Abstract
For those interested in understanding cultures of learning in both formal and informal science educational contexts, ethnography is often the research approach of choice. Yet ethnography, as a research approach, is far from monolithic. The myriad of nuances, distinctions, and open questions of ethnographic research, employed as full-scale ethnographies or as ethnographically informed approaches to broader qualitative research, can be a source of numerous tensions in science education research and educational research in general. In order to trouble and learn from these tensions, we employed a novel, analytic approach of meta-ethnography. We relied on Bakhtinian dialogic analysis to contrast questions of ethnographic methodology and method across four multidisciplinary studies of learning cultures rooted in varied levels of ethnographic methods. Commonalities in methodological tensions between the studies include the role of the researcher, the temporal scope, and analysis and representation. We proposed an ethnographic continuum as one way to envision our ethnographic studies without bounding them by the traditional nomenclatures.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
01 February 2021
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-021-10018-y
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199807)82:4%3c417:AID-SCE1%3e3.0.CO;2-E.
Aikenhead, G. S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Science Education, 27, 1–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057269608560077.
Aikenhead, G. S. (2001). Students’ ease in crossing cultural borders into school science. Science Education, 85, 180–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-237x(200103)85:2%3c180:aid-sce50%3e3.0.co;2-1.
Angers, J., & Machtmes, K. L. (2005). An ethnographic-case study of beliefs, context factors, and practices of teachers integrating technology. The Qualitative Report, 10(4), 771–794.
Atkins, S., Lewin, S., Smith, H., Engel, M., Fretheim, A., & Volmink, J. (2008). Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: Lessons learnt. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 8(1), 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-21.
Ayar, M. C., Bauchspies, W. K., & Yalvac, B. (2015). Examining interpretive studies of science: A meta-ethnography. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 15(1), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2015.1.2153.
Bakhtin, M. (1982). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
Banning, J., & Folkestad, J. E. (2012). STEM education related dissertation abstracts: A bounded qualitative meta-study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 730–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9361-9.
Barton, A. C. (2001). Science education in urban settings: Seeking new ways of praxis through critical ethnography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 899–917. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.1038.
Bateman, K. M. (2019). Assembling policy dilemmas: Science teacher responses to educational policy. In [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. School of Education, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.
Beach, D. (2017). Personalisation and the education commodity: A meta-ethnographic analysis. Ethnography and Education, 12(2), 148–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794103033003.
Bianchini, J. A., & Cavazos, L. M. (2007). Learning from students, inquiry into practice, and participation in professional communities: Beginning teachers’ uneven progress toward equitable science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 586–612. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20177.
Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. J. (1989). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
Bondas, T., & Hall, E. O. (2007). Challenges in approaching metasynthesis research. Qualitative Health Research, 17(1), 113–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732306295879.
Borrego, M., Foster, M. J., & Froyd, J. E. (2014). Systematic literature reviews in engineering education and other developing interdisciplinary fields. Journal of Engineering Education, 103(1), 45–76. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20038.
Brandt, C. B. (2008). Discursive geographies in science: Space, identity, and scientific discourse among indigenous women in higher education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(3), 703–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-007-9075-8.
Brandt, C. B., & Carlone, H. (2012). Ethnographies of science education: Situated practices of science learning for social/political transformation. Ethnography and Education, 7(2), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2012.693690.
Brandt, C. B., Shumar, W., Hammond, L., Carlone, H., Kimmel, S., & Tschida, C. (2010). Habitus, social fields, and circuits in rural science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5(2), 477–493.
Britten, N., Campbell, R., Pope, C., Donovan, J., Morgan, M., & Pill, R. (2002). Using meta ethnography to synthesise qualitative research: A worked example. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 7(4), 209–215.
Canagarajah, A. S. (1993). Critical ethnography of a Sri Lankan classroom: Ambiguities in student opposition to reproduction through ESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4), 601–626.
Corbett, K. (2016). Gender, identity and culture in learning physics. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(2), 371–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9679-3.
Derrida, J. (2016). Of grammatology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Doyle, L. H. (2003). Synthesis through meta-ethnography: Paradoxes, enhancements, and possibilities. Qualitative Research, 3(3), 321–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794103033003.
Eisenhart, M. (2017). A matter of scale: Multi-scale ethnographic research on education in the United States. Ethnography and Education, 12(2), 134–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2016.1257947.
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226206868.001.0001.
Flaherty, M. G., Denzin, N. K., Manning, P. K., & Snow, D. A. (2002). Review symposium: Crisis in representation. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 31(4), 478–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241602031004004.
Gadamer, H. G. (1998). Praise of theory: Speeches and essays. New Haven, CT: Yale University. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt211qwts.
Geertz, C. (2008). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In T. Oakes & P. Price (Eds.), The cultural geography reader (pp. 41–51). London, UK: Routledge.
Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception (Classic ed.). London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315740218.
Green, J. L., & Bloome, D. (1997). Ethnography and ethnographers of and in education: A situated perspective. In J. Flood, S. B. Heath, & D. Lapp (Eds.), Reasearch on teaching and literacy through the communicative and visual arts (pp. 181–202). NY: Macmillan.
Hamlin, M. L. (2013). “Yo soy indígena”: Identifying and using traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) to make the teaching of science culturally responsive for Maya girls. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8(4), 759–776. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-013-9514-7.
Hammersley, M. (2018). What is ethnography? Can it survive? Should it? Ethnography and Education, 13(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2017.1298458.
Hammersley, M., & Atkinson, P. (2007). Ethnography: Principles in practice. NY: Routledge.
Hammond, L., & Brandt, C. B. (2004). Science and cultural process: Defining an anthropological approach to science education. Studies in Science Education, 40(1), 1–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260408560202.
Harris, M. (1976). History and significance of the emic/etic distinction. Annual Review of Anthropology, 5(1), 329–350. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.an.05.100176.001553.
Hernández-Hernández, F., & Sancho-Gil, J. M. (2017). Using meta-ethnographic analysis to understand and represent youth’s notions and experiences of learning in and out of secondary school. Ethnography and Education, 12(2), 178–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2016.1180542.
Huaman, E. S. (2016). Tuki Ayllpanchik (our beautiful land): Indigenous ecology and farming in the Peruvian highlands. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 11(4), 1135–1153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-014-9622-z.
Hudock, L. A. (2018). The picturebook project: A meta/ethnographically informed case study on child reader’s aesthetic responses to metapicturebooks at an urban community center. In [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. School of Education, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.
Huf, C., & Raggl, A. (2017). The normativity of the helping child—meta-ethnographic perspectives on individualised learning in age-mixed classrooms. Ethnography and Education, 12(2), 165–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2016.1192479.
Hughes, S., & Noblit, G. (2017). Meta-ethnography of autoethnographies: A worked example of the method using educational studies. Ethnography and Educatio, 12(2), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2016.1216322.
Jackson, A. Y. (2017). Thinking without method. Qualitative Inquiry, 23(9), 666–674. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417725355.
Jeffrey, B., & Troman, G. (2004). Time for ethnography. British Educational Research Journal, 30(4), 535–548.
Jeong, S. (2018). Using actor-network theory to rethink gender and race in advanced placement biology classrooms. In [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. College of Education, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
Kakos, M., & Fritzsche, B. (2017). A meta-ethnography of two studies on interactions in schools: Reflections on the process of translation. Ethnography and Education, 12(2), 228–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2017.1278578.
Kelly, G. J., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883–915.
Kincheloe, J. L., McLaren, P., & Steinberg, S. R. (2011). Critical pedagogy and qualitative research: Moving to the bricolage. In N. K. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 163–177). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Kusenbach, M. (2003). Street phenomenology: The go-along as ethnographic research tool. Ethnography, 4(3), 455–485.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Law, J., & Hassard, J. (1999). Actor network theory and after. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Lazar, J. (2001). User-centered web development. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
LeCompte, M. D., & Goetz, J. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1), 31–60. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543052001031.
Lortie, D. C. (1977). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
MacLure, M. (2011). Qualitative inquiry: Where are the ruins? Qualitative Inquiry, 17(10), 997–1005. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800411423198.
MacLure, M. (2013). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 658–667. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2013.788755.
Maxwell, J. A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review, 62(3), 279–301. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.62.3.8323320856251826.
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Meijer, P. C., Verloop, N., & Beijaard, D. (2002). Multi-method triangulation in a qualitative study on teachers’ practical knowledge: An attempt to increase internal validity. Quality & Quantity, 36(2), 145–167. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014984232.
Middleton, M., Dupuis, J., & Tang, J. (2013). Classrooms and culture: The role of context in shaping motivation and identity for science learning in indigenous adolescents. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(1), 111–141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9385-5.
Nespor, J. (2013). Tangled up in school: Politics, space, bodies, and signs in the educational process. London, UK: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315045252.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Noblit, G. (1979). Patience and prudence in a southern high school. In R. C. Rist (Ed.), Desegregated schools. Appraisals of an American experiment (pp. 65–88). Cambridge: Academic Press.
Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Norris, J., Sawyer, R. D., & Lund, D. (2012). Duoethnography: Dialogic methods for social, health, and educational research. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press.
Pezalla, A. E., Pettigrew, J., & Miller-Day, M. (2012). Researching the researcher-as-instrument: An exercise in interviewer self-reflexivity. Qualitative Research, 12(2), 165–185. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111422107.
Rahm, J. (2007). Youths’ and scientists’ authoring of and positioning within science and scientists’ work. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 1(3), 517–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-006-9020-2.
Rappaport, J. (2008). Beyond participant observation: Collaborative ethnography as theoretical innovation. Collaborative Anthropologies, 1(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1353/cla.0.0014.
Rogers, M. (2012). Contextualizing theories and practices of bricolage research. The Qualitative Report, 17(48), 1–17.
Ryan, A. (2008). Indigenous knowledge in the science curriculum: Avoiding neo-colonialism. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(3), 663–702. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-007-9087-4.
Saldana, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. NY: Teachers College Press.
Sherman, B. (2016). Agency, ideology, and information/communication technology: English language instructor use of instructional technology at a South Korean college. In [Doctoral dissertation]. School of Education, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, PA.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. San Diego, CA: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
St. Pierre, E. A. (2016). The empirical and the new empiricisms. Cultural Studies? Critical Methodologies, 16(2), 111–124.
Streeck, J., & Mehus, S. (2004). Microethnography: The study of practices. In K. Fitch & R. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 381–404). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Tan, A. L. (2011). Home culture, science, school and science learning: Is reconciliation possible? Cultural Studies of Science Education, 6(3), 559–567. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9343-5.
Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Sang, G., Voogt, J., Fisser, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2012). Preparing pre-service teachers to integrate technology in education: A synthesis of qualitative evidence. Computers & Education, 59(1), 134–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.009.
Uny, I., France, E. F., & Noblit, G. W. (2017). Steady and delayed: Explaining the different development of meta-ethnography in health care and education. Ethnography and Education, 12(2), 243–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457823.2017.1282320.
Vedder-Weiss, D. (2017). Serendipitous science engagement: A family self-ethnography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(3), 350–378. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21369.
Walker, J. L. (2012). The use of saturation in qualitative research. Canadian Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, 22(2), 37–41.
Wegerif, R. (2008). Dialogic or dialectic? The significance of ontological assumptions in research on educational dialogue. British Educational Research Journal, 34(3), 347–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701532228.
Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labour: How working class kids get working class jobs. London, UK: Routledge.
Windschitl, M., Thompson, J. J., & Braaten, M. (2018). Ambitious science teaching. Boston, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Wortham, S. (2006). Learning identity: The joint emergence of social identification and academic learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Lead Editor: Jesse Bazzul.
The original online version of this article was revised: In the original publication the author name Sophia Jeong was in correctly published. This has been corrected with this Correction.
Appendix
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sherman, B.J., Bateman, K.M., Jeong, S. et al. Dialogic meta-ethnography: troubling methodology in ethnographically informed qualitative inquiry. Cult Stud of Sci Educ 16, 279–302 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09961-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-019-09961-8