Critical Ethnography

Designing and Conducting Critical Ethnography

Many communication scholars define critical ethnography as a subset of ethnography in general. Thus, the research design and process of critical ethnography are much like developing a conventional ethnography. First, the researcher develops a clear and identifiable purpose and research questions. Often in critical ethnography, topic selection emerges from researchers’ direct experience with social phenomena about which they are passionate. Second, the research population and field sites are defined. The most important consideration is to identify the sources that have direct experience with the topic. Next, data are collected through fieldwork, interviews, and possibly other methods that lend themselves to interpretive inquiry such as participatory photography or oral history interviews. The data are analyzed and then a research report is written for the intended audiences.

The difference between critical ethnography and conventional ethnography is that the researcher maintains commitments to critical reflection and raising awareness throughout the process. For example, when developing the purpose and research questions for a critical ethnography, researchers are encouraged to reflect on their life experiences and personal history and knowledge to determine what problems and issues are important to them and why. Rather than limit the researcher’s positions on and experiences with social problems and inequalities, critical ethnography seeks to mine the researcher’s knowledge of a topic in order to bring clarity of focus and depth of inquiry to the research. In this way, the critical ethnographers acknowledge that they are an active participant in the research process.

A second distinguishing characteristic of critical ethnography is that theory is embedded in the methods. In order to critique social groups, institutions, and power structures, critical ethnographers draw upon a range of theories derived from critical philosophical perspectives. These include feminist, queer, postcolonial, neo-Marxist, and Foucauldian perspectives. Theory provides the guiding framework for developing research questions, interacting with participants, interpreting the data, and presenting the findings.

Finally, the relationship between the researcher and participants is an important concern in critical ethnography. In communication, critical ethnographers often endorse dialogue as both a legitimate practice and stance when working in the field. In developing dialogic relationships with participants, researchers remain open to being changed and challenged by the field experience. This is in contrast with methods that position the researcher as an expert and participants as informants.

...