B 20

Sample Journal Entry

I have lots of questions about this stuff. One of my main questions is about researcher role. I am involved in a study in which my role is really embedded. I have lots of faces in this research. I am a mother of a child who attends school in the district we are studying. I used to be engaged to a man who works in the district. Now I'm not. All circumstances have had a role in my work. It would be disingenuous to claim that none of these circumstances color my vision of what is happening. But I'm not sure how to present myself. I mean, I tell all the participants in the research that I have a child in the district, and when I was engaged to the person, I told everyone that was the case. That's only respectful, I think. But when I think about what is happening, and what I see, and the implications, I am torn. And I am certainly torn when I think about presenting my work. I don't want it to be discredited on the basis of my involvement, nor do I want to represent myself as a disinterested party. That would be a lie. But it would also be a lie to say that my ill fated romance has had a negative influence on my vision, or that my positive evaluation of the education my son is receiving has had a positive influence on my vision. I like to think that I see what I see--but I know that what I see must be colored. Somehow.

And here's another thing. One of the (married, and powerful) participants made an ill-concealed pass at me--in front of other participants, who rushed to my defense. I know that this instance has colored my perception of this person, and the perceptions of other participants. My initial response was to say that I shouldn't have contact with this person, but that would hamper the research effort. So my compromise has been to pretend that it didn't happen. But we all know that it did. And I know that the incident has colored the way I view the person. And it's colored my view of myself. I mean, does a single cute lil blonde girl have the right to place herself in harm's way? Of course I know I do, but then I think, geez, if an ugly old man had been where you were sitting, the whole weird interaction would never have happened.

So, pragmatics reign--if and when I write of this part of the study, do I mention this bizarre thing, with the notion that telling it will make clear my stance on this person? Do I pretend that it makes no difference--and I think in a lot of ways it does make no difference--in my own mind it's a fluke, or I say it is.

I guess the question is how much can I trust my own statements of disinterest? And how honest am I?, or do I need to be? If I ever write of this research, and my writing includes the evil guy, it will be pretty apparent to many who he is. So do I, in writing, pretend that it never happened, assuming that my understanding of the incident is that it was a weird confluence of stars and environment, that it has nothing to do with what I'm writing about? Or do I 'fess up, risking that my work will be discredited (oh, no self interest here!) and say what has happened, in the name of Truth? And, do I risk the reputation (and possibly the marriage, and possibly the position) of the person involved? Would that not be a sacrifice, in the name of Truth, that was simply self aggrandizing? ("Oh yes, this thing happened to me, and I kept on with my work-- or "Oh yes, this thing happened, but it didn't color anything I have to say.") On the other hand, is it discrediting the person who reads the research not to say anything? Would it be cheating the reader not to give the "whole picture" as I see it? On the one hand, I think that the best answer is to see whether or not this incident colors what happens. On the other hand, I don't trust my perceptions--things have happened, and I don't know if they are colored by this incident or not--or even if the incident remains important to anyone but me.

I think it's clear that I must say that I have a child in the district being studied, because that interest creates tensions that I probably cannot resolve--I want the best education possible for him, and it's entirely possible that some of the discussions taking place within the group I am studying will create an education for him that is better--so I view the work the group is undertaking favorably. And I also know that I am both capable and willing to augment any deficits I do see in his education.

And here's another question. I volunteer in my son's school twice a week, and talk to his teacher. I am privy to her questions and concerns, and have a distinct feeling about how she might resolve them, both as a product of the work I'm doing, and as a product of the thinking I have done about education. I listen to her, and nod, and say little bits about what I feel is right. So anyway, I guess this boils down to a question of who am I to undertake this study? In one sense I am the best person to think about these issues, because they mean something to me. In another sense, I am the worst. For the same reason.

I guess that I think that my unfortunate involvement with particular men in the course of the study is irrelevant--just one of those things (call me cold hearted). But my involvement with my son is not just one of those things. I have a definition of good education, and it includes being involved with people who have come from different circumstances, and I understand that some of the people in his school have come from different circumstances--not an unproblematic understanding! And I understand that involvement goes beyond being in the same classroom. And I understand that, according to the group I am involved in studying, there is racism in the schools, and that they are working to combat it. And I think this is a good thing. So I find myself interested in furthering their agenda. And that does not bode well for someone who purports to "study" a group. I find it difficult to disengage from their agenda, and I find myself portraying it in a positive light, though I like to think that my positive portrayal (with some negative comments) is somehow truthful and meaningful to others.

So here's the thing. I think that what the project is doing is inherently good. I think it is a good thing for people to gather and discuss the education of the young people in the community. I think it is good that these people have organized. I think it is good that they have wrestled to discover what it is that they find of concern in the district. Is there a creditable way to talk about this? I mean, my task is not to evaluate them, but to describe them. I find in my description that I have a positive feeling toward them. I believe in what they are doing--faults, flaws, and all. I don't want to write about them as a cheerleader "yay rah." That would discredit me and them. Nor do I want to pretend no stance whatsoever. That (again) would be a lie.

That's the crux of case study research to me. These horrendous ethical dilemmas about being a real person in the field, dealing with real people, in a real way. There is no masking, no smoothing of statistical "data." It's all right there.

Ok, here's another real thing. In a project I was involved with several years ago, I was videotaping classrooms. I watched and taped some horrible teaching--disconnected, ill supported, unsubstantiated teaching. What should I do? Or, another true story, I taped a male teacher stroking the hair of a female student, who said, "Hands off the hair, please." What should I do? What I ended up doing is intimating to the principal that she might want to watch this teacher's classes, and he subsequently moved to another district. Did I fulfill my ethical obligations? My ethical warrant? He was the research subject, and I was obligated to do him no harm. I was in his classroom by invitation. But under my gaze,with no remorse, he engaged in that behavior. I took the chicken way out. I told on him without telling. I feel rotten about it to this day. I feel rotten because I didn't take a stance on either side--I didn't take a stance that the student's rights were paramount, and she must be protected from his unwanted attention, nor did I take the stance that his trust in me was paramount, and that the fact that he had invited my attentions put him in danger.

On the other hand, my move could be seen as supremely political. I did not forsake, entirely, the ethical call of the researcher in a classroom, because I did not tell the event that caused me to think that the principal might want to pay strict attention to the teacher's classroom. Nah. That's crap. He had power. She didn't. He was counting on my adherence to ethical research to engage in that boloney. Ok, here's what made it particularly dicey for me. Her parents lived in the same apartment complex as I did. (Actually, her father and step-mother.) I knew them. We barbequed together. They knew I was working on this evaluation. They wondered what I knew. And she moved back to her mother's house after that year.

Well, ok. You get my drift. Where is the responsibility of the researcher? Kind of like Mabry’s case study of Nicole--those lines seem easily drawn, but often, they aren't. It's hard to say this is mine and that's yours. Especially when you're dealing with kids, vulnerable populations, people who could probably use our protection.

I guess that's the power of case study research. People are people. They behave in ways we can only describe, not explain. We can think about the consequences of their behavior, and hope by our explications that people will behave in either the same or different ways, but we can't control behavior. Yeah, ok, that's a stance. I think it's true, though.

So the power of case study research is to say, look, here's what happened here now in this place. Maybe it can inform you. Don't try to say that because it happened here now in this place that it will be the same for you. It may not be. But maybe you can get something from what has happened to these people here.

Which leads me to believe that one of the things that needs deep exploration is the individuality of the researcher in the place of research--because the researcher is of course here now in this place. Even given the cloak of the variable, the dagger of the measurement, the researcher is still in this place. That seems to me the thing that we hope will go away. But that seems to me to be another power of doing case studies--the power of saying not only this is what happened in this place in this time, but also the power of being able to say this is who is telling you what happened. I think that the ability to say who you are and in what situation you are is a power.

I question, though, to what extent that power is to be used, as a case study researcher, a person has particular knowledge of particular people. And the researcher has ethical and possibly professional responsibilities. For instance, in the case I talked about earlier with the teacher who presented a bad lesson, and whom I had observed presenting many bad lessons--I viewed him through the lens of a researcher and through the lens of a teacher. Do I have an obligation as a former teacher to judge this bad teaching? Do I have an obligation as a researcher to expose this bad teaching, when my question is about whether or not a particular reform has "worked"? Do I have an obligation as a researcher to present what I saw without comment? I mean, good teaching is a problematic thing. Those who would say they know it on sight are few and brave. What right do I have, a teacher for five years, a novice researcher, to say anything at all but what I see?

But if what I see is colored by what I believe, and I can't pinpoint those beliefs, then what right have I to speak at all? Good God, the minefields are endless! I guess a person can only do what a person can do.

My own personal resolutions are to ignore the interactions I've had with the men in the district I'm studying (at least for the moment, as they seem unimportant to me now), but to talk about my son, because my understanding of his education seems important to my understanding of the school district. I feel like the other things are little "Oopses" in the world of what I am observing--possibly important in the discourse of what it is to be a person like me in the world of case study research, but not particularly important in what it is to be in the school system now.

Oh Yuck. How do I divorce one from the other? See, that's what I hate. I can divorce one from the other in statistical research--well, I can maintain that I can. In case study research, there are no numbers to hide behind. I don't have a list of neatly defined variables to look for--things to filter my seeing. I must see all that I can see. So do I tell all that I can see? Or do I say that some of what I see is a product of who I am? And if what I see is a product of who I am, who gets to decide which things I see because of that, and which things are something else?

It's all so messy and yucky!! But fortunately for me, I am a mud person. Mess and yuck are among my favorite things. Not that I think I'll ever resolve some of these dilemmas, but I do think that I will write what I think, honestly, in the best way I can, with lots of help.

I've been thinking about the issues of translation and storytelling. When I write a conversation that I have observed, I am translating it--it goes into me, and I then take on the responsibility of giving it to you. But in giving it to you, I also take on the responsibility of passing its meaning on to you