Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine teaching approaches adopted by teachers in ex-Model C English medium secondary schools (former mono-ethnic White Schools) currently in Port Elizabeth, South Africa, after schools became desegregated in 1994 and changed from being mono-ethnic to multi-ethnic.

This study was conducted through a qualitative research approach against the backdrop of a phenomenological design according to the interpretivist paradigm. Data were elicited through in-depth semi-structured interviews with 16 teachers from four ex-Model C English medium secondary schools (former White schools) who had experiences of teaching both pre-1994, when schools were mono-ethnic, and post-1994 when the schools were multi-ethnic. The interviews were transcribed, and the data were analysed and categorised into themes and sub-themes.

The findings indicated that although the teachers were positive towards teaching in multi-ethnic contexts, the majority of them tended to adopt approaches that militated against multicultural education in their classes; such as assimilationist, colour blind and business-as-usual approaches, while a minority incorporated various aspects of multicultural education in their teaching to a limited degree.

The study is original in the sense that it focused on the application of Castagno’s framework of typologies to teachers’ approaches to teaching in multi-ethnic classes. Research of this nature, which explored teachers’ approaches to diversity within their multi-ethnic contexts according to Castagno’s framework, has not been previously undertaken in South Africa.

Can children give their informed consent to participate in a research study, or can they only provide assent? This chapter explores this tricky question by drawing on three stages of a longitudinal ethnography within a multi-ethnic school in the north of England. Illustrative examples are used to show how the ability to give consent is not based on age alone, but rather on children’s experiences and confidence, the type of research conducted, and the researcher’s own expertise in communicating with children. The chapter provides examples of children’s active and ongoing negotiation of consent and through their choice to withdraw consent, ‘correct’ the researcher’s interpretations, actively produce their own written field notes and reflect on data collected as part of fieldwork. To facilitate consent, children were given time and space to familiarise themselves with the researcher and the study. Actively involving children in all stages of the study highlighted the importance of familiarisation and participation to the processes of informed consent to ensure children’s ongoing and meaningful involvement in the research.

I consider the following question: given my commitment to creating an inclusive classroom environment where students of all backgrounds and skill levels can feel comfortable taking emotional and intellectual risks, how do I responsibly teach a course on American Life Writing in which students both read and write narratives of trauma, many of which stem from gender-based violence? With the rise of the #MeToo movement, especially, many survivors of this kind of violence feel compelled to share their stories as a way to heal themselves and to create communities of care and support. In some cases, this kind of disclosure can be restorative. But it is also important to recognize that sharing one's narrative of trauma does not always serve as a path to healing and wholeness. There is also power in choosing to tell part of one's story, sharing one's story only with a certain audience, or not disclosing one's story at all. The works that I assign in the seminar highlight these different paths to healing and model for students the ways in which a confessional model is not the only model for dealing with trauma. In this chapter, I first describe how feminist pedagogy shapes my teaching. Then I outline my approach to teaching life writing, focusing on how I teach texts that highlight trauma and how I teach the personal narrative assignment. Finally, I reflect on how these pedagogical practices might inform our larger conversations about gendered oppression, trauma, and healing.

Drawing on research findings from an ethnography conducted with young children, exploring notions of difference, identity and peer interactions, this study uncovers how four- and five-year-olds initiated and maintained peer interactions within a linguistically diverse Early Years setting in the North of England.

This study adopted an applied ethnographic approach to gain the emic perspectives of children in the reception class at Sunnyside over a full academic year. Over the course of this school year I spent a day a week with the class undertaking non-participant and participant observations alongside unstructured informal conversations and focused on visual research activities.

Language and identity were closely intertwined in children’s patterns of interaction at Sunnyside. For some children language had a functional value while for others it was a symbolic marker of identity. Similarly, for some children their minority language held valuable linguistic capital while for others their first or home language was viewed as being something to shun. For all the children language was only one factor that played a role in initiating and maintaining their peer interactions at school. These implications will be discussed in this chapter.

Situated in a particular local context, this study provides an in-depth insight into the experiences of a linguistically diverse group of children from North and Sub-Saharan African countries who have come together in a single school setting where Somali and Arabic are the two key languages that are spoken by children in the class. This chapter discusses how these children viewed languages within the classroom context and how other identity markers associated with ethnicity, religion and nationality intersected with language within the context of ‘being friends’ at Sunnyside.

All research has the potential to affect people, ethnographers delve into the life of the every day of their participants, they walk their walk, talk their talk and strive for valid, in-depth contextualised data, gathered over a longitudinal and often intimate basis. Ethnography is explorative and inductive. It is messy, unpredictable and complex. Ethnography conducted with young people and children adds to the intricacy of managing ethically sound research practice within and beyond the field. In recent years, ethnographies with children, young people and families have become increasingly prominent, yet few scholars have written about conducting ethnographic research with children and young people (Albon & Barley, 2021; Levey, 2009; Mayeza, 2017). The ethnographer that works with children and young people needs to be aware that the power relationship between adults and children operates in complex and sometimes surprising ways and so needs to be ethically aware, ethically reactive and be prepared to be ethically challenged.

This chapter reflects on how ethics was managed in Basque educational ethnographic research. Specifically, it addresses researcher positionality when relating to research collaborators in an attempt to manage inclusive ethics in situ. Nowadays, most research is evaluated by an ethical review board that ensures adequate research practice. However, unexpected fieldwork events need to be managed in the field, and this chapter addresses the impact of these events on the relationship between researchers and collaborators. Influenced by a post-qualitative stance we posit that research collaborators should be included in the research process. It reflects on the data collected during an ongoing ethnographic study with higher education students. The method used includes several interview meetings between researchers and collaborators, multimodal representations of collaborators' learning, and participants' self-observations. In the interviews, participants' discourses, representations, and self-observations were collaboratively analysed. The ethnographic data from these meetings show how researchers use a collaborative approach to practise ethics. Through such meetings, the knowledge derived from the ethnographic data is co-constructed in a research relationship where participants engage in dialogue and negotiation about the discourse created around them. Based on this relationship, we propose the concept of inclusive ethics as a process requiring an honest, inclusive, and collaborative relationship with the research subject.

THE ILEA is the body responsible for education within the London area. It is an elected committee of forty eight members with the majority of seats currently held by the Labour Party, and consists of inner London councillors of the GLC, plus representatives of the twelve inner London boroughs and the City of London, as well as seventeen additional members.