions, ethnography and evaluation
 
Spindler, G., & Spindler, L.  (1992). Cultural process and ethnography: An anthropological perspective. In LeCompte, M., Millroy, W., & Preissle, J. (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp 53-92). San Diego, CA: Academic Press, Inc. Excerpt, pp 63-74.

Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1983).  Ethnography: Principles in practice. London, England: Routledge. Chapter 1, “What is Ethnography?”

Stacey, J. (1988). “Can there be a feminist ethnography?” Women's Studies International Forum 11(1): 21-27.

Porter, M.K. (1996). Moving mountains. Reform, resistance and resiliency in an Appalachian Kentucky high school. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 12, 107-115. Optional - read Methodology Appendix

Edelman, M. (1988).  Constructing the political spectacle. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. Chapter 2, “The Construction and Uses of Social Problems.”

Giroux, H. (1996). Hollywood, race and the demonization of youth: The “kids” are not “alright.” [Review of the 1995 film Kids by C. Woods and L. Clark.]  Educational Researcher, 25, 31-35.

Berliner, D.C., & Biddle, B. J. (1995). The manufactured crisis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Preface and Chapter 1, “Thinking about Education in a Different Way.”

Locke, L., Spirduso, W. W., & Silverman, S. (1987). Proposals that work. A guide for planning dissertations and grant proposals. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Chapter 1, “The Function of the Proposal.”

Rudestam, K.E., & Newton, R.R. (1992). Surviving your dissertation. A comprehensive guide to content and process. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Chapter 2, “Selecting a Suitable Topic.”

Rossman, M. H. (1995). Negotiating graduate school. A guide for graduate students. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Pages 81-101 from Chapter 5, “The Proposal and the Thesis/ Dissertation.”

Hammersley, M.,& Atkins, P. (1983). Ethnography: Principles in practice. London, England: Routledge. Selections from Chapter 2, “Research design: Problems, Cases, and Samples.”

Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Chapters 1-3; “Introduction,” “Feminist Interview Research,” “Feminist Ethnography.”
 
Eisner, E. W. and A. Peshkin (1990). Qualitative inquiry in education. NY, Teachers College Press.

Lather, P. (1992). “Critical frames in educational research: Feminist and post- structural perspectives.” Theory Into Practice 31(2): 87-99.
 
Garman, N. (1996). Qualitative inquiry: Meaning and menace for educational researchers. Qualitative research practice in adult education. P. Willis and B. Neville, David Lovell Publishing.
 

2/4 Offering constructive criticism, problematizing language use and publishing conventions, support for creative, critical and compelling writing
 
Madigan, R., Johnson, S., &Linton, P. (1995) . The language of psychology. APA style as epistemology.  American Psychologist, 50, 428-436.

American Psychological Association.  (1994). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. (Fourth edition). Washington, DC: Author.

Mills, C.W. (1959). The sociological imagination. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Appendix, “On Intellectual Craftsmanship.”

Buford, B. (1996) The Seductions of Storytelling. The New Yorker. (June 24. July 1). pp 11-12.

Ladd, G.W. (1987). Imagination in research. An economist’s view. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press. Selections from Chapter 2, “Conditions stimulating to unconscious mental processes.”

Piercy, M.  ( 1992). Starting Support Groups for Writers. In T. Fulwiler and A. Biddle (Eds.) A community of voices. Reading and writing in the disciplines (pp 55-59). New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.

Doc-talk discussion on writing groups. http://www.asgs.org/SuppGrps.htm.

Heim, P. and S. K. Golant (1992). Hardball for women: Winning at the game of business. NY, A Plume Book. Chapter on criticism.
 

2/11-2/18 Ethics and Fieldwork
 
The Ethnography Seminar’s Compendium of Methodology Guides

Hargreaves, A. (1996). Transforming knowledge: Blurring the boundaries between research, policy, and practice. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 18, 105-122.

Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
 
Allan, G. and C. Skinner (1991). Handbook for research students in the social sciences. London, The Falmer Press.
 
Bernard, H. R. (1988). Research methods in cultural anthropology. Newbury Park, CA, Sage Publications.
 
Bernard, H. R. (1995). Research methods in anthropology: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Walnut Creek, CA, Altamira Press.
 
Brettell, C. B. When they read what we write: The politics of ethnography. Westport, CT, Bergin & Garvey.
 
Denzin, N. K. (1989). The research act: A theoritical introduction to sociological methods. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall.
 
Douglas, J. D. (1976). Investigative social research: Individual and team field research. Beverly Hills, CA, Sage Publications.
 
Hunt, M. (1985). Profiles of social research: The scientific study of human interactions. NY, Russell Sage Foundation.
 
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
 
Montoya W., M. (1998). Terminal Encounters: Ethnographic Location for Technophiliacs. Stanford University.
 
Moris, J. and J. Copestake (1993). Qualitative enquiry for rural development: A review. London, Intermediate Technology Publications.

Nelson, N. and S. Wright (1995). Power and participatory development: Theory and practice. London, Intermediate Technology Publications.
 
Slocum, R., L. Wichhart, et al. (1995). Power, process and participation: Tools for change. London, Intermediate Technology Publications.
 
Spindler, G. (1982). Doing the ethnography of schooling: Educational anthropology in action. Prospect Hights, IL, Waveland Press.
 
Spindler, G. and L. Spindler (1987). Interpretive ethnography of education: At home and abroad. Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
 
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA, Sage Publications.
 

2/25-3/18 Genres of ethnographic writing, building a case, excellence in ethnographic writing
 
The Ethnography Seminar’s Compendium of Methodology Resources

Heath, S.B. (1983).Ways with words. Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Prologue, Note on Transcriptions and Chapter 1, “The Piedmont: Textile Mills and Tmes of Change.”

Jackson, J.  (1990). “I am a Fieldnote:” Identity as a symbol of professional identity. In R. Sanjek, Fieldnotes. The making of anthropology (pp 3-33). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Sanjek, R. (1990). A vocabulary for fieldnotes. In R. Sanjek, Fieldnotes. The making of anthropology (pp 92-138). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Wolf, M. (1990) Chinanotes: Engendering Anthropology. In R. Sanjek, Fieldnotes. The making of anthropology (pp 3-33). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Geertz, C. (1973).The interpretation of cultures. Selected Essays. New York, NY: Basic Books, Inc. Chapter 1, “ Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture.”
 
Madigan, R., S. Johnson, et al. (1995). “The language of psychology: APA style as epistemology.” American Psychologist 50(6): 428-436.
 
Items from Porter's wall file on writing groups

3/25-4/1 Metaphors, thinking and writing

Dickmeyer, M.K. (1989). Metaphor, model, and theory in educational research. Teachers College Record, 91, 151-160.

Porter, M. (1998). “Points of light, bridges to the future, flower gardens, and the alamo: rural teachers' metaphors of schooling.” The Teacher Educator 33(3): 185-207.

Adamson, T., G. Johnson, et al. (1997). Metaphors We Ought Not Live By: Rush Limbaugh in the Age of Cognitive Science. http://darwing.uoregon.edu/~rohrer/rush.htm, University of Oregon: 13.
 
Lakoff, G. (1991). Metaphor in Politics. An open letter to the Internet from George Lakoff (1991). http://darwing.uoregon.edu/~rohrer/lakoff-l.htm, University of Oregon: 10.
 
Lynch, T. (1996). Darmok. synopsis and review by Timothy Lynch. http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~werdna/sttng/tlynch/darmock.rev.html, Caltech: 5.
 
Rohrer, T. (1996). Annoted Bibliography of Metaphor and Cognitive science. http://darwing.uoregon.edu/~rohrer/annbib.htm, University of Oregon: 10.
 
Rorher, T. (1995). Metaphors we compute by: bringing magic to interface design. http://darwing.uoregon/~hohrer/gui4web.htm, Univeristy of Oregon: 6.

Gola, E. (1997). Knowing through Metaphor.  A Survy of the New Theories about Non Literal Language. http://www.psyc.nott.ac.uk/met/abstract1.html#warren: 6.
 
Lakoff, G. (1997). George Lakoff. http://www.cs.tcd.ie/www/raveale/lakoff.html: 4.
 

4/8-4/15 Sense of place
 
120 resources in the Sense of Place book manuscript bibliography (to be borrowed directly from instructor)