The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research

  • 93 2,173 10
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research

THE SAGE HANDBOOK OF U\LITI\TIVE ~SEARG-I THIRD EDITION INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD Pertti Alasuutari Social Scienc

11,119 7,452 76MB

Pages 1231 Page size 506 x 723 pts Year 2010

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Recommend Papers

File loading please wait...
Citation preview

THE SAGE HANDBOOK OF

U\LITI\TIVE ~SEARG-I

THIRD EDITION

INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD Pertti Alasuutari Social Sciences, University ofTampere, Finland

Elizabeth C. Hirschman Marketing, Rutgers University

Arthur Bochner Communication, University of South Florida

Udo Kelle Institute for Interdisciplinary Gerontology. University of Vechta, Germany

Ivan Brady Anthropology. State University of New York at Oswego julianne Cheek Health, University of South Australia Patricia T. Clough Sociology and Women~ Studies, City University of New York

Anton Kuzel Richmond, Virginia Morten Levin Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University ofScience & Technology Meaghan Morris Cultural Studies, Lingnan University. Hong Kong

Donna Deyhle Education, University of Utah

janice M. Morse Health, University ofAlberta

Yen Espiritu Ethnic Studies, University of California-San Diego

Michael Olivas Law, University of Houston

Carolyn Ellis Communication, University of South Florida

)ames ). Scheurich Education, Texas A&M University

Orlando Fals-Borda Sociology. University of Colombia

David Silverman Sociology. University of London

Michelle Fine Social Psychology. City University of New York

Robert Stake Education, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Davydd Greenwood Anthropology. Cornell University

Barbara Tedlock Anthropology. State University of New York at Buffalo

Rosanna Hertz Brookline, Massachusetts

Harry Wolcott Education and Anthropology. University of Oregon

ABOUT THE COVER Some readers will be curious about the cover photograph. Beginning with the 2nd edition of the Handbook, we have used the cover to symbolize some theme or themes of the Handbook. This is no less true in this edition's cover photograph. We deliberately chose a photograph that is both non-Western in its orientation and also clearly performance-driven. We have been fortunate enough, with the good offices of the Sage Publications art division, to locate a photograph with three critical elements: performers, a group that appears to be getting instruction, and an audience. For those familiar with the performance in the right -hand side of the photograph, the introduction of the whirling dervishes will come as as a familiar scene. The dervishes are Muslims, members of one of several sects, who take vows of poverty and austerity. The dance they perform is a sacred ritual, carried out to gradually reduce the body to focus on Allah and holy matters only. The performance itself-now shared with Westerners and non-Muslim audiences-is an intensely spiritual experience, as it is intended to be, even for non-Muslim audiences. We have intended this photograph to do several things at once in the "reading": to indicate a broader reach for this Handbook, incorporating the perspectives of non-Western, indigenous, First Nations, and other non-U.S. and non-European sources; to signify the performance aspects of performance ethnography and performative, communitarian social justice; to indicate the "experience-near" quality of a new generation of ethnography, via showing the audience both near to the performers and, simultaneously, on the same level; and to signal the return of the spiritual and the sacred to the practices of sciences, foretold in the previous editions. It is our hope that other readers, from other standpoints, will locate and resonate to other extended meanings in the cover and find that its multiple levels sets them, too, to dreaming of a re-envisioned ethnography and a set of qualitative practices that summon a wider view of the purposes of a re-imagined social science. - Yvonna S. Lincoln -Norman K. Denzin

THE SAGE HANDBOOK OF

-..aU IIi\I1VE ......-SE:ARCH THIRD EDITION

EDITORS

NORMAN K. DENZIN Universi ty af llU,lOis at Urbana ~Champaigl1

YVONNA S. LINCOLN Texas A&M University

~SAGE Publications ~ Thousa,d Oaks. london.

\1",,'1'

Del'l

2005 by

Copyrigh-

Ytl bb.:atlo:1s, Inc

All rights reserved.]\;o parto:',bis book may be rcpmduccd or I:tilized in all)' form or by ilny means, electronic or mechankai"ndudlng photocopying, recording, or by any iniormatlOlI ,tmage ;lnd rebcvalsys!ct:l, without permission in writing from tnO' publisher. ----------------------~-----

For i'1formatioJJ: ?uhl',atio1s, Inc, Teller Road "housand Oaks, California 91320 E-mail: orde:@sagepdu:oll1 Sage

Pllblication~

Ltd,

1 Oi:Vf;l; Yard City Ro~d LOll don £C IY lSI' United KiLgdom

Publimtiolls India Pvl. Ltd. B-42, P;mchshcd I'IldaV2 Post !lox 4109 :\ew DeI:1! 110 017 India Printed in

United States of Amrrka_

Til is hook is printed on acid free p,ll'er.

The SAGE handbook of qllallrativc research I edited by NOTnUlfi K, Ue'nzin, ):\'onna S. Lin coli:. - 3rt! cd, P,.-JL

Rev. eeL of: Handbook of q1l3Iirllti\'c research. 2nd ed. dDUO. Ir:cludes biblkgraphical fe/i'fences and index, ISBN 0-7C (doth) I Sodnl I, Dcm.ln, Sorman K. II, Li:Jwln, Yvonna S. III. Har:dbook of q uaHtativt' R'liean:::'. 1162. H2:45.5 200S lIO IA'2-dc22

2U040260l:15

05

06 07 Oti 0')

A"ljllir!lIg Ediwr: .""socia:e EJitlJr: Pr.'ect Edi/or: lORV EiliJ'ors: 1)rpesf:!tel:

Indexer:

10

\I

8 7 6 5 4 3 2

I

Usa Cue\'as :;haw Margo CmuFpen L1alldia A. H:JmrlllJl D. J. Peck, Jllt!y 'iclnorst, and :\,), Sobczak C&M UigJtals (1'\ Ltd, Kathlee:l Pap archon Iis Rav i BalasuriYlI

CONTENTS

ix

Preface

lVormun K. UenziiJ and ¥FumUl S Lincoln L Introduction: The Disdp: tne ar:d Praclic.: of tlnalit,,;ive Research Norman K. Detli;in and Yvomw S. Linearn PART I: LOCATISG THE FIELO

2.

33

Reforlll of lr.e Social and of Ulliversitie~ ThroJgh Adun Rcseaxl: Drlvya'd f. Creenwood and MUT!en Levin

43

Co:n pusitional Studies, in r1'N Part,: Critical Theoriz:ng ar,d Anruysi,$ on Sock."!1 (I;t)Justke Michelle Fin!' and Lois lVeis

t

On T['eky (round: Re>carching the Kativc in 6;: Undl! T~h fwui 8mitl'

5,

r;ceing Ourselves from Keocolonilll Dmninatior: in Research:

6,

of Uncertah:ty

85

A KaUpilpil Mauri Approach to Creatir.g Knowledge Russell Bishop

109

Ethics anc Pulilit;s i 0 Qualitat lve Research Cliftiml Christian.>

139

7, II1S1itutiouai Review Boards antI Methodological Conservatism: The Challenge to and fro:n Phenomenoklgkal P.,radigms h'OWJU

165

S, Linwin

PART II: PARADIGMS At>;D PERsPEcrrvEs IN CO!ilTENTIOK

183

It Paradig:natic Contruversies, Contradictions, and Emerging Confluence, Egon (j, G,lba al1d )'vctltla S. Lillwln

191

9. Critical Ethnography: The Politics Collaboration Douglas Foley and Angela Vakn:mela

217

Ie,

Earl)' MilIe1!nial Femin:st Qualitative RescilTl'h: Challenge:; u:1d CUIl\uurs Virginia Olesen

2,l5

11. The Moral Activist Role of Cril i;,:a! Race Theory Scholarship Gloria Ladson-Billings and famei Domwr 12, Rethinking Critical Theory ar:d Qualitat:ve Research loe L. Kincheloe (md Peter McLaren

303

11 Methodologies for Cultural Studies: An Integrative Approach

343

Paula Saukko 14, Criticall1um(ln :sm and Queer Theory: Living With the Tensions

357

Plummer PART HI; STRATEGIES OF INQUIRY

375

15. The Practice anc Politics ufFunded Qualiratve Research Julianne Cheek

387

16, Performance Ethnograpl:y: The Reenacting a:1d Inciting of Culture

4: I

Bryant Keith Alexander

Ut

Q'Jalitative Case Studies Robert E. Slake

443

The Observation of Participation anC the ErnergeJce of Publk Ethnugraphy Barbara Thdlock

467

19. Imerpretive Practice and Social Action James A, Holstein and Jaber E Gubrium 20. Gruunded Theory in thc21 st Century: Applications for Advanc1 ng Social Justice Studies

483

507

Kathy Charmaz 21. Cri:ical EthlJogra?hy as Street Performance: Reflections o~ Horne, Murder, and Jnstice D. So]i1l i ,\1adi50n 22.

Testim!mio, Subalternity, and Narrative Authority

537 547

John Beverley !k;lrtidpatory Action Research: Commc:nkative Action and the Publk Sphere

559

Stephen Kemm1:; and Robin M(Iaggarl Clioi cal Research William 1. Miller and Benjamin r: Crabtree PART IV: METIIODS OF COLLECTING AND ANALYZING EMPIRICAL MATERIALS

Narrative Inqui ry: ~Iultiple Len~es, Appro3ches, Vokes Susan Chase 26. Am-Based lnqciry: Performing Revolulionary Pedagogy Susan Finley

60S

641 05 I

681

17. 'll:e interviCl\': From Nrutral Stance to Pnliticallnvolvc:nent Andrea FOlltana a/ul James H,

695

Frey

28. Reconlextualizing Observation: Ethnographv, Pedagog}', and be Prospects tor a Progres~ive PoJit'cal Agenda Mich"e!l': M!grosino

729 747

What's New Visually? Dotlg"'~ Harper

30, Autoetlu:ography: Makir:g the

~lcrslJl:ai

Pol i tical

'Ie)

SI14CY Hlllmem Jallcs

31. The Methods, Politics, and Ethics of Representation in Onll:1e Ethnogm~)hy Atme1t1t lv'. M(lJ'khall1 Anaiy6: Perspectives Paul/llk!,;sc!'! ,md Sam Ddamoni

821

FO;lcault's Methodologies: Archcaology aud Genealogy James Joseph Schel"ich cmd KIHhryn Hell McKenzie

1\41

34, Al1ayzil1g Tal~ " :!J~\', DiSLomses NOrlmHi f( lh!l1zin

38. Writi:1g: A Method L(lUre! ,!(ic!Ulrdsoll

the Et~ics and

j'olitic~

of Inter;"rrtation

Inquiry iwd l::'lizu/'C'lh Adams St. Pierre

39. Poetics tor .ll'lanet:Discoursc 0:1 Sume Proh:el:lS of Being-in-Place

933 %Y 979

{Vim Brady

40,

L!ltura: I'ocsis; The Gcncfativity of E:ncrgent T'lings

1027

Kathleen Stew(!rt

42,

'~I\ria

in ';'ime of War": [lwestgative Poetry and the Politics ofV\,'itnessing Stepht'tl J. Hartnett Clnd Jeremy D. Engel,;:

1043

Qilalilalive Evaluation and Changing Sodal11ol icy

1069

Erne.'! R. House PART VI: THE FUTURE OF QUALITATIVE RESEARCH 43.

M:c:1hil'Jgh:: On Writing; On Writing Suciology lygm:mt Bauman

1083 1089

44. Refunctioning Ethnography: The Challenge of an Anthropology of the Contemporary Douglas R. Holmes Clnd Georgi: E. Marcus

Epilogue: The Eighth and Ninth Moments-Qualitative Research inland the Fra f;J Qualitatil'l! fn'luiry. and

Collecting and Interpreting Qualitati')!; Materials. Qualitative inquiry. ammg other t:-tings. is the nan~c ror a "fefoemisl :uovemenl tnat begatl in the early 1970~ in the academy" (Sciwandl, 2000, p. IR9). :hc interpretive and critical paradigms,:n their :nult'?le forms, are centra: to tbis mi )vemer:t lndeed, Ibis movement ;;nCO;n~YdsSeS multi?lc pitr· lldigmatic fOf:mdatior.s. It a:so indudes con:plex epistemological end ('tl:kal criticisms of hadi· liona! sodal science research, The movem etlt l10W has its own journals,scientltk assoclatitlns, con ferencio:1 ;I) the interest, 01 red res." Ilfi grit"IO';S problems in ma:1l' Mca, of womens h"altt" (p. 2. These ctiltria range :wrr. thQ3e e:'dor;;ed h postposilivjsl~ (v,aiatioll S on ,,: Sage. Snow, ll. (1999). ,\ssessing the ways in which qualitatiYe/ethnographic research (or:lrib,lteS t;, social psychology: Introduction to spedal Sodal

p,ydw!ugy Quaflerl;~ ~2. ~7 -100. Trinh T 1'4. 11992;. Fmmerfrml11:d I\cw York: Routledge. Weems, M. (2002). f speak jiom the wound that i, mOllt.~. I\cIV Yt1lk: Peler tang.

1

. . . ._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _....._

. .~HHt:;.;)}H;""

INTRODUCTION ,

The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research

"

Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S. Lincoln

W

riling abou: sc:entific research. :nduding qJ:alitative research, from ~he vantage point of the colonized. a position that S:1" chooses to privilege, Lbda Tuhiwai Smith (1999) ,ta:e, that "the term 'research' is inextricably linked to European imperialism and colonialism,," She cor::inues, "The word itself is probably one of :he dirtiest words in the indigenous world's vocabulary: "" , It is implicated in the worst excesses of colonialism:' w:th the ways i:1 which "knowledge about indigenous peoples was collected. c:ass:fied, and then represented back to the West" (p, 1), This dirty word stirs up ar:ger, silence, distrnst "It is so powerful that indigenous people even write poetry about research" (p. 1). It is one of coladalism's :nost sordid legacies. Sadly, qualitative research, in many if not aU of its forms (observation, participation. interviewing, ethnography), serves as a metaphur fur colonial knowledge, for power, and for truth. The metaphor wo~ks this way. Research, quantitative

and qualitative, is scientific, Research provides the fuundation for reports about anc. repre~en­ tations of Kthe Other." In the colouial co:m:xt, research becumes an object'v!: ''Vlly of represent· ing the dark-skinned Other to the white world. Colonizing nations relied on the human dis· ciplines. es?ecially sociology ar:d anthropology. to produce knowledge about strange and foreign worlds. This close involvement with the colon inl p~llject con:ributed. insignificant 'Ways, to qualitative research's long and anguished history, to its becoming a dirty word (for reviews, see in tbis volume Foley &: Valenzuela, Chapter 9; Tedlock, Chapter 18). In sociology, be work of the "Chicago sehool" in the 1920s and 19305 established the in:portan,e of qualita:ive inquiry for the study of human grou:> Hfe, In anthropology during fbe same period, :he discipline-cefilling studies of Boas, Mead, :Benedict, Bateson, Evans· Pritchard, Radcljffe-Brown. ane Malinowski charted the outlines of the fieldwo:-k metbod (see Gupta &: FergnsQn, 1997; Stocking, 1986,1989)"

Author;;' Note. We a~e grateful :0 many who have helped witl: this ;:hapter. 'nduding Ego!: Gub., Mil;;h 1\11 are prisms that reflect elite~nal'ties and :efract within thef!lselves, ..:rea ~h:g (iiffe rer.! colors, patterns, ar:(lYS. cast:ng otT in diftcre::1t directions" (Richardson, 2000, p.934). tn the crys:allization process, the writt'l 1..11., the sane tale from different poinl, of view. For example, in A 711rire-Told 'Iale C992), Margery Wolf uses fieUQn, tleld not~"and II scie!1tific article to three different accounts of the same se: of experier.ces in a native ·,dbge. Sim::arly, ill her play Fire; In thl! ;\1irrar (1993), Anna Deavere Smith presc:1l'l a series of :Jerlormance piece, based 011 i :uerviews with peopk who were involve':: in a racial con flier in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, on A:.Jgust 19, 1991. The play has mu:tipIe spca1;iIlg pans, including conversations with mcmbe:-:>, police officer3, and h a definition fo:purposes this discus,ion. We burrow f:um. and parap;uase, Nelson et ( 1992. p. 4) attempt to define {:ultural stulie,,; Ql.lalitativ{· rcsuility, On t:~e olhe: ';and, it is dr~wn to mOrt' :1arnlwly de:! ned pc)sitivls;, P[}5tposi:il'lsl, h:;mar::stk. and natun!listic wIIlep' tiu::!> of human experience and analy~is. Fonher. tensions can be coml:lincd in t;le same projec:, bringing both postmodefIl and naturalistic, or hoth critica; and humanistic. pers,cc\ives to bear.

This rather awky'llrd statement means that qualitative research, as " at the A:nerican Sociological Association meetings held in San Francisco and shared their memories of the "Chicago years~' [yn l.ofland (1980) describes this time as a mooent of erea:ive fer:nent-sch~lar:y 3.:ld poli:icsL The Sar. Franci;n) meetings not s::"ply the Bbmer.Hul'hes event but a "coun:crrevolution:' , , , a group first came to ... talk about the problems OJ bel "1\ a wciologi,t alld a

female. , , ,the cis,bline seemed literallv 10 '::Ie bursting with new. : . ideas: :abcllinl! th~ry, e:h· nonetlro':Dlogy, conHie! tht',lry, phenomenology. dramaturgical analysis. (p.l:'3)

Thus did 6e modernist phase come 10 an end.

Blurred Genres By the heginning of the third phase (19701986), which we call the moment of blurred gt'nres, qualitative researchers had a full complement of paradigms, methods, and strategies to employ i:l their research, Theories ranged from sym· balk interaction ism to mnstructivism, natura!:s!ic inquiry, positivism and postpositivism, phenomenology, ethnomcthodology, critical theory, neoMarxist theory, semiotics, structuralism, :'em inism, :e them up briet1y in order here; we disCllSS these phases more fully in our introductiQIl,~ to the individual parts of this volume,

phase 1: The Researcher Our remarks above indka:e the depth and complexity of the traditiunal and applied {juillilaEve resear6 perspectives into wh:ch a sodal'y situated researd:er enters. These traditions locate l'1e researcher ill his,lory, simultaneously guid~ng and constr,,! ning Ihe work that is done in any spedfic study, This fielc !las always been 6aracter!zed by d:veroit y and wnmet, and these are u:ost enduring :raditions (see Greenwood & Levin, C.hapter 2, th:s volume). As a carrier of this complex ane coni radictory history, the researcher mu:;t a1;;0 confront the e6ics and politics of research (;;rein this volmne fine &: Wei;;, Crtapter 3; Smith, Chapler 4; Bishop. fhapler 5; Ch rist:ans. Chapter 6), Researching the na:ive, :ne indigenous Other, ,,1 j oes is over,I~)day researchers str Jggle to develnp situational and transsituationa: ethics that app: y to all lo:ms of the rescar6 act and its human-to-human rela· t~unsh ips_ We no lor.ger have the option of deterring the d('colm:7.atior. ",ri),,>r-t Phase 2: Interpretive Paradigms All qualitative researchers are ph:Josophers in t:1tep, to au ecoi,'8Y of "lind. New York: BilllEl1tinl;', BaHiste, /d. (2000). Introduction: U:1folding It'ssons of micll1izaliol1, III M, Battiste (Ed.l, R~dflimillg huii,,(etl(lus voife (lnd visi,)!; (pp. xvi~xxxJ, Vancouver: Vniversitv of Bdi.sn Colum':l'a Press, • Btcker, H. S. {l970 I. Prohlems ut' and :m)ofin partic'pant nh,,lCES

American Association of University Professor~. (2l)(J:), Protecting hUI;1an beings: [nstitutionai Review Boards lind scier:c(' research,Academe, 87(3),55-67, Amc:ican Assndation of Univer.dy Professors. (2002), Should all diSciplines be sub;ect to the Com:non Rule? Hu :':Jan ,ubj "CIS of sodal sdence research, Jklldfme. BiI( 1;, Bateson, G, (1972). Steps tlf all ecology oj mind, New York: &:iantine, Christans, G. (199S)~ The naturalistic falla~y in co:Jtemp,lrary interac~ionis:~interprelivc research, Studies il: Symlnjir Inl£rncrion, 19, 125-130,

Part I: Locating the t;teM II 41 (: 'lilt). The ebks of being in a communications context In C. Christians & M. Trahe~ (Eds. I. ComrnWticatl'ol1 ethics alld Ill!ivi?r$ll/ ~lililes {pp. Thousand (}"ls, CA; Sage. C:1rislians, G. \1998), The sacredness oflik Mfdta lJeve/opmen(, 2, 3-7. Collins, P. (I 99()). Bla(:kfi:mirlist thought. )lew York: Routledge. Guha. E, Go, &: Lincoln, y, S, (1989). /:1our!n generatiQIl,W';U'ualim:. :-Jew bury Park, CA: Sage. Lim:olt;, y, 5" III Can:J!!:!;}, G. $. (2004a). [>angerous discoUl'~s: Methodological conservatism ard governmental rrgimes of I ruth, Qualimlive It/quit}; lOr I), Lincoln, Y. & Cannella, G, S. (2004h). Qualita:ive research, power, and the radkal r:ghl. Quarfwi'l(J lnquir), 10(2), 175-201. li:lcoln, Y. S.. 8\ Tierney, vI/. G. (2004), Qualitath'e researc'l and InstitJtirmal Ikview Boards. Christiar,s. G,

QU£lJilat!ve Trlquiry, j 0(2 J, 219 234.

Mitchel!, R. j., Jr. r. Y93). Sel:"~y and fie/liJ~ork. Ncwbll ry Park, CA: Pritcilard, I. A. (2002J. 'trllvelers and tmlls: I'ractitioner research illId Institutional Rt'\'iew Boards. l:.d"calio'l!ul Researcher, 31, 1 Rvar;, K, & Destefano, :.. (2000). l:Jtroduction, In K Rvan , & L. Destefano (Eds,), Ev(t/umum ill a democratic society: LJdiberatrQt1, dialogue alld inclusion (pp. 1-20). Sail Fr:u:cisco: Josse;· Sass, Sr:1ith, L, [11., (1990). Eth:cs.field s:lJdie",md the paradigm crisis. In E. G, Gliba IEdJ, Tne paradigm dialog (pr. 137-157). N'~wbury Park, CA: Vid;ch,A. J., & Lyman, S. M. (lOOO), Qualitative mrthods: Their hi.tory 1:1 sodo:ogy il:Jthropo!· (lgy, In N, [, Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), IJm:dbOi.lk of qualitiltivi' re. involve centrally the developmen: of boundary mu:nte nance mechar:isms that serve to include. eX"ducie, certify, and decertify practitioners and groups of practitioners, This literature also emphasizes 6e deve!opn:ent (}f internal professional power sl;ue!lues that agendas for work, that drtlne the "discipline" of w';tieh the pmtession is an em':lOdimenl, aTld that establish the genealogies of some of the most powerful slIhgmup s of pr "ctition' ers and tUf:l these partisan genealogies into !l "his:ory" of profession (Madon Lenl:,'ermann & Kieh:,ugge· Emr:tl cr, 1998), In these appmacbes. the self-interest of' the establishe(! academic practitioners is cent:at Essential tu professionalism is th~,t 3 strong boundary exist bel"ween w'la~ is inSl(le and what is outside the profession, Tliis is key to the development of amden:ic pfo:'essional structures and also directly requires that groups of professj(Jn~1 colleagues engage in nUlTleWJS transactions with superordi nate systems of' power i:l order ro he cerritied by tbem, '10 function, the acade:nic professions must be m::cq::ted ane accredited by those in power at U :lj"ersities. yet nwmbers of the professiun owe principal a[cgiance to their professional peers, not to beir universities, With:n the Jniwrsily structure. disdpEnary departme:1t chairs-no matter how important their discipline might be-are suhordinate to deans, provosts, and pre:;icen:s, Thus, a department

III R\NDBOOK Of QI:.U;TATIVE RESEARCHCH~PTER 2

chair who might he a major player in the national and internationll: disciplinary associations in his or her field is, on campus, a relatively luw-Ievel functionary, This sitt:atio:t often leads to a double str"teg;y. Ambitious department chairs work 011 the ranking of their depart:ne:tts if. various nat:onal schemes in oreer to acquire and control university resources. Deans, provosts, and vice· chancellors m',!st pay attention to these ranklngs because dcc1ilil~5 in the ranking> of the un:!s in tl:eir charge are part of the pseudo-market lest of tl:eir abilit:es as academic administrators. S'lch proles5ional strategies have some advan· tages for senior academic ad:ni:tislrators or public higher educatiou o:ncials because they encourage the "acuity the departments to compete mainly with each other. III this way, disciplines "disci~ pUne" each other iUld permit higher administrators to behave like referees in a contest. Clear:y, Qrganizatiom structur(xi this way arc generally passive in relation to central power and li.,e rclali vely easy to control. campllS romrol, are hacked up by national ranking schemes that encourage fu;ther compet::ivencs5 ar:d by ,:ate and national funding sehc!:1cs that set the terms of ?he competition wi:hin groups and that privilege iUld pt;nish profes~ sim:lll groUp5 according:o extradiscip\[nary criteria. Stude:!ls and; unior colleagues Ii re soci;;lizerl into these structures through req'Jired curricula, examinations, ideological pressures, and threats to their ability to continue In the profession, neir attention is driven inward and away from the exte~nal relations or social rolesiresponsibilites of their professions, and certainly away from ing any challenges to higher authorities. These stLlClures, of course, are higl:ly sensitive to the larger management schemes into which they tit and to the larger political economy. As a ~emh, there are qu:te dramatic national differences i:1 the composition, mission, and ranking of different professiom, as Elliot: Krause has shown (1996). but pursuiog b is topic would take us beyond the scope of this chapter.

HistorkallDevelopmcntal Views Perhaps the best~developed literature or. these topics comes from history. Scholars such as Mary

Ft;rner (197S), Ellen Messer·Davicow (2(}02), Dorothy Ross (1991), and Geor~e Stocking, Jr. (1968) have cio(Umr:1led and analyzed the long~ run tramitions in the social sc~ences and the ht:manities. There are also ~cores of self promoting and self protective professional association histo~ ries (i.e" the "offidal stories"). We ignl)re this latter set here, finding them useful as ethnographic rioeuments but not as ex?lanations of the processes involved. There is an advantage in having a long time ?crspective because large~scale changes in the disciplines often become sharply visible only wl:e:! viewed as they de'velop over several decades. The literature on the history of the sodal sciences i:t the United ::ita res st.ggests some~ thing Ilk" the fo]owing narrative. 11 begins with t:,e founding of ehe American Soc:al Science Association in 1865 as an association of seoior academics who would st1:dy and debate major issues of pU'::olic policy and provide governments and corporal" leaders with supposedly balanced advice. By :he 18805, this approach began 10 wane, and the various social science disciplinary associations emerged, beginning wth econ om~ k •. The link between tie founding of these associations and the emergence of dsdp: inary departments in PhD~granting insthaions was a sea change in the trajectory of the $(lelal SCHmc,~s and resulted ill many of the structures that exist today, The works of Mary Furner (1975), Patricia Madon lengermann and fill ~iebrugge-Brant:ey (1998), Ellen :\-lesser-Davidow (2002). and F.dward Silva and Sheila Slaughter (198.1:) amplify this larger picture by showing how the institutionalization of the disciplines and their profesSional associations was achieved through homogenizing tte intellec~ tual and political agendas of each ficid, electing the reformers, and creating the self- ~:hl!ting and self-regarding disciplinary structures that are so powerful in universities today. These histories also show tl:.a7 these outcomes were human products, were COntext dependent, and were fought over for decades at a time. Despite diflerences in the disctlll:nes and in liming, the overall trajectory (:OIn "advocacy to objecliv it y" (as Furner [1975] phrased it) seems to beoverde ter:nined, One of the sobering apparent lemms

Greellwm:d /1; Levin; Reform Hmmgh Ado;'l 3.esearch III 47

of these histories is ~hat the prospect rebuilding a sociallv• connected or, less likelv.• il social~vf relonnist agenda in the conventional sodal sdences not only faces negative odds but also LlnS directly connter to the course of 120 years of disdp:ina:y histories. Just how this proces, of disciplinarization ane domestication applies 10 the newer sodal sciences (e.g., plllleY 51 udies, management studies, organi~ zational behavior) is not dear, as there is E:lle crit~ ical his tor kal work avai:able. I:npression::ttically, it seems to t:s t!:at these newer sodal sciences are beginning to repeat the process undergone in conventional social a process that resulted in theif current disdplinarizatiOtI and separation from engagerru,,:11 in :b.e everyday wor~d of social practice. '[U: consisten~ divergence between theory 3:1d practice in aU the social sc:cm.:e fields is especially notable. How this develops in a group of disci~ pli:It~:> explic:t1y founded to inform social practice should puzzle everyone. Even the great :1ational differences that appear in these trajectories .md be'r organizational contexts do not overcome the global cY:1amifodllction notion of knuwledge into broader spheres, p~es­ sures th",t go along with increasing emp;,asis on cost-benefit :nodels in decision making by higher education rr:onagel's. Iust how this struggle over the 'Jniveniry genemtiOl:, managemer:t. and sale of knowledge will tl'rn out is not cleat. On one hand, research universilies increasingly act :0 commoditize knowledge productioll 10 ere-dte regular rC'I'"Cn'Je flm,'S (as well ,Hi academic prc!ltige the commodi:y pmdt:dion-based ranking systems), In the sciences, (l:i5 has led t() a spate of applied research and a de -emphasis on basic rescal·ch. In the social sdences, the balk of the external reSt~an:h money available to 'Jnivcrsity social science is for positivistic research or: economic :5sues, demographic trends, 9:1d public attitt:des. Whatever else it does, the current academic regime does not support unequivocally epi5tftne-o~nlered views of social science knowledge. However,:: is also c:ear that few universities supp!)rt "krl(l\\'ing how" work either. hecaJse sllch wor~ IOCUSl'S altention on :uI:clamental needs for sodal and economic reform and thu$ often ~rri­ tates public and private sector constituencies and

wealthy donors, There is almos~ no indication thac existing research funding patterns support more linked enorts betwee:l multiple academic parI, ners ane relevant non -university stakeholders.

The "Humpty Dumpty" Prohlem Another dlfficulty iu the way universities, most particularly in the social sciences, organize knowledge production activities has been called the "Hmnpry Dumpty" problem by Waddock and SpllIlgler: Speoalizalioll in Frofessions today resembles a:! the king's horses and all the king', men ta,kling the puzz:e ,realed ':ly the fragments of Humpty !)urnpt)'s broken body, Professionals, .. are tack, ling problc::1s with only somt' of the ~:lowledge ::eeded to solve tne il[Qblems, , . , Despite thl" fragmenta;iOD into profeSSional spedal:ies, profession' ~lil and :nanagers are expected :0 oornehnw p.t tbi:ir-and only their----pieces of Hurnpty [lllmpty iJack together again. Further, they are 10 accomplish this ta~k with aut real~, unders:anding what Humpty looked like in lhe (:SI place. or what ttt: other professions am do 10 milke organized. it is dear that problem dell nit ion must be acco:nplished moperatively wi:b :he actors wl:o ('xI'e:;ence the actual ?roblen: ,itualiQllS. Thw;, research will have 10 he condu;ted "natural" settings witbout trying to create a university-centered substitute experimer:tal situation. (o:lducting research thi, way gua£a:1tee;; I'lal research fod will not from reading about Ine latest fash ionable theory with!n an acadmlk ?rofessiofl, but rathe: as a negotiated joint understanding nf wh a.t the problem in focas should be. an understand: ng in which both profcssio:1als and problem owners have a say in setting C1C iss:!e the group ...'ill deal wit:t. For academic researchers, this places a prcniLm Oil the ability and w:llingnes5 to fra:ne researchable questions ir: collcrete problem s[ruatjotL~, a pmu~ss that certainly forces t1'.e researcl1ers to lldopt persprc· lives tbal often afC not central or that colltain cnOl:gh varie!'c, llr cxperl:se relevant to the problem at Il,md so 6Jt the i !llen: ..1 capacity to mO"jililC the nL"t'dl:d thrillS of knowledge 1:1 bo:h situaliom, :he (en:erpiecc is tht require men: t~at academic researchers be able to operate in a transdisciplinary environment where the challenge; cente:: on acth'cly transforming their 0,,'0 persoectives ioorder to accommodate and help build the necessary :"nowledgc platfimn neeced for working through problem, They also would also have to understand their accountability to the exlrauniversity "akehulders' evaluation of the results t::!rough action. Thus, team-based research and breaking down bour:daries between diffl.'rent professional posil ions ate ce:1tml features of file ceploymenl of act'Oi! resf~rch in un :versities. ':eaching would 'lave to change in much file sar.1!! way In fact, it is pnssi':>le 10 envisage a teachir.g process that mirrors Ihe action resi:arch process W~ have articulated above. The obviouS starting poi nt would be Uiie of concrete proolem situations in dassmo;ns, probably accomplished hy us,," uf real case," Stanitg here, the developmer.1 lear:lil1g foci (e.!! .. problem dctlnitions) would have to from the con crete preblcu: situations, a posi rio:! that is the centerpiece of roh n Dewey's pedagogy, In this regard, Ihis teach'ng situation is pilml. lei to an action resear,:' p;ojcct main diff,,;, enee is that are three type, of ;;rincipal actor~ in the problem owners, the s:udcl1ts, ar:d thc As in act;on research, tney will aJ be linked in a mJtual lear:tkg process. Even tbougb students might themselves be participants, without many the neCC'isary skills and insights, they will discover tr.at, as students, tIley bring a dJfcrcnt ,et of experiences and poi IIts view into the collaborative learning arena !l:1d call make i:nportant con:ribt:ions as gain confider:ce in thei r own a:,il ities" rbus, all three parlies will be teachers a!1d co:earm:rs, The orofessionaillcacemks ... iU have a oped al oh:igatioJ: to SlrU,lu re the learmng 5i luation effectively and to provide necessary substantive knowledge to the parlkipants in the learn! ng process" As is genenllly be case in teachi ng,

the ?rOfeS5DrS would start the course using beir conception (if what are key substantive iSllues in :he si:uation under examinatill:1. Because Ihis :{ind of leach! ng is problem driven, however, all predetermined plans will have to be ~djusled 10 the concrete teaching s:mation as new, cogl;'ner' uled und"rsta:ldings err;erge fro:n learning group. Focusil:g 1111 real-life problen:s also forces the diifl;'renl disciplines to coop"rate because relevant knowledge musl be ",ught from any and all s(Jure!::s, No single discipline or strand of think! rig [,m dominate act:on :-esearch because real-wor:d pmble:m; art' not tailored to match disdpli nary structures 3:1d ,tandar.!, of acaciemk popularity. The valuabl~ aCJ.dem Ie professiona: thus is not the world's leading expert in discipline "X" 0: theory "y" but instead is the person who can bring relevant knowledge for solving the problem 10 the table, Though such pedagogical processes, whatever c1~e they do, it is certain that students will learn how to apply what they j:now and how to learn from Olr.Cr, from the profesmr>, and from the problem owners. What tiler wHillor develop ~8 a narrow allegianCe> til a particular discipline or 10 a u:1iversi:y wmld sepa,ated from liCe in so(~etr at large. And logether, the professors and students will be of service to the world outside the arademy Thus, uni vcrsil!e, Ihat fo(us III elr tcachill!! on act~()n research will he able to ,upply practical remits and insights to the surroumliI:g sodet},

Is This Possible? The question is 1I0t whether llc:lOn research can be accoml;lOda:ed [;1 contemporary un:versities, but how to create experimental situations to :nake il happen, We can find examples of tl:is in under!!::"'dduate education, in professional degree courses, and in Ph D programs. Programs action research at both of the authors' institutions (Cornell and the )/orwegian Unive:sity of Science and Technology) have .town :hat such programs are possible, .lIbeit on a ve::y sn:all at present. The biggest obstacle is now 10 j £lIegrate thb type of illlerr:ative educational process :'!Illy :n the

62 • HAND!llJOK m QUALITATrVE RESEARCif-CHAPTER 2

current structures of universities. Everything we have said above constitutes a challenge tD the (meent division of labor and to the disciplinary ilnd administrative structures of universities. ?ursuing this wO'Jld weake:J the hegemony of sepanlle professional and disciplinary structures, would force professional activity to move toward meeting ~ocial m:eds, and wO'Jld limit the self· serving and self· regarding academic profession· aJism that is the hallmark of contemporary Ill:! versifies. Despite how difficult it appears to be, there are reasons to think that progress can be made along these lines. The increasing public and fl s· cal pressure on universities to justify the:nselves and their activities creates a risky but promising situation in which experimemhg with action research approaches may be the only possible solution for unive;sities that wish to survive ;nto :he next generation. There is a choice. One strategy some universi· ties have adopted is that, as the public finan"ial support for universities drops. they consider themselves even less accountable to the public, Another is to 1:·1' 10 renegotiate this relationship 3:1 d reverse the m:gative trend. We believe in using action research to try to repair the deeply compromised relationships universities have with their publics and governments.

III

Et divorcio fin Ire la tferia y 1" praclica y (I dedive de iii ar.tropo/(}gfa tmivmitaria (Inapplicable Anthropology: The Divorc,;: :Betweell Theory and Practice and :he Decline of University Anthropology) at the conference of Soc:edad E,;pafJoia de Antropologia Aplkada in Granada, Spai", in Ko\'ember of 2002. S. A critique of this kind o~blind positivism was

Cefltral tll the ideils of the :najor social thinkers who gave rise to the sodal sciences in the first ?lace (Adam Srn:th, Kadl\.ian:, Max Weber, I::nile Durkheim, and John D~wey. among others J. 1\ good source of cllrrent critiques is James Scheurich (1997), 6. For a foil discllssion of these iss;Ies, see Robert Stake (1995) 7. This:5 a pseudonym. S. observed mLlch of thi~ prnces. because he served as a member of the local steering co=nmiltce for :he projec:. Hc :'ecollects :,ow little linllagc there was at the outset between engineering and tbe sodal

sciences. 9. A search conference is a democratically orga· nized action research means for t-ringinr, a group of problem owners together for an lmen,i,,!: process of reflection, analy;is, and action planning. For a more detailed description, see Greenwood and tel/in (199Sb 1. 10. Greenwoud served as it rr.elllber of Reynolds's PhD committee and wo:i, we tuke up a m:n· pan ion project, writing through th" perspectives of nmltiple groups of th:s social puzzl,' we call America, fraclured by jagged lir:es of POI>',,!, so as to theorize caref'Jlly this rdalio:lali:y and, at the same lime, rt>. 1998 l and in Working Class Wit/lOut Work (Weis, 1990), ao;!lytically speaking, we have

argued that while working claM mC'1l lea,! in the urball Norlheast of the Cniled $late,~) C3:l bt, understood only in relation 10 a collstructed African An:erka;l"other; with the most powe~­ :ful refraction lIccurrillg b relation to African Ar.le:ir'ln men. These while working-class men must he theorized abollt rarely refer· ell,;e t:isto;y Dr the glob~l economy explicitlJ, we have had ttl sllllatc these nen, as th"y 'llllve through their daily lives and narrate their ~lJdal rela:ions, in the shifting historic sar.ds of sodal, econorn k, politica! Cl)nditions, The key poi III hen: is :1: at sodal theorY and a:13: yse~ can no lo:tger afford to isolate a ~group:' or to re-prl!Sen! :J:eir stuIiI!S as "transparent;' as though th3t group were wherenl ,1110 bounded; i1l5:ead, we mast theor:ze explicitly-that is, "oon:lect tle dQts" -10 rend"f visib:e rdatiolls to other "groups" ar.,j 10 larger sociopolitical formaliollS, The emergent mon:age groups ll1llSt sirllu',taIlEc\lIsly be positioned within 3j51orically shifting sodal and ecollomic relations in Luiled States and acrnss the globe. Although the spec ilk "borderlllg" groups are ullcovere(' elt.no, graphicallya:ld may by~ite, deep theorizing and deep analysis arc required to join these seemingly se?arate and iso:atec. groups d urbun schools in OJf study were designed, indeed, tu \ But broadly cor.ceived, the slrudure, and of ciltsS and racial formation;; mnstitute pubJc schooling (Noguera, 2003; Payne, 1995), Inequitable state financing. school organizatiun, school and classed and radal izcd access to r;gor, as well as dt.>ep-pocket private support~ that ?ri11i1eged studrnts enjoy rather than Ihe "bodies" or "cultures" {{ face/ell:nkity-produce consistent differelltial oukomes wit:1in and across schools (Gra:nsci, 1971). Tte "gap" l~ overdeterm ~lIed but not fully inhaled by all. Although social analysh; may reveal the uf the lor.g arr:1 of the state. the economy. and filL-Ial formations on the lives of youth and young adults, il i, interesting, for a nlo:nent to consider who does, and who doesn't, acknowledge the presence (and stranglehold) of the arm. As in :he focus gm;]p narrative and O1:r survey ma:erial, we see that youth of privilege a:ld success larg..ly (for re-examination see Burns, 2004) re-p:csent themselves "l!~ if" untuuched hy thest: structural forces, if" they are gracefuU y movi ng forward simply on the basis of meril, hard work, good luck, andJ or COIn m!:I!!c parenting. in contrast, youth of color and/or poverty never immune to neger.lOnic !ii,coursE-season thei r wot(ls v..:th c;i:iq ue, uutrage, and ~he twit: ned relations of strw::hlrai and personal responsibility. Ukt: the men in Class geunlrm (and maybe evel: more so). tllese young WOOlf:l and men speak through a relational. companltive sense of the "(Jth~r~' Hul in their ronll'Jlations, they are saddL'neci 10 realize that they have become the "other:' A1I1ivl's are fotmed in history, power ineqllities, institllt:onal arrangen:etlts, and relational negotiations. Compositiolla: studes are we!: suited to reveal these relations, Youb of color and in pove:1y know these :elations and ron;;istently narrate :hem for us all, This projrct, like Reunirm, reveals thc complex!! y' and, we believe, the power of ron:positional SI'Jdies, Across and withiJl institutions of pu'Jlk education, we come to s':'" how finance inequities tattoo shame and lack Oll the inlelleclually ht;ngry S (Ed.},l(,7hfnkillg eaUi'a1ior:al change wftrl hearf ami mind. Alexandria, VA: As,sociation for S'~pervision and Curriculum Dtvc:opmcnt O'Connor, C. (2001), l;-b\king >.ellse of the complexity of so;;i,;J identily in relation to acb:vemel1t: Asociological challenge in the new millcnniunUiodCllogy of rdi1cnNon.74, 159-169, Orfield, & ;;;aston, S, (1996), Di£mant/ing desegrega, tion, t;;ew York: :-lew I'ress, Pay ne, C ( 19'1::').l'YC got light off!(ledo'lJ: l'he org~ .

"izing tradi!iJm and the ;\1ississippi jreedmtl strug· gle, Berkeley: t:nivcr,1, (1999). Black i,/entities: West Indian imrni'

grmll dreams Qna American realities, New Yo~k: Russell Sage I'mmdation,

84

'Ill

HANDROOK OJ! QUALITATIVE RESEARCHr.HAPTER 3

Wtis, L, (19901. Working ciass withaut work: High

sch,ml s!ud.wts in a de,jndusrriaUzfng economy. New York: Routledge, Weis, L (2004), Class reunion: 1'hc new working class. Kew York: Routledge, Wheelock, A, (1992), ('nming t/II; tracks, New Yorit: New Press. W'IHar::s, P. (:992). The alchemy of race alld rights, Cambridge, MA: Earvard Uni\'e~i:y Press.

Willis, P. ( 1977), Learm'llg to Itlbciur. Far::bnoough, UK: Saxon House. Wilson, W, I, ; 1987), Tht truly disadvantaged: The inner ciljl the Ilt/derelass and pl/bUc policy. Chkago: UnivCTSily or Ch icago Press. Woodson, C. G. (! 972), rile mis'educatiotl of the Negro. New York: AMS Press. (Original work publishl'd ""133)

4 ON TRICKY GROUND Researching the Native in the Age of Uncertainty Linda Tuhiwai Smith

II

INTRODl:CTlON

[n the spaces between n'search methodologies, ethical principles, institutio:tal regulations, and bULlan subject, as incividulI!s ll:1d a1> sodally organize': identify as a powe:iul agent for res:star:ce and dlange. These approaches connect and draw from iadigenous

9(1 III HANDBOOK OF QUALlTA1W£ RESEARCH-CHAPTER 4

knowledge and privilege indigenous pedagogiC's their practices, re;ationships. and m~hod!)lo­ gies. Most indigenous researehers would claim that their research \Oalidates an ethical and cultur· ally detlned 8?proach thai enables indigenous conJmur:ities to theorize their own lives and thai connects 6.eir past histories w!~h their future Eves (Marker, 20(J3). Indigenous approaches are a1su mindfl:; of and sensitive to the audiences of research and therefore of the accoaJ:tab:lities of researchers as lltMytellers, dotumenters of (uhure, an d witnesses of the realities of :ndi~e­ :l!1US lives, their ceremonies, their aspira:iotls, their ;m;arceratiorls, 6elr deaths. (Pihama, 1994; Steinhauer, 2003; Te Helloepe, 1993; Warrior, 1995 L In 'lew Zealand, Miiori scholar, have coined their research approach as Kaupapa Maori or Mauri research rather than employing the term "indigenisL" Tbere a~e strong reasons for such a naming, as the struggle has been seer. as one over Maori language and the ability by Manri as MaOTi to :lame the world, to theorize world, and 10 research back to power: The genealogy of indigenous research for Maori has one of beginnings in the developmenl of alternative Maor: immersiun-based ",hooting (Piha:na, (ram, 8< Walker. 2002; H. Smith, 1990; L. T, SmUh. 2000). Grahafl Smith (1990} has argued tbat the strugg:e to develop alternative schools known as K'Jra Kaupapa Maori helped product' a of educalior.al strategies thai engaged witn muit i?le levels of colonization alld sodal inequal ity: These strategies induded er:gagement ",·ith :heory erts, observi:Jg practices, and developing word banks and other resources, The protocols 6at have been developed by t'1e International Society 0" Ethnobotany will be Clscussed agai:1 later in this chapter, One use of the ;esearch that its members galher :i of re,/. Harju, J., & Flird, (i, (1997), ReinV resear::h, Chapel Hill: Ull iversity cf :iQrth urnlinii Press, Ladson,RilIings, G. (2000), Radalized discourses and ethnk epist,'mo\ugies, In N, K, Denzin &: y, S, !.incnln (F,c,s.), Har.dboo~ qrlalitam'e reSearch (2nd ed., pp. 257-278), Thousand Oak!;, CA: Sage, Langton, M, (1981), ."ulthropoJogislS mnS! change, Idemit)', 4(4).1 L The La;ina Feminist Group, (2001). leUi'£g w lir