Participant observation PDF

Preview

Summary

This essay highlights the strengths and limitations researchers may face when conducting a study on pupil exclusion. The focus point of the essay is on participant observation. This essay is a 20 marker ...

Description

Methods in context essay question Evaluate the strengths and limitations of using PO to investigate pupil exclusion (20 marks)

Participant observation can be defined as the researcher taking part in an event or the everyday life of the group, they are observing to help support their thesis and come up with an unbiased conclusion. While investigating pupil exclusion there are many strengths and limitations that sociologists may face due to them trying to come up with an approach that they are still able to obtain information but also gain the trust of their participants. To start of with one of the strengths that sociologist may face while using participant observation to study pupil exclusion is that with participant observation there is more flexibility within the investigation then in regards to the other methods that sociologists could have used for example questionnaires or surveys. Flexibility meaning that the sociologists is able to come into the investigation of pupil exclusion with and open minded meaning that they do not have a prefixed judgement on the pupils which creates a safe environment, ‘rapport’ to be more specific which leads to trust being built between the researcher and the participants thus causing them to become more open with their answers. This alludes to the idea that participant observation has high validity due to the trust that is built. This method is seen to be useful because of the evidential support we have seen when sociologist go to study gangs, thieves, drug users and have concluded that when there is flexibility and rapport is built the participants become more willing to talk to them and engage in conversation. A case that can be used to also justify that participant observation is useful when studying pupil exclusion is Lewis Yablonsky's study of teenage gangs and found that when they come towards them with a long list of demanding questions they show more hostility towards the sociologists and refuse to answer which can happen when studying pupil exclusion thus justifying my argument that flexibility is important as you need to gain the trust of the pupils to increase the validity of the research. However, as much as validity and flexibility is important the limitation in this situation is ‘going native’ in the sense that the sociologist has become to involved with the pupils and now has a biased view. This can affect the concluding result of the investigate because they know believe that what the pupils have done is justifiable and that they have been wronged in a sense. This is an issue that commonly recurs when using participant observation especially when you have built a rapport with the students you feel obligated to obtain that despite which can put the basis of the research at risk. An example that can be used to justify this when sociologist Maurice Punch was investigating the Amsterdam police, he went ‘native’ and believed that he also should undergo the role of a policeman himself that it went to the point that he was defending his fellow ‘police mates’ from the abuse that they would face from the public. This links to the critic against participant observation that there are issues on detachment and

objectivity meaning that there comes a point that a sociologist isn’t able to identify the difference between their logical and rational thinking to their emotional thinking which mostly comes to interview bias when they are trying to build a connection with the participant or closely relate to the situations at hand which commonly occurs when studying pupil exclusion meaning that if the researcher has come from the educational background as the student or from the same social class they are more likely to hold biased view. This critic was also mentioned by David Downers and Paul Rock when they mentioned that the more time a sociologist spends their participants the less likely they are to notice things that would have been noted down as unusual in the early stages of their investigation. Also this leads to my leading point that the sociologists now believes that they now have loyalty to the group which leads to them concealing sensitive information that should have been noted down. Progressing onwards, another strength would be that when conducting participant observation on pupil exclusion you are able to obtain insight on the pupils. The founding father of this approach is Waverber and what he advocated is ‘verstehen’ which means that you are able to emphasise an emphatic approach to the observation by understanding the pupils and their situations as to why they were excluded. As well as this you are also able to gain insight on the trends as to why pupils get excluded and what social class mostly fall victim to exclusion. This is beneficial to the sociologist because they are able to develop on their thesis and use other topics as education to support their study as to why these pupils were failed by the education system and had no support or encouragement. They are also able to observe the family background that theses pupils come from and the support they get from home which could be a factor as to why they were excluded or if their behaviour towards the education system is because of the environment they grew up in. They are also able to see what ethnicity and gender are more likely to be excluded and in more realistic sense afro-Caribbean boys are more sustainable to exclusion with reference to the methodological pluralism/triangulation they are more likely to fall victim in comparison to white middle class boys and this can be because of many factors but with the evidential support of Sewell’s study of black boys in the education system it is noted down that they lack male role models to help support them to do better and majority of them grow up in a matrifocal household which can cause them to go out and try to find that male role models that they are missing and this is mostly found in gangs which persuade them to not care about the education system because there is no meritocracy and they already have a pre-determined place for them in society, in a working class job due to the racialised expectations from teachers and the education system. All of this is beneficial to sociologists when studying pupil exclusion as they are able to develop their understanding as to why situations like this occurs. Despite the strengths shown, the limitations is that there are particular issues that can occur because you need the evidential information to support your thesis but with this you can lose the trust that you have already built with the pupils because you need to note down or record somehow the facts that they are telling you but in most cases the pupils don’t want to be recorded or it could the fact that if the pupils were to know that they were being recorded in

can promote the Hawthorne effect meaning that the validity within the study decreases as they are not being genuine enough with their answers and are telling you what they think you want to hear or could be trying to impress the other students by making their reasoning worse than what it actually is which again tests the validity of the research. To avoid this sociologist usually use convert observation meaning that they do not tell the pupils that what they are saying is going to be recorded or note down to avoided dishonesty in their answers but this can cause some ethical issue such as consent not being given. Their justification for this is that they want to about the Hawthorne effect from happening so that they results are not artificial in any sense. But with this in mind if the sociologist uses covert observation on the pupils it can cause some health and safety issues for not only the pupils but for the sociologists as well in the sense that the sociologists does not know who the pupil is associated with and in most cases the pupils who are excluded are linked to gangs or some form of violence and if something is recorded without their consent if can put the safety of the sociologist at risk of danger also they never the full basis of the situation that the pupil is experiencing in terms of their exclusion and may have said some things to them in confidentially which can effect the students if it wasn’t meant to be said. In conclusion, it can be said that participant observation can be used when studying pupil exclusion to a certain extent because they are able to develop on the answers of the pupils due to the face-to-face conversation that they are having but it can cause problems that can affect the validity and the reliability of their research....