Clarificatory Discussion

This post is an attempt to record some of the ideas that came out of a discussion I had with my supervisor.

The Name of the Library
I began by stating how I felt about using the name of the new library to be studied (i.e. that I didn't want to use it at all). He felt that this was impractical and that my arguments for wanting to entirely anonymize it were not sound:

• I thought this was a handy shortcut around ethical issues of anonymity (of which more later). He felt there were better ways of achieving this, such as requesting that the dissertation be not allowed for public consultation for x years;
• I thought it would be less generalisable with a particular library's name and details all over it. He commented that it was not particular generalisable anyway, since the library under consideration is unique, and the aspects of staff interaction that I want to study are also unique. He also mentioned that problems I had foreseen to do with a lack of purity of cultural distinction since the two groups had been working together for six months already, were in fact not really problems at all since no cultural distinction could ever be achieved however far we go back. Also if the name of the institution involved could be freely used then facts like this would be interesting background facts that would have to be mentioned anyway in the 'research background' section of the dissertation.

Ethical Dimensions to Consider

• It is vitally important to ensure that participant consent is established before the ethnographic study can begin. This is a lot easier considering that I am studying the interactions between staff, rather than the interactions between the staff and students, who I would also have to get consent from (in theory).
• It is important to value the contributions of each participant equally (given that other things are equal). This is something to look at in more detail since I will be a member of one of the groups to be examined and therefore potentially more willing to give one group more attention and so on.

See Atkinson et al (2001) The Handbook of Ethnography, SAGE: London (esp. Chapter 29 on 'Ethics and Ethnography'

Epistemic Dimensions to Consider

• The question of how far ethnography can genuinely deliver knowledge about a particular culture will be of great theoretic importance to this study.
• The fact that this study will have to be of the form of a participant observation means that issues relating to the fact that I am very much involved with the culture involved will have to discussed at length. Does this mean that I am less able to make judgements about how the cultures interact, or more so. Are my judgements less valid or more valid due to the fact that I am so closely involved?

See Spradley (2000) Participant Observation and Jorgenson (1989) Participant Observation

Boundary Objects
After discussing the idea of studying boundary objects, I think its still a good idea. My supervisor seemed particularly interested in the idea of experts as boundary objects. I agree that this does seem a promising idea. He recommended looking for particular situations that I could locate observations that would be particularly revealing of attitudes towards experts, such as the counter.
We discussed how the literature sees boundary objects as things created in order to bring two communities together, rather than as objects that are revealing of the differences between two communities, and he argued that this should be borne in mind, and I should think about other phrases for the things I want to study, such as 'boundary concepts'. It might turn out experts are not genuinely shared in which case this can be rejected, but it is a useful analytic tool to have which can be utilised should anything spring out.

He thought the idea about librarians appealing to process as the expert, and computer technicians appealing to people as expert was interesting, but pointed out that this might not be how it turns out in the end.

Research Procedure
He recommended that I conduct observations on several (not a lot) of days at the beggining of the research process, focussing on some places or things that I think will be revealing of differneces in culture, or of similarity of culture, maybe with some things that are shared but viewed differently (boundary objects) in mind. He thought that the counter and roaming were particularly good examples of places to begin observing.

I would then conduct in depth and open ended interviews with a few people that I think would be particularly interesting on some subjects that have beome apparent as demonstrating something interesting about the groups.

The observations would be noted down and the interviews transcribed, and both analysed (or coded) for the remainder of the summer.

I should also start observing from now on how the groups interact. I should note down lots of stuff, as Okley recommends, especially things that I do not understand, and then see how I come to understand them etc. Anything that stikes me as interesting or relevant, or as a potential new esearch direction should be noted down because this is an important part of my overall impression of the place and the culture therein.