COMM 6410 Ethnography and Cultural Analysis
Fall 2011
Thursdays 2 - 4:50 * Sage Conference Room
Prof. Tamar Gordon
gordot@rpi.edu
4210 Sage, x8129
Office hours Monday 2-4, and by appointment
Qualitative sociocultural research is a set of methods that involves interpretation and
representation as well as the rigor of systematic investigation. This course is an introduction to
the methods, theories, and perspectives of ethnography, and its applications within the various
disciplines in which HASS graduate students are working, including
 basic theoretical readings in the field of ethnographic methodology
 conceptualization, research design, and framing questions
 basic techniques for collecting, interpreting, and analyzing qualitative data
The seminar is appropriate for Ph.D. students at all stages of their training from first year to
students who are already writing research proposals and actively developing a dissertation
project. Students will build a research project from the bottom up. Methods include (with varying
degrees of depth) participant-observation; interview; ethnographic focus groups; multi-sited
fieldwork, ethics and IRB; audio/videotaping; and data interpretation and coding. We will
interrogate our own epistemological practices and subject positions as we grapple with the
complex contexts and processes – symbolic, discursive, structural, historical, institutional,
translocal - that undergird our informants' social worlds.
Every seminar participant is required to select a feasible, small-scale research site and, develop a
research design, do fieldwork (some combination of participant-observation, interview and
textual/archival analysis), present readings and data for weekly discussions, and complete a
twenty-page fieldwork report by the end of the grading period. In the course of the semester,
students will present (1) readings, (2) an ethnography of their choice, and (3) their own field data,
both “raw” and “cooked.” As the course progresses we will be spending more and more time
discussing students’ own ethnographic research and analytical strategies. Syllabus is subject to
change.
Course Requirements
Every seminar participant is required to
1. select a feasible research topic
2. write a project proposal
3. develop a set of research materials: fieldnotes, memos, bibliographic sources, etc.
(ongoing)
4. write and submit an IRB proposal
5. do fieldwork (some combination of participant-observation and interview) (ongoing)
6. present readings and data for weekly discussions, including at some point an ethnography
of their choice
7. complete a twenty-page fieldwork report by the end of the grading period (12/20)
1
20% READING PRESENTATIONS. Students will be responsible for orally presenting
readings and providing a written outline in advance. In these presentations, you are asked
to further articulate the key theoretical and methodological questions you see in the
readings, issues you thought worthy of further discussion, and analytic problems you
think are important.
20% RESEARCH PROPOSAL. By the fourth or fifth meeting all seminar participants will
submit a 4-page research proposal that will include a succinct statement of the problem(s)
selected and questions asked; theoretical framework; social setting; population(s), scope
of the project, any preliminary hypotheses, feasibility of the one-semester study, saliency of
your fieldsite(s) for the research questions you are posing; and the methods that will be used to
gather the data you will need to answer those questions, analyze your findings, and protect
human subjects. Students are expected to supply the conceptual and theoretical frameworks
derived from their disciplines. The proposal will include a preliminary bibliography. (See attached
guidelines) We will be workshopping the proposals.
20% RESEARCH NOTEBOOK. A research notebook should be kept during the semester
containing memos about your research project, both as you are formulating it (which would
incorporate insights into readings and seminar discussions) and as you are conducting research.
The notebook would include notes taken during fieldwork including observations, transcribed
interviews, data interpretation and analysis, preliminary coding strategies, visual images, social
maps, and other relevant materials.
40% WRITTEN ETHNOGRAPHY. A 20-page report based on your original research.
Learning Outcomes. By the end of this course students will be able to:
 Propose, develop, carry out, and write up a piece of fieldwork relevant to your area of
research
 Write an IRB proposal that satisfies the committee at RPI
 Respond critically to methodological and theoretical texts that you will be reading
 Apply particular methods to research within your discipline
 Construct research questions and create a research design
 Assess the ethical issues involved in ethnographic work
 Recognize the appropriateness of particular ethnographic methods for particular
situations.
 Demonstrate a reflexive self-awareness within the context of research.
Books to be purchased
 Maxwell, Joseph. 2005. Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, 2nd Ed. Sage
 Johnstone, Barbara 2007. Discourse Analysis. Wiley-Blackwell.
 Kvale, Steinar and Svend Brinkmann 2009. InterViews. Sage.
 Hammersley, M and Paul Atkinson 2007. Ethnography: Principles in Practice, 3rd Ed.
Routledge
2



Markham, Annette and Nancy Baym 2009. Internet Inquiry. Sage
An additional ethnography of your choice to be ordered later.
Articles on reserve are available through the Renssearch class reserves for this course.
Additional Books on Library Reserve
 Emerson, et al. 1995. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. University of Chicago Press.
 Atkinson, P. 1990. The Ethnographic Imagination. Routledge.
 Atkinson, et al., 2001. Handbook of Ethnography. Sage.
 Bernard, H. Russell. 1998. Handbook of Methods in Cultural Anthropology. Altamira.
 Ethnographer’s Toolkit, vols. 1-7
 Schensul, S.L., J.J. Schensul and M.S. LeCompte. 1999. Essential Ethnographic Methods.
Altimira
 Annual Reviews of Anthropology (available electronically and physically through Folsom
library) NOTE: start browsing Annual Reviews for articles in your research area.
 Norman K. Denzin, Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds., 2005. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2rd
Ed. Sage
There are many very useful reference books in my office, including:
 Kreuger, R.A. and Mary Anne Case 2005. Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied
Research, 2nd Ed. Sage
 Saldana, Johnny 2009. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Sage
 Markham, Annette M. and Nancy K. Baym 2009. Internet Inquiry. Sage
 Gray, Ann 2003. Research Practice for Cultural Studies. Sage
 Denzin, Norman K. and Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds., Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative
Materials. Sage.
Required Statement on Academy Dishonesty
You are expected to uphold the highest standards of integrity and professionalism in your work.
The Rensselaer Handbook of Student Rights and Responsibilities defines various forms of
Academic Dishonesty, and you should make yourself familiar with this information and with the
penalties for plagiarism. Plagiarism in any written work will result in an "F" for the course. Visit
the following websites for definitions and techniques for avoiding plagiarism:
http://www.google.com/search?q=define:PLAGIARISM
http://www.essex.ac.uk/plagiarism/Contents.htm
First Meeting: 9/1 Introductions. Discussion of research agendas. What makes a
study ethnographic? What kinds of questions do ethnographers ask? How do
ethnographic methods relate to various disciplines?
Works referred to in instructor’s introductory talk
Hammersley, M., and P. Atkinson. 2007. "What is ethnography?" In: Ethnography: Principles in
Practice, 3rd ed. London: Routledge, pp. 1-22.
Markham, Annette N. and Nancy K. Baym 2009. Internet Inquiry. Sage. Pp. Vii – 25; 131-155.
3
Geertz, Clifford 1973. Notes on a Balinese cockfight. In The Interpretation of Cultures. New
York: Basic Books.
Found at: http://akbar.marlboro.edu/~jsheehy/courses/wlink/deepplay.doc
Gupta, Akhil and James Ferguson. 1997. “Introduction.” In Gupta and Ferguson, eds.
Anthropological Locations: Boundaries and Grounds of a Field Science. Berkeley: Univ. California
Press. Pp. 1-46 (on electronic reserve)
Marcus, George, Multi-sited ethnography. In Annual Review of Anthropology. Accessed through
Folsom electronic.
Dilley, Roy 1999. Introduction. In Dilley, ed., The Problem of Context. NY: Berghahn. 1-46.
Entire chapter found on Google books
http://books.google.com/books?id=1ZIPxhe_pgC&printsec=frontcover&dq=the+problem+of+context&hl=en&ei=4DFcToOWOdDTgAe0tImP
Ag&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
Norman K. Denzin, Yvonna S. Lincoln, eds. 2005. Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd Ed.
Sage. Chapter 1. Introduction: the discipline and practice of qualitative research. Found at:
http://www.sagepub.com/booksProdSampleMaterials.nav?prodId=Book225664
NO CLASS 9/8 – instructor is away at a conference. Catch up on the background
reading above.
This week, start your research notebook with the following materials. Read first three chapters
of Maxwell and do the following exercises:
 2.1 (p. 27), reflecting on your personal purposes in doing your prospective study;
 3.1 (page 52), creating a preliminary concept map for your prospective study;
 If you feel ready, you can also create a one-page description of a study you would like to
carry out
Share your documents on the group site (which will be created shortly). If there are multiple
possibilities floating around in your head, feel free to process as many prospective studies as you
like. You may find, ultimately, that they are connected.
Second Meeting 9/15: Grounded theory and its role in building a priori knowledge.
Dialectic of theory and data. Discovering indigenous categories. Ethics. IRB.
Charmaz, K. and Richard G. Mitchell, 2001. Grounded theory in ethnography. In Atkinson, et al.,
Handbook of Ethnography. Sage. Pp. 160-174. (on electronic reserve)
Hammersley, Research Design pp. 23-53
Kvale and Brinkmann, Ch. 4
American Anthropological Association “Statement on Ethics”
http://www.aanet.org/stmts/ethstmnt.htm
4
Familiarize yourself with the RPI Institutional Review Board website:
http://www.rpi.edu/research/irb/
Sample IRB consent forms.
Third Meeting 9/22: Participant-Observation. Exploratory observation.
Ethnographic contexts.
Finish Maxwell
Hammersley, Access; Field Relations; Insider accounts: listening and asking questions.
Barry Thorne, You still taking notes . . .
Dewalt, K.M. et al. Participant observation. Pp. 259-299. In HM
Scott, Joan 1991. The evidence of experience. Critical Inquiry 17(4): 783-787. (on electronic
reserve)
OPTIONAL
Gordon, T. 1996. “They Loved Her Too Much: Interpreting Spirit Possession in Tonga.” In
Howard and Mageo, eds., Spirits in Culture and Mind. NY and London: Routledge.
Keane, Webb 2003. Self-Interpretation, agency, and the objects of anthropology: Reflections on
a genealogy. Comparative Studies of Society and History. 45(2). Accessed through Folsom
electronic Cambridge site.
Fourth Meeting 9/29: The Interview. Structured-unstructured. Focus Groups.
Complete draft of proposal in preparation for submission next week. Commit to your fieldsite.
Kvale and Brinkmann, Chs. 1, 5, 6, 7
Charmaz, K. 2001. Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In HE Pp. 675-694.
DeVault, M.L. and L. McCoy. 2001. Institutional ethnography: Using interviews to investigate
ruling relations. In HE Pp. 751-775. (optional)
Fifth Meeting 10/6: Proposals Due
Session is spent workshopping proposals and IRB form.
Bring a material object from “the field” for symbolic analysis
Sixth Meeting 10/13: Discourse and Narrative
Students1 and 2 present ethnographies
5
Johnstone, Ch. 2: Discourse and the World
Shearing and Erikson 1993. "Culture as Figurative Action." British Journal of Sociology 42: 481506.
Seventh Meeting 10/20: Discourse and Coding
Students 3 and 4 present ethnographies
Emerson, R. et al. 1995. Processing fieldnotes: Coding and memong. In: Emerson, et al., Writing
Ethnographic Fieldnotes, pp. 142-166.
Hammersley, Chs. 6, 7: Documents; Recording and Analyzing Data
Johnson, Allen, and Orna Johnson. 1990. Quality into quantity: On the measurement potential of
ethnographic fieldnotes. In: Fieldnotes: The Making of Anthropology, pp. 161-186. (optional)
Eighth Meeting 10/27: Coding Interviews and Conversations
Student 5 present ethnography
Weatherell, Discourse as Data, selections
Hammsersley, Ch. 8, 9: The Process of Analysis; Writing Ethnography
Kvale and Brinkmann, Ch. 10, 11, 12
Ninth Meeting 11/3:
Data analysis: students bring audio and transcriptions
Tenth Meeting: 11/10
Data analysis
Eleventh Meeting 11/17:
Data analysis
Twelfth Meeting 12/1:
Data analysis
Thirteenth Meeting 12/8:
Data analysis
Fourteenth Meeting 12/15:
Final paper clinic – drop-in
Final projects due 12/20
6
Appendix A
Qualitative vs. Quantitative Perspectives
What is qualitative:
 Socially constructed nature of reality
 More “open-systems” approach
 Explicitly participatory and reflexive
 Richly descriptive
 Process-oriented
 Salient categories created through exploration, triangulation (“grounded
codes”)
 Dialogical relationship between theory and data (explicit theory development)
 Data treated as fields of inference in which hypothetical patterns can be
identified
 Participatory as well as observational, capturing the flow of activities and
events
 Extensive interaction between researcher and informants: formal and informal
interviews, conversations, elicitation of sustained narratives
 Observation across contexts
 Extensive fieldnotes, thematically coded
 Longer term
 View of cultural knowledge as not fixed, but interactive, emergent,
heteroglossic
 Contextualizing role of history, power, culture, etc.
What is quantitative:
 Variables to be observed are defined are exclusively a priori
 Experimental methodology
 Testing, falsification
 Limited, single-setting observation
 Data taken at “face value”
 Limited number of codes observed
7
Appendix B
How is the “ethnographic interview” distinguished from other genres of
interview?
Ethnographic interviewing, Barbara Heyl (2001) [in Atkinson]
 On-site
 Unstructured, in depth
 Conversations
 Expressed in their own language
 Emergent categories are key
 Awareness of interviewer-interviewee relationship on the co-construction of
knowledge
 Focus on interviewees what they choose to share with researchers reflects
conditions in their relationship and the interview situation. Central to this
process is how interviewees reconstruct events or aspects of social experience,
as well as how interviewers make their own sense of what has been said. Co
construction of the interview also involves feminist and postmodern critiques
of power. (Briggs has been foremost theorist in this regard): “Each interview
is a unique social interaction that involves a negotiation of social roles and
frames of reference between interviewer and interviewee”
 Representation, authority, voice: power circulates through the interview
process, as well as the interpretation and writing process.
 Awareness of how facts and meanings are shaped by narratives of
interviewees and inscriber alike.
 Conversations are like travels: they take unexpected twists and turns
 Data gathered in this way strengthen the developing conceptual frameworks of
the study (grounded theory)
 Flexibility
 Interviews = inter-views: first and foremost interaction.
8
Appendix C
Research Proposal Guidelines
Ethnography and Cultural Analysis
Prof. Tamar Gordon
TITLE
* Does the title reflect the specific focus of the project?
* Does the title reflect how the project is linked to broad concerns/issues?
STATEMENT OF PURPOSE: A one page abstract that is a summary of the subject,
setting, questions/problems, theoretical framework, methods, scope and rationale.
In general, the Statement of Purpose frames the research and should provide readers
with a memorable sense of what the project is about, how it will be carried out and why it
is important
* Does the SP start out with a succinct, comprehensive and intelligible statement of what
the project is about? (This is harder than you think!)
* Does the SP define a delimited set of problems that the research will address?
* Does the SP provide a hierarchy of questions – both general and specific – that informs
and frames the study?
* Does the SP provide a brief description of the social context and setting that has made
these problems of particular significance and indicated the saliency of this particular
setting for addressing those problems?
* Are the problems and questions derived from, and contextualized within the disciplinary
background of the researcher?
* Does the SP indicate the importance of the study to the discipline(s) and bodies of
literature within which the researcher is working?
* Does the SP provide a succinct description of the methods through which the project will
be carried out?
* Does the SP indicate who will be interested in the final research results?
9
BODY OF THE PROPOSAL: Contains a more complete narrative of the context,
background and problems of the study, including description of setting (based on “preknowledge”) and proposed activities within that setting, elaboration of any hypotheses,
important theoretical implications, potential benefits of research, and any relevant ethical
considerations. This section should contain titled subsections.
* Is the project organized around central research questions?
* Is there just enough “natural” description to provide a picture of the setting, people and
practices within it?
* Does the proposal demonstrate sufficient preliminary investigation into the research
topic?
* Does the project provide grounds for any hypotheses that orient the research?
* Does the proposal specify and justify selection of a research site?
* Does the proposal explain how the selection of relevant data responds to the overall
goal of the project?
* Does the proposal specify and delimit relevant literatures to be used as secondary
resources?
* Does the proposal describe the relationship between this project and previous work
carried out by the researcher?
* Does the proposal describe how research conclusions will be presented?
* Does the project comply with guidelines established by the agency, program or class to
which the proposal is presented?
METHODOLOGY
* Does the proposal identify and justify methods to be used in fulfilling the project’s central
research questions?
* Does the proposal indicate specifically how the methods and perspectives of
ethnography will fulfill the central research questions?
* Are the goals of data collection explicitly identified and delimited?
* Does the proposal provide a clear sense of how data will be obtained?
* Does the proposal adequately establish the feasibility of the plan for data collection?
10
* Does the proposal adequately describe how data will be analyzed?
* Does the proposal include a viable research plan, identifying time frames and stages in
which various components of the project will be completed?
LITERATURE REVIEW AND PROJECT RELEVANCE
* Does the proposal provide an adequate review of relevant literature?
* Does the literature review reflect sufficient acquaintance with similar studies, debates
and problems in those fields?
* Does the proposal describe the relationship between your project and existing scholarly
work, explaining the contributions to be made to specific disciplines or areas of inquiry?
* Does the proposal explain how your research will provide insight into the larger
concerns and issues of your discipline?
IN GENERAL
* Does the proposal cohere to suggest a clear focus, through explicit explanation of how
component parts tie together?
* Does the proposal provide a sense that tough decisions regarding parameters and
relevance have been justifiably made?
* Does the proposal adequately persuade the reader of the project’s feasibility?
* Does the proposal indicate thoughtful analysis of what the research is likely to discover?
* Does the proposal adequately persuade the reader of the project’s significance?
* Has the proposal been edited for clarity, precision and grammar?
* Does word choice and sentence structure maximize the amount of explanation and
specificity provided?
* Is the language of the proposal amenable to diverse readerships?
* Does the proposal demonstrate awareness that the research proposal is a particular
genre of document, suggesting understanding of the importance of the form as well as of
the content of effective scholarship?
11