As I continue my ethnographic work on beekeepers, I have concluded that one idea of Pierre Bourdieu seems quite useful. Bourdieu notes that the necessities and realities produced by one's position in an objective social space are often framed as virtues by those occupying the position. (When the fox can't reach the grapes, he says they were probably sour anyway!) So, the faculty member, whose academic background and/or lack of ability forces him/her to forego scholarly research and work for an emphasis on teaching, will construct a rationalization making teaching a greater virtue than research.
Bourdieu takes this one step further however. The winners in social struggles, not only accumulate capital, they also get the right to define their "virtues" as the rules of the social game. So, for example, if these "virtuous" teacher-professors dominate an academic institution, they often impose this "virtue" on others as the "standard" all good academics must follow and rewards are distributed accordingly.
Showing posts with label ethnography. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethnography. Show all posts
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
Introduction
I remember when I first heard about the bee epidemic that has since been labelled "CCD". I was up early on a cold windy morning in either February or March engaged in my normal pre-work rituals: packing up my knapsack, making some hot tea and eating a granola bar so that I could rush out to teach my 7:45 class at the university. As usual, my partner and I were listening to the news on National Public Radio, waiting primarily for the weather report. Most of the news was rather expected, mostly concerned with violence in Iraq or domestic economic woes, but then I heard a report that made me stop and listen more carefully; Beekeepers around the nation were reporting the mysterious disappearance of bees.
This was very disturbing news to me, a "pit of the stomach", "end of the world" type of anxiety. I was not a beekeeper at the time but did recognize the importance of bees to the "community of life". Emotionally, I felt a particular fondness to the insect, remembering those days growing up in Brooklyn, New York, watching bees forage in a backlot near my house I was fascinated by their diligence and appreciative of their tolerance of me as I touched and examined them. A decade or so later, my interests turned to the human species and I pursued advance degrees in sociology but a concern and study of other species remained. I bred Angel fish in graduate school, and kept a number of exotic reptile species as pets throughout my lifetime. I was obsessive about the research on any species I kept, studying all I could find about the animal.
After hearing the report, I began to research on the web and at the university's library what I could discover about the epidemic . My research took me far beyond the species itself to its imposed relations with human beings. I found that the plight of the honey bee illuminated those abstract concepts, processes and practices (e.g. agribusiness practices and IMF policies) I had bored my students with in Global Issues courses. Those frames beekeeper's of all stripes were constructing to explain the crisis offered concrete examples of frame building for my Introductory Sociology courses as well.
The connections I was drawing did not go unnoticed to those around me, especially my partner. Dinner and driving conversation changed as I shared my new found knowledge. Finally, after one of my long, and animated monologues on bees, Monta suggested that I pursue the research more systematically even, perhaps, creating a course in Global Issues which focused entirely on honey bees.
This was very disturbing news to me, a "pit of the stomach", "end of the world" type of anxiety. I was not a beekeeper at the time but did recognize the importance of bees to the "community of life". Emotionally, I felt a particular fondness to the insect, remembering those days growing up in Brooklyn, New York, watching bees forage in a backlot near my house I was fascinated by their diligence and appreciative of their tolerance of me as I touched and examined them. A decade or so later, my interests turned to the human species and I pursued advance degrees in sociology but a concern and study of other species remained. I bred Angel fish in graduate school, and kept a number of exotic reptile species as pets throughout my lifetime. I was obsessive about the research on any species I kept, studying all I could find about the animal.
After hearing the report, I began to research on the web and at the university's library what I could discover about the epidemic . My research took me far beyond the species itself to its imposed relations with human beings. I found that the plight of the honey bee illuminated those abstract concepts, processes and practices (e.g. agribusiness practices and IMF policies) I had bored my students with in Global Issues courses. Those frames beekeeper's of all stripes were constructing to explain the crisis offered concrete examples of frame building for my Introductory Sociology courses as well.
The connections I was drawing did not go unnoticed to those around me, especially my partner. Dinner and driving conversation changed as I shared my new found knowledge. Finally, after one of my long, and animated monologues on bees, Monta suggested that I pursue the research more systematically even, perhaps, creating a course in Global Issues which focused entirely on honey bees.
Monday, October 1, 2007
Organic Beekeeping?
A couple of months ago, I wrote a short piece on my thoughts concerning the terms: natural, organic and sustainable. Since that time I've explored what these words mean in the world of beekeeping and was surprised to find that they are such "contested concepts". Not only is there disagreement over what the concepts mean in the beekeeping world but it seems like there is something else at stake as well, the right to use the term as a rhetorical weapon and the right to call oneself an organic beekeeper.
Ross Conrad, in his book Natural Beekeeping, distinguishes between those beekeepers who espouse a liberal definition of organic to those who use the term much more conservatively. (p 38-9) The liberals would argue that an organic beekeeper is simply one who manages her/his hives without synthetic chemicals or antibiotics. The question of where one's bees forage would not be used to define whether one is an "organic beekeeper" or not. Conservatives, on the other hand,want the term organic applied to a much more "exclusive club" of beekeepers: those who not only manage their bees without synthetic chemicals or antibiotics but do not let their bees forage in areas where these chemicals are used. (Quite a difficult task!)
I have found recently that this is not the only front where beekeepers battle over the use of these concepts. There are some (like the leadership of the Organic Beekeeper email list) who apply organic only to those bees that are managed without any chemical interventions whether it be "hard" chemicals (e.g. antibiotics) or "soft" alternatives (e.g. essential oils). These beekeepers are opposed by others who believe that the use of chemicals in itself does not preclude a beekeeper from the label "organic" if the chemicals used are themselves organic as with essential oils.
The debates over these concepts in the beekeeping world fascinate me and lead me to ask a whole set of other questions concerning the capital used in fighting these battles. This seems to be one direction my ethnographic research will take.
Ross Conrad, in his book Natural Beekeeping, distinguishes between those beekeepers who espouse a liberal definition of organic to those who use the term much more conservatively. (p 38-9) The liberals would argue that an organic beekeeper is simply one who manages her/his hives without synthetic chemicals or antibiotics. The question of where one's bees forage would not be used to define whether one is an "organic beekeeper" or not. Conservatives, on the other hand,want the term organic applied to a much more "exclusive club" of beekeepers: those who not only manage their bees without synthetic chemicals or antibiotics but do not let their bees forage in areas where these chemicals are used. (Quite a difficult task!)
I have found recently that this is not the only front where beekeepers battle over the use of these concepts. There are some (like the leadership of the Organic Beekeeper email list) who apply organic only to those bees that are managed without any chemical interventions whether it be "hard" chemicals (e.g. antibiotics) or "soft" alternatives (e.g. essential oils). These beekeepers are opposed by others who believe that the use of chemicals in itself does not preclude a beekeeper from the label "organic" if the chemicals used are themselves organic as with essential oils.
The debates over these concepts in the beekeeping world fascinate me and lead me to ask a whole set of other questions concerning the capital used in fighting these battles. This seems to be one direction my ethnographic research will take.
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Latest On The Sabbatical Front
I sent in my revised proposal to my department chair, dean, and Faculty Development Committee. Most of the responses have been favorable but they mostly have focused on the pedagogical, sociological, and methodological issues of the proposal and very little on bees. Interestingly though, I continue to get offers of help from faculty in a number of different disciplines. There is something about this idea of raising bees that has resonance for people here at my university.
When the proposal is approved, I will not wait for two years to begin my ethnographic research. (I have started already in little ways.)I plan on starting to attend beekeeper's meetings at the closest club I've found, some 20 miles from my home. I will also be applying for a grant so that I can travel and attend various national beekeeper's conferences and perhaps visit with a number of beeks I've been in contact with over the internet. The use of the internet as a resource in doing ethnography fascinates me. That means this week I must make some contacts.
The other news to report is that Monta and I have purchased some wooden fence sections for creating a protective barrier around the beeyard. When we finish putting it up we will leave photos here.
When the proposal is approved, I will not wait for two years to begin my ethnographic research. (I have started already in little ways.)I plan on starting to attend beekeeper's meetings at the closest club I've found, some 20 miles from my home. I will also be applying for a grant so that I can travel and attend various national beekeeper's conferences and perhaps visit with a number of beeks I've been in contact with over the internet. The use of the internet as a resource in doing ethnography fascinates me. That means this week I must make some contacts.
The other news to report is that Monta and I have purchased some wooden fence sections for creating a protective barrier around the beeyard. When we finish putting it up we will leave photos here.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Sabbatical Proposal Revised Again
I received some comments from the Faculty Development Committee concerning my sabbatical proposal and have revised it. (see below) I am going to let my department chair read this before I send it back to committee since he didn't understand why any changes were called for in the first draft to begin with.
____________
Sabbatical Proposal for Spring Semester 2009
Wesley E. Miller
Department of Social Science
September 2007
1. Synopsis
I teach the interdisciplinary course called Global Issues and every semester I am faced with the same problem: How do I engage students to consider important macro-structural global issues without losing them? An understanding of the problems and benefits surrounding economic and environmental globalization is a must for any informed citizen, yet for many students, these issues are too abstract and distant from them. Their eyes glaze over with each discussion of IMF policy, or the impact of neo-conservative ideology. I do well enough on my evaluations so I could ignore this problem and coast to retirement, but I have this gut feeling, not found in any of the “positivist” assessment tools used to evaluate the course, that my students are just not getting it. Developmentally, my students are very concrete thinkers, so I am left with the problem of getting them to somehow ponder very abstract concepts and processes.
One approach to my dilemma is to get my students to cultivate what we sociologists call “the sociological imagination”: the ability to perceive that one’s inner and day-to-day life is very much connected to the larger macro-structures we live within (Mills 1959); the concrete mundane problems that we can easily grasp are very much related to those larger global issues and policies which we see as distant. From this pedagogical approach, students would start by focusing on an engaging, concrete activity and slowly broaden this focus during the semester, learning how this activity is impacted by a complex web of larger national and global structures that seem so distant to them at first.
After doing some initial reading last summer on the complex issue of “Colony Collapse Disorder” (CCD) amongst honey bees (Apis Mellifera), I think that a Global Issues course that centers on honey bees as the proverbial “canaries in a coal mine” would help students understand and engage in the global issues that impact their own lives as well. The problems (e.g. CCD, organic vs. conventional husbandry) that beekeepers and their bees face are not simply biological issues, but are influenced by macro structural forces as well.
The effective construction of any such course will demand a retooling on my part. A course with this focus will demand knowledge outside my disciplinary expertise. Besides a hands-on understanding of day-to-day apiculture I will need to become more familiar with global economic and political policy, ecological issues, agribusiness practices, and the cultures and philosophies in the beekeeping world.
In sum, then, I request a sabbatical leave for spring semester 2009 in order to pursue the following objectives:
1. To understand how the day-to-day lives of honey bees and beekeepers are impacted by the larger macro-forces produced by globalization.
Underlying this objective is the theoretical orientation in sociology called “structural constructivism” (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1988). Like ‘normal’ social constructivist theory, this approach recognizes that as individuals interact they collaboratively construct “typifications” or representations of reality (Berger and Luckmann 1967). Structural Constructivism argues that the “social materials” used in the social construction of reality come not only from the external social environment of individuals, but that these materials systematically vary with the structural/historical position of the actor. For example, a middle class, 21 century, US citizen from the Midwest will produce a different social construction than an upper class, 19th century, Irish citizen from Cork simply because their social/geographical/historical coordinates have placed them in different environments where the “social materials” at hand are different.
The chief advantage of this approach in both sociological research and problem-based pedagogy is that it avoids the false opposition between human agency and structural determinism. Actors “improvise” and create but always within the limits of the structures at hand; they internalize the external, while externalizing the internal, all with some “improvisational” control on the part of the agent. As they externalize they also reproduce, and creatively adapt to some degree, the structures they originally internalized.
As a proponent of the Conflict paradigm in sociology, I tend to shy away from the use of systems theory. From my viewpoint, systems theory tends to overly exaggerate the integration of cultural artifacts and the functional interdependence of societal structures, while casting conflict and cultural contradiction as “abnormal”.
2. To distill the above information into concepts and activities that would effectively engage students in understanding global issues.
Admittedly, at this point, I only have vague notions of what a “bee-focused” Global Issues course might look like. I would like to explore the possibility of combining a problem-based pedagogical approach (Delisle 1997) with a grounded theory-based (Glaser and Strauss 1967) research methodology (see more about grounded theory under objective 3). In problem-based pedagogy, students learn not by reading or listening for the teacher’s “correct answers”, but by creating and answering their own questions. The grounded theory methodology would provide the students with an environment to do this in, not simply as students, but as research collaborators elaborating on and clarifying the work I’ve already begun in my ethnography through their collection of data from new theoretically chosen comparison groups. Course activities might well include experiences interviewing beekeepers and observing different apiaries, content analysis of internet “bee” forums and email lists, attending to the current research on bee management and bee ‘problems’ in various apicultural publications, examining economic, environmental and political policies that might impact bees and/or beekeepers, and hands-on experiences in bee management and care. All these experiences would be recorded and reflected upon by each student in a detailed journal of field notes.
While the sociological perspective of the instructor will no doubt be a guiding influence here, the course should offer an interdisciplinary (rather than “other disciplinary”) perspective on “bees in a global context”.
3. To produce an ethnography of the beekeeping world including those more “esoteric” movements like “biodynamic beekeeping” and “apitherapy”.
Methodologically, this ethnography will be guided by two meta-sociological approaches: reflexive sociology and grounded theory.
In a nutshell, reflexive sociology (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992) recognizes that the same types of social forces that impact the social constructions of ordinary actors in day-to-day life also impact the scientific observer and her instruments when doing research and analysis. The scientific method does not provide the observer with a “magic bubble,” giving the researcher a “god-like viewpoint” on reality, thus exempting her from the influences that her social/historical position exerts on her. The reflexive sociologists rejects the “futile attempts to eliminate the effects of (and on) the researcher” (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1983:17), but instead calls on the scientific observer to examine those effects in order to produce a richer understanding of the phenomena under study. Ignoring these social forces or claiming to control them doesn’t make the knowledge produced any more valid.
This proposed sabbatical project could serve as an institutional model for doing reflexive research. Whether we are discussing our positivist approach to assessment or Bloom’s taxonomy at SMU, we lack any general acknowledgement or analysis of reflexivity in the knowledge we produce. To paraphrase Schuman (in Hammersley and Atkinson, 1983:17), artifacts (or numbers) are produced in the minds of their socially positioned beholders.
The ethnographic study will also be informed by what is called Grounded Theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). According to Glaser and Corbin (1990: 21) “the grounded theory approach is a qualitative research method that uses a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived grounded theory about a phenomenon”. Through “theoretical sampling” and strategic comparisons, the researcher produces substantive theories that fit the data observed well. The beauty of such a methodology for problem-based pedagogy is that the theories produced are always open-ended, allowing others (both students and faculty) to clarify and possibly add to the theory through their own systematic observations, strategic comparisons and analytical clarifications.
2. Activities Description
The following is a tentative timeline of the activities I propose to do during this sabbatical. The spring semester was chosen since it coincides with the beginning of beekeeping season in Minnesota.
a. January
1. Library research with a focus on bee biology and apiculture.
2. Begin interviews with apiculturalists of all types. It will include interviews with large and small-scale intensive honey producers, apiarists who practice “organic” or “sustainable” beekeeping, and backyard beekeepers who have one or two hives.
3. Attend the American Beekeeping Federation annual meeting.
b. February
1. Library research and interviewing with a focus on the philosophical “esoteric” side of beekeeping. This includes examining the ideas of Rudolf Steiner, Gunther Hauk, and other members of the “biodynamic” movement. Also, time will be spent studying the ideas of Charles Mraz and other proponents of “apitherapy”. This also might include attendance at an American Apitherapy meeting and a visit to the apiary founded by Charles Mraz in Burlington, Vermont.
2. Attend the Organic Beekeeping Society meeting.
c. March
1. Library research on global agricultural policy and practices.
2. Take a short course on apiculture at the University of Minnesota extension from Dr. Marla Spivak, breeder of the “Minnesota Hygienic” bee.
3. Prepare two hives: one using conventional Langtroth boxes and frames, the second using a Kenyan Top Bar hive.
4. Continue interviews
d. April and May
1. Begin construction of a Global Issues syllabus using materials collected thus far. Syllabus will include readings and activities in and out of class.
2. Participant observation conducted at local apiaries of different sizes and philosophies. Observations will go beyond simply husbandry concerns to attitudes towards bees and global concerns.
3. Add bees to the two hives set up last month.
4. Library research with a focus on global environmental issues that may impact bees.
e. May to Summer
1. Begin the writing and continue research for the ethnography.
2. Summer management of bees.
3. Contribution Description
a. Professional Development – Sociology has a long tradition of ethnographic studies describing the subcultures of occupations. Back in the 1920s, Robert Park (1983) analyzed the social world of news reporters. In the 1950s, Howard Becker (1963) examined the lebenswelt of Chicago jazz musicians. More recently, French sociologist Loic Wacquant (2006) did a participant observation study as an apprentice boxer. These studies looked underneath the manifest, official descriptions of these occupations found in organizational flow charts or career services materials to a complex world of meanings and rituals. This ethnographic examination of the world of beekeeping is my first attempt to add to this body of materials.
b. Academic Program – I think that the activities of this proposed sabbatical, brought into the classroom environment, will enhance our students understanding of global issues. If other faculty find this approach engaging and/or successful, it might inspire others to approach other courses in this manner.
c. Sharing Results with Other Faculty- Besides doing a post-sabbatical presentation on some relevant issue growing out of my research, I will be keeping a daily blog which will be accessible to faculty, students, and administration during and after the sabbatical. This blog (“Canaries in a Coal Mine”) will document my sabbatical’s day-to-day activities and discoveries. The use of a blog in this fashion is something rather unique.
5. Assessment Description
Four types of evidence will be used in assessing this sabbatical project.
a. Scholarly Publications- I will produce some body of work that will be submitted either in article or book form. I can envision the research producing a number of possible publications in sociology, pedagogy, environmental studies, and apiculture.
b. Presentation at the Midwest Sociology Convention.
c. I will use the comments left on my blog to assess the accuracy and clarity of what I am discovering. I will also share the assessment of my work to my blog readers as well.
d. I will produce a new syllabus for my Global Issues course that uses honeybees as a concrete focus for examining the problems and benefits globalization.
Works Cited
Becker, Howard S. 1963. The Outsiders. New York: Free Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre and Loic Wacquant. 1988. “Social Space and Symbolic Power”. Social Theory 7:18-26.
Bourdieu, Pierre and Loic Wacquant.1992. Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Delisle, Robert. 1997. How to Use Problem-Based Learning in the Classroom. Alexandra, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Hammersley, Martyn and Atkinson, Paul. 1983. Ethnography: Principle in Practices. New York: Routledge.
Mills, C. Wright. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Park, Robert E. 1983. “The Natural History of a Newspaper”. The City: Suggestions for Investigation of Human Behavior in the Urban Environment. Edited by Robert E. Park and Ernest W. Burgess. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wacquant, Loic. 2006. Body and Soul: Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer. Oxford: Oxford University.
____________
Sabbatical Proposal for Spring Semester 2009
Wesley E. Miller
Department of Social Science
September 2007
1. Synopsis
I teach the interdisciplinary course called Global Issues and every semester I am faced with the same problem: How do I engage students to consider important macro-structural global issues without losing them? An understanding of the problems and benefits surrounding economic and environmental globalization is a must for any informed citizen, yet for many students, these issues are too abstract and distant from them. Their eyes glaze over with each discussion of IMF policy, or the impact of neo-conservative ideology. I do well enough on my evaluations so I could ignore this problem and coast to retirement, but I have this gut feeling, not found in any of the “positivist” assessment tools used to evaluate the course, that my students are just not getting it. Developmentally, my students are very concrete thinkers, so I am left with the problem of getting them to somehow ponder very abstract concepts and processes.
One approach to my dilemma is to get my students to cultivate what we sociologists call “the sociological imagination”: the ability to perceive that one’s inner and day-to-day life is very much connected to the larger macro-structures we live within (Mills 1959); the concrete mundane problems that we can easily grasp are very much related to those larger global issues and policies which we see as distant. From this pedagogical approach, students would start by focusing on an engaging, concrete activity and slowly broaden this focus during the semester, learning how this activity is impacted by a complex web of larger national and global structures that seem so distant to them at first.
After doing some initial reading last summer on the complex issue of “Colony Collapse Disorder” (CCD) amongst honey bees (Apis Mellifera), I think that a Global Issues course that centers on honey bees as the proverbial “canaries in a coal mine” would help students understand and engage in the global issues that impact their own lives as well. The problems (e.g. CCD, organic vs. conventional husbandry) that beekeepers and their bees face are not simply biological issues, but are influenced by macro structural forces as well.
The effective construction of any such course will demand a retooling on my part. A course with this focus will demand knowledge outside my disciplinary expertise. Besides a hands-on understanding of day-to-day apiculture I will need to become more familiar with global economic and political policy, ecological issues, agribusiness practices, and the cultures and philosophies in the beekeeping world.
In sum, then, I request a sabbatical leave for spring semester 2009 in order to pursue the following objectives:
1. To understand how the day-to-day lives of honey bees and beekeepers are impacted by the larger macro-forces produced by globalization.
Underlying this objective is the theoretical orientation in sociology called “structural constructivism” (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1988). Like ‘normal’ social constructivist theory, this approach recognizes that as individuals interact they collaboratively construct “typifications” or representations of reality (Berger and Luckmann 1967). Structural Constructivism argues that the “social materials” used in the social construction of reality come not only from the external social environment of individuals, but that these materials systematically vary with the structural/historical position of the actor. For example, a middle class, 21 century, US citizen from the Midwest will produce a different social construction than an upper class, 19th century, Irish citizen from Cork simply because their social/geographical/historical coordinates have placed them in different environments where the “social materials” at hand are different.
The chief advantage of this approach in both sociological research and problem-based pedagogy is that it avoids the false opposition between human agency and structural determinism. Actors “improvise” and create but always within the limits of the structures at hand; they internalize the external, while externalizing the internal, all with some “improvisational” control on the part of the agent. As they externalize they also reproduce, and creatively adapt to some degree, the structures they originally internalized.
As a proponent of the Conflict paradigm in sociology, I tend to shy away from the use of systems theory. From my viewpoint, systems theory tends to overly exaggerate the integration of cultural artifacts and the functional interdependence of societal structures, while casting conflict and cultural contradiction as “abnormal”.
2. To distill the above information into concepts and activities that would effectively engage students in understanding global issues.
Admittedly, at this point, I only have vague notions of what a “bee-focused” Global Issues course might look like. I would like to explore the possibility of combining a problem-based pedagogical approach (Delisle 1997) with a grounded theory-based (Glaser and Strauss 1967) research methodology (see more about grounded theory under objective 3). In problem-based pedagogy, students learn not by reading or listening for the teacher’s “correct answers”, but by creating and answering their own questions. The grounded theory methodology would provide the students with an environment to do this in, not simply as students, but as research collaborators elaborating on and clarifying the work I’ve already begun in my ethnography through their collection of data from new theoretically chosen comparison groups. Course activities might well include experiences interviewing beekeepers and observing different apiaries, content analysis of internet “bee” forums and email lists, attending to the current research on bee management and bee ‘problems’ in various apicultural publications, examining economic, environmental and political policies that might impact bees and/or beekeepers, and hands-on experiences in bee management and care. All these experiences would be recorded and reflected upon by each student in a detailed journal of field notes.
While the sociological perspective of the instructor will no doubt be a guiding influence here, the course should offer an interdisciplinary (rather than “other disciplinary”) perspective on “bees in a global context”.
3. To produce an ethnography of the beekeeping world including those more “esoteric” movements like “biodynamic beekeeping” and “apitherapy”.
Methodologically, this ethnography will be guided by two meta-sociological approaches: reflexive sociology and grounded theory.
In a nutshell, reflexive sociology (Bourdieu and Wacquant 1992) recognizes that the same types of social forces that impact the social constructions of ordinary actors in day-to-day life also impact the scientific observer and her instruments when doing research and analysis. The scientific method does not provide the observer with a “magic bubble,” giving the researcher a “god-like viewpoint” on reality, thus exempting her from the influences that her social/historical position exerts on her. The reflexive sociologists rejects the “futile attempts to eliminate the effects of (and on) the researcher” (Hammersley and Atkinson, 1983:17), but instead calls on the scientific observer to examine those effects in order to produce a richer understanding of the phenomena under study. Ignoring these social forces or claiming to control them doesn’t make the knowledge produced any more valid.
This proposed sabbatical project could serve as an institutional model for doing reflexive research. Whether we are discussing our positivist approach to assessment or Bloom’s taxonomy at SMU, we lack any general acknowledgement or analysis of reflexivity in the knowledge we produce. To paraphrase Schuman (in Hammersley and Atkinson, 1983:17), artifacts (or numbers) are produced in the minds of their socially positioned beholders.
The ethnographic study will also be informed by what is called Grounded Theory (Glaser and Strauss, 1967). According to Glaser and Corbin (1990: 21) “the grounded theory approach is a qualitative research method that uses a systematic set of procedures to develop an inductively derived grounded theory about a phenomenon”. Through “theoretical sampling” and strategic comparisons, the researcher produces substantive theories that fit the data observed well. The beauty of such a methodology for problem-based pedagogy is that the theories produced are always open-ended, allowing others (both students and faculty) to clarify and possibly add to the theory through their own systematic observations, strategic comparisons and analytical clarifications.
2. Activities Description
The following is a tentative timeline of the activities I propose to do during this sabbatical. The spring semester was chosen since it coincides with the beginning of beekeeping season in Minnesota.
a. January
1. Library research with a focus on bee biology and apiculture.
2. Begin interviews with apiculturalists of all types. It will include interviews with large and small-scale intensive honey producers, apiarists who practice “organic” or “sustainable” beekeeping, and backyard beekeepers who have one or two hives.
3. Attend the American Beekeeping Federation annual meeting.
b. February
1. Library research and interviewing with a focus on the philosophical “esoteric” side of beekeeping. This includes examining the ideas of Rudolf Steiner, Gunther Hauk, and other members of the “biodynamic” movement. Also, time will be spent studying the ideas of Charles Mraz and other proponents of “apitherapy”. This also might include attendance at an American Apitherapy meeting and a visit to the apiary founded by Charles Mraz in Burlington, Vermont.
2. Attend the Organic Beekeeping Society meeting.
c. March
1. Library research on global agricultural policy and practices.
2. Take a short course on apiculture at the University of Minnesota extension from Dr. Marla Spivak, breeder of the “Minnesota Hygienic” bee.
3. Prepare two hives: one using conventional Langtroth boxes and frames, the second using a Kenyan Top Bar hive.
4. Continue interviews
d. April and May
1. Begin construction of a Global Issues syllabus using materials collected thus far. Syllabus will include readings and activities in and out of class.
2. Participant observation conducted at local apiaries of different sizes and philosophies. Observations will go beyond simply husbandry concerns to attitudes towards bees and global concerns.
3. Add bees to the two hives set up last month.
4. Library research with a focus on global environmental issues that may impact bees.
e. May to Summer
1. Begin the writing and continue research for the ethnography.
2. Summer management of bees.
3. Contribution Description
a. Professional Development – Sociology has a long tradition of ethnographic studies describing the subcultures of occupations. Back in the 1920s, Robert Park (1983) analyzed the social world of news reporters. In the 1950s, Howard Becker (1963) examined the lebenswelt of Chicago jazz musicians. More recently, French sociologist Loic Wacquant (2006) did a participant observation study as an apprentice boxer. These studies looked underneath the manifest, official descriptions of these occupations found in organizational flow charts or career services materials to a complex world of meanings and rituals. This ethnographic examination of the world of beekeeping is my first attempt to add to this body of materials.
b. Academic Program – I think that the activities of this proposed sabbatical, brought into the classroom environment, will enhance our students understanding of global issues. If other faculty find this approach engaging and/or successful, it might inspire others to approach other courses in this manner.
c. Sharing Results with Other Faculty- Besides doing a post-sabbatical presentation on some relevant issue growing out of my research, I will be keeping a daily blog which will be accessible to faculty, students, and administration during and after the sabbatical. This blog (“Canaries in a Coal Mine”) will document my sabbatical’s day-to-day activities and discoveries. The use of a blog in this fashion is something rather unique.
5. Assessment Description
Four types of evidence will be used in assessing this sabbatical project.
a. Scholarly Publications- I will produce some body of work that will be submitted either in article or book form. I can envision the research producing a number of possible publications in sociology, pedagogy, environmental studies, and apiculture.
b. Presentation at the Midwest Sociology Convention.
c. I will use the comments left on my blog to assess the accuracy and clarity of what I am discovering. I will also share the assessment of my work to my blog readers as well.
d. I will produce a new syllabus for my Global Issues course that uses honeybees as a concrete focus for examining the problems and benefits globalization.
Works Cited
Becker, Howard S. 1963. The Outsiders. New York: Free Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre and Loic Wacquant. 1988. “Social Space and Symbolic Power”. Social Theory 7:18-26.
Bourdieu, Pierre and Loic Wacquant.1992. Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Delisle, Robert. 1997. How to Use Problem-Based Learning in the Classroom. Alexandra, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
Hammersley, Martyn and Atkinson, Paul. 1983. Ethnography: Principle in Practices. New York: Routledge.
Mills, C. Wright. 1959. The Sociological Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Park, Robert E. 1983. “The Natural History of a Newspaper”. The City: Suggestions for Investigation of Human Behavior in the Urban Environment. Edited by Robert E. Park and Ernest W. Burgess. Chicago: University of Chicago.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. 1990. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wacquant, Loic. 2006. Body and Soul: Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer. Oxford: Oxford University.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Finally, Someone Put this into Words (Warning: No Bee Content)
In preparation for my impending (and still tentative) ethnographic sabbatical, I've been returning to some books on field research, one of which is a highly engaging work by Hammersley and Atkinson, Ethnography Principles and Practices. I've been waiting for years to put into words what Hammersley and Atkinson state in one short sentence:
"Here, naturalism takes over a common, but erroneous, view that only false beliefs can be explained sociologically, and in this case the outcome is thoroughgoing relativism. " (pg 13)
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Some Random Thoughts in Ethnographic Mode
It's been a little over a month since I began this exploration in beekeeping as both a novice beekeeper and an ethnographer. I've primarily focused on the actual mechanics of apiculture and developing a sense of the different philosophies and approaches within this world. At this point I've been somewhat limited, primarily depending on books and internet information, including involvement in the biobees forum and the organic beekeeping list. I have also corresponded with a number of beekeepers through email. I am much less overwhelmed but still have many questions.
So far, I've only been in contact and interaction with beekeepers through the internet which leads me to ask: how important is this media to the "socialization" of future beekeepers? I know that I live in a place where the closest beekeeping club is twenty miles away in another state and there seems to be no beekeepers in my immediate vicinity since I never observe honey bees in my own yard. How common is it for new beekeepers to learn the "craft" through internet sources without one-on-one mentoring? Has this changed beekeeping and, if so, how? How important was a mentoring relationship in the past? Or were clubs and apiculture books the primary transmitters?
I've read accounts about beekeeping clubs being primarily the domain of older men, yet many of the resources available on the web are provided by younger people both men and women. Is this pattern stereotypical or is there some generalizability to it? If it is a general pattern, how might it be explained?
I'll be interested in finding out how beekeepers are adapting both cognitively and "apiculturally" to the "threat of CCD". Is the sustainable beekeeping movement attracting more interest than just a few short years ago? How are commercial beekeepers coping with this "threat"? Is it changing viewpoints on husbandry or are they simply searching for another "silver bullet"?
I'm very interested in the way beekeepers think and talk about their bees. I've observed some beekeepers anthropomorphizing bee behavior. How does this activity vary with the type of beekeeping done? Do hobbyists talk of the bees differently than let's say a commercial apiculturalist?
Ethnographically speaking, I have questions about how to approach this blog. Should I see this as the place to record my own field notes albeit in a very unique and challenging way? Placing my field notes online like this has both advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that it allows me immediate feedback on my insights as I do this ethnography. Other beekeepers, sociologists and anthropologists can become collaborators in my work, pointing out problems in what I've written and offering useful suggestions on the direction I might go. This never really happens in regular field research. No one but the ethnographer ever sees his/her field notes. Others simply read monographs based on those notes. The chief disadvantage, as I see it, is confidentiality. Many observations I make might need to be kept from the public for ethical reasons. Also, I can see field notes becoming quite boring to many readers as they will often appear to be narratives without a real point.
So far, I've only been in contact and interaction with beekeepers through the internet which leads me to ask: how important is this media to the "socialization" of future beekeepers? I know that I live in a place where the closest beekeeping club is twenty miles away in another state and there seems to be no beekeepers in my immediate vicinity since I never observe honey bees in my own yard. How common is it for new beekeepers to learn the "craft" through internet sources without one-on-one mentoring? Has this changed beekeeping and, if so, how? How important was a mentoring relationship in the past? Or were clubs and apiculture books the primary transmitters?
I've read accounts about beekeeping clubs being primarily the domain of older men, yet many of the resources available on the web are provided by younger people both men and women. Is this pattern stereotypical or is there some generalizability to it? If it is a general pattern, how might it be explained?
I'll be interested in finding out how beekeepers are adapting both cognitively and "apiculturally" to the "threat of CCD". Is the sustainable beekeeping movement attracting more interest than just a few short years ago? How are commercial beekeepers coping with this "threat"? Is it changing viewpoints on husbandry or are they simply searching for another "silver bullet"?
I'm very interested in the way beekeepers think and talk about their bees. I've observed some beekeepers anthropomorphizing bee behavior. How does this activity vary with the type of beekeeping done? Do hobbyists talk of the bees differently than let's say a commercial apiculturalist?
Ethnographically speaking, I have questions about how to approach this blog. Should I see this as the place to record my own field notes albeit in a very unique and challenging way? Placing my field notes online like this has both advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that it allows me immediate feedback on my insights as I do this ethnography. Other beekeepers, sociologists and anthropologists can become collaborators in my work, pointing out problems in what I've written and offering useful suggestions on the direction I might go. This never really happens in regular field research. No one but the ethnographer ever sees his/her field notes. Others simply read monographs based on those notes. The chief disadvantage, as I see it, is confidentiality. Many observations I make might need to be kept from the public for ethical reasons. Also, I can see field notes becoming quite boring to many readers as they will often appear to be narratives without a real point.
Monday, August 6, 2007
Forewarning the Beekeepers
If I get my sabbatical approved and use "Canaries..." as my principle conduit of information, I will be writing here about issues that have very little to do with beekeeping. One of the first of these topics will be the examination of ethnographies and ethnographic methods, using these as possible models for my own research reporting. I've done participant observation before while a graduate student at Loyola but I have never produced a whole monograph using such an approach. At this point my plan is to first read Loic Wacquant's Body and Soul: Notebooks of an Apprentice Boxer. Wacquant is a French sociologist who did a participant observation study of boxing while in Chicago. So those of you who expect a total beekeeping blog, be warned and bear with me. And don't be afraid to comment anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
