The Result…

Today I have picked up my results for my proposal. Ok, but I am kicking myself somewhat about a piece of constructive criticism which was that I needed to demonstrate a deeper understanding of autoethnography. What is annoying about that, is that autoethnography and ethnography has been takin up alot of my reading time lately and if I were now asked to write my proposal again I know that I would have been able to cover this particular section at greater length and in greater detail, mostly thanks to ’The Ethnographic I’. 

It is a bit of a shame that the proposal was due when it was, because like I say, if there would have been even a couple of weeks longer, I know that I would have been able to drag my result up, but thats the way the cookie crumbles and I guess that everyone will be in the same boat. It could be worse, at least I didn’t get comments like, ‘focus’ as some of my peers seem to have done!

I think that now I will take a read of someone else’s blog which I am beginning to find a bit of an infectious read…she should most definetly take up wriring fiction!

Blogspot

http://colt123.wordpress.com/2008/11/04/blog-entry-9-what-is-autoethnography/

http://eaptools.blogspot.com/

http://eaptools.blogspot.com/search?q=sickness

Just a quick note of some interesting ‘reads’ that I have come across while stumbling through the www today…

Unscholarly? Nah.

I had to stop and think today while reading a sentence I found a little curious in ‘The Ethnographic I’ under a subheading entitled ‘Criteria for Evaluating Ethnographic Projects’, which I think is probably worth noting.

“Often we go to great lengths to hide the messiness of our research because we fear our project might be seen as unscientific or unscholarly. We play language games – running for cover behind terms like ‘validity’, ‘reliability’ and ‘grounded’ – and specifying criteria.” (p253)

‘Art’, Ellis’ partner in the novel (and in real life) suggests that in response to such criticism one should not suggest that one way think or discover is ‘the truth’ but rather that it is more productive to think ‘what if this was the truth?’

I think I am a little confused as to whether or not any form of (social science) research can be unscholarly or indeed unscientific. After pondering about this, I thought… If a researcher wanted to complete a piece of research, but could not find a suitable research method, has it not been the case that one has been created to enable the research to be completed anyway? Think about it… Ethnogrpahy (looking outwards) links with Autoethnography (inward looking) and then there are narrative stories, methodological novels and the list goes on. Surely the point is that as long as the research has ‘value’ (and I use the term value loosely, for want of a better word) either for the researcher, or the ‘researched’ or the social science community then I think it is difficult to describe it as unscholarly. I mean just this week, the scientific community have replaced a womans windpipe using cells grown using relatively ground breaking scientific methods. In other words, the scientific community created a new method to get to where they wanted to be… whats the difference when you relate this to social science?

Everything all jumbled up

Phenomenological ethnography, Psychobiography, Personal Narratives, Narratives of the Self, Self-Stories, Personal Essays, Writing Stories, Personal Ethnography, Self-Ethnography, Evocative Ethnography, Autopathography, Personal Writing, Reflexive Ethnography, Ethnographic Memoir, Emotionalism, Narrative Ethnography, Native Ethnography – Ellis’ book covers them all. Do I understand them all? No. Did I look them up to try and gain an insight? Yes.

As for the book… detailed yes, confusing, not really. It has been such as accessible read that I have recommended it to a peer, not that I am finished with it myself mind. What I think is so appealing about ‘the ethnographic I’ is that it is written in such a way that the personal and emotional life of the author is intertwined with the theory or story of how she came to practice, research and teach autoethnography. Theory in this book is coupled with evocative, emotional, and somethimes comic moments, which seem to give a break from what can sometimes feel like the ’seriousness’ (for want of a better word) of some academic reading.

Reading…

So, its now the 11th of November and I am still reading. Today I have got hold of 2 of the books that I listed on my previous post, and have immersed myself straight into the one which I have heard good things about from several sources, ‘The Ethnographic I’ by Ellis. (Full reference in previous post). Having only got hold of it today, and got through 30 pages already this evening, I thought I might write on here some initial thoughts. Firstly, it wasn’t really what I expected, though I am not sure what I did expect having said that. It is a story told from the perspective of a professor in an American University, but there are details of conversations with students, some ranging from the comical to the deadly serious. It is contextualised well though. There is thorough explanation around who is who, and Ellis justifies and explains her responses to students questions at length. Secondly, Ellis presents some definitions which I know that I will find particularly useful, including one of Autoethnography (preface xix) and pages 9-18 entitled ‘A Personal History: From Sociology to Communication, from Ethnography to Autoethnography’. I think that I will be able to utilise the work of Ellis in my study, and way that she integrates theory with her own examples definetly enhances my understanding.

Another piece of reading that I have done recently is another independent study completed in the academic season 2006-2007 by Rachel Jones entitled “Cogito ergo sum…I think” My Heuristic Journey.

The reason that I read this independent study is because during a discussion with another lecturer, I came across something strange. When I asked him for examples of studies completed on Autoethnography, he said ‘well Neil’s ideas of Autoethnography and my ideas of Autoethnography might be different. Why don’t you have a read of this and see what you think? To be honest, I have skim-read the independent study and from what I can gather it is about a woman who did not know what topic(s) she wanted to explore through an independent study, but she did know that she was interested in research. In other words, she knew she was able to research, wanted to complete research, but did not have a topic to research, so after some discussion with her mentor, she decided to research doing research. Complicated hey? I am not sure what I think of this study. I can’t decide on its value. On one hand, the researcher is clearly well read and presents her work in a great way, but on the other hand I am unsure how she sustained an interest in researching research for 10-15000 words. I am not dismissing her study, far from it, I do think however that it has the potential to blur my appreciation of some research methods, which I guess is why I skim-read her work rather than reading it from cover to cover. Maybe I didn’t want to engage in it fully in case it confused me? Anyway, it is fresh in my mind at the moment so perhaps if I think about it a bit more, the waters will ’unmuddy’…we’ll see.

They are on Order!

Books, I mean, obviously. Three of them in total.

Ellis, Carolyn, (2004)- The ethnographic I : a methodological novel about autoethnography. Oxford; Rowman & Littlefield

Crang, M. Cook, I. (2007) Doing ethnographies. London; Sage

Denzin, N. (1997) Interpretive ethnography : ethnographic practices for the 21st century. Thousand Oaks, Calif.; London; Sage

Bit annoying really. Would rather read them now, but guess I will have to be patient, not that patience has ever been one of my strong points! Anyway, thats all for today.