This chapter brings together cultural-historical approaches to human development with interpretive and multi-sited ethnography in order to: (1) develop ethnographic tools that attend to the ways young people learn within and across multiple contexts; (2) draw from and contrast the methodological insights of single and multi-sited ethnography; and (3) glean principles that help constitute a “multi-sited sensibility” appropriate for taking a more expansive approach to learning that advances conceptions of learning as movement.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AsadT. (1993). Genealogies of religion: Discipline and reasons of power in Islam and Christianity. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
2.
AsadT., FernandezJ. W., HerzfeldM., LassA., RogersS. C., SchneiderJ., & VerderyK. (1997). Provocations of European ethnology. American Anthropologist, 99(4), 713–730.
3.
BarronB. (2006). Interest and self-sustained learning as catalysts of development: A learning ecology perspective. Human Development, 49(4), 193–224.
4.
BartonD. (1994). Literacy: An introduction to the ecology of written language. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
5.
BartonD., & HamiltonM. (2000). Literacy practices. In BartonD., HamiltonM., & IvanicR. (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 7–16). New York, NY: Routledge.
6.
BevanB., & MichalchikV. (2013). Where it gets interesting: Competing models of STEM learning after school. Afterschool Matters, 17, 1–8.
7.
BurawoyM. (2003). Revisits: An outline of a theory of reflexive ethnography. American Sociological Review, 68(5), 645–679.
8.
CandeaM. (2007). Arbitrary locations: In defense of the bounded field-site. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 13(1), 167–184.
9.
CandeaM. (2009). Arbitrary locations: In defense of the bounded field-site. In FalzonM-A. (Ed.), Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis and locality in contemporary research (pp. 25–46). Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing.
10.
CazdenC. B. (1986). Classroom discourse. In WittrockM. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 432–463). New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
11.
CazdenC. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
12.
CliffordJ. (1983). On ethnographic authority. Representations, 2, 118–146.
13.
CliffordJ. (1988). The predicament of culture: Twentieth-century ethnography, literature, and art. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14.
Cochran-SmithM., & LytleS. (Eds.). (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
15.
ColeM. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16.
ColeM., & GriffinP. (1983). A socio-historical approach to re-mediation. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 5(4), 69–74.
17.
DeweyJ. (1938). Experience and education. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster Inc.
18.
DiazE., & FloresB. (2001). Teacher as sociocultural sociohistorical mediator. In de la Luz ReyesM. & HalconJ. (Eds.), The best for our children: Critical perspectives on literacy for Latino students (pp. 29–47). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
19.
EmersonR. M., FretzR. I., & ShawL. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20.
EngeströmY. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
21.
EngeströmY. (1991). Toward overcoming the encapsulation of school learning. Learning and Instruction, 1, 243–259.
22.
EngeströmY. (1996). Developmental work research as educational research. Nordisk Pedagogik: Journal of Nordic Educational Research, 16(5), 131–143.
23.
EngeströmY. (2005). Developmental work research: Expanding activity theory in practice (Vol. 12). Berlin, Germany: Lehmanns Media.
24.
EngeströmY. (2008). Putting Vygotsky to work: The change laboratory as an application of double stimulation. In DanielsH., ColeM., & WertschJ. (Eds.), Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 363–382). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
25.
EngeströmY. (2009). The future of activity theory: A rough draft. In SanninoA., DanielsH., & GutiérrezK. (Eds.), Learning and expanding with activity theory (pp. 303–328). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
26.
EricksonF. (1984). Literacy, reason and civility: An anthropologist's perspective. Review of Educational Research, 54(4), 525–546.
27.
EricksonF. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In WittrockM. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 119–161). New York, NY: Macmillan.
28.
EricksonF. (1996). On the evolution of qualitative approaches in educational research: From Adam's task to Eve's. The Australian Educational Researcher, 23(2), 1–15.
29.
EricksonF. (1998). Qualitative research methods for science education. In FraserB. J. & TobinK. G. (Eds.), International handbook on science education (pp. 1155–1173). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
30.
EricksonF. (2001). Co-membership and wiggle room: Some implications of the study of talk for the development of social theory. In CouplandN., SarangiS., & CandlinC. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and social theory (pp. 152–181). London, England: Longman.
31.
EricksonF. (2004). Talk and social theory: Ecologies of speaking and listening in everyday life. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
32.
EricksonF. (2006). Studying side by side: Collaborative action ethnography in educational research. In SpindlerG. & HammondL. (Eds.), Innovations in educational ethnography: Theory, methods and results (pp. 235–257). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33.
EricksonF. (2010). Classroom ethnography. International encyclopedia of education (3rd ed., pp. 320–325). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
34.
EricksonF., BagrodiaR., Cook-SatherA., EspinozaM., JurowS., ShultzJ. J., & SpencerJ. (2008). Students’ experience of school curriculum: The everyday circumstances of granting and withholding assent to learn. In ConnellyF. M., HeM. F., & PhillionJ. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of curriculum and instruction (pp. 198–218). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35.
EricksonF., & GutiérrezK. (2002). Comment: Culture, rigor, and science in educational research. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 21–24.
36.
EricksonF., & SchultzJ. J. (1982). The counselor as gatekeeper: Social and cultural organization of communication in counseling interviews. New York, NY: Academic.
37.
EricksonF., & SchultzJ. (1997). When is a context? Some issues and methods in the analysis of social competence. In ColeM., EngeströmY., & VasquezO. (Eds.), Mind, culture, and activity: Seminal papers from the laboratory of comparative human cognition (pp. 22–31). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
38.
EspinozaM. (2009). A case study of the production of educational sanctuary in one migrant classroom. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 4(1), 44–62.
39.
EspinozaM. (2011). Making and unmaking: The organizational come-and-go of creativity. Unpublished research report. San Francisco Exploratorium.
40.
FalzonM. (2009). Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis and locality in contemporary research. Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing.
41.
FitzgeraldD. (2006). Towards a theoretical ethnography of migration. Qualitative Sociology, 29(1), 1–24.
42.
FortunK. (2009). Scaling and visualizing multi-sited ethnography. In FalzonM. (Ed.), Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis and locality in contemporary research (pp. 73–86). Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing.
43.
GilleZ., & RiainS. Ó. (2002). Global ethnography. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 271–295.
44.
GonzalezN., MollL. C., & AmantiC. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
45.
GustavsonL. C., & CytrynbaumJ. D. (2003). Illuminating spaces: Relational spaces, complicity, and multisited ethnography. Field Methods, 15(3), 252–270.
46.
GutiérrezK. (2006). White innocence: A framework and methodology for rethinking educational discourse and inquiry. International Journal of Learning, 12(10), 223–230.
47.
GutiérrezK. D. (2007). Commentary. In LewisC., EncisoP., & MojeE. B. (Eds.), Reframing sociocultural research on literacy (pp. 115–120). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
48.
GutiérrezK. D. (2008). Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(2), 148–164.
49.
GutiérrezK. D. (2012a). When scientific and everyday concepts grow into one another: A syncretic approach for new literacies. Paper presented at the annual Literacy Research Association conference. San Diego, CA.
50.
GutiérrezK. D. (2012b). Re-mediating current activity for the future. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(1), 17–21.
51.
GutiérrezK. (2013). Foreword. In HallK., CreminT., ComberB., & MollL. (Eds.), International handbook of research on children's literacy, learning, and culture (pp. xxix–xxxvi). New York, NY: Wiley–Blackwell.
52.
GutiérrezK., AliA., & HenríquezC. (2010). Syncretism and hybridity: Schooling, language, and race and students from non-dominant communities. In AppleM. W., BallS. J., & GandinL. A. (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of the sociology of education (pp. 358–369). London, England: Routledge.
53.
GutiérrezK. D., & ArzubiagaA. E. (2012). An ecological and activity theoretic approach to studying diasporic and non-dominant communities. Research on schools, neighborhoods, and communities: Toward civic responsibility (pp. 203–216). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
54.
GutiérrezK., Baquedano-LopezP., & TejedaC. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 286–303.
55.
GutiérrezK. D., BienA. C., SellandM. K., & PierceD. M. (2011). Polylingual and polycultural learning ecologies: Mediating emergent academic literacies for dual language learners. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 11(2), 232–261.
56.
GutiérrezK. D., & LarsonJ. (2007). Discussing expanded spaces for learning. Language Arts, 85(1), 69.
57.
GutiérrezK., & OrellanaM. (2006). The “problem” of English learners: Constructing genres of difference. Research in the Teaching of English, 40(4), 505–510.
58.
GutiérrezK., PaguyoC., & MendozaL. (2012). Essentializing racial and ethnic identity. In BanksJ. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of diversity in education (pp. 816–822). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59.
GutiérrezK. D., & RogoffB. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25.
60.
GutiérrezK., RymesB., & LarsonJ. (1995). Script, counterscript, and underlife in the classroom: James Brown versus Brown v. Board of Education. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 445–472.
61.
GutiérrezK., & VossoughiS. (2010). Lifting off the ground to return anew: Mediated praxis, transformative learning and social design experiments. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1-2), 100–117.
62.
HageG. (2005). A not so multi-sited ethnography of a not so imagined community. Anthropological Theory, 5(4), 463–475.
63.
HallK. D. (2004). The ethnography of imagined communities: The cultural production of Sikh ethnicity in Britain. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 595(1), 108–121.
64.
HandV., PenuelW. R., & GutiérrezK. D. (2012). (Re)Framing educational possibility: Attending to power and equity in shaping access to and within learning opportunities. Human Development, 55(5-6), 250–268.
65.
HeathS. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
66.
HellerM. (2008). Language and the nation state: Challenges to sociolinguistic theory and practice. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(4), 504–524.
67.
HolyL. (1984). Theory, methodology and the research process. In EllenR. (Ed.), Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct (pp. 13–24). London, England: Academic Press.
68.
HullG., & SchultzK. (2001). Literacy and learning out of school: A review of theory and research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 575–611.
69.
HymesD. (1972) Reinventing anthropology. New York, NY: Vintage Books.
70.
IngoldT. (1994). Introduction to culture. In IngoldT. (Ed.), Companion encyclopedia of anthropology: Humanity, culture and social life (pp. 329–349). London, England: Routledge.
71.
ItoM., GutiérrezK., LivingstoneS., PenuelB., RhodesJ., SalenK., SchorJ., Sefton-GreenJ., & WatkinsS. C. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Irvine, CA: Digital Learning and Media Research Hub.
72.
LaveJ. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
73.
LaveJ. (2011). Apprenticeship in critical ethnographic practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
74.
LeacockE. (1977). Race and the “we-they dichotomy” in culture and classroom. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 8(2), 152–159.
75.
LeeC. (2001). Is October Brown Chinese?: A cultural modeling activity system for underachieving students. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 97–141.
76.
LemkeJ. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 296–316.
77.
MarcusG. E. (1995). Ethnography in/of the world system: The emergence of multi-sited ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 24, 95–117.
78.
MarcusG. E. (1998). Ethnography through thick and thin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
79.
MarcusG. E. (1999). What is at stake—and is not—in the idea and practice of multi-sited ethnography. Canberra Anthropology, 22(2), 6–14.
80.
MarcusG. E. (2009). Multi-sited ethnography: Notes and queries. In FalzonM. (Ed.), Multi-sited ethnography: Theory, praxis, and locality in contemporary research (pp. 181–196). Surrey, England: Ashgate Publishing.
81.
MartínezR. A. (2010). Spanglish as literacy tool: Toward an understanding of the potential role of Spanish-English code-switching in the development of academic literacy. Research in the Teaching of English, 45(2), 124–149.
82.
MasseyD. (2005). For space. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
83.
MatusovE. (1998). When solo activity is not privileged: Participation and internalization models of development. Human Development, 41, 326–349.
84.
McDermottR. P. (1977). Social relations as contexts for learning in school. Harvard Educational Review, 47(2), 198–213.
85.
McDermottR., & RaleyJ. (2011). Looking closely: Toward a natural history of human ingenuity. In MargolisE. & PauwelsL. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of visual research methods (pp. 372–391). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
86.
MollL. C. (1997). The creation of mediating settings. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 4(3), 191–199.
87.
NasirN. I. S. (2000). “Points ain't everything”: Emergent goals and average and percent understandings in the play of basketball among African American students. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 31(3), 283–305.
88.
NasirN. S., RoseberyA. S., WarrenB., & LeeC. D. (2006). Learning as a cultural process: Achieving equity through diversity. In SawyerR. K. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 489–504). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
89.
NesporJ. (1997). Tangled up in school: Politics, space, bodies, and signs in the educational process. New York, NY: Routledge.
90.
O'ConnorK., & AllenA. (2010). Learning as the organizing of social futures. In PenuelW. R. & O'ConnorK. (Eds.), Learning research as a human science. National Society for Studies in Education, 109(1), 160–175.
91.
O'ConnorM. C. (1996). Managing the intermental: Classroom group discussion and the social context of learning. In SlobinD., GerhardtJ., KyratzisA., & GuoJ. (Eds.), Social interaction, social context, and language (pp. 495–509). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
92.
PachecoM. (2012). Learning in/through everyday resistance: A cultural-historical perspective on community resources and curriculum. Educational Researcher, 41(4), 121–132.
93.
PieridesD. (2010). Multi-sited ethnography and the field of educational research. Critical Studies in Education, 51(2), 179–195.
94.
RogoffB. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
95.
RosaldoR. (1993). Culture and truth: The remaking of social analysis. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
96.
RoseM. (2005). The mind at work: Valuing the intelligence of the American worker. New York, NY: Penguin Books.
97.
RoseM. (2012). Rethinking remedial education and the academic-vocational divide. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 19(1), 1–16.
98.
SaidE. (1979). Orientalism. New York, NY: Vintage.
99.
ScribnerS., & ColeM. (1981). The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
100.
ScribnerS., & StevensJ. (1989). Experimental studies on the relationship of school math and work math (Technical Paper No. 4). New York, NY: National Center on Education and Employment.
101.
StreetB. V. (2005). Introduction: New literacy studies and literacies across educational contexts. In StreetB. V. (Ed.), Literacies across educational contexts: Mediating learning and teaching (pp. 1–21). Philadelphia, PA: Caslon.
102.
ValenciaR. (1997). The evolution of deficit thinking. London, England: The Falmer Press.
103.
ValenciaR. (2002). The plight of Chicano students: An overview of schooling conditions. In ValenciaR. (Ed.), Chicano school failure and success (pp. 3–51). New York, NY: Routledge.
104.
VossoughiS. (2011a). On the formation of intellectual kinship: A qualitative case study of literacy, learning, and social analysis in a summer migrant education program. (University of California, Los Angeles). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, 299.
