Textbooks often describe roles taken on during participant observation and case study in quite simplistic terms. The idea conveyed is that the evaluator assumes a role and remains in that role for the duration of the evaluation. This paper examines two projects in education and health where this was certainly not the case, as each involved complex role dualisms that had to be confronted. The authors describe the dilemmas faced and how they can be addressed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AckroydS., & HughesJ.A.1981, Data collection in context, Longman, London.
2.
Anthropology and Education Quarterly1984, Special Issue on Field Researcher Role, vol. 15, no. 3, Fall, pp. 191–258.
3.
ArgiridesA.2001, ‘Lessons to be learned from an internal evaluation within an acute health care setting: a case study’, unpublished thesis, Faculty of Education, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
4.
BallS.1990, ‘Self-doubt and soft data: social and technical trajectories in ethnographic fieldwork, International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 157–171.
5.
BehorR.1996, The vulnerable observer: anthropology that breaks your heart, Beacon Press, Boston.
6.
BergB.L.1989, Qualitative Methods for the Social Sciences, Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
7.
BurawoyM.1991, ‘Appendix: Teaching participant observation’, in BurawoyM,, Ethnography unbound, University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
8.
DenzinN.K.1989, ‘A theoretical introduction to sociological method: varieties and strategies of the field method’, in The Research Act, 3rd edn, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
9.
EdwardsB.2002, ‘Deep insider research’, Qualitative Research Journal, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 71–84.
10.
GoldR.L.1958, ‘Roles in sociological field observations’, Social Forces, vol. 36, pp. 217–233.
11.
HiggsJ.2001, ‘Charting standpoints in qualitative research’, in Byrne-ArmstrongH, HiggsJ, & HorsfallD, Critical moments in qualitative research, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford.
12.
HockeyJ.1993, ‘Research methods: researching peers and familiar settings’, Research Papers in Education, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 199–225.
13.
HorowitzR.1986, ‘Remaining an outsider: membership as a threat to the research report’, Urban Life, vol. 14, pp. 409–130.
14.
HughesE.1960, ‘Introduction: the place of fieldwork in social science’, in TurnerB (ed.), Fieldwork: an introduction to the social sciences, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
15.
HumphreyB.1995, ‘Insider research, the process and practice: issues arising from professionals conducting research with their own working environments’, unpublished PhD thesis, Deakin University, Geelong.
16.
HurworthR.1998, ‘Ten Cases of qualitative methods teaching: practices, problems and proposals’, unpublished PhD thesis, Post Graduate School of Education, La Trobe University, Melbourne.
17.
LoflandJ.1971, Analyzing social settings: a guide to qualitative observation and analysis, Wadsworth, Belmont, California.
OlesenV., & WhittakerE.1967, ‘Role making in participant observation: processes in the researcher–actor relationship’, Human Organisation, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 273–281.
20.
PlattJ.1981, ‘On interviewing one's peers’, British Journal of Sociology, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 75–91.
21.
RossmanG.B.1984, ‘I owe you one': considerations of role and reciprocity in a study of graduate education for school administrators’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 3, Fall, pp. 225–234.
22.
WadeJ.E.1984, ‘Role boundaries and paying back: switching hats in participant observation’, Anthropology and Education Quarterly, vol. 15, no. 3, Fall, pp. 211–224.
23.
YinR.K.1984, ‘Case study design and methods’, Applied Social Research Methods, vol. 5, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, California.
