1. The only justification is pragmatism
Exploring beneath the ethnographic ideal in an international higher education study
Adam Walton, PhD candidate

2. Planning for ethnography in IHE
Ideal ethnography
Original plan
Thick description:
‘Hanging out’
Natural settings
Flexible research questions
Pertinent case selection
Analytic attention to people’s own accounts
Challenges expected
North Afghanistan universities
Uzbek – already spoken
Masculinities
Ethnographically informed:
Long research period
Observations, informal conversations, interviews
Grounded theory
Multi-site

3. Obstacles
My institution would not allow me to go to Afghanistan (after 1.5 years of study)
Second option – Tajikistan – PhD researcher kidnapped
Complete ignorance about eventual location – Turkey
Delays, haste and distance
Language – reduced possible case studies and access to participants
Loss of supervisor with regional expertise
Ethics – limits on observations; insistence on anonymisation

4. Pragmatism hits Original plan Actual study
North Afghanistan universities
Uzbek – already spoken
Masculinities
Ethnographically informed:
Long research period
Observations, informal conversations, interviews
Grounded theory
Multi-site
Cosmopolitan Turkish context
Exploring academic engagement with gender
Research in English
Ethnographically informed:
Short research period
Observations and interviews
Limited informal observation
Fixed research design
Single Westernised case
Still ‘risky’

5. Pragmatically diminished?
Actual study
Ideal ethnography
English language – loss of nuance and range of access
Limited informal observations or conversations because of language, time, ethics, distance
Case limitations: similarity to well documented contexts; no comparison; less pressing issue
No real space for development of RQs
Limited access to administrators, feminists, existing research
Thick description:
‘Hanging out’
Natural settings
Flexible research questions
Pertinent case selection
Analytic attention to people’s own accounts
Challenges expected
Actually happens!!

6. Challenges of ethnography in international higher education – general
Access: no contacts; difficult to get information; even once inside
Language: severe limitations of working in second language
Ignorant: ability to understand contexts limited and time-consuming
Encompasses the entirety of researcher’s life e.g. family, religion
Greater expectations of specificity on research design as compared to e.g. anthropology

7. Challenges of ethnography in international higher education - Risks
Overall
At each level
Do not know / understand settings:
Cannot assess accurately
More able to inadvertently cause harm
More vulnerable
Objectively more risky:
Less stability
Less rule of law
More violence
Research:
Greater likelihood of researcher causing harm
More likely to be significant
Institutional:
Risk aversion limits locations that can be researched
Increased risks – approach with care
Personal:
Likelihood of significant change to research plans
Security risks more unpredictable

8. Desirability of ethnography in international higher education
Understand contexts in their particularity
In some contexts other levels of education have engagement from humanitarian agencies and hence some type of opportunities for research – while HE does not
Comparative value – understand own contexts better
Value of looking at things with a cross-cultural lens, as an outsider

9. Maximising IHE ethnography’s pragmatic scope
Research process
Ethics
Planning: realistic; language; B & C backups; early consideration of access / risk
Appropriate geographic supervision. Systems for having supervision nationals
Reflection on RQ flexibility
Recognise need for significant preparation – strong caution against unplanned change of country!
Informed consent:
acceptance of lectures as public spaces?
reconsideration of restrictions on informal observations / conversations
Anonymisation:
difficult with HE institutions – scarce or distinctive
Is it appropriate not to anonymise, if acknowledged with participants?

10. Maximising IHE ethnography’s pragmatic scope - Risk
Institutional risk
Research
Acknowledge risk aversion limits locations that can be researched
Attention to regional experts and risk evaluation companies
Risk inherent to research
Learn from journalism and humanitarian agencies
Increase:
Negotiation
Transparency, clarity of criteria
Training
Ethics process good at encouraging reflection on this
Again acknowledge that risk is inherent to research
PERSONAL
Be realistic about limitations
Make backup plans
Get training
Build strong local support network

11. Maximising IHE ethnography’s pragmatic scope – increased collaboration?
Increase access to local organisational and cultural knowledge …
... while retaining outsider perspective
IHE institutions have many potential collaborators
Allows for focus on shared, felt research problems
In some settings could helpfully increase local research capacity
At PhD level possibly limited to local supervisory support / working with research assistants
More extensive possibilities at other levels

12. Selected References
Geertz, C. (1973) “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture.” Culture: Critical Concepts in Sociology 1: 173–96.
Hammersley, Martyn, and Paul Atkinson (2007) Ethnography: Principles in Practice. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
Kovats-Bernat, J. Christopher (2002) “Negotiating Dangerous Fields: Pragmatic Strategies for Fieldwork amid Violence and Terror.” American Anthropologist 104, no. 1: 208–22.
Mills, David, and Missy Morton. Ethnography in Education (2013) Research Methods in Education. Los Angeles ; London: Sage.