Cross-Case Analysis of Ethnographic Studies Across International Borders: Common Frame in Uncommon Sites

• In Event: Roundtable Session 13
  In Roundtable Session: Ethnography and Language in Educational Settings: (Re)Envisioning and Reformulating Language Use in Educational Settings

Abstract

Purposes. In the past four decades, ethnographic studies of discursive work in classrooms have become ubiquitous; however, social, cultural, economic and political factors vary greatly across contexts. Green & Bloome (1997) identified differences on understanding what ethnography means and what is implied by doing ethnographic work. In this study, we analyze our use of a particular ethnographic approach to studying language-in-use in classrooms, Interactional Ethnography. This analysis outlines the “expressive potential” (Strike, 1989) of the approach and demonstrates how adopting a reflective approach enabled us to uncover constraints and biases.
Perspectives. We share interests in how students in diverse settings are afforded opportunities for learning over time, particularly through classroom discourse. Underlying Interactional Ethnography (Author, 2001; 2012) are sociocultural theories that orient us to classrooms and how members of communities interact over time to construct, particularly through discursive action, what they need to know and be able to do in order to participate. Interactional Ethnography includes theoretical assumptions originating from anthropology, sociology, philosophy of science and ethnography of communication that contribute to a litany of questions that guides our logic of inquiry. For example, who can do or say what, with or to whom, for what purposes, under what conditions, and for what desired outcomes? and leaving aside ethnocentrism, assumptions which we apply to the current study.
Methods. Each of us will present a set of studies as a telling case (Mitchell, 1984) to demonstrate how Interactional Ethnography guided our logic of inquiry. Next, striving to leave our ethnocentrism aside, we will contrast the two sets of telling cases, describing and demonstrating the situated nature of ethnographic work in examining roles of language, and uncover opportunities, constraints and bias of the research.

Data. The studies are located in different countries (Brazil and the US) and educational contexts.The first telling case focuses on ethnographic studies in Brazilian classrooms that sought to understand challenges that teachers and students face in accomplishing ever-changing curricular goals and educational policies. The researcher revisited issues related to visions of schooling, curricula, and teaching-learning relationships, among others. The second telling case focuses on studies in the US that examine the role of a teacher’s language in students’ learning local disciplinary practices in a Studio Art class, and the limits to certainty about claims that could be made.

Results. By approaching this inquiry from an Interactional Ethnographic approach, we demonstrate a reflexive stance that includes examining phenomena from multiple perspectives and triangulating findings. This process led to questions that guided our analysis. For example: through an Interactional Ethnographic approach, what were we able to observe, describe and analyze across time and space? What did we not have access to, and therefore, were unable to observe? What contextual factors did we ignore, or not recognize?
Scholarly significance. The paper raises questions about what can be (or not) observed through a methodological approach, and it adds to critical conversations about the need for transparency in research, particularly when adopting an ethnographic frame for examining roles of language in educational settings.

Author

• Maria L. Castanheira, Federal University of Minas Gerais