ANTH 380.001/ CLST
300.001
ethnographic field
methods: networked
anthropology
instructor: Samuel Collins
LA 3216; MW, 2-3:15 pm
Office hours: Mondays,
Wednesdays and Fridays,
10:30-11:30 am
Room: LA 3334
Phone: x3199
(e-mail)
scollins@towson.edu
homepage:
pages.towson.edu/scollins
course description
Once upon a time, the stories anthropologists told themselves about field research went
something like this: after entering the field and gaining the trust of the “natives,” the
anthropologist develops a “deep” understanding of culture, upon which she then returns to her
own “culture” to communicate to her peers. As nearly 40 years of introspection in
anthropology have borne out, there are many problems in this gloss on anthropological
fieldwork, but one of the most glaring: the insistence on “entering” and “leaving” the site, as if
the field were a room one could open and close a door on.
In contrast, this course builds on the insight that we are always already connected in myriad
(and perhaps very uncomfortable) ways to each other and to the places or the emergent
phenomena that we might designate as our “field”. Instead of building an ethnographic
methods premised on separation, this class introduces an alternative model for our connected
age: a networked anthropology.
Networked anthropology generates ethnographic data in multiple media. Here it overlaps with
similar advances in different subdisciplines, including visual anthropology, public anthropology
and action research. The difference is that a networked anthropology produces data that is
simultaneously media to be appropriated and utilized by the communities with whom
anthropologists work in order to connect to others (other communities, potential grantors,
friends and family). And the opposite is also true—anthropologists are only generating data for
their research in the space of their engaged commitments to communities to assist in their
efforts to network to different audiences.
Far from completely breaking with the past, network anthropology is itself (re)connected to
anthropological history—amplifying some possibilities, counteracting other tendencies.
Accordingly, the characteristics of networked anthropology both echo and contest other
evocations of ethnography:
1. It’s about process. The point behind a networked anthropology is to articulate your
work through the network, and that means posting up data, ideas and theories that are
still in motion. The moment the book is printed, or the article published, then that
process stops, and your work has been ossified—reified—into a singular, static work.
Instead, networked anthropology takes a sometimes terrifying step into revealing ideas
that are not fully formed.
2. It’s connected. What does it mean to be connected? It means more than just putting
something up online. And it means more than your video going “viral”. In other words,
being connected is entirely different than the 20th century media paradigm of either a)
no one seeing your work; or b) everyone seeing your work. Instead, “connected” refers
to the deliberate formation of a network of followers and sites you follow. It refers to
the tagging you use to delineate and interpret your content for search engines and to
attract new nodes and new connections. Mass media measures “audience” by
demographic blocks; a networked audience is never undifferentiated, even if the
number of page views scales into the millions. Each node delineates a particular quality
of connection in a connected cluster of similar nodes.
3. It’s cross-platform. One of the biggest antecedents to networked anthropology is
multimedia anthropology. A networked anthropology, however, is more nomadic, with
the same material being used and re-used across different platforms, restlessly re-mixed
and re-posted in different configurations. By crossing multiple platforms, meaning
inevitably changes, and a networked anthropology seeks to take advantage of that while
still admitting the shortcomings (and biases) of commercial platforms.
4. It’s collaborative. Once you’re decided on a networked anthropology, then you’ve given
up some control and autonomy over your work. Your immediate collaborators (which
include co-researchers, interlocutors and mentors), together with future collaborators
(people who have connected to your work in some way through the networks you’ve
formed) have measurable impacts on your work.
5. It’s recursive. What do you gain from a networked anthropology? One of the most
important benefits is immediate feedback, which is not to say that people are
necessarily commenting on content you’ve uploaded. But they are giving you feedback,
even if it’s just in the form of site analytics. In return, that is data you need to
incorporate into your research—it’s part of an emergent interpretation of your
networked anthropology.
6. It’s about the long-term. Given the ephemerality of web content, the insistence on the
long term seems disingenuous, but this is exactly the difference between viral media
that makes the rounds of social networks over the course of a week and disappears and
the anthropology we’re advocating. A networked anthropology establishes long-term
connections for the benefit of everyone in the network. Premised on reciprocation,
reciprocity, collaboration and recursivity, it only works if connections have an
opportunity to develop over time.
7. It’s an ethical orientation. Networked anthropology engages heterogeneous ethical
systems as it develops—the image is one of the network itself, edges multiplying along
varied nodes. Perhaps the best metaphor for this anthropology is one deployed by
James Faubion: “connectivity”. That is, in the course of connecting anthropologists,
people and communities through networked media, we simultaneously connect to
ethical problems and tensions inherent in both the “nodes” themselves (people,
institutions, communities) as well as in the “edges”—our relationships with them. The
creation of a linked, networked anthropology, then is simultaneously the elaboration of
a networked ethics, and the ethical challenge of networked anthropology is to identify
different ethical fields as they emerge across the field of ethnographic
investigation. Potentially, then, we see several ethical nodes becoming salient to our
work, but also acknowledge (and expect) that other issues will emerge.
This course will, fittingly, adopt multiple perspectives on ethnography and networked
anthropology. On the one hand, we will consider ethnography’s relationship--historical and
theoretical--to cultural anthropology. We will consider the historical development of
ethnography from early experiments in the mid-nineteenth century up to the present and link
those putatively methodological developments to theoretical debates (then and now) in
cultural anthropology. But the possibilities and problems with this ethnographic practice will
lead us to consider other, networked alternatives—the possibilities for novel ethnographic
practice nevertheless premised on the past.
And while much of the emphasis on networked anthropology seems theoretical, it is ultimately
about engaging in ethnographic practice. Throughout the semester, we will engage in a
number of structured activities that bridge the gaps between everyday understanding and
experiential, ethnographic knowledge. Additionally, students will take the first steps towards
their own ethnography, following the building blocks of ethnographic research through their
own research and through their connection to a long-term, networked anthropology of
Baltimore: Anthropology By the Wire. Finally, the course will introduce possibilities for careers
in qualitative research—another outcome of a properly networked world.
Learning Outcomes
Upon satisfactory completion of the course, students will be able to:
1). Communicate ethnographic methodology as arising in a context of anthropological
theory.
2). Critically compare contemporary (and even experimental) methodologies through careful
readings of ethnographies.
3). Utilize qualitative methods germane to the anthropological
encounter: participant observation, interviews, life stories and visual anthropology.
4). Communicate research findings.
required reading:
The following texts are available through the University Store. Additional required readings are
listed below in the class schedule.
Chao, Emily (2012). Lijiang Stories. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Coleman, E. Gabriella (2013). Coding Freedom. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Novak, David (2013). Japanoise. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Required software:
1). NodeXL: http://nodexl.codeplex.com/
2). Gephi: http://gephi.org
3). Yoshikoder: http://sourceforge.net/projects/yoshikoder/?source=dlp
graded assignments. Unless otherwise noted, all assignments should be uploaded to the
appropriate discussion group on Blackboard. Failure to do so will result in a 2 point penalty
per assignment.
Methodology Assignments (Due on assigned days) Students will each complete six of eight
short projects over the course of the semester. Projects will include 1) observations; 2) mapping;
3) blogging; 4) social network analysis;5) interviews; 6) transcription and coding. 100 pts.
Baltimore Stories: Using data gathered during methodology assignments, together with data
and media gathered for Anthropology By the Wire (anthropologybythewire.com), students will
analyze and interpret some element of community in Baltimore in the content of multimedia.
Emphasis should be on the efforts of groups of people to represent themselves as form of data
production. Final papers will consider background, transcription, coding and interpretation,
and should be from 10-15 pages in length. (50 pts.)
Final Examination: (December 18th, 12:30-2:30 pm) Students will demonstrate their
understanding of ethnographic methodologies by applying their knowledge to questions about
the 3 ethnographies for the course. 50 pts.
Explanation of Grading:
A+ 186+
A- 180-185
B+ 174-179
B 166-173
B- 160-165
C+ 154-159
C 140-153
D+ 134-139
D 120-133
F <120
class schedule:
1st Week Introduction to the course and explanation of syllabus.
(8/28) Characteristics of Cultural Anthropology
Assigned reading: Novak, Introduction and Chapter 1
2nd Week Ethnographer and Flaneur
(9/4) History of anthropological fieldwork
Readings: Novak, Chapter 2
Burrell, Jenna (2009). “The Field Site as a Network.” Field Methods 21(2): 188-199.
September 6—Change of Schedule Period Ends.
3rd Week Varieties of Ethnographic Research
(9/9-9/11) Themes in contemporary ethnographic research
Assigned Reading: Novak, Chps. 3-4
Assignment #1: Survey of Contemporary Ethnography
4th Week Collaborative Anthropology
(9/16-9/18) Building a Network; Introduction to semester projects.
Assigned Reading: Novak, Chap. 5-6
Coleman, Introduction and Chp. 1
Stewart, Michael (2013). “Mysteries reside in the humblest, everyday things.” Social
Anthropology 21(3): 305-321.
Baltimore Book Festival Project
5th Week Varieties of Observation
(9/23-9/25) Structured and unstructured observation
Assigned Reading: Novak, 7-Epilogue
Coleman, Chps. 2-3
Wilkinson, Clare (2012). “An Anthropologist Among the Actors.” Ethnography 13(2): 144-161.
Baltimore Book Festival (9/27-9/29)
6th Week Field Sites: Neighborhood Assessment
(9/30-10/2) Site selection, anthropological ethics and participant observation
Assigned Reading: Coleman, Chps. 4-5
Assignment #2: Festival Observations
7th Week Mapping
(10/7-10/9) Library research methods
Assigned Reading: Coleman, Conclusion and Epilogue
Feldman, Gregory (2011). “If ethnography is more than participant-observation, then relations
are more than connections.” Anthropological Theory 11(4): 375-395.
Assignment #3: Neighborhood Assessment
8th Week
(10/14-10/16) Social Media Assessment
Assignment #4: Library Research.
9th Week Social Media and Place
(10/21-10/23) Introduction to the Baltimore Stories Project
Assigned Reading: Chao, Introduction and Chapter 1
Assignment #5: Social media assessment.
10th Week Informants, Hubs and Gatekeepers
(10/28-10/30)
Assigned Reading: Chao, Chps. 2-3
Assignment #6: Networked places.
11th Week Interviews
(11/4-11/6) -Structured and unstructured.
Assigned Readings: Chao, Chapter 4
November 6: Last day to withdraw with a grade of ‘W’
12th Week Art and Deception in Transcription
(11/11-11/13)
Assigned Readings:
Chao, Chapter 5
Saldana, Johnny (2008). “An Introduction to Codes and Coding.”
Assignment #7: Interview transcription
13th Week Coding and Analysis
(11/18-11/20) Assigned Reading:
Chao, Conclusion.
14th Week Building Ethnographic Theory
(11/25) Assigned Reading: Stewart, Kathleen (2012). “Precarity’s Forms.” Cultural
Anthropology 27(3): 518-525.
Assignment #8: Coding and analysis
15th Week Ethnographic Careers
(12/2-12/4) Assigned Reading: Pandian, Anand (2012). “The Time of Anthropology.” Cultural
Anthropology 27(4): 547-571.
16th Week
(12/9-12/11) RESEARCH PROPOSALS DUE.
FINAL EXAMINATION: Thursday, May 17th, 10:15 am-12:15 pm
notes
1. Although exams and graded work will remain as stated above, I may have to change different
readings or films on the syllabus throughout the semester. I will, in any case, try to give you
ample warning of any syllabus changes.
2. Cheating and Plagiarism policy: Our department has the following policy on academic
dishonesty:
The faculty of the Department of Sociology, Anthropology & Criminal Justice take a strong stand
against Academic Dishonesty of all forms. Academic dishonesty will not be tolerated in any
class. It includes, but is not limited to, any form of cheating or unapproved help on an exam or
academic exercise, copying someone else’s written work without citation, presenting fabricated
information as legitimate, any unauthorized collaboration among students, or assisting
someone to cheat in any way. All students have the ethical responsibility for doing their own
work. A student who is uncertain about whether or not something constitutes academic
dishonesty in a particular class has the obligation to see their instructor for
clarification. Consistent with university policy, the minimum penalty for academic dishonesty in
any form is determined by the individual faculty member in each class, and may consist of “a
reduced grade (including “F” or zero) for the assignment; a reduced grade (including “F”) for
the entire course,” or other options as stipulated in Appendix F of the Undergraduate
Catalog. Students who are charged with academic dishonesty must remain enrolled in the
course and cannot withdraw. Instructors who make the determination that academic
dishonesty has occurred will notify the student in writing of the finding, the penalty, and the
process for appeal. The same written notice will be forwarded to the Office of Judicial Affairs
on campus, the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts, and to the Chair’s Office in the
department. Academic Dishonesty undermines the legitimate efforts of students and involves
serious repercussions. The faculty of the department urge all our students to act with integrity
with regard to work submitted. (Approved Spring 2004)
In addition, Students are expected to familiarize themselves with the University’s policy:
http://wwwnew.towson.edu/provost/resources/studentacademic.asp
At a minimum, students who plagiarize in this class will receive an “F” for the assignment.
3. Students who have, or suspect that they may have, a disability should seek services through
Disability Support Services. Students must be registered with DSS and receive written
authorization to obtain disability-related accommodations. If you need accommodation due to
a disability, please visit DSS for guidance. The office is located at 7720 York Road, AD 232, Ph:
4-2638 or 3475.
4. Students may not repeat this course more than once (make a third attempt at this course)
without the prior approval of the Academic Standards Committee. Please call 4-4351 or visit ES
235 for more information.
5. Late assignments: Late assignments will be accepted at ½ credit (1-2 days late) or ¼ credit (34 days late). After 4 days, late assignments will no longer be accepted.
6. Make-up Work: Under extraordinary circumstances, documented by physicians, police, etc.,
students may be allowed to make-up missed work.
7. Students who are disruptive may be dismissed from class.
8. Emergency Statement (TU Office of the Provost)
In the event of a University-wide emergency course requirements deadlines and grading
schemes are subject to changes that may include alternative delivery methods, alternative
methods of interaction with the instructor, class materials, and/or classmates, a revised
attendance policy, and a revised semester calendar and/or grading scheme. In the case of a
University-wide emergency, please refer to the following about changes in this course:
pages.towson.edu/scollins
Email: scollins@towson.edu
o
For general information about any emergency situation, please refer to the
following:
1. Web Site: www.towson.edu
2. Telephone Number(s)
3. TU Text Alert System: This is a service designed to alert the Towson
University community via text messages to cell phones when situations
arise on campus that affect the ability of the campus to function normally.
Sign up:
http://www.towson.edu/adminfinance/facilities/police/campusemergency
/
explanation of grading
Consistent with University policy, the following grades will be assigned according to the
designated criteria:
A: A superior performance surpassing assigned work in unique and novel ways and
integrating diverse ideas from a wide range of sources in addition to those discussed in class.
AB+
B: Excellent work surpassing the expectations of the assignment and demonstrating initiative
and a willingness to move beyond the basic requirements of the assigned work.
BC+
C: Satisfactory work meeting all basic requirements of the assignment.
D+
D: Work in some way less than satisfactory. Although conforming to basic requirements in
some way, the completed work is nevertheless not a coherent response to the
assignment.
F: A profoundly unsatisfactory performance which doesn't meet
the intent of the assignment at any level.