Developing and enacting an ethical framework and method for cross-cultural researchi

  • Norah Hosken
Chapter
Part of the Transgressions book series (TRANS, volume 88)

Abstract

Cautionary ‘anticipatory’ ethical consideration and practice is essential in developing and implementing a research project involving ethnography and, more so, auto-ethnography (Tolich, 2010, p. 1600), particularly one that includes crosscultural elements. Anticipatory means that ethnographers and auto-ethnographers should, among other procedures, usually gain informed consent before gathering and publishing data that can affect themselves and other people. This chapter reports on the continuing development of an ethical framework that underpins a current qualitative research project, Searching for Recognition and Social Justice in Tertiary Education. The project aims to place at its lived heart daily, enacted and active respect for the different and similar world views, culture and standpoints of its three main informants.

Keywords

Ethical Framework Feminist Sociology Institutional Ethnography South Sudan Mutual Mentor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agouk Dinka Community. (2011). Community meeting narrative under tree.Google Scholar
  2. Allen R. Whiteness and critical pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory. 2004;36(2):121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Commission AHR. African Australians: A report on human rights and social inclusion issues. Sydney: Australian Human Rights Commission; 2009.Google Scholar
  4. Bangura A. African-centered research methodologies:From ancient times to the present. San Diego: Cognella; 2011.Google Scholar
  5. Bell D, Nelson T. Speaking about rape is everyone's business. Women’s Studies International Forum. 1989;12(4):403–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Campbell M, Gregor F. Mapping social relations: A primer in doing institutional ethnography. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  7. Dillard C. When the ground is black, the ground is fertile: Exploring endarkened feminist epistemology and healing methodologies in the spirit. In: Denzin N, Lincoln Y, Smith L, editors. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage Publications; 2008.Google Scholar
  8. Fenstermaker S, West C. Doing gender, doing difference: Inequality, power, and institutional change. New York: Routledge; 2002.Google Scholar
  9. Friedman S. Beyond white and other: Relationality and narratives of race in feminist discourse. Signs. 1995;21(1):1–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gum Malong, C. (2011a). Cross-cultural mutual ethnography narratives. South Sudan (Agouk) Dinka Community.Google Scholar
  11. Gum Malong, C. (2011b). Discussion of ethical research principles for research involving African women.Google Scholar
  12. Hatoss A, Huijser H. Gendered barriers to educational opportunities: Resettlement of Sudanese refugees in Australia. Gender and Education. 2010;22(2):147–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hosken, N. (2010). Social work and welfare education without discrimination. Are we there yet? Practice Reflexions, 5(1).Google Scholar
  14. Moreton-Robinson A, Walter M. Indigenous methodologies in social research. In: Walter M, editor. Social Research Methods. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press; 2009. p. 1–18.Google Scholar
  15. NHMRC/ARC/Universities Australia. (2007). Australian code for the responsible conduct of research. National Health and Medical Research Council, the Australian Research Council and Universities Australia.Google Scholar
  16. Pennycook, A. (1996). Borrowing Others’ words: Text, ownership, memory, and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, 201-230.Google Scholar
  17. Smith D. Women’s perspective as a radical critique of sociology. Sociological Inquiry. 1974;44(1):7–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Smith D. The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press; 1988.Google Scholar
  19. Smith D. The conceptual practices of power: A feminist sociology of knowledge. Boston: Northeastern University Press; 1990a.Google Scholar
  20. Smith D. Texts, facts, and femininity: Exploring the relations of ruling. London: Routledge; 1990b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Smith D. Institutional ethnography: A sociology for people. Walnut Grove, CA: AltaMira Press; 2005a.Google Scholar
  22. Smith, D. (2006). Institutional ethnography as practice: Rowman & Littlefield Pub Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Smith, L. (2005). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zed.Google Scholar
  24. Tolich M. A critique of current practice: Ten foundational guidelines for autoethnographers. Qualitative Health Research. 2010;20(12):1599–1610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Norah Hosken
    • 1
  1. 1.Social Work, Health & Social DevelopmentDeakin UniversityAustralia

Personalised recommendations