Narrative, critical ethnography:
some epistemological and
methodological considerations
from a research experience
György Mészáros, Phd
ELTE University of Budapest
Faculty of Education and Psychology







a lot of different studies
cultural perspective
long term involvement
researcher as the main research
instrument
theory – empirical experience – theory –
empirical experience
the tradition of cultural anthropology
colonial dimensions of cultural
anthropology
Educational ethnography
the first long-lasting
educational ethnography in
Hungary
six months: deep
evolvement in the everyday
life of a classroom (17
year-old students)
a critical
narrative
ethnography
epistemology: critical
pedagogy and poststructuralism
My research
methodology: participant
observation, interviews,
content-analysis, blog




narrative text with auto-ethnographical
characteristics which tells the story of the
whole research experience from the literature
review to the writing of the paper
a post-structural and critical narrative
ethnography which is an open space for
continuous reinterpretation
an experimental journey -> an experimental
text
a radical counter-voice in the context of
present-day Hungarian educational sciences
„Results”
everyday
life of a
school
perspective
of the body
power and
resistance
epistemology
methodology
„subcultural
pedagogy”
postmodern
no
reflection
of the
teachers
Results
How did the experimental nature of the study influence
the whole research process?
Methodolgy
Epistemology
Can a scientific research text reach its transformative goal
(making the students’ voices be heard) when using
esoteric language, difficult even for a scientific audience?
Is it possible to force two seemingly incompatible
approaches (post-structuralism and critical pedagogy) to
real dialogue in a study?
How can ethnography overcome its colonial past and
approach, how is that still present even in such a highly
reflective study?
Ethics
How should teachers’ voice be considered when the study
would like to represent the students’ perspective?
What kind of responsibility should the researcher assume
for the participants after the empirical study?
Experimental journey
„Transformative science”
Is it possible to force two seemingly incompatible
approaches (post-structuralism and critical
pedagogy) to real dialogue in a study?
Reinterpretation Starting point:
A clear intention
of my
fighting
evaluators
incompatibilities
Incompatibility – dialog
Colonialism
Teachers’ voice
After ethnography






Walford, G. (2002, ed.): Debates and Developments in Ethnographic
Methodology (Studies in Educational Ethnography, Volume 6).
Elsevier, Oxford
Smith, P. M. (2003): Mapping the Whirled. Syncopations in the Life of a
Woman Religious. Spectrum, Melbourn.
McLaren, P. (1986/1999): Schooling as a Ritual Performance. Towards
a Political Economy of Educational Symbols and Gestures.
Routledge, London.
Fine, M. (1998): Working the Hyphens: Reinventing Self and Other in
Qualitative Research. In: Denzin, N. K. – Lincoln Y. S. (eds.): The
Landscape of Qualitative Research. Theories and Issues. SAGE,
Thousend Oaks, 130–155.
Denzin, N. K. – Lincoln, Y. S. (2005, eds.): The SAGE Handbook of
Qualitative Research. SAGE, London.
Crozier, G. (2005): Is ethnography just another form of surveillance?
In: Troman, G. – Jeffrey, B.– Walford, G. (2005, eds.): Methodological
issues and practices in Ethnography (Studies in Educational
Ethnography, Volume 11). Elsevier, Oxford, 95-110.
Bibliography
Thank you for you
attention!
meszarosgyuri.d@gmail.com