Participant observations - Revision history

Lombanaphd at 00:58, 4 October 2014

2014-10-04T00:58:19Z

Lombanaphd: Created page with "One of the data collection methods used by the Digital Edge research team was participant observation. Following the traditional phases of participant observation (Howell 1972..."

2014-09-26T18:14:03Z

Created page with "One of the data collection methods used by the Digital Edge research team was participant observation. Following the traditional phases of participant observation (Howell 1972..."

New page

One of the data collection methods used by the Digital Edge research team was participant observation. Following the traditional phases of participant observation (Howell 1972; ), our researchers first established rapport with the participants of the study, then immersed themselves in the field, recorded observations, and finally analyzed and organized the information gathered. Thinking about the limitations of the type of participant observation that was being made, it is important to notice that researchers did not participate actively in the afterschool activities nor become members of the community. According to the categories of participant observation outlined by Spradley (1980), the role of the Digital Edge researchers was the one of a passive participant who limited its interactions to the one of a bystander and observer who hanged out at the space in a weekly base.

Given the nature of the digital media afterschool program we observed, the fieldwork expanded across multiple settings where the activities of the program took place. For instance, inside the FHS building the afterschool program was split between two computer lab classrooms, the one of Mr. Lopez, the video technology teacher, in the second floor, and the one of Mr. Warren, the videogame teacher, in the first floor. Researchers decided to observe either of these two spaces according to where their assigned subjects of study hanged out. While some subjects inclined towards gaming practices spent most of the time in the first floor computer lab, others participants interested in digital video, audio, and graphics production and spent most of their time in the second floor classroom.

Inside FHS, the afterschool activities also expanded to other spaces such as the cafeteria, the theater, the second floor hall, and two adjacent rooms to Mr. Lopez' classroom. Especially during the development of the Cinematic Arts Project (CAP), a special project that emerged inside the digital media afterschool program and that happened from November 2011 to May 2012, researchers had the opportunity to observe how the students participated in a range of activities such as shooting rehearsals, casting sessions, brainstorming, public presentations and screening of films across multiple FHS spaces.

Afterschool program activities also expanded outside the FHS location, and some members of the research team had the opportunity to observe two public presentations at a regional educational technology conference in downtown Austin.

Participant observation allowed researchers immersing themselves in the afterschool actoivities of FHS students interested in digital media.

It was casual hanging out.

which events he or she considers are important and relevant to the research inquiry

Document the nuances of student's learning ecologies and new media practices over a long period of time, and to create a “thick description” (Geertz, 1973) of the elective classes and the afterschool program.

We build rapport, in particular with the teacher and supervisor of the after school space, and with the students that participated in the study and that each team member followed during extended period of time.

Immersed on the field. It is important for the researcher to connect or show a connection with the population in order to be accepted as a member of the community. DeWalt & DeWalt (2011) [8][11] call this form of rapport establishment as “talking the talk” and “walking the walk”.

Our connection to the afterschool community was the one of observers, and we did not directly participated in the activities that the community realized. We were mainly passive participants, researchers in bystander role.

Recording Observations and Data. field notes, interviews,
reflexivity journals: Researchers are encouraged to record their personal thoughts and feelings about the subject of study. They are prompted to think about how their experiences, ethnicity, race, gender, sex, sexual orientation, and other factors might influence their research, in this case what the researcher decides to record and observe (Ambert et al., 1995).

Analyzing Data
Thematic Analysis:organizing data according to recurrent themes found in interviews or other types of qualitative data collection and narrative analysis:categorizing information gathered through interviews, finding common themes, and constructing a coherent story from data.

participant observation is a complex method that has many components. One of the first things that a researcher or individual must do after deciding to conduct participant observations to gather data is decide what kind of participant observer he or she will be. Spradley[14] provides five different types of participant observations summarised below.

Spradley has described five different types of participant observation.
Participant Observation Type

=== References ===

Agar, MH. (1996). The Professional Stranger. Second Edition. New York: Academic Press.

Fetterman, DM. (1998). Ethnography: Step by Step. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 17. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Howell, Joseph T. (1972). Hard Living on Clay Street: Portraits of Blue Collar Families. Prospect Heights, Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc. pp. 392–403.

Spradley, James P. (1980). Participant Observation. Orlando, Florida: Harcourt College Publishers. pp. 58–62

-----------------------

Fetterman, 1998, p. 1

Ethnography is the art and science of describing a group or culture.
A key difference between the investigative reporter and the ethnographer, however, is that whereas the journalist seeks out the unusual - the murder, the plane crash, or the bank robbery - the ethnographer writes about the routine, daily lives of people

-----------------------

Agar, 1996, p. 53

Ethnography is both a product and process of research (Agar, 1980). The product is an ethnography - a written manuscript of one's observations of the culture under study. The process involves prolonged observation of a group (nurses, physician, surgeons).

Common Methods used in Ethnography

Participant Observation. This involves the researcher immersing him or herself in the daily lives and routines of those being studied. This often requires extensive work in the setting being studied. This is called fieldwork.

Interviewing. Enthnographers also learn about a culture or group by speaking with informants or members of the culture or group. Talking with informants is called interviewing. The types of interviews conducted by ethnographers vary in degree of formality (informal interviews to semi-structured to structured interviews).

Collection of Artifacts and Texts. Ethnographers may also learn about a group or culture by collecting and studying artifacts (e.g. written protocols, charts, flowsheets, educational handouts) - materials used by members of the culture in their daily lives.

-------------

a move to dialogic modes of ethnographic reporting that represent multiple voices in the text. Yet, these representations are always through the writer/enthnographer's lens. (Atkinson & Hammersley, 1994)

Atkinson, P. & Hammersley, M. (1994). "Ethnography and participant observation." In NK Denzin and YS Lincoln (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 248-261). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-One of the data collection methods used by the Digital Edge research team was participant observation. Following the traditional phases of participant observation (Howell 1972; ), our researchers first established rapport with the participants of the study, then immersed themselves in the field, recorded observations, and finally analyzed and organized the information gathered. Thinking about the limitations of the type of participant observation that was being made, it is important to notice that researchers did not participate actively in the afterschool activities nor become members of the community. According to the categories of participant observation outlined by Spradley (1980), the role of the Digital Edge researchers was the one of a passive participant who limited its interactions to the one of a bystander and observer who hanged out at the space in a weekly base.
+One of the qualitative data collection methods used by the Digital Edge research team at the afterschool setting was participant observation. During the course of eight months (October 2011-May2012) researchers conducted approximately 70+ hours of fieldwork in this setting. Following the traditional stages of participant observation (Howell 1972), researchers first established rapport with the participants of the study, then immersed themselves in the field, recorded observations as fieldnotes, and finally analyzed and organized the information gathered. According to the types of participant observation described by Spradley (1980), the role of our researchers at the afterschool setting was the one of passive participants who limited their interactions to the one of bystanders who hanged out at the space in a weekly basis and focused their observations in the digital media practices and social interactions that the students developed. Researchers did not participate actively in the afterschool activities nor become members of the community, and both the subjects of the study and the supervisors of the afterschool setting, recognized them as outsiders who were working in a project associated with the University of Texas and lead by Professor Craig Watkins (PI).
-Given the nature of the digital media afterschool program we observed, the fieldwork expanded across multiple settings where the activities of the program took place. For instance, inside the FHS building the afterschool program was split between two computer lab classrooms, the one of Mr. Lopez, the video technology teacher, in the second floor, and the one of Mr. Warren, the videogame teacher, in the first floor. Researchers decided to observe either of these two spaces according to where their assigned subjects of study hanged out. While some subjects inclined towards gaming practices spent most of the time in the first floor computer lab, others participants interested in digital video, audio, and graphics production and spent most of their time in the second floor classroom.
+Given the nature of the digital media afterschool program we observed, the fieldwork expanded across multiple spaces where the activities of the program took place. For instance, inside the FHS building the afterschool program was split between two computer lab classrooms, the one of Mr. Lopez, the video technology teacher, in the second floor, and the one of Mr. Warren, the videogame teacher, in the first floor. Researchers decided to observe either of these two spaces according to where their assigned subjects of study hanged out. While some subjects inclined towards gaming practices spent most of the time in the first floor computer lab, others participants interested in digital video and music production spent most of their time in the second floor classroom.
-Inside FHS, the afterschool activities also expanded to other spaces such as the cafeteria, the theater, the second floor hall, and two adjacent rooms to Mr. Lopez' classroom. Especially during the development of the Cinematic Arts Project (CAP), a special project that emerged inside the digital media afterschool program and that happened from November 2011 to May 2012, researchers had the opportunity to observe how the students participated in a range of activities such as shooting rehearsals, casting sessions, brainstorming, public presentations and screening of films across multiple FHS spaces.
+==== Limitations ====
-Afterschool program activities also expanded outside the FHS location, and some members of the research team had the opportunity to observe two public presentations at a regional educational technology conference in downtown Austin.
+===== References ====
-Participant observation allowed researchers immersing themselves in the afterschool actoivities of FHS students interested in digital media.
+* Howell, Joseph T. (1973). Hard Living on Clay Street: Portraits of Blue Collar Families. Garden City, N.Y., Anchor Press.
-It was casual hanging out.
+* Spradley, James P. (1980). Participant Observation. New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
 We build rapport, in particular with the teacher and supervisor of the after school space, and with the students that participated in the study and that each team member followed during extended period of time.