Difference between revisions of "Atkinson-Morriss2016"
ElliottHoey (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Paul Atkinson; Lisa Morriss |Title=On Ethnographic Knowledge |Tag(s)=EMCA; Qualitative methods; Unique adequacy requirement; Pedagogy; E...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
|BibType=ARTICLE | |BibType=ARTICLE | ||
|Author(s)=Paul Atkinson; Lisa Morriss | |Author(s)=Paul Atkinson; Lisa Morriss | ||
| − | |Title=On | + | |Title=On ethnographic knowledge |
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Unique adequacy requirement; Ethnomethodology; ethnography; ethnographies; methodologies; qualitative research and education; qualitative research; training; evaluating and extending qualitative methods; decolonizing the academy; pedagogy; |
|Key=Atkinson-Morriss2016 | |Key=Atkinson-Morriss2016 | ||
|Year=2016 | |Year=2016 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Qualitative Inquiry | |Journal=Qualitative Inquiry | ||
| − | |URL= | + | |Volume=23 |
| + | |Number=5 | ||
| + | |Pages=323–331 | ||
| + | |URL=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1077800416655825 | ||
|DOI=10.1177/1077800416655825 | |DOI=10.1177/1077800416655825 | ||
|Abstract=We discuss the kinds and degrees of competence that the ethnographer needs to acquire. We consider the “unique adequacy” postulate, proposed by ethnomethodologists, that suggests that in the study of esoteric or specialized domains, the researcher needs to acquire or have previously acquired competence themselves. We suggest that this deserves more critical and nuanced scrutiny, not least given the impossibility of having prior competence in all aspects of a complex organization or activity. We also suggest that we need a more delicate appreciation of types of competence and, hence, of ethnographic knowledge. There is no single prescription, but a more thorough appreciation of the sociology of knowledge will inform ethnographic practice and methodological commentary. | |Abstract=We discuss the kinds and degrees of competence that the ethnographer needs to acquire. We consider the “unique adequacy” postulate, proposed by ethnomethodologists, that suggests that in the study of esoteric or specialized domains, the researcher needs to acquire or have previously acquired competence themselves. We suggest that this deserves more critical and nuanced scrutiny, not least given the impossibility of having prior competence in all aspects of a complex organization or activity. We also suggest that we need a more delicate appreciation of types of competence and, hence, of ethnographic knowledge. There is no single prescription, but a more thorough appreciation of the sociology of knowledge will inform ethnographic practice and methodological commentary. | ||
| − | |||
}} | }} | ||
Latest revision as of 12:25, 27 December 2019
| Atkinson-Morriss2016 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Atkinson-Morriss2016 |
| Author(s) | Paul Atkinson, Lisa Morriss |
| Title | On ethnographic knowledge |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Unique adequacy requirement, Ethnomethodology, ethnography, ethnographies, methodologies, qualitative research and education, qualitative research, training, evaluating and extending qualitative methods, decolonizing the academy, pedagogy |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 2016 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Qualitative Inquiry |
| Volume | 23 |
| Number | 5 |
| Pages | 323–331 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.1177/1077800416655825 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
We discuss the kinds and degrees of competence that the ethnographer needs to acquire. We consider the “unique adequacy” postulate, proposed by ethnomethodologists, that suggests that in the study of esoteric or specialized domains, the researcher needs to acquire or have previously acquired competence themselves. We suggest that this deserves more critical and nuanced scrutiny, not least given the impossibility of having prior competence in all aspects of a complex organization or activity. We also suggest that we need a more delicate appreciation of types of competence and, hence, of ethnographic knowledge. There is no single prescription, but a more thorough appreciation of the sociology of knowledge will inform ethnographic practice and methodological commentary.
Notes
