This article discusses the various, sometimes competing, self-identities of the qualitative researcher and the impact of these identities on decision making in the research process. The author proposes that while culture provides the backdrop to identity, various aspects of the microcultures to which a researcher belongs may result in varying “personas” that influence decision making about the research process. The author illustrates these points with examples from her ethnographic research with African-American/Latino, low- to middle-income families of children with disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BanksJ. A., & McGeeBanks C. A. (1993). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
2.
BernheimerL. P.GallimoreR., & WeisnerT. S. (1990). Ecocultural theory as a context for the individual family service plan. Journal of Early Intervention, 14(3), 219–233.
3.
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and human design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4.
BruynS. T. (1966). The human perspective in sociology: The methodology of participant observation. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
5.
DaleyK. (1992). The fit between qualitative research and characteristics of families. In GilgunJ. F.DaleyK., & HandelG. (Eds.), Qualitative methods in family research (pp. 3–11). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6.
Delgado-GaitanC. (1993). Researching change and changing the researcher. Harvard Educational Review, 63(4), 389–411.
7.
Delgado-GaitanC., & TruebaH. (1991). Crossing cultural borders: Education for immigrant families in America. London: Falmer Press.
8.
DenzinN. K., & LincolnY. S. (1994). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In DenzinN. K. & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 1–18). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
DunnL. M. (1998). Bilingual Hispanic children on the U.S. mainland: A review of research on their linguistic, cognitive, and scholastic development. Honolulu, HI: Dunn Educational Services. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 304 274).
10.
FineM. (1994). Working the hyphens: Reinventing self and other in qualitative research. In DenzinN. K. & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 70–82). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
GallimoreR.WeisnerT. S.KaufmanS. Z., & BernheimerL. P. (1989). The social construction of ecolcultural niches: Family accommodation of develop-mentally delayed children. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 94, 216–230.
12.
GliedmanJ., & RothW. (1980). The unexpected minority: Handicapped children in America. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
13.
HandelG. (1992). The qualitative tradition in family research. In GilgunJ. F.DaleyK., & HandelG. (Eds.), Qualitative methods in family research (pp. 12–21). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
14.
HarryB. (1992). Culturally diverse families and the special education system: Communication and empowerment. New York: Teachers College Press.
15.
HarryB.AllenN., & McLaughlinM. (1995). Communication vs. compliance. African-American parents' participation in special education. Exceptional Children, 61, 364–377.
16.
HarryB., & KalyanpurM. (1994). The cultural underpinnings of special education: Implications for professional interactions with culturally diverse families. Disability and Society, 9(2), 145–165.
17.
HarryB.TorgusonC.KatkavichJ., & GuerreroM. (1993). Crossing social class and cultural barriers in working with families: Implications for teacher training. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 26, 48–52.
18.
HermanR. I. (1983, Fall). Poverty, minority and exceptionality. The Educational Forum, 47–63.
19.
KincheloeJ. L., & McLarenP. L. (1994). Rethinking critical theory and qualitative research. In DenzinN. K. & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 138–157). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20.
LincolnY., & GubaE. (1986). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
21.
OakleyA. (1981). Interviewing women: A contradiction in terms. In RobertsH. (Ed.), Doing feminist research (pp. 30–61). London: Routlege & Kegan Paul.
22.
PenceA. R. (1988). Ecological research with children and families. New York: Teachers College Press.
23.
PeshkinA. (1988). In search of subjectivity—One's own. Educational Researcher, 17, 17–22.
24.
ThomasW. I., & ZnanieckiF. (1927). The Polish peasant in Europe and America. New York: Knopf.
25.
U.S. Department of Labor. (1965). The Negro family: The case for national action. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
