Blog #5 “An Autoethnography on Learning About Autoethnography"
Fatima Muhammad
March 22, 2020
Dr. Nelson ENG 5002
My
response to:
“An
Autoethnography on Learning About Autoethnography"
By
Dr. Sarah Wall
About the Author
Sarah Stahlke Wall, PhD
Education:
PhD (Sociology), University of Alberta 2011
Masters of Health Services Administration, University of Alberta, 1997
BScN, University of Alberta, 1986
Career:
Dr. Wall is a Sociologist and an Assistant Professor at the Faculty of
Nursing at the University of Alberta and an Adjunct Professor in the Department
of Sociology at the University of Alberta
Experience:
As part of her doctoral studies she completed a two year fellowship in
Qualitative Inquiry at the International Institute for Qualitative
Methodology. And she became the
Educational Director of that program. Dr. Wall has conducted and published many
ethnography and autoethnography projects and is currently undertaken research
using interpretive description, discourse analysis, and narrative inquiry.
Interest:
Her interest in autoethnography developed in 2006 when she became an
adoptive mother. She had questions about her experiences. She noticed that her experience as an
adoptive did not fit into what she read in the discipline practices and what
she read in social science literature about being an adoptive mother. This study was one of her major studies.
A Brief History
of Autoethnography:
The term “autoethnography” first formally appeared in
the 1970s. Heider (1975) used “auto-ethnography” to describe the practice of
cultural members giving an account of the culture. Goldschmidt (1977) called
all ethnography “self-ethnography” in that ethnographic representations
privilege personal beliefs, perspectives, and observations (p. 294). Hayano
(1979) referred to “auto-ethnography” to describe researchers who “conduct and
write ethnographies of their ‘own people’” (p. 99).” (Pg 1, Adams, Ellis,
Jones)
Likewise,
in the 1970s, the term autoethnography was used to describe studies in which
cultural members provide insight about their own cultures. Walter Goldschmidt proposed that all "autoethnography" is
focused around the self and reveals, "personal investments,
interpretations, and analyses."[3] David
M. Hayano was an Associate Professor of Anthropology at California
State University in Northridge.
As an anthropologist, Hayano was interested in the role that an individual's
own identity had in their research. Unlike more traditional research methods,
Hayano believed there was value in a researcher "conducting and writing
ethnographies of their own people."[4]
Introduction:
As Dr. Wall searched for more studies and reports of autobiographical
methods she realized that
autoethnographies “are highly personalized accounts that draw upon the
experience of the author/researcher for the purpose of extending sociological
understanding” (Sparkes, 2000, p.21) An
autoethnography “lets you use yourself to get to the culture” (Pelias, 2003, p.
372). (Pg. 147)
So this made me questioned. What
is the difference between an autobiography and autoethnography? The two are closely related, but they have
different goals. The goal of an
autobiography is to share your life experiences in a chronological order. While the goal of an autoethnography is not
only to share your life experiences, but to also analyze those experiences to
see how they relate to a particular study.
Following Dr. Wall’s format for this article, I will attempt to analyze
this article and use it to support my research proposal on autistic students
and poetry.
Philosophical and theoretical
foundations for autobiographical methods:
“From a positivist perspective, there is only one way to “do science,”
and any intellectual inquiry must conform to establish research methods.” “I have been socialize to believe that “real”
science is quantitative, experimental, and understood by only a select and
elite few.” (Wall pg. 14) I share this
same experience with Dr. Wall. Studying
literature and history in high school and later on, studying Sociology in
college, I always thought that only those that have contributed to the schools
of thought and historical facts were the only ones qualified to do so. I never thought that other theories would be
considered in the social sciences. It is
welcoming to see postmodernism offering a different way of performing research.
“The goal of postmodern is not to eliminate the traditional scientific method
but to question its dominance and to demonstrate that it is possible to gain
and share knowledge in many ways. (Wall Pg. 174) Research is not just collecting and analyzing
data or collecting data that fits in a certain mode or observing and reporting
a case study and using scientific terms in reports. In my research I will use autoethnography
to include my experience of working with autistic students and culture of the
student’s classroom. As well as the
experience of the functioning in a world that has very little understanding of
their autistic culture. This should
develop a broader understanding of the study.
Reflexivity and voice:
We can all walk into a museum and look at the same piece of art. As we
study and analyze the piece of art, we all can have a different perspective of what
the art work looks like and what it interrupts.
I believe it’s the same for research.
I believe that our personal perspectives always affect the end results
of our research. We study the same
theory. But, we will most likely interpret
that theory in different ways we based on our understandings which derive from
our academic levels and background, our life experiences and our attitude
toward the matter that is being studied. And when our perspectives are not included
into the process of research, then the product is deficient. “If a researcher’s
voice is omitted from a text, the writing is reduced to a mere summary and
interpretation of the works of others, with nothing new added (Clandini &
Connelly, 1994) (Wall Pg. 148)
Furthermore, it is most essential to allow one to practice
autoethnography by expressing their own voice, because a story is always best
when it is told by its owner. “we could argue that an individual is best
situated to describe his or her own experience more accurately than anyone
else.” (Wall Pg. 148) Since the 1980s autoethnography
has proven to be a valuable research method. While the postmodern thoughts continue to
challenge the traditional scientific manner, there still exists some resistance
to accepting new research methods.
During my research I will encourage the students to express themselves through
their own original poetry. This will
allow the students to express their own voice and tell their own story. I will
do the same. I will write poetry to
express my voice on the matter of autism.
Understanding the
autobiographical methods:
There are many terms that connect autoethnography and autobiographical.
Terms such as personal narratives, lived experience, critical autobiography, evocative
narratives, reflexive ethnography, ethnographic autobiography, autobiographical
ethnography, personal sociology and autoanthropology (pp. 739-740) (Wall Pg. 149) Each term relates to self. This is very interesting to me. I never thought of some many different to
ways for an individual to research their self. Each term could be used as a
guide to writing poetry.
A heuristic research project enables a person to discover or learn
themselves for themselves. “The aim is
to “awaken and inspire researchers to make contact with and respect their own questions…
(Wall Pg. 150) The basic design of a heuristic research project, involves six
steps: Initial engagement –
intense interest, personal meaning, broad social implications. I will identify my interest and learn what
triggers happiness in an autistic student.
And earn how those triggers affect my emotions. Immersion– sustained focus, total
concentration, explore researcher’s tacit knowledge of the topic. I’ll take
notes to recall my tacit knowledge and experience of working with autistic students. Incubation-period of retreat, focus on
unrelated distractions, form new ideas
I’ll discover facts about the topic and include my emotions. Illumination – something new is seen in
the familiar. I’ll search for new but familiar discoveries. Discoveries such as, realizing that autistic
students are like any other student, they want to learn and enjoy life. Explication – comprehensive depiction
of the core themes. I’ll review themes
to be sure I understand them, and then share my experience dealing with those
themes in my life. Culmination-creative
synthesis, poem, drawing, or other creative form. This is when the hands on creative work
begins. What I consider the ease after the research is complete. This is the fun. As a class we would conduct interviews, produce
journals, poems and art work. Also,
there are other methods that are known to be connected to autoethnography such
as storytelling, personal writing, reflection and personal narrative. My students and I can use each of the steps
listed above.
Understanding autoethnography
by example:
There are many ways to use autoethnography. Here are some examples: Sparkes (1996) used a narrative to describe
his personal journey. I would use
narrative to tell how I began this research, from my initial thought and all
the steps that lead to the finish product.
Pelias (2003) used personal observations: As the researcher I will use
this method to observe the students.
Then I would incorporate how I was inspired by the poems that the
students wrote. Clarke (1992) the combination of her daughter’s essay and poetry
produced-Art Communication. I will combine the work of the students and my work
to develop a new product. I love the
term Art Communication. I will use that
term as the theme for our writing. Paulette (1993) used a highly personal,
evocative writing style. She gave a
voice to a seldom-noticed perspective. In order to achieve I would ask the
parents/guardians to participate to provide the personal and evocative
products. I believe that their voices deserve to be heard. Duncan (2004) Rigor
in the essay process. It provides
reports that are scholarly and justifiable interpretations. I would definitely pay
close attention to the interpretations, because the interpretation is the tool
that relays our message. I will want to
be sure that our audience understands the theme of the process. Holt (2001) used his practical background to
generate questions and implications. Sometimes
we can be at a lost for words or we may have questions that are not open
ended. The more questions and implications
that are generated the more opportunities we have to share ideas and develop new
data to collect and analysis. I would
like to have a Q&A session with the students, the parents and myself.
Criticisms, defenses, and validity:
Some state that there is not enough rigor in
autoethnography. Dr. Wall states,
“However, I like structure, and I believe that rigor is possible and necessary
in qualitative research. Using self as
subject is not a problem for me, but how self is used is very important. (Wall Pg. 156) Another criticism is when self is used as s
data source, self can become self-indulgent, narcissistic, introspective, and
individualized (Atkinson, 1997) (Wall Pg.155)
In closing, autoethnography addresses the self and the
culture of the self. It uses data that
is usually not considered in research. “When researchers write autoethnograpies,
they seek to produce aesthetic and evocative thick descriptions of personal and
interpersonal experience. I do believe
that additional research methods are necessary to analyze different types of
data. (Ellis, Adms, Bochner Pg. 14)
WORKS CITED
Authoethnography, from
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Autoethnography TONY
E. ADAMS Northeastern Illinois University, USA CAROLYN ELLIS University of
South Florida, USA STACY HOLMAN JONES Monash University, Australia
Autoethnography
John A. Tetnowski, Blanco Endowed Professor in
Communicative Disorders, University
of Louisiana-Lafayette
&
Jack S. Damico, Hawthorne Eminent Scholar in
Communicative Disorders, University of
Louisiana-Lafayette
Autoethnography: An Overview
Carolyn
Ellis, Tony E. Adams and Arthur P. Bochner
Comments
Post a Comment