Observation quotes

 Participant Observation as a Data Collection Method - (Kawulich, 2005).

Participant observation, for many years, has been a hallmark of both anthropological and sociological studies. In recent years, the field of education has seen an increase in the number of qualitative studies that include participant observation as a way to collect information (Kawulich, 2005).

MARSHALL and ROSSMAN (1989) define observation as "the systematic description of events, behaviors, and artifacts in the social setting chosen for study" (p.79).

Observations enable the researcher to describe existing situations using the five senses, providing a "written photograph" of the situation under study (ERLANDSON, HARRIS, SKIPPER, & ALLEN, 1993).

Participant observation is the process enabling researchers to learn about the activities of the people under study in the natural setting through observing and participating in those activities. It provides the context for development of sampling guidelines and interview guides (DeWALT & DeWALT, 2002).

SCHENSUL, SCHENSUL, and LeCOMPTE (1999) define participant observation as "the process of learning through exposure to or involvement in the day-to-day or routine activities of participants in the researcher setting" (p.91).

BERNARD (1994) defines participant observation as the process of establishing rapport within a community.

DeWALT and DeWALT (2002) believe that "the goal for design of research using participant observation as a method is to develop a holistic understanding of the phenomena under study that is as objective and accurate as possible given the limitations of the method" (p.92). They suggest that participant observation be used as a way to increase the validity1 of the study, as observations may help the researcher have a better understanding of the context and phenomenon under study. Validity is stronger with the use of additional strategies used with observation, such as interviewing, document analysis, or surveys, questionnaires, or other more quantitative methods. Participant observation can be used to help answer descriptive research questions, to build theory, or to generate or test hypotheses (DeWALT & DeWALT, 2002).

DeMUNCK and SOBO (1998) provide several advantages of using participant observation over other methods of data collection. These include that it affords access to the "backstage culture" (p.43); it allows for richly detailed description, which they interpret to mean that one's goal of describing "behaviors, intentions, situations, and events as understood by one's informants" is highlighted (p.43).

DeWALT and DeWALT (2002) add that it improves the quality of data collection and interpretation and facilitates the development of new research questions or hypotheses (p.8).

The MEAD-FREEMAN2 controversy illustrates how different researchers gain different understanding of what they observe.

Participant observation is conducted by a biased human who serves as the instrument for data collection; the researcher must understand how his/her gender, sexuality, ethnicity, class, and theoretical approach may affect observation, analysis, and interpretation. [16]

SCHENSUL, SCHENSUL, and LeCOMPTE (1999) refer to participation as meaning almost total immersion in an unfamiliar culture to study others' lives through the researcher's participation as a full-time resident or member, though they point out that most observers are not full participants in community life.

Another potential limitation they mention is that of researcher bias. They note that, unless ethnographers use other methods than just participant observation, there is likelihood that they will fail to report the negative aspects of the cultural members DeWALT, DeWALT, and Wayland (1998)

WHYTE (1979) notes that, while there is no one way that is best for conducting research using participant observation, the most effective work is done by researchers who view informants as collaborators; to do otherwise, he adds, is a waste of human resources. His emphasis is on the relationship between the researcher and informants as collaborative researchers who, through building solid relationships, improve the research process and improve the skills of the researcher to conduct research. [29]

Conducting observations involves a variety of activities and considerations for the researcher, which include ethics, establishing rapport, selecting key informants, the processes for conducting observations, deciding what and when to observe, keeping field notes, and writing up one's findings (Kawulich, 2005).

Rapport is built over time; it involves establishing a trusting relationship with the community, so that the cultural members feel secure in sharing sensitive information with the researcher to the extent that they feel assured that the information gathered and reported will be presented accurately and dependably.

ANGROSINO and DePEREZ (2000) advocate using a structured observation process to maximise the efficiency of the field experience, minimize researcher bias, and facilitate replication or verification by others, all of which make the findings more objective.

A different approach to observation, consensus analysis, is a method DeMUNCK and SOBO describe to design sampling frames for ethnographic research, enabling the researcher to establish the viewpoints of the participants from the inside out. This involves aspects of ethnographic fieldwork, such as getting to know participants intimately to understand their way of thinking and experiencing the world. It further involves verifying information gathered to determine if the researcher correctly understood the information collected.

Seeking out participants with different points of view enables the researcher to fully flesh out understanding of the topic in that culture.

KUTSCHE (1998) states that, when one is trying to analyze interview information and observation field notes, he/she is trying to develop a model that helps to make sense of what the participants do.

One is constructing a model of culture, not telling the truth about the data, as there are numerous truths, particularly when presented from each individual participant's viewpoint.

Adler, Patricia A. & Adler, Peter (1987). Membership roles in field research. Newbury Park: Sage.

Adler, Patricia A. & Adler, Peter (1994). Observation techniques. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S.

Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.377-392). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Agar, Michael H. (1980). The professional stranger: an informal introduction to ethnography. SanDiego: Academic Press.

Angrosino, Michael V. & Mays dePerez, Kimberly A. (2000). Rethinking observation: From method to

context. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (second edition, pp.673-702), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bernard, H. Russell (1994). Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches (second edition). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

Bernard, H. Russell (Ed.) (1998). Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology. Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.

Breuer, Franz & Roth, Wolff-Michael (2003, May). Subjectivity and reflexivity in the social sciences: epistemic windows and methodical consequences [30 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 4(2), Art.25. Available at http://www.qualitativeresearch.net/fqs-texte/2-03/2-03intro-3-e.htm [April, 5, 2005].

deMunck, Victor C. &Sobo, Elisa J. (Eds) (1998). Using methods in the field: a practical introduction and casebook. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

DeWalt, Kathleen M. & DeWalt, Billie R. (1998). Participant observation. In H. Russell Bernard (Ed.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (pp.259-300). Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.

DeWalt, Kathleen M. & DeWalt, Billie R. (2002). Participant observation: a guide for fieldworkers. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

Ellis, Carolyn (2003, May). Grave tending: with mom at the cemetery [8 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social research [On-line Journal], 4(2), Art.28. Available at http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/2-03ellis-e.htm [April 5, 2005].

Erlandson, David A., Harris, Edward L., Skipper, Barbara L., &Allen, Steve D. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry: a guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Fine, Gary A. (2003). Towards a peopled ethnography developing theory from group life. Ethnography, 4(1), 41-60.

Gaitan, Alfredo (2000, November). Exploring alternative forms of writing ethnography. Review Essay: Carolyn Ellis and Arthur Bochner (Eds.) (1996). Composing ethnography: Alternative forms of qualitative writing [9 paragraphs}. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 1(3), Art.42. Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-00/3-00review-gaitane.htm [April, 5, 2005].

Gans, Herbert J. (1999). Participant observation in the era of “ethnography.” Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 28(5), 540-548.

Geertz, Clifford (1973). Thick description: Towards an interpretive theory of culture. In Clifford Geertz (Ed.), The interpretation of cultures (pp.3-32). New York: Basic Books.

Glantz, Jeffrey & Sullivan, Susan (2000). Supervision in practice: 3 Steps to improving teaching and learning. Corwin Press, Inc.

Glickman, Carl D., Gordon, Stephen P., & Ross-Gordon, Jovita (1998). Supervision of instruction (fourth edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Gold, Raymond L. (1958). Roles in sociological field observations. Social Forces, 36, 217-223.

Holman Jones, Stacy (2004, September). Building connections in qualitative research. Carolyn Ellis and Art Bochner in conversation with Stacy Holman Jones [113 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 5(3), Art.28. Available at http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-04/04-3-28-e.htm [April 5, 2005].

Johnson, Allen & Sackett, Ross (1998). Direct systematic observation of behavior. In H. Russell Bernard (Ed.), Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (pp.301-332). Walnut Creek: AltaMira Press.

Kawulich, Barbara B. (1998). Muscogee (Creek) women’s perceptions of work (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University).

Kawulich, Barbara B. (2004). Muscogee women’s identity development. In Mark Hutter (Ed.), The family experience: a reader in cultural diversity (pp.83-93). Boston: Pearson Education.

Kottak, Conrad P. (1994). Cultural anthropology (sixth edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Kroeber, Alfred L. (1939). Cultural and natural areas of Native North America. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kutsche, Paul (1998). Field ethnography: a manual for doing cultural anthropology. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Levi-Strauss, Claude (1953). Social structure. In Alfred L. Kroeber (Ed.), Anthropology today (pp.24-53). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lincoln, Yvonna S. & Guba, Egon G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Marshall, Anne & Batten, Suzanne (2004, September). Researching across cultures: issues of ethics and power [17 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 5(3), Art.39. Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-04/04-3-39-e.htm [April 5, 2005].

Marshall, Catherine & Rossman, Gretchen B. (1989). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Marshall, Catherine & Rossman, Gretchen B. (1995). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Merriam, Sharan B. (1988). Case study research in education: a qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Merriam, Sharan B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Pike, Kenneth L. (1966). Emic and etic standpoints for the description of behavior. In Alfred G. Smith (Ed.), Communication and culture (pp.52-163). New York: Holt, Reinhart & Winston.

Ratner, Carl (2002, September). Subjectivity and objectivity in qualitative methodology [29 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 3(3), Art.16. Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/3-02/3-02ratner-e.htm [April 5, 2005].

Schensul, Stephen L., Schensul, Jean J., & LeCompte, Margaret D. (1999). Essential ethnographic methods: observations, interviews, and questionnaires (Book 2 in Ethnographer's Toolkit). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

Schmuck, Richard (1997). Practical action research for change. Arlington Heights, IL: IRI/Skylight Training and Publishing.

Spradley, James P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.

Spradley, James P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Spradley, James P. & McCurdy, David W. (1972). The Cultural Experience. Chicago: Science Research Associates.

Steward, Julian H. (1955). Theory of culture change: the methodology of multilinear evolution. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Taylor, Steven J. & Bogdan, Robert (1984). Introduction to qualitative research: The search for meanings (second edition). New York: John Wiley.

Werner Oswald & Schoepfle, G. Mark (1987). Systematic fieldwork: Vol. 1. Foundations of ethnography and interviewing. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Whyte, William F. (February, 1979). On making the most of participant observation. The American Sociologist, 14, 56-66.

Wolcott, Harry F. (2001). The art of fieldwork. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

# COLLECTING DATA THROUGH OBSERVATION: Barbara B. Kawulich

Observations further help you learn what is important to the participants. They help you determine how much time is spent on various activities, verify nonverbal expression of feelings, and determine who interacts with whom (Schmuck, 1997). They provide an opportunity for you to record in writing what you have learned by taking field notes that can be used at a later time to recall what was observed in the research setting.

## Smit, B. and Onwuegbuzie, A.J., 2018. Observations in qualitative inquiry: When what you see is not what you see. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 17(1), p.1609406918816766.

Observation in qualitative research “is one of the oldest and most fundamental research methods approaches. This approach involves collecting data using one’s senses, especially looking and listening in a systematic and meaningful way” (McKechnie, 2008, p. 573). 

Similarly, Adler and Adler (1994) characterized observations as the “fundamental base of all research methods” in the social and behavioral sciences (p. 389).

I strived to develop an insider’s [i.e., emic] perspective without participating in the setting that I was studying; Adler & Adler, 1987), one of the teachers quietly told me that “what you see is not what you see.”

Qualitative researchers extol (enthusiastic praise/glorify or honour) the virtues of observations regarding rich descriptions of research phenomena, reinforced with interviews (Smit and Onwuegbuzie, 2018)

My prolonged engagement and persistent observations in the field allowed for “the discovery of unanticipated phenomena” (McKechnie, 2008 p. 575)

As qualitative researchers, we should be open to the lessons from our research participants and privilege their voices as we conduct our scholarly work (Onwuegbuzie & Frels, 2013). 

According to Werner and Schoepfle (1987), there are three observational procedures for seeing, as follows: (a) descriptive observation, involving the observation of everything, wherein the researcher assumes a novice attitude by assuming no knowledge and taking nothing for granted; (b) focused observation, wherein certain entities are deemed irrelevant and thus can be ignored, and the researcher typically concentrates on well-defined, observable entities; and (c) selective observation, wherein the researcher concentrates on a specific form of general entities.

##Eradze, M., Rodríguez-Triana, M. J., & Laanpere, M. (2019). A Conversation between Learning Design and Classroom Observations: A Systematic Literature Review. Education Sciences, 9(2), 91. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9020091

In parallel, observational methods (manual or automated) have been used in the classroom to reflect on and refine teaching and learning, often in combination with other data sources (such as surveys and interviews) (Eradze, Rodríguez-Triana and Laanpere, 2019)

In order to evaluate the implementation of learning design, there is a need for evidence coming from those digital or physical spaces where teaching and learning processes take place [5].

[5]Hernández-Leo, D.; Martinez-Maldonado, R.; Pardo, A.; Muñoz-Cristóbal, J.A.; Rodríguez-Triana, M.J. Analytics for learning design: A layered framework and tools. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2019, 50, 139–152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Observations (or observational methods) have been traditionally used by researchers and practitioners to support awareness and reflection [6,7]. Especially in educational contexts that occupy, fully or partially, physical spaces, observations offer an insight not easily available through other data sources (e.g., surveys, interviews, or teacher and student journals).

[6] Wragg, T. An Introduction to Classroom Observation (Classic Edition); Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2013; ISBN 1136597786. [Google Scholar]

[7] Cohen, L.; Manion, L.; Morrison, K. Research Methods in Education; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2013; ISBN 113572203X. [Google Scholar]

While designing for learning, practitioners develop hypotheses about the teaching and learning process [20].  - FOCUS GROUP WORKSHOPS

[20] Mor, Y.; Ferguson, R.; Wesson, B. Editorial: Learning design, teacher inquiry into student learning and learning analytics: A call for action. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2015, 46, 221–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

The collection of evidence during the enactment to test these hypotheses contributes to the orchestration tasks (e.g., by detecting deviations from the teacher’s expectations that may require regulation) to the teacher professional development (leading to the better understanding and refinement of the teaching and learning practices) [16,21] and to the decision making at the institutional level (e.g., in order to measure the impact of their designs and react upon them) [22].

[16] Mor, Y.; Craft, B. Learning design: Reflections upon the current landscape. Res. Learn. Technol. 2012, 20, 19196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

[21] Hennessy, S.; Bowker, A.; Dawes, M.; Deaney, R. Teacher-Led Professional Development Using a Multimedia Resource to Stimulate Change in Mathematics Teaching; Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; ISBN 9789462094345. [Google Scholar]

[22] Rienties, B.; Toetenel, L. The Impact of Learning Design on Student Behaviour, Satisfaction and Performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 60, 333–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

In a parallel effort to support teaching and learning, classroom observation (CO) contributes to refining and reflecting on those practices. CO is a “non-judgmental description of classroom events that can be analysed and given interpretation” [24]. Through observations, we can gather data on individual behaviours, interactions, or the educational setting both in physical and digital spaces [8,25]

[24] Moses, S. Language Teaching Awareness. J. Engl. Linguist. 2001, 29, 285–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

[8] Hartmann, D.P.; Wood, D.D. Observational Methods. In International Handbook of Behavior Modification and Therapy: Second Edition; Bellack, A.S., Hersen, M., Kazdin, A.E., Eds.; Springer US: Boston, MA, USA, 1990; pp. 107–138. ISBN 978-1-4613-0523-1. [Google Scholar]

[25] Marshall, C.; Rossman, G.B. Designing Qualitative Research; Sage Publications: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2014; ISBN 1483324265. [Google Scholar]

The context and the design decisions may guide the analysis of the observations [6,32].

[6] Wragg, T. An Introduction to Classroom Observation (Classic Edition); Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2013; ISBN 1136597786. [Google Scholar]

[32] Lockyer, L.; Heathcote, E.; Dawson, S. Informing pedagogical action: Aligning learning analytics with learning design. Am. Behav. Sci. 2013, 57, 1439–1459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

Another main aspect of the observations is the protocol guiding the data collection. Unstructured protocols provide observers with full expressivity to describe what they see, with the risk of producing big volumes of unstructured data that is more difficult and time-consuming to interpret [33]. 

[33] Gruba, P.; Cárdenas-Claros, M.S.; Suvorov, R.; Rick, K. Blended Language Program Evaluation; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2016; ISBN 978-1-349-70304-3 978-1-137-51437-0. [Google Scholar]

According to the papers, the main reasons identified in the studies were: To support teacher professional development (13), classroom orchestration (11), and reflection, e.g., understanding the impact of the learning design (10) or comparing the design and its implementation (8).

[13] Dobozy, E. Typologies of Learning Design and the introduction of a “LD-Type 2” case example. eLearn. Pap. 2011, 27, 1–11. [Google Scholar]

[11] Martínez, A.; Dimitriadis, Y.; Rubia, B.; Gómez, E.; De la Fuente, P. Combining qualitative evaluation and social network analysis for the study of classroom social interactions. Comput. Educ. 2003, 41, 353–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

[8] Hartmann, D.P.; Wood, D.D. Observational Methods. In International Handbook of Behavior Modification and Therapy: Second Edition; Bellack, A.S., Hersen, M., Kazdin, A.E., Eds.; Springer US: Boston, MA, USA, 1990; pp. 107–138. ISBN 978-1-4613-0523-1. [Google Scholar]

Angrosino, M. and Rosenberg, J., 2011. Observations on observation. The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 4, pp.467-478.

(Angrosino and Rosenberg, 2011).

Mulhall, A., 2003. In the field: notes on observation in qualitative research. Journal of advanced nursing, 41(3), pp.306-313.

(Mulhall, 2003)

Baker, L., 2006. Observation: A complex research method. Library trends, 55(1), pp.171-189.

(Baker, 2006)

"The value of observation is that it permits researchers to study people in their native environment in order to understand “things” from their perspective" (Baker, 2006)

Some researchers describe observation as the bedrock source of human knowledge about the social and natural world (Baker, 2006).

In the field: notes on observation in qualitative research (Mulhall, 2002)

Clearly through observation it is possible to ascertain whether what people say they do and what they do in reality tally. However, it is important to note two things. First, both ‘accounts’ (what people perceive that they do and what they actually do) are valid in their own right and just represent different perspectives on the data (Mulhall, 2002).

Secondly, in my view observational data, rather more than interview data, are subject to interpretation by the researcher (Mulhall, 2002).

Although the researcher conducting an interview has some freedom regarding the questions they ask, the informant probably plays a greater role in governing where the questioning leads. Moreover, many researchers return to the interviewee with the analysed data for member checking. So interviewees may influence data analysis whereas those who are observed usually do not (Mulhall, 2002).