But Does "Ethnography By Any Other Name" Really Promote Real Ethnography?

  • Wolff-Michael Roth University of Victoria
Keywords: ethnography, categorization, identity, difference, chaos and catastrophe theory, boundary work

Abstract

Categorization—such as deciding whether something is real ethnography—is a difficult task, because nature and social practices, the topics of ethnography, themselves do not come with inherent labels. In this article, which takes its starting point in AGAR's contribution to the debate on the quality of qualitative research, I articulate and expose the aporetic and internally contradictory nature of categorizing something as real ethnography. URN: urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0604374

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Wolff-Michael Roth, University of Victoria
Wolff-Michael ROTH is Lansdowne Professor of applied cognitive science at the University of Victoria. His interdisciplinary research agenda includes studies in science and mathematics education, general education, applied cognitive science, sociology of science, and linguistics (pragmatics). His recent publications include Talking Science: Language and Learning in Science (Rowman & Littlefield, 2005), Doing Qualitative Research: Praxis of Method (SensePublishers, 2005), and Learning Science: A Singular Plural Perspective (SensePublishers, 2006).
Published
2006-09-30
How to Cite
Roth, W.-M. (2006). But Does "Ethnography By Any Other Name" Really Promote Real Ethnography?. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-7.4.178
Section
FQS Debate: Quality of Qualitative Research

Most read articles by the same author(s)

<< < 1 2 3 4 > >>