A question of quality: the art/science of doing collaborative public ethnography

Abstract

Social science researchers have long stressed the importance of a more publically relevant and accessible science. Nevertheless, significant barriers remain within the academy, such as processes for peer review, promotion, and awarding of degrees, which discourage the use of nontraditional dissemination techniques that support a more public ethnography. Concerns over scientific rigor, best practices, and methods for disseminating ethnographic research to public audiences may act as some of the barriers, among others. The purpose of this article is to discuss challenges in doing and disseminating collaborative ethnography to public audiences while still operating within the constraints of the academy. By sharing this experience, my intent is to stimulate debate and scholarship around assessing the quality of public ethnography using less traditional modes of reporting, such as video, and to encourage changes in peer review and institutional practices to more effectively support quality and dialogic dissemination of public ethnography that aims to bring together both academic and public audiences to address issues of great public significance.

Arts-based health research and academic legitimacy: transcending hegemonic conventions

“…Scholars engaged in qualitative ethnographic work have raised similar concerns with respect to scientific rigor and uncertainty regarding best and promising practices and modes for sharing research with diverse stakeholders (Degarrod, 2013; Hodgins and Boydell, 2014; Mosher, 2013). This is also true of community-based practice researchers whose accomplishments (such as improving public education or increasing access to social housing) often fail to allow for reporting within traditional tenure and promotion frameworks (Teufel-Shone, 2011).…”

“…This is also true of community-based practice researchers whose accomplishments (such as improving public education or increasing access to social housing) often fail to allow for reporting within traditional tenure and promotion frameworks (Teufel-Shone, 2011). Current methods of peer review, tenure promotion, and manuscript and thesis requirements frequently discourage the use of nontraditional dissemination techniques (Mosher, 2013; Pauwels, 2002). There are, however, a number of promising practices in universities who actually acknowledge the impact of this work in promotion dossiers (Fitzgerald et al, 2012).…”

Suiga/Change: An Ethnodrama Exploring Challenges in Intimate Relationships With Young People in Samoa

“…Ongoing debates related to best practice in developing and disseminating ethnodrama highlight the importance of creating accessible, yet scientifically rigorous research (Mosher, 2013; Saldaña, 2003). With no “correct” or prescribed method, researchers must consider the overall aims and potential outcomes of their research to choose the most appropriate mode of data analysis and presentation (Saldaña, 2003).…”

Art as a pathway to impact: Understanding the affective experience of public engagement with film

“…Film, in particular, has become well established as a means of data collection and dissemination within public engaged and visual ethnographies (Degarrod, 2013;Dicks, Soyinka, & Coffey, 2006;Franzen, 2013;Mosher, 2013;Pink, 2013). It is important to note that the work described herein is not ethnographic, nor are we describing a piece of visual methods research per se, accepting the difficulties inherent in making such arbitrary distinctions.…”