[Ethnocomm] e-seminar

[Kris Acheson-Clair]

Many thanks to everyone for the responses on interdisciplinarity! 

I have another point I'd like to ask for more discussion on as well -- Wendy's comments on internationalization. Below are some of the notes I made on that section when I first read it; responses are welcome:

1. I wonder if the more recent focus on the local/domestic in EC is in part a reaction to critiques of ethnographers in anthropology, communication, etc. for exoticizing and otherizing cultural groups farther from home. As the pendulum swings back again from self to other, how can we avoid these issues?

2. I really appreciated Wendy's reminder of the value of ethnology. It sparked a curiosity for me - why do we see meta-analyses in quantitative research so much more often than in qualitative? Granted the purpose is quite different; while a meta-analysis of statistical studies might be looking for similarities among them to find evidence of generalizable or even universal principles, meta-analysis of ECs might be more interested in documenting the range of diversity between cultural groups. This kind of research seems so vital to me as an intercultural communication scholar. Of course concentrating on very specific contexts is a wonderful way to develop both self and other awareness, but moving beyond each piece to an examination of how they fit together as a whole is a task that we have not always taken up seriously as ethnographers.

3. Of course, media eases the crossing of national and geographical barriers in exciting and constantly changing ways, but I personally am just as fascinated by the physical border-crossing that has become so common. Last year on Fulbright in Honduras, I was hosted by a university with a 70% international study body and even more diverse faculty. I think back to my own extremely homogenous undergraduate experience and am amazed by that mobility. My favorite encoding example from that context: although the lingua franca is Spanish on campus, student roommates have begun to call each other "wife" in English, reciprocally and regardless of gender. In other words, even with male roommates, each would refer to the other as his "wife." I so want to go back and figure out what that is all about! In this discussion many of you have also provided wonderful examples of the encoding that happens when individuals or groups of people are mobile, simultaneously highlighting spatial and temporal aspects of speech codes. I hope more EC work moves in this direction in addition to the focus on mediated communication, because I see both as highly relevant to our lives.

Kris

Kris Acheson
Director of Undergraduate Studies
Department of Applied Linguistics
Georgia State University

-----Original Message-----
From: Gerry Philipsen [mailto:gphil at u.washington.edu] 
Sent: Monday, February 8, 2016 7:33 PM
To: Kris Acheson-Clair
Cc: ETHNOCOMM at listserv.linguistlist.org
Subject: Re: [Ethnocomm] e-seminar

Kris

Several have given great responses to you, I'd like add a point or two.

1. I think most ethnographers of communication working in the communication discipline would love to have a research and teaching colleague who is an applied linguist. If you see the work of someone you like, think you would benefit from working with them and that you have something to offer them, I'd recommend you start up a conversation with them. Don't be discouraged by initial "no thanks," try someone else.

2. In my experience, most ethnographers of communication work alone, at least on their own ethnographic work (although there are some great exceptions to the rule). Most of the time that there are collaborations they are triggered by a graduate student who comes from one discipline and takes a class in another. If you welcome comm grads into your grad courses, that could be the start of something important for them, and maybe for you, and maybe for their comm prof. It might happen in ways that you had never anticipated.

3. My most recent experience with data-based publications is with a team of four authors, two nursing profs, a professor of medicine, and me. We have team-authored two ethnographic publications now. We came together because one of the authors was once a student in my two-quarter methods sequence, 10 years ago. Our joint publications came 10 years later. Not everyone can afford such a long wait. Sometimes collaborations can be expedited.

4. Yes, the odds are that "critical" scholars might not want to collaborate with non-critical scholars. There is hope, perhaps, for even the most fallen, but it's a huge gamble. I've been burned. Probably better to look for an open-minded person.

--Gerry



On Sun, 7 Feb 2016, Kris Acheson-Clair wrote:

> 
> When I first read the Katriel and Leeds-Hurwitz texts, I was struck by 
> the positive tone of each piece – commendably, they seem to me full of 
> excitement and possibility. I used to believe myself an optimist, but perhaps after a couple of decades of critical scholarship that is no longer entirely the case, for Trudy Milburn’s cautionary discussion of “questions to grapple with” resonated with me strongly. After going back and taking another look at my earlier notes, especially on Wendy’s section on Interdisciplinarity, I felt compelled to add my voice here.
> 
>  
> 
> My own experience with interdisciplinarity has been a bit 
> disheartening, to be frank. Although it functions as a buzz word at 
> the institutional level, often finding its way into discourses of 
> strategic goals and initiatives,  it seems to me at the departmental 
> level that interdisciplinarity is commonly resisted. The tree metaphor is useful here: folks in different branches not only often have no idea what is happening elsewhere, even in parallel branches where the same kinds of tools (like EC) are being used and the same phenomena are of interest, but also sometimes discount out of hand work done elsewhere, for example not counting towards tenure studies published in cognate disciplines and limiting new hires to scholars with a very particular degree or career trajectory.
> 
>  
> 
> I greatly appreciated the historical perspective that Wendy further 
> developed at the beginning of her response, and in a continued spirit of hope for the future I would love to hear from contemporary EC scholars who are successfully working in very interdisciplinary ways. Perhaps your academic home is outside of Communication or you have an appointment across departments.
> Perhaps you consistently work in interdisciplinary research teams. 
> Perhaps you publish widely outside of your primary field. Please 
> inspire those of us who have met resistance when crossing
> boundaries: What insights do your positive interdisciplinary experiences offer for this vision of EC’s future?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Kris
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> Kris Acheson
> 
> Director of Undergraduate Studies
> 
> Department of Applied Linguistics
> 
> Georgia State University
> 
> [logo-avast-v1.png]
> This email has been sent from a virus-free computer protected by Avast.
> www.avast.com
>


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus