SOC$518: QUALITATIVE$METHODSIN$ SOCIAL$RESEARCH … · 3 Some&Journals$ American$Ethnologist$$ $ $...

1

SOC 518: QUALITATIVE METHODS IN SOCIAL RESEARCH FALL 2014 TUESDAYS 9:00 – 11:50 am in TORY 4-‐4

Dr. Sara Dorow [email protected] Office: Tory 6-‐28 Office Hours: Tues 12:30 – 2:00 (or e-‐mail to set a time) I. Introduction and Overview I aim for this course to be challenging and invigorating. It will introduce a necessarily limited selection of qualitative techniques for gathering and analyzing data (methods), and a range of approaches to qualitative research (methodologies). We will consider the theoretical and epistemological underpinnings of qualitative research, and most importantly, you will conduct your own original, hands-‐on qualitative research. By the end of the semester, each of you will have completed a modest “exploratory” (or possibly pilot) research project. To mirror good research practice, your projects will be:

• driven by theoretical interests and specific questions; • informed by (and thus refer to and be in conversation with) our readings and discussion

of methods and methodologies; • attentive to ethics, audience, and purpose; • carefully documented and organized; • supported by input from our ‘community of practice.’

While one key goal is to learn while doing, a corollary goal is to build reflexive practice by engaging in a number of debates, e.g., truth claims based on qualitative evidence, the accountability and positionality of researchers, the problem of defining culture and experience, ‘rigour’ and ‘validity’, the complexities of ethics, and the politics of representation. Be sure to manage your time so that you are regularly and consistently doing all four of the following (all of which feed into each other!):

• preparing for class readings and discussions (see below); • planning for and carrying out field research; • researching literature (substantive and methodological) relevant to your project • tracking, writing about, and reflecting on your research project (in the portfolio).

Note: “Field research” refers to the qualitative study of a site or case or topic. Individual semi-‐structured interviews will be the core method, but you will also try at least one other method: analysis of a text (i.e. document(s), image(s), or object(s)), participant observation, or a visual method (i.e., either interview-‐produced or visual documentation/narration). THE PREREQUISITE FOR THIS CLASS IS SOC 418 OR THE EQUIVALENT. STUDENTS ARE EXPECTED TO HAVE BASIC FAMILIARITY

AND EXPERIENCE WITH QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS AND SOCIAL THEORY.

2

READINGS Required: Maxwell, Joseph A. (2013) Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, 3rd edition.

Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Coursepack /Electronic Resources (permanent links with each reading in course schedule below) Recommended as Overview/Background: Mayan, Maria J. (2009) Essentials of Qualitative Inquiry. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press. Mayan, Maria J. (2001) An Introduction to Qualitative Methods. University of Alberta:

International Institute for Qualitative Methodology. Other Selected References and Resources (and there are many, many more...): Atkinson, Paul et al. (2007) Handbook of Ethnography. Los Angeles: SAGE. Becker, Howard (1998) Tricks of the Trade: How to Think about Your Research While You're

Doing It. Chicago: Chicago UP. Bloor, Michael and Fiona Wood (2006) Keywords in Qualitative Methods: A Vocabulary of

Research Concepts. London: SAGE. Denzin, Norman et al. (2005) The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks:

SAGE. Emerson, Robert M., R.I. Fretz, and L. L. Shaw (1995) Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes. Chicago,

University of Chicago Press. Gibson, William J. and Andrew Brown (2009) Working with Qualitative Data. LA: SAGE. Given, Lisa M. (2008) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. LA: SAGE. Gubrium, Jaber F. & James A. Holstein, eds. (2002) Handbook of Interview Research: Context &

Method. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Kleinman, Sherryl (2007) Feminist Fieldwork Analysis. Qualitative Research Methods Series 1.

Los Angeles: SAGE. Lofland, John and L. Lofland (1995) Analyzing Social Settings: A Guide to Qualitative Observation

and Analysis, Third Edition. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Marshall, Catherine and Gretchen B. Rossman (2006) Designing Qualitative Research. Thousand

Oaks: SAGE. Naples, Nancy A. (2003) Feminism and Method: Ethnography, Discourse Analysis, and Activist

Research. New York: Routledge. Piantanida, Maria and N. Garman (2009) The Qualitative Dissertation: A Guide for Faculty and

Students. Corwin Press. The SAGE Qualitative Research Kit (electronic books through U of A Libraries) Saukko, Paula (2003) Doing Research in Cultural Studies: An Introduction to Classical and New

Methodological Approaches. London: SAGE. Seale, Clive et al. (2007) Qualitative Research Practice. London: SAGE. Wolfe, Diane, ed. (1996) Feminist Dilemmas in Fieldwork. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

3

Some Journals American Ethnologist Narrative Inquiry Discourse Studies Qualitative Inquiry Ethnography Qualitative Research Int’l Journal of Qual Methods Qualitative Sociology Jnl of Contemporary Ethnography Visual Anthropology Review THREE IMPORTANT NOTES: 1. ETHICS: I have received course ethics approval for research projects in the course. Projects must be ‘minimal risk’ – we’ll talk about what that means. Under this arrangement, I am (as far as REB1 is concerned) the Principal Investigator on all student projects, and the findings of the projects are to be used only for course requirements. IF you think you will integrate research data from this course into your thesis or any other research project outside of this class, you should make your own separate ethics application ASAP to REB1. (Another option, to be discussed in class, is for the consent form used in the 518 project to state that findings may be used for a thesis or other publications on X topic.) Those of you working with community partners will need to abide by their wishes regarding ‘ownership’ of the interviews, i.e., you also need their permission to use the data for anything beyond this class. 2. COMMUNITY SERVICE-‐LEARNING: The CSL Program (based in the Faculty of Arts) integrates community-‐based projects with academic courses, providing hands-‐on learning experiences that also benefit community partners. For Soc 518, we have several CSL partners with different kinds of research needs. To see the list of community projects matched with Soc 518, go to www.csl.ualberta.ca and click on “CSL Portal” (you will use your CCID and password to access it). IF one of these projects matches your interests and background, and/or you don’t already have an idea for a research topic, then do consider taking up one of these partnerships as the basis for your course project. This is a unique opportunity to exercise your collaborative research skills -‐ your work will be developed with and for a community group that has an identified research interest. One added benefit is ease of ‘access’ to participants (to be discussed further in class). Students who choose the CSL option will be given a few additional resources, and will have a couple of short extra meetings. Overall, the whole class will benefit from the mutual sharing of research experiences from both CSL and non-‐CSL projects. Some extra logistics for CSL students:

• meet with your community supervisor by the third week in September to get to know each other, to devise a plan for communication, and to talk about your respective goals for the project, “fit” with semi-‐structured interviewing, and any specific ethics concerns

• read the CSL Student Guidebook and return the Student Agreement to me by Sept 30th (print your Agreement from the Portal and take to the first meeting with your partner)

• complete a Police Information Check if required (see Guidebook for details)

4

3. TECHNOLOGY NEEDS FOR THE COURSE: • You will need a recording device for your interviews. I would recommend a separate

small digital recorder that you have gotten to know well. IF you use your cell phone, be doubly familiar with how recording works on your phone (e.g., an incoming call or text can stop the recording, with you unawares). In all cases, be conscious of how you are going to protect confidentiality and privacy (e.g., upload the recording onto a secure, password-‐protected computer, ensure it has been properly saved, and then delete from your recording device), and test it out in a simulated interview setting (with background noise, with a number of feet between speaker and device, etc.).

• You will want to look into transcribing software that will ease the process of interview transcription by allowing you to easily slow or speed the audio, rewind, etc. (there are many; some students in the past have used Express Scribe). Do NOT use voice recognition software; this is both unreliable for interviews and skips transcription as an important part of research analysis.

• You will not be using any CAQDAS software (NVivo, Atlas Ti, etc.) for coding data in this course, although we will discuss it in class. Doing just a few interviews ‘by hand’ is a more effective way to practice the art of coding.

• You can still use project-‐organizing software to organize your field notes, reflexive writing, lit searches, interview transcripts, coding, and analysis. For example, I can see how Scrivener would be a useful tool. See an extensive list of interesting applications at www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/apps.html. Or, just use good old Word...

NOTE: Whatever you do, remember that you need to give me your research portfolio twice during the term, so it needs to be created in or at least be convertible to a format that can be coherently compiled and submitted as one document. II. Logistics Plagiarism/Professionalism KNOW WHAT IT IS, DON’T DO IT: see www.osja.ualberta.ca/en/students.aspx The University of Alberta is committed to the highest standards of academic integrity and honesty. Students are expected to be familiar with standards regarding academic honesty and to uphold the policies of the University. Students should be familiar with the Code of Student Behaviour (www.governance.ualberta.ca) and avoid any behaviour which could potentially result in suspicions of cheating, plagiarism, misrepresentation of facts and/or participation in an offence. Academic dishonesty can result in suspension or expulsion from the University. Audio or video recording of lectures, labs, seminars or any other teaching environment by students is allowed only with the prior written consent of the instructor or as a part of an approved accommodation plan. Recorded material is to be used solely for personal study, and is not to be used or distributed for any other purpose without prior written consent from the instructor.

5

Grading/Marking • I will strive to provide thorough feedback to you on all written assignments, and to do so

in a timely manner; my ability to do so depends on you handing assignments in by the specified dates.

• I will generally dock 5% for each day of a late assignment, unless you and I have agreed on another course of action due to an understandable and acceptable delay.

• Grades will be provided to you in number form; see below for how these translate into letter grades (A, A-‐, B+, etc.) Your final letter grade for the course is determined by calculating the average across weighted assignments. Descriptor Letter Grade Grade Point Value Approx. %-age equivalent Excellent A+

A A-

4.0 4.0 3.7

97 – 100 91 – 96 87 – 90

Good B+ B B-

3.3 3.0 2.7

83 – 86 77 – 82 73 – 76

Satisfactory C+ C C-

2.3 2.0 1.7

69 – 72 63 – 68 59 – 62

Poor Minimal Pass

D+ D

1.3 1.0

55 – 58 49 – 54

Failure F[or FI]* 0.0 48 and below

Policy about course outlines can be found in §23.4(2) of the University Calendar.

III. Class Activities and Assignments About the Research Project The exploratory research project is comprised of a number of interlinked components that culminate in a two-‐part final paper (described below). This means that in addition to class readings and discussions, you will be putting an average of 2-‐3 hours/week into your research project – planning and developing your research question; setting up, conducting, and analyzing interviews; conducting literature searches; and regularly writing in your portfolio. NOTE: This time does not include transcribing – and take heed, transcribing can take up to four hours for each hour of interviewing! NOTE: There is no formally scheduled ‘lab time’ for the course, as these hours will go toward your individual field work and research analysis outside of class.

6

Your research project will be based mainly on semi-‐structured interviews (usually three, depending on how long they are – they should add up to three hours’ worth of interview time). You will also have a chance to try one appropriate and complementary second method, such as participant observation (e.g., at a public event, or online), textual analysis (e.g., of documents or images), or a visual method (such as photography or mapping). For example... ...you might conduct in-‐depth interviews with three long-‐time residents about the gentrification

of their neighbourhood and then complement the interviews by conducting participant observation at a local town hall meeting with the city and the developer

...you might conduct three key informant interviews about a new policy on Aboriginal economic development and then complement the interviews by conducting discourse analysis of one of the core policy documents

...you might do shorter semi-‐structured interviews with five young adults about their experience in a LGBT theatre group and as your complementary method, ask one or two of them to document their experiences using photographic journaling.

This amount of research does not usually a full project make, so we are treating these as ‘exploratory’ (or ‘pilot’) projects. Maxwell (2013) briefly describes such projects, and Sandelowski (2000) provides a useful discussion of basic “qualitative description.” A. PORTFOLIO (total 60%) – due on Oct 21st (P1) and Nov 25th (P2) in class (proposal is due earlier) (includes proposal, interviews + coding/analysis, second method, & ongoing notes and memos)

‘Write early and write often; don’t get it right, get it written.’ (Delamont et al. 1997) The centerpiece of the research project is your Portfolio (alternatively called the field journal or project notebook). As a sort of ‘living archive’ of the project, it is a way to:

• record your research activities • consistently reflect on your research practice • organize your data and analysis • develop your questions and ideas.

The Portfolio serves as the main expression of what you are doing, learning, and thinking – for you, and for me. Therefore, it MUST be kept up regularly and consistently, from your first topic idea to the last bit of coding, and it must be organized. (In turn, it will help to keep you organized and engaged with your project! Really, it will.) As described below, the Portfolio includes original materials generated by the project (such as your proposal, interview transcripts, photos, texts, coding schemes, etc.) AND regular notes/memos on the shape and direction of your unfolding research project.

7

Proposal (due October 7th by 9 am, electronically) – 7.5% [three pages, double spaced excluding consent form & interview guide] The research proposal should be succinct and convincing. Given that this is an exploratory study done in a relatively short time frame, you can save a broader lit review and more in-‐depth methodological design for the final paper. However, your exploratory proposal should clearly describe and justify your methods (especially your sampling and recruitment) and should refer to at least two or three relevant and key pieces of extant scholarly literature on the issue/topic. When devising your topic and question, consider do-‐ability (is the project feasible?), should-‐do-‐ability (what is the potential significance? do benefits outweigh risks?), and want-‐to-‐do-‐ability (will it hold your interest?) (Marshall and Rossmann 2011). Guided by Maxwell’s (2013) advice for qualitative research design, your preliminary proposal will:

• briefly introduce the scholarly and/or social interest of this particular topic/question (so what? what are the potential goals/contributions?)

• pose a do-‐able research question or close-‐knit set of questions (what do you want to know? how does this follow from the goals/drivers of the project?):

• briefly situate your research question in the relevant literature (at least two or three key academic sources – don’t worry about a “conceptual framework” yet unless you already have one up your sleeve) -‐ -‐ -‐ [this is roughly a third-‐ to half-‐way into your proposal] -‐ -‐ -‐

• describe your methods, i.e., how you will go about studying your question (semi-‐structured interviews with what people? why those people, for this project? how will you access/recruit them?; what supplementary method do you want to try, and why? how might it be a good ‘fit’?) – refer to methods readings in the course to legitimate your choices; while you could mention the influence or relevance of one or two particular methodological strategies/approaches (such as ethnography or phenomenology) for studying this particular question, you do not need to commit to any one approach at this stage of your exploration

• consider ethics issues of specific relevance to your project (speaks to validity) • attach a) a sample consent form for your project and b) a preliminary interview guide of

main questions along with follow-‐up questions and probes (not included in the three pages)

CSL NOTE: CSL proposals will be developed with input and direction from your community partner. You will need to consider their needs and clarify for them your interests in the project so that you can come to some agreement about the project goals and the format in which they would like to see your results (see notes under the Final Paper). I will send you electronic feedback on your proposal before the following week’s class (by October 13th, I hope).

8

Interviews (at least one in P1-‐Oct 21; all included in P2-‐Nov25) – 30% *Each interview is to be transcribed (as soon as possible after the interview) and included in your portfolio (usually in a separate section). Note that when given permission to record, you are expected to transcribe verbatim all interview interactions, although you may simply reference or summarize clearly unrelated portions (such as chatter about the weather...hmmm, unless your study is on people’s narratives or embodied experiences of weather...). *As you go, your interview transcripts will show increasing signs of coding and analysis. For P1 (Oct 21), you will be in the very early stages of developing some themes. By P2 (Nov 25), I expect to see that you have teased out and applied a full coding/analytical scheme. (This is messier than it sounds, and takes several iterations.) *Each interview will be accompanied by three short pieces of writing, which you should begin to do shortly after the interview (usually in the main section of the portfolio, since it is part of your field notes and memos):

a) a narrative description of the context, setting, and feel of the interview (when you interview someone in a study-‐relevant setting, such as their workplace, your description might be a bit longer); you might want to include a visual representation of the setting b) a paragraph or two of methodological reflection (MN) on the interview: what went well/not? what did you learn about the theory and/or practice of interviewing? This could be about the setting, the interview questions, the rapport, technical/procedural insights, analytical approach, your emotional response, and/or other methodological issues... (NOTE: enrich your reflection through reference to course material!) c) a paragraph or two of analytical summary (TAN) of the interview: what seemed to be the key contributions of this interview toward answering your research question? what particular themes jumped out at you? what new directions in your thinking are suggested? how does it compare to earlier interview themes/findings? (NOTE: enrich your summary through reference to the topical literature you have found)

NOTE: Sometimes (more often than you might think), observational, methodological, and analytical notes bleed into each other. Do not feel you have to always draw a clear line. Write in ways that reflect your research experience. This also means you do not have to write in formal prose all the time. Use maps, bullet points, side boxes, etc. as useful for you. But be clear enough that I understand, and that you can easily retrieve information. Remember, the Portfolio is mostly not a formal ‘front stage’ document, but rather, a ‘back stage’ document that must, nonetheless, be useful and useable. NOTE: You will need to start making contact and setting up your interviews early...usually by early October (once we have discussed ethics and protocols for ‘first contact’). Do not distribute a finalized consent form or set of interview questions to interview participants until you have received feedback on your proposal.

9

Complementary Second Method (due either in P1 or P2) – 7.5% I want you to have the experience of trying a method other than interviewing. But I do not want you to feel the pressure of having to fully employ it or formally integrate it into your work (one possible exception: interview techniques that generate new material, such as maps or photos by participants). So, you are to conduct a limited trial run with a second supplementary method (don’t spend more than 3 or 4 hours conducting it) and then include a write-‐up about it in your portfolio. (Your write-‐up does not have to be polished – just comprehensible.) This will probably be easiest to do in October, while you are setting up interviews or conducting the first one, but in some cases you won’t be able to do it until November (e.g., you have chosen to try an interview-‐based technique, or there is an event in November at which you want to observe). The second method might be participant observation, document analysis (extant or solicited text), or use of a visual method (participant-‐ or researcher-‐produced). These will be briefly discussed and exemplified in class. The write-‐up about your supplementary method (in your Portfolio) should be two or three pages, and should discuss (with reference to readings about that method):

• what method you chose and why • how you went about ‘doing’ it and analyzing it • any initial lessons learned about using the method • what your initial impressionistic findings are, and how you think these could supplement

your interview findings • what you imagine the possibilities of this method might be for your research project if it

were done on a bigger scale NOTE: Materials associated with the second method (e.g., a copy of the document you are analyzing; the visual material produced, the observational notes you wrote, etc.) should be included in the Portfolio when possible. NOTE: You are only required to refer to your second method in the final paper. In most cases you do not need to present its findings (although you may do so if you wish). Everything Else: Portfolio Notes and Memos – 15% The Portfolio may have distinct parts to it, but it is your regular and consistent notes and memos and jottings that are its connective tissue. These constitute what Cheek (2004) calls the “decision trail” of the project.

One important part of the “decision trail” is a date log of what you do, so do keep a calendar for yourself: a date-‐log of when you did (and plan to do) what – this could be a Google calendar, or some method by which you are organizing your schedule of research-‐related activities, keeping track of your various recruiting contacts and efforts etc. (while keeping ethical practice in mind).

10

Your ongoing notes and memos about the project are of two main types: Methodological Notes (MN): Notes about the process and experience of doing qualitative

research – sampling and recruitment, the experience of doing interviews, questions of power or identity, how knowledge is co-‐constructed, which methodological approaches are relevant or appealing and why, epistemological tensions in qualitative work, etc. As your project unfolds, these portfolio entries might end up focusing on just a couple of methodological issues that are especially salient for you. NOTE: I expect you to refer to and engage with relevant class readings. This will build your ability to engage with methodological ideas and to present methodological justifications.

Theoretical/Analytical Notes (TAN): Notes about what you are learning about the research

topic/question as you brainstorm, conduct your project, and consult the relevant literature. These are your growing body of hunches, hypotheses, connections, interpretations, and insights about the content. As your project unfolds, and you develop your analysis, these portfolio entries should become more focused. NOTE: I expect you to refer to and converse with other scholarly work, but do not expect a long bibliography. The idea is to find and include key pieces that help you develop your analysis about the topic.

You should also include some: Personal Notes (PN): Your feelings about the research, about participants, etc. Note your

doubts, anxieties, pleasures, “aha” moments… (these notes are often related to MN above) NOTE: It does not always make sense to so clearly delineate these different sorts of notes and memos. But in P1, at least, start by indicating which kinds of notes you are making (use the abbreviations and/or use a different font style or whatever strategy works for you). NOTE: The Portfolio will be very useful when it comes to pulling the project together and writing up your final paper. So, having a system where you have the ability to go back through your portfolio and find particular pieces will prove valuable! NOTE: Most people arrange their portfolio by sections, with each section being chronological. See what works for you. NOTE: Most page ranges refer to double-‐spaced documents. But to save paper, you can hand in the Portfolio on single-‐ (or 1.5-‐) spaced, double-‐sided pages (with some white space in there so I don’t lose my mind reading it). NOTE: All portfolio documents must be anonymized, in keeping with ethical research practice and as discussed in class.

11

B. FINAL PAPER: Report and Proposal (due Dec 12, hard copy and electronic) – 25% Because the final paper is a research proposal that builds on the initial exploratory findings of your project, its format is a bit of a hybrid. The first part presents the findings of your exploratory research project, providing a detailed description and analysis of your original research. The second part then builds on a key initial finding or set of findings from your exploratory project to propose a larger qualitative research study. In short, this 15-‐17 page paper will A) present a report of your exploratory project (crafted around key preliminary findings); and B) propose a major research project that aims to fully explore a main theme/question that emerged from your exploratory project. Part A: Exploratory Research Report – 9-‐10 pages

• briefly describe and provide background to the exploratory project (question, goals, methods, relevant lit) – hint: you can update your draft exploratory proposal

• present key findings of the exploratory project, making substantial but judicial use of your evidence to support your analysis (remember that this is based mostly on interviews, but if you wish to incorporate your trial complementary method, that is most welcome)

• make a preliminary argument based on your analysis (with an eye to how it can and should be explored further, thus providing a basis for your larger proposal)

• attach your final interview guide and consent form (not included in page count) as an appendix

Part B: Proposal (refer to Maxwell) – 6-‐7 pages

• identify and pose a research question that has emerged from the exploratory study (usually, this will be a revised and/or expanded version of your initial research question, although in some cases you will have discovered a whole new direction)

• present the goals/contributions of the proposed project • provide a preliminary conceptual framework that draws on key initial puzzles or patterns

found in your exploratory study + relevant scholarly theories/concepts/findings in the extant literature (try to have at least 5 or 6 references – these can include references you used in your initial proposal)

IN SUM, your research portfolio (both P1 and P2) should include: • main section: running notes and memos of three kinds (MN, TAN, and PN) • interview transcripts + write-‐ups + coding/analysis (at least one in P1; all by P2) • write-‐up of second method (P1 or P2) • appendices: research proposal; sample consent form(s) and interview guide(s),

including different versions as they emerge; materials relevant to your second method (such as images or documents or observational field notes)

12

• describe the methods you propose to use, including sample (who/what is to be studied), techniques (methods to be used), and a justification for the method (go back to Maxwell, Creswell, and other related readings from the course!); discuss the methodological strategy or strategies that you are drawing on, and why; NOTE: It is important that you are clear about how your proposed design is derived from the methodological and substantive findings of the exploratory project

• discuss pertinent ethics issues and how you will address them (again, refer to the ethics and reflexivity literature!)

NOTE: In some cases, especially for those CSL students who are preparing a report for a community partner on the outcomes of the exploratory project, the final format of Part A might change a bit (to be discussed with your community partner and with me). CAUTIONARY NOTE: It will be tempting to analyze your evidence/data in the exploratory study with an eye to the final proposal (i.e., you might latch onto one theme early on). You can and should memo ideas for the final paper in your research portfolio, but do not decide on them until you have completed most of your analysis in the exploratory project. You never know what surprising new theme or question or relationship might emerge as you explore the data. HINT, HINT: If all has gone well, your Portfolio will have developed in such a way that your final paper follows fairly smoothly from it... C. PARTICIPATION (15%) Please come to class having thoroughly read the material (except where skimming or ‘leisurely’ reading is suggested), ready to engage in discussion. We will treat our class as a ‘community of practice’ in which we seek input from each other on our research experiences and ideas. It is very important that you attend class each week. Informal Interactions and Interlocutions Please come to class prepared to discuss class readings, and to share insights and questions from your own research practice. This will require attending carefully to the Class Schedule (below), where there is direction regarding specific preparations for each class. Formal Individual “Airings” In addition, we will set up a schedule by which each of you will once during the second half of the term bring a specific aspect of your fieldwork to formally ‘air’ with the class (Oct 21, Oct 28, Nov 4, Nov 18, Nov 25). This could be a couple of pages from your observational field notes or from an interview transcript (anonymized), an image or selection of text that you are analyzing, or a scenario from your experience of planning, collecting, or analyzing research data. The idea is to come with a concrete example that raises a methodological question – to use an actual struggle or puzzle or dilemma you have encountered (or might encounter) for the class to

13

consider with you. (You could make paper copies OR present a field sample electronically OR whatever works for being able to share the particular example and your question(s) about it.) You will have 15 minutes to ‘air’: plan for five minutes to present the issue/case and the question(s) it raises for you, followed by 10-‐15 minutes of class response and discussion. HINT: This only works if you come prepared with a well thought-‐out and specific issue/problem from your research experience, and with a specific question or questions that will spark collective discussion helpful for you and for the class. Use this opportunity to get useful feedback! Final Presentation In the final class (Dec 2) you will each give a brief class presentation on the key direction and argument of your research paper (thus far), ‘how you got there’, and any remaining question(s) with which you are wrestling. (We might decide to make this a pecha kucha night.) It is customary that we invite CSL community partners to this event.

14

IV. Class Schedule and Readings Sept. 9 – Introductions; Getting Started; Key Questions Readings I – Intro to Qualitative Methods (and community-‐based work) * Denzin, Norman K. and Y. S. Lincoln (2005) “Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of

Qualitative Research.” In N. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE [see article outside my office; the entire book is on Reserve in Coutts Library]

NOTE: probably the most definitive overview of qualitative research, its history, its tensions * Himley, Margaret (2004) “Facing (Up To) ‘The Stranger’ in Community Service Learning.”

College Composition and Communication 55(3) [Online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/4140694.pdf?acceptTC=true NOTE: this article is about CSL, but the questions of ethics and relationships that it raises are applicable to qualitative research in general – thus, it’s a plenary reading

Readings II -‐ Two (Quite Different) Examples of Exploratory Qualitative Research Projects * Yan, Miu Chung, Shirley Chau, and Dave Sangha (2010) “An Exploratory Study of How

Multiculturalism Policies are Implemented at the Grassroots Level.” Canadian Ethnic Studies 41/42(3-‐1): 49-‐75. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ofs&AN=78077443&site=ehost-‐live&scope=site

* Hurdley, Rachel (2006) “Dismantling Mantelpieces: Narrating Identities and Materializing Culture in the Home.” Sociology 40(4): 717-‐733. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://soc.sagepub.com/content/40/4/717.full.pdf+html

NOTE: Skim these with Denzin and Lincoln’s overview in mind; attend to the (similar and/or different) methods and approaches, and to how findings and arguments are framed. How do these two pieces together exemplify the possibilities of qualitative research?

Some Other Examples: Albert, Sasha (2011) “Spontaneous Pleasures: Sex Between Women in Public Places.” Sexualities 14: 669-‐

680. Dimaya, Roland M. et al. (2012) “Managing Health Worker Migration: A Qualitative Study of the

Philippine Response to Nurse Brain Drain.” Human Resources for Health 10:47. Mitchell, Richard C. (2011) “Sustaining Change on a Canadian Campus: Preparing Brock University for a

Sustainability Audit.” International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education. 12(1): 7-‐21. Redhead, Robin and Nick Turnbull (2011) “Towards a Study of Human Rights Practitioners.” Human

Rights Review 12: 173-‐189.

15

Sept. 16 – Designing Qualitative Research (esp. with interviews) Readings * Maxwell, Joseph A. (2013) Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, 3rd ed.

Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Chs. 1-‐5 * Warren, Carol B. (2001) “Qualitative Interviewing.” In Gubrium, Jaber F. and James A. Holstein,

eds. Handbook of Interview Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book] http://srmo.sagepub.com.login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/view/handbook-‐of-‐interview-‐research/SAGE.xml

PLUS Quickly re-‐visit the two examples of exploratory research from Sept 5 (Yan et al. 2010 and Hurley 2006) and ‘apply’ Maxwell to them: What sort of purpose/goal (pp. 66-‐68)? What kind of research question (pp. 78-‐83)? What methods (p. 90+)? What conceptual framework (Ch. 3)? SEE ALSO (I will use these documents as resources for our discussion, but they are not required

reading for you): Jacob, Stacy A. and Furgerson, S. Paige (2012) “Writing Interview Protocols and Conducting

Interviews: Tips for Students New to the Field of Qualitative Research.” The Qualitative Report 17: 1-‐10 [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=88905599&site=ehost-‐live&scope=site

Stoecker, Randy (2005) “Head and Hand Together” (Ch. 3) In Research Methods for Community Change : A Project-‐based Approach. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book] NOTE: Especially good for CSLers and others collaborating with community groups. [available online through U of A Library]

Sept. 23 – Methodology, Epistemology, and Strategies of Inquiry/Approaches + MAPPING WORKSHOP (11 am – 1 pm) (Come to class with your initial draft research question in mind; we will start workshopping some of these in class.) Readings I – Epistemology and Methodology * Brewer, John D. (2000) “Ethnography as a Method and Methodology.” Ethnography.

Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. [see article outside my office] * Saukko, Paula (2003) “Combining Methodologies in Cultural Studies.” In Doing Research In

Cultural Studies: an Introduction to Classical and New Methodological Approaches. London: SAGE. [available online through U of A Library] NOTE: Both Brewer and Saukko are attempting to resolve/accommodate methodological impasses, albeit in different ways.

16

Readings II – Approaches/Strategies * Creswell, John W. (2013) “Five Qualitative Approaches to Inquiry.” Qualitative Inquiry &

Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches. Los Angeles: SAGE. [TBA] Note: Read this as background. As you read, consider which approach(es) seem most appropriate for use in your larger study (i.e., in your final paper), given your questions, goals, and findings thus far.

PLUS you might do a search for a couple of articles relevant to your chosen topic that represent

different qualitative “approaches” or “genres” of qualitative research as discussed by Creswell (HINT: this is the kind of thing to include in the TAN or MN notes of your Portfolio.)

Recommended: Angrosino, Paul V. (2008) “Introduction: Ethnography and Participant Observation.” Doing Ethnographic

and Observational Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. NOTE: provides a basic overview of various theoretical traditions used in qualitative sociology Davies, Bronwyn and C. Davies (2007) “Having, and Being Had by ‘Experience’; Or, ‘Experience’ in the

Social Sciences after the Discursive/Poststructuralist Turn.” Qualitative Inquiry. Dilthey, Wilhelm (1883) Introduction to the Human Sciences (see

http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/dilthey.htm) Gubrium, Jaber F. and James A. Holstein (1997) “Method Talk.” In The New Language of Qualitative

Method. New York: Oxford University Press. Harris, Scott R. (2006) “Social Constructionism and Social Inequality : An Introduction to a Special Issue of

JCE.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 35(3): 223-‐235. Sandelowski, Margarete (2000) “Focus on Research Methods: Whatever Happened to Qualitative

Description?” Research in Nursing & Health 23: 334-‐340. Scott, Joan (1991) “The Evidence of Experience.” Critical Inquiry 17. Willis, Jerry W. (2007) Foundations of Qualitative Research: Interpretive and Critical Approaches.

Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Sept. 30 – Research Ethics and Reflexivity (Come prepared to informally discuss your research topic and ethics issues pertinent to it.) Readings * Tri-‐Council Policy Statement 2 (SKIM Intro, Chs. 1-‐5 & Ch. 10):

http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-‐politique/initiatives/tcps2-‐eptc2/Default/ * Clark, M. Carolyn and Barbara Sharf (2007) “The Dark Side of Truth(s): Ethical Dilemmas in

Researching the Personal.” Qualitative Inquiry 13(3): 399-‐416. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://qix.sagepub.com/content/13/3/399.full.pdf+html

* Gray, Breda (2008) “Putting Emotion and Reflexivity to Work in Researching Migration.”

Sociology 42: 935-‐952. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://soc.sagepub.com/content/42/5/935.full.pdf+html

17

*PLUS Choose ONE of the following two Examples of Methodological Reflections from Exploratory Studies that Highlight Ethics Issues [come ready to discuss/share key insights of the article you read, and how it extends or complicates points made in the above ethics/reflexivity readings] * Castleden, Heather, V. S. Morgan, and C. Lamb (2012) “’I Spent the First Year Drinking Tea’:

Exploring Canadian University Researchers’ Perspectives on Community-‐Based Participatory Research Involving Indigenous Peoples.” Canadian Geographer 56(2): 160-‐179. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=76244554&site=ehost-‐live&scope=site NOTE: This piece deals with ethics in collaborative community research

* Mauthner, Melanie (2000) “Snippets and Silences: Ethics and Reflexivity in Narratives of Sistering.” International Journal of Social Research Methodology 3(4): 287-‐306. [online] NOTE: This piece deals with feminist methodology and the ethics of reflexivity, reciprocity, and disclosure. http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=3959465&site=ehost-‐live&scope=site

Recommended: Davidson, J., Dottin, J. W. Jr., Penna, S. L., & Robertson, S. P. (2009) “Visual sources and the qualitative

research dissertation: Ethics, evidence and the politics of academia.” International Journal of Education & the Arts 10(27) [Online]

Finlay, Linda (2002) “Negotiating the Swamp: The Opportunity and Challenge of Reflexivity in Research Practice.” Qualitative Research 2. [Online]

Haggerty, Kevin (2004) “Ethics Creep: Governing Social Science Research in the Name of Ethics.” Qualitative Sociology 27(4): 391-‐414. PLUS two responses from Becker and Bosk

Halse, Christine and Anne Honey (2007) “Rethinking Ethics Review as Institutional Discourse.” Qualitative Inquiry 13(3): 336-‐352. [Online]

Song, Hoon (2006) “Seeing Oneself Seeing Oneself: White Nihilism in Ethnography and Theory.” Ethnos 71:4 [Online]

Pierce, Jennifer (1995) “Appendix One.” Gender Trials: Emotional Lives in Contemporary Law Firms. UC-‐Berkeley Press. [electronic book]

Pini, Barbara (2004) “On being a Nice Country Girl and an Academic Feminist: Using Reflexivity in Rural Social Research.” Journal of Rural Studies 20.

Watts, Jacqueline (2006) “'The outsider within': dilemmas of qualitative feminist research within a culture of resistance.” Qualitative Research, Aug, 6:3. [Online]

Wolf, Margery (1992) A Thrice-‐Told Tale. Stanford University Press. Whiteman, E. (2007). “’Just chatting’: Research ethics and cyberspace.” 6(2): Article 7 [Online]

18

Oct. 7 – Interviewing: Constructing, Creating, & Contextualizing Knowledge (Proposal is due. Bring a hard copy of your Draft Interview Guide to class. You should have begun contacting potential participants by now, aiming for a first interview by mid-‐October. Please do NOT set up all of your interviews for this time; spread them out into November.) NOTE: You will probably find it very useful to do the readings early in the week, before you complete the methods section of your proposal. Readings * Holstein, James A. and Gubrium, Jaber F. (2003) “Inside Interviewing: New Lenses, New

Concerns” (read pp. 1-‐36) In Inside Interviewing. J.A. Holstein and J. F. Gubrium (eds.) Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book available online through U of A Library] Note: this is a discussion of some of the current epistemological and conceptual concerns around interviewing, with a focus on the question of ‘the subject’. For a Foucaultian response to this, see Bastalich below.

* Kvale, Steinar (2007) “Conducting an Interview” and “Interview Variations” In Doing

Interviews. London: SAGE. [electronic book available online through U of A Library] NOTE: Social psych bent on interviewing (but) many practical tips for actually conducting

interviews. *AND CHOOSE ONE of the following that is relevant or interesting to you and come to class

ready to share/discuss tips and insights from your chosen reading: *Atkinson, Robert (2001) “The Life Story Interview.” In Gubrium, Jaber F. and James A.

Holstein, eds. Handbook of Interview Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book available online through U of A Library]

*Brown, Lyndsay and Kevin Durrheim (2009) “Different Kinds of Knowing : Generating Qualitative Data Through Mobile Interviewing.” Qualitative Inquiry 15(5): 911-‐930. http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://qix.sagepub.com/content/15/5/911.full.pdf+html

*Charmaz, Kathy (2001) “Qualitative Interviewing and Grounded Theory Analysis.” In Gubrium, Jaber F. and James A. Holstein, eds. Handbook of Interview Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book available online through U of A Library]

*Gilchrist VJ, and Williams RL (1999) “Key Informant Interviews.” In Crabtree BF and Miller WL (eds.) Doing Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage:71-‐88. [outside my office]

*Holt, Amanda (2010) “Using the Telephone for Narrative Interviewing: a research note.” Qualitative Research 10(1): 113-‐121. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://qrj.sagepub.com/content/10/1/113.full.pdf+html

*Kazmer, Michelle M. and Bo Xie (2008) “Qualitative Interviewing in Internet Studies: Playing with the Media, Playing with the Method.” Information, Communication & Society 11(2): 257-‐278. [online] http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691180801946333

Recommended: Barbour, Rosaline S. and Jenny Kitzinger (1999) “The Challenge and Promise of Focus Groups.”

Developing Focus Group Research. London: SAGE.

19

Bastalich, Wendy (2009) “Reading Foucault: Genealogy and Social Science Research Methodology and Ethics.” Sociological Research Online 14(2). <http://www.socresonline.org.uk/14/2/3.html>

Briggs, Charles L. (2007) “Anthropology, Interviewing, and Communicability in Contemporary Society” and COMMENTARIES! Current Anthropology 48:4.

Markham, Annette N. (2004) “The Internet as Research Context” In Qualitative Research Practice, Clive Seale et al., eds. London: SAGE.

Willis, Paul (2012) “Talking Sexuality Online – Technical, Methodological and Ethical Considerations of Online Research with Sexual Minority Youth.” Qualitative Social Workxi 11: 141-‐155.

Wimpenny, Peter and John Gass (2000) “Interviewing in Phenomenology and Grounded Theory: Is There a Difference?” Journal of Advanced Nursing 31(6): 1485-‐1492.

Oct. 14 – Interviewing and Complementary Methods: Observational, Visual, Document-‐based Readings I – Examples of Interviews + Another Method NOTE: Read the three asterisked readings in a ‘leisurely’ fashion, noting how each sets up its

work theoretically and methodologically, and then combines another method with interviewing when presenting findings. (I strove to find articles that had some thematic overlap...in this case, broadly, globalization and identities/selves/subjects...)

* Katsiaficas, Dalal et al. (2011) “Everyday Hyphens: Exploring Youth Identities with

Methodological and Analytic Pluralism.” Qualitative Research in Psychology 8:120–139. [online] [interviews + multiple elicitation techniques]

http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=61011960&site=ehost-‐live&scope=site

* Feighery, William G. (2011) “Discourse and the Governance of Diversity in England's Official

Tourism Texts.” Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 3(2): 121-‐146. [online] [interviews + discourse analysis ]

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2011.555456 *Wang, Leslie K. (2013) “Unequal Logics of Care: Gender, Globalization, and Volunteer Work of

Expatriate Wives in China.” Gender & Society 2013(4): 538-‐60 [online] [interviews + participant observation] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://gas.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/04/12/0891243213483877.full.pdf+html

Readings II – About Other Methods NOTE: Choose and read ONE set of methodology readings, depending on what you want to try

for your complementary method. Be prepared to bring key elements/challenges of that method to class discussion.

Participant Observation *Tjora, Aksel (2006) “Writing small discoveries: an exploration of fresh observers' observations.”

Qualitative Research 6:4 [Online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://qrj.sagepub.com/content/6/4/429.full

.pdf+html

20

also (if time) Angrosino, Michael V. (2008) “Focus on Observation” Doing Ethnographic and Observational Research. Los Angeles: SAGE. [electronic book available online -‐ Library]

Visual Methods * Banks, Marcus (2007) “Approaches to Studying the Visual” and “Visual Methods and Field

Research.” Using Visual Data in Qualitative Research. Los Angeles: SAGE. [electronic book] Documents and Discourse Analysis * Rapley, Tim (2007) “Exploring Conversations About and With Documents” and “Exploring

Documents.” Doing Conversation, Discourse and Document Analysis. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book]

also (if time) Mills, Sara (2004) “Introduction.” Discourse. London: Routledge [electronic book] Recommended: Hannam, Kevin et al. (2005) “Discourse Analysis in Tourism Research: A Critical Perspective.” Tourism

Recreation Research 30(2): 23-‐30. Harper, Gary W. et al. (2003) “Community Narratives: The Use of Narrative Ethnography in Participatory

Community Research.” In L. A. Jason et al. (eds.). Participatory Community Research: Theories and Methods in Action. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Lichterman, P (2002) “Seeing Structure Happen: Theory-‐driven Participant Observation” in Methods of Social Movement Research

Mannay, Dawn (2010) “Making the Familiar Strange: Can Visual Research Methods Render the Familiar Setting More Perceptible?” Qualitative Research 10

Mitchell, Claudia (2011) Doing Visual Research. Los Angeles: SAGE. Parker, Ian (1999) Critical Textwork: An Introduction to Varieties of Discourse and Analysis. Buckingham:

Open University Press. Pink, Sarah (2007) “The Visual in Ethnography: Photography, Video, Cultures and Individuals.” In

Doing Visual Ethnography, 2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE. [electronic book] Prior, Lindsay (2004) “Documents.” In Qualitative Research Practice, Clive Seale et al., eds. London:

SAGE. Wheeldon, Johannes and Jacqueline Faubert (2009) “Framing Experience: Concept Maps, Mind Maps,

and Data Collection in Qualitative Research.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods. 8(3): 68-‐83.

Oct. 21 – (Interview) Coding and Analysis (First set of “airings.”) (Research Portfolio P1 is due.) Readings * Gibbs, Graham R. (2007) “Thematic Coding and Categorizing.” Analyzing Qualitative Data.

Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book] http://srmo.sagepub.com/view/analyzing-‐qualitative-‐data/SAGE.xml * Kvale, Steinar (2007) “Analyzing Interviews.” Doing Interviews. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

[electronic book available online through U of A Library] Recommended:

21

Emerson, Robert M. (2007) “Working with ‘Key Incidents’.” In Seale, Clive et al., eds. Qualitative Research Practice. London: SAGE.

Saldana, Johnny (2009) “An Introduction to Codes and Coding” The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. Los Angeles: SAGE. [Coursepack]

Oct. 28 – Methodological Issues and Power Dynamics (Second set of “airings.”) Readings * Briggs, Charles L. (2007) “Interviewing, Power/Knowledge and Social Inequality.” In Handbook

of Interview Research, Jaber F. Gubrium and James A. Holstein, Eds. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book available online through Library]

* Humphrey, Caroline (2007) “Insider-‐Outsider: Activating the Hyphen.” Action Research 5: 11-‐

26. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://arj.sagepub.com/content/5/1/11.full.pdf+html

* Matsinhe, David (2007) “Quest for Methodological Alternatives.” Current Sociology 55(6): 836-‐856. [online]

http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://csi.sagepub.com/content/55/6/836.full.pdf+html

Recommended: Bolak, Hale C. (1996) “Studying One's Own in the Middle East: Negotiating Gender and Self-‐ Other Dynamics in the Field.” Qualitative Sociology 19(1). Dickson-‐Swift, Virginia, et al. (2009) “Researching Sensitive Topics: Qualitative Research as Emotion

Work.” Qualitative Research 9. [Online] Fisher, Susannah (2011) “Knock, Knock, Knocking on Closed Coors: Exploring the Diffuse Ideal of the

Collaborative Research Relationship.” Area 43(4): 456–462. [Online] Hood, S., Mayall, B., & Oliver, S. (1999) Critical Issues in Social Research: Power and Prejudice.

Buckingham, UK: Open University Press. Rogers, Dallas (2012) “Research, Practice, and the Space Between: Care of the Self Within Neoliberalized

Institutions.” Cultural Studies <=> Critical Methodologies 12: 242-‐254, Song, Miri and David Parker (1995) “Commonality, Difference and the Dynamics of Disclosure in In-‐Depth

Interviewing.” Sociology 29(2). [Online] November 4 – Analysis, Building Concepts, Theorizing as You Go (Third set of “airings.”) Readings * Gibbs, Graham (2007) “Comparative Analysis.” (Ch. 6) Analyzing Qualitative Data. Los Angeles:

SAGE. [electronic book available online through U of A Library]

22

* Markham, Annette N. (2005) “’Go Ugly Early’: Fragmented Narrative and Bricolage as Interpretive Method.” Qualitative Inquiry 11:6. [Online]

http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://qix.sagepub.com/content/11/6/813.full.pdf+html

* Dunn, Jennifer L. (2009) “The Path Taken: Opportunity, Flexibility, and Reflexivity in the Field.”

In Ethnographies Revisited: Constructing Theory in the Field, Antony J. Puddephatt et al., eds. London: Routledge. [TBA]

SEE ALSO (I will use this as a resource in class, but it is not required reading): Clarke, Adele E. (2003) “Situational Analyses: Grounded Theory Mapping after the Postmodern

Turn.” Symbolic Interaction 26(4): 553-‐576. [Online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/10.152

5/si.2003.26.4.553.pdf?acceptTC=true November 18 – Approaches/Genres of Qualitative Research (Fourth set of “airings.”) Readings

CHOOSE ONE approach/genre to read more about and come ready to discuss in class.

NOTE: I have added Action Research and Feminist Research as choices to Creswell’s five. Remember that there are not necessarily hard and fast boundaries between the different genres/approaches (e.g., see the Harper et al. piece below on “community narrative ethnography”), but be mindful of potential epistemological or methodological contradictions. You might also see the bibliographies provided by Marshall and Rossman – see Sept 12):

Ethnography * Delamont, Sara (2007) “Ethnography and Participant Observation.” In C. Seale et al. (eds.)

Qualitative Research Practice. London: SAGE. [electronic book] SPECIFIC FORMS in which you might be interested (CHOOSE ONE to REVIEW): DeVault, Marjorie and Liza McCoy (2003) “Institutional Ethnography: Using Interviews to Investigate

Ruling Relations.” In Inside Interviewing. J.A. Holstein and J. F. Gubrium (eds.) Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Harper, Gary W. et al. (2003) “Community Narratives: The Use of Narrative Ethnography in Participatory


Sparkes, Andrew C. (2000) “Autoethnography and Narratives of Self: Reflections on Criteria in Action.” Socilogy of Sport Journal 17: 21-‐43.

Thomas, Jim (1993) “Resisting Domestication” and “Doing Critical Ethnography.” Doing Critical Ethnography. Newbury Park: SAGE.

Garcia, Angela Cora et al. (2009) “Ethnographic Approaches to the Internet and Computer-‐Mediated Communication.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 38(1): 52-‐84.

Burawoy, Michael et al. (2000) “Introduction: Reaching for the Global.” Global Ethnography. Berkeley: University of California Press. [online at http://burawoy.berkeley.edu/Books/GE/Introduction.pdf]

23

Case Study *Stake, R. E. (2008) “Qualitative Case Studies.” In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (eds.). The Sage

Handbook of Qualitative Research (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks: SAGE [TBA] NOTE: His approach is usually contrasted to that of Robert Yin. *Flyvberg, Bent (2006) “Five Misunderstandings About Case-‐Study Research.” Qualitative

Inquiry 12(2): 219-‐245. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://qix.sagepub.com/content/12/2/219.full.pdf+html

Narrative Inquiry/Analysis * Squire, Andrews, & Tamboukou (2008) “Introduction: What is Narrative Research?” In

Andrews, Squire, & Tamboukou (eds.) Doing Narrative Research. Los Angeles: SAGE. * Riessman, Catherine K. (2002) “Narrative Analysis.” In A. M. Huberman and M. B. Miles (eds.)

The Qualitative Researcher’s Companion. Los Angeles: SAGE. [electronic book -‐ Library] SPECIFIC FORMS in which you might be interested: Czarniawska, Barbara (2001) “Narrative, Interviews and Organizations.” In J.F. Gubrium and J.A. Holstein

(eds.) Handbook of Interview Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [electronic book] Phenomenology * Van Manen, Max (2001) “Turning to the Nature of Lived Experience” and (also skim)

“Investigating Experience as We Live It”. Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy (2nd ed.) London, CAN: Althouse. [TBA]

RECOMMENDED BOOK/OTHER FORMS: Ahmed, Sara (2006) Queer Phenomenology: Orientations, Objects, Others. Durham: Duke University Press.

Grounded Theory * Charmaz, Kathy (1990) “’Discovering Chronic Illness: Using Grounded Theory.” Social Science &

Medicine 30(11): 1161-‐1172. [online] http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://ac.els-

cdn.com/027795369090256R/1-s2.0-027795369090256R-main.pdf?_tid=dd058ef0-09b9-11e3-942f-00000aab0f26&acdnat=1377018143_1457c8428adae3fc81a3be995a7d420d

* Bryant, Antony and Kathy Charmaz (2007) “On Solid Ground: Essential Properties for Growing Grounded Theory.” The SAGE Handbook of Grounded Theory. London: SAGE. [electronic book available through U of A Library]

RECOMMENDED BOOK/OTHER FORMS: Clarke, Adele E. (2005) Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory after the Postmodern Turn. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Action and Participatory Research * Swantz, Marja Liisa (2008) “Participatory Action Research as Practice.” In P. Reason and H.

Bradbury (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. Los Angeles: SAGE. [electronic book available online through U of A Library]

* Fox, Jonathan (2006) “Lessons from Action-‐Research Partnerships: LASA/Oxfam America 2004 Martin Diskin Memorial Lecture.” Development in Practice 16(1): 27-‐38. [online]

http://login.ezproxy.library.ualberta.ca/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/4029857.pdf

24

RECOMMENDED/OTHER FORMS: Harper, Gary W. et al. (2003) “Community Narratives: The Use of Narrative Ethnography in Participatory


Kemmis, Stephen and Robin McTaggart (2008) “Participatory Action Research: Communicative Action and the Public Sphere.” In N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds.) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

McNiff, Jean (2002) Action Research: Principles and Practice. Routledge. Feminist Research * Sprague, Joey (2005) “Qualitative Shifts: Feminist Strategies in Field Research and

Interviewing.” Feminist Methodologies for Critical Researchers. Oxford: AltaMira Press [TBA] Other Recommended: Charmaz, Kathy and R. G. Mitchell (2007) “Grounded Theory in Ethnography.” In Atkinson et al., eds.

Handbook of Ethnography. Los Angeles: SAGE. Dowling, Maura (2005) “From Husserl to van Manen: A Review of Different Phenomenological

Approaches.” International Journal of Nursing Studies 44: 131-‐142. O’Shaughnessy, Sara and Naomi Krogman (2012) “A Revolution Reconsidered? Examining the Practice of

Qualitative Research in Feminist Scholarship.” Signs 37(2): 439-‐520. Hesse-‐Biber, Sharlene N. and Patricia Leavy (2006) Emergent Methods in Social Research. Thousand

Oaks: SAGE. Smith, Dorothy E. (2005) Institutional Ethnography: A Sociology for People. Lanham, MD: Altamira Press. Stacey, Judith (1990) “Can There Be a Feminist Ethnography?” In Berger and Patal, eds. Women’s Words:

The Feminist Practice of Oral History. November 25 – Representation and Writing (Fifth set of “airings.”) (Research Portfolio P2 is due.) Readings *Maxwell, Joseph A. (2013) “Research Proposals” (Ch. 7) Qualitative Research Design, 3rd ed. *Richardson, Laurel (2000) “Writing: A Method of Inquiry.” In Norman K. Denzin and Yvonna S.

Lincoln, eds. Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE. [TBA] *Loseke, Donileen R. and Spencer E. Cahill (2004) “Publishing Qualitative Manuscripts: Lessons

Learned.” In Clive Seale et al. eds. Qualitative Research Practice. London: SAGE. [electronic book available online through U of A Library]

Recommended: Alexander, Bryant Keith (2005) “Performance Ethnography: The Reenacting and Inciting of Culture.” In N.

K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, eds. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd Edition. Anzaldua, Gloria (1987) Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books. Humphreys, Michael and Tony Watson (2009) “Ethnographic Practices: From ‘Writing-‐up Ethnographic

Research’ to ‘Writing Ethnography.’” In Ybem et al. (eds.) Organizational Ethnography: Studying the Complexity of Everyday Life. Los Angeles: SAGE.

25

Lather, Patti (2007) “Postmodernism, Post-‐structuralism and Post(Critical) Ethnography: of Ruins, Aporias and Angels.” In Atkinson et al., eds.

Wall, Sarah (2008) “Easier Said than Done: Writing an Autoethnography.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 7(1) November 28 & December 1 – Individual Meetings Meet with Sara individually to get back your research portfolio and discuss your project (sign up in class for a time). December 2 – Wrapping Up Brief individual presentations on research findings and plans. CSL Partners invited. FINAL PAPER DUE ON FRIDAY, DECEMBER 12th BY 4 PM in the SOCIOLOGY OFFICE NOTE: also send an electronic copy to [email protected]

SOC$518: QUALITATIVE$METHODSIN$ SOCIAL$RESEARCH … · 3 Some&Journals$ American$Ethnologist$$ $ $...

Documents

Transcript of SOC$518: QUALITATIVE$METHODSIN$ SOCIAL$RESEARCH … · 3 Some&Journals$ American$Ethnologist$$ $ $...