Comparing ethnographies when comparison seems impossible
dc.contributor.author | Anderson-Levitt, Kathryn | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2019-11-01T22:40:30Z | |
dc.date.available | 2019-11-01T22:40:30Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2018 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/151925 | |
dc.description | Part of theTheme issue "Living in an Era of Comparisons: Comparative Research on Policy, Curriculum and Teaching" guest edited by Ninni Wahlström | en_US |
dc.description.abstract | This essay examines comparison in a double sense. Focusing on ethnographies of teachers’ work in the published literature, I ask whether it is possible to compare ethnographic studies across national borders without losing the particularities of local context, and also without losing the distinctive theoretical perspective of ethnographers operating within different national traditions. Building on the volume Comparing ethnographies, I explore as a tool an expansion of Noblit and Hare’s ‘meta-ethnographic’ approach. Because meta-ethnography aims to remain faithful to local contexts, it works for cross-national comparison; because it is meant as an interpretation of the ethnographers’ interpretations, it can allow for national differences in scholarly traditions. I illustrate with a comparison of ethnographies of practices in Danish and in Japanese preschools, identifying ‘reciprocal’ translations, ‘refutational synthesis’, and ‘line-of-argument synthesis.’ The essay demonstrates that meta-ethnography’s interpretive approach does permit comparison across national contexts and scholarly traditions, and that it actually encourages ‘theoretical generalisation’, the ability to expand our understanding, without obscuring local context. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en_US | en_US |
dc.subject | ethnography, comparison, comparative education, meta-ethnography, qualitative synthesis, teachers' work | en_US |
dc.title | Comparing ethnographies when comparison seems impossible | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Anthropology and Archaeology | |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Social Sciences | |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | Department of Behavioral Sciences | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationumcampus | Dearborn | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151925/1/Comparing teachers' work- draft for JCS v12 revisions May 2018.docx | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1080/00220272.2018.1502809 | |
dc.identifier.source | Journal of Curriculum Studies | en_US |
dc.identifier.orcid | 0000-0001-5412-1818 | en_US |
dc.identifier.name-orcid | Anderson-Levitt, Kathryn; 0000-0001-5412-1818 | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Behavioral Sciences: Anthropology, Department of (UM-Dearborn) |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.