1

Midterm Exam
Samantha Nicdao

A. PERSONAL REFLECTION.

I’ve learned the basics of quantitative research from different social science classes. I know

what’s considered quantitative research and how it can be valuable to studies focused on

human experiences, perceptions, and social interactions. As far as scholar readings go, I’ve read

a couple of articles in the previous anthropology and sociology courses I’ve taken. I find in

anthropology, quantitative methods are commonly used and have developed over time with the

interactions across the world trying to investigate different cultures. It’s always good to have

previous knowledge on the topic of the class but reading the articles for the classes also gave

light on the topic discussed within the piece. I read an article on the perspective of

menstruation within a culture for anthropology and the differences compared to the Western

view have changed my thoughts on the subject. Ethnography and participant observation are

some of the methods I most enjoy, the level of engagement with the community of study as

well as how it can impact the perspective of the researcher, being so intertwined with the

research. I understand the downsides to these methods like bias but they create insights into

social phenomena that wouldn’t obtained without. I’m willing to keep an open mind and my

knowledge of qualitative research methods was limited so I was hoping to learn a lot more. I do

find that each person has a certain amount of bias and some methods I find less interesting

than others. In the starting weeks, it is emphasized that you should keep awareness of the

perspective that you enter into while doing research. I wasn’t previously so concerned with that

aspect but the mindset of the research can affect the respect and ethics that is put into a study.
2

Reading the articles and assigned texts, as well as having other peoples’ responses to the text

has given me a new perspective, and although I don’t always agree in class and through the

annotations it has shaped what the methods mean to me. Even hearing about the personal

examples from classmates and knowing about them has changed what I thought about

sociology in general. Hearing about Indigenous backgrounds and stories of what is taught in

school explores what shapes our point of view. As we go through the readings and discussions

I’ve found there is always an association between certain people and attributes. The nature of

how you do your research and the mindset you go in with affect how the study will turn out. My

marshmallow or hidden assumptions come from how I grew up and what was taught to me and

developed into unconscious biases. I think I had some going into our Indigenous topics, my base

knowledge came from what was told to me by teachers and friends. There is an attachment

between Indigenous people and other cultures to certain stereotypes that I’m becoming more

aware of as we progress.

B. PARADIGMS.

From my understanding, a paradigm is a framework that holds a set of shared assumptions. It

can shape how research is understood and investigated. It can act as a basis for the ideas you go

into a study with. Ontology, epistemology, and axiology are each concerned with a different

aspect of life. Ontology focuses on reality while epistemology focuses on knowledge and how it

is obtained and Axiology questions ethics. Each has limitations when you consider the

hindrances on our perspective, they can make false assumptions not appropriate for the study.

The quote used in the question shows that paradigms can be unconscious and even if we aren’t

thinking of them, they can still implant biases into our work.
3

Richardson’s notion of the crystal explains that we cannot fully understand the concepts we

investigate, and looking at different sides of the crystal will always change the information to be

understood, but no side is necessarily wrong. It describes knowledge as abstract and ever-

changing. In connection with paradigms, the metaphor encourages us to examine the structure

and diversity of our assumptions and enhance our understanding of how we construct

knowledge to reevaluate frameworks. Collin’s’ article covers the idea that knowledge is

controlled by “whiteness”, as we discussed in our lecture, the knowledge that is not dominant is

usually analyzed with a level of disrespect. Black feminist views and other subordinate groups

have faced historical challenges in having their perspectives and experiences acknowledged by

mainstream institutions. Within the article, it is mentioned that Black feminist ideas have to use

alternative methods to affirm knowledge outside of traditional frameworks. (Collins, 2000)

When we think of the crystal there is an idea of vast knowledge with different shapes and colors

among different sides depending on where you look, this is metaphorical to how knowledge is

different with viewpoint but not invalid. Near the end of the text, a quote reads “Black women’s

experiences serve as one specific social location for examining points of connection among

multiple epistemologies.” (Collins, 2000, p.g. 20). I enjoy how it doesn’t put black feminist

perspectives above anyone but acknowledges that it has value along with multiple other

epistemologies.

Epistemology concerns the scope of knowledge, Collins writes “It investigates the standards

used to assess knowledge or why we believe what we believe to be true. Far from being the

apolitical study of truth, epistemology points to the ways in which power relations shape who is

believed and why.”(Collins, 2000, p.g. 2) To Collins, there is a level of ingenuity when
4

investigating black feminist thought, that can stem from the power that whiteness holds. There

is a pattern of validation for those who have power and benefit in validating certain ideas. Those

in power who hold Western knowledge at a higher value, suppress the opportunity of black

feminists and other subordinate groups like the Indigenous peoples. Most of what is considered

history is shaped by Western culture and those are considered “winners” in history. (Collins,

2000).

Chilisa’s reading brought up a post-colonial indigenous Indigenous paradigm, that aims to

decolonize methodologies by raising questions about voice, representation, rights, and

ownership in research. It aims to resist the universal knowledge that afflicts Indigenous

research. (Chilisa, 2020). Indigenous methodologies are often silenced and excluded by Western

dominance. Indigenous methods promote culturally responsive and ethically grounded

approaches to research that honor the values, knowledge systems, and self-determination of

Indigenous people. McGuire Adam does well to represent these values in her talk as she

mentions not needing the Western ways like her recorder and notepad, she respects the input

the elders give. Indigenous issues specifically have had a long history that needs to be

readjusted to not only better understand and treat them as equal but to open up the ways of

thinking and help discover new methodologies. The institution has spent too long in ignorance

on these topics, new perspectives on research can only help to better understand our world

views.

C. ETHICS
5

3. Roger and Mignone’s reading, takes into account what you provide for those you do research

for. Doing this research represents the people of study and gives them a narrative, it brings you

to question why you are doing the research and how it benefits those involved. When we

consider ethics in research we focus on the three fundamental principles of respect for persons,

concern for welfare, and justice. These are implemented to protect the individuals participating

but each case is unique. When we implant ourselves into a community, those who are

researched are put in a vulnerable place and it is the job of the researcher to work with them to

create the narrative. As far as limits and challenges go, the text mentions the hindrance of

restricting certain vulnerable groups and the unfairness of leaving them out. The main idea is to

keep it fair by including all groups of people and to follow ethical protocols as you go but always

reflect on any improvements as you go on because ethics is always changing and does not

always follow a script. (Roger & Mignone, 2018)

4. Tuck’s reading brought to question the view that influences how we look at a community. The

damage-centered research focuses on pain, loss, and trauma, this is often done for particular

goals. This frames these communities as victims and emphasizes systemic injustices, in looking

for these issues it becomes a project rather than a narrative. When we look into desire-centered

research, it becomes a matter of working with marginalized groups. To learn about the complex

nature, self-determination, and aspirations of the community, it seeks a real narrative of

experiences. (Tuck, 2009). In connection to Peers’ reading, we see a damage center through the

interrogations within the text, the interactions Peers face show the assumption of individuals

after hearing the word disability. The quote used questions about what is considered more

valuable, in people with disability, it is often the case that they are viewed as weaker or have
6

less quality of life. The associations with the word disability are often negative from the need to

connect and focus on their pain and loss. (Peers). Tuck encourages us to see the full picture of

the narrative we research, Peer was often treated with repetitive opinions about themselves

from individuals who weren’t asking the right questions. Within McGuire-Adams' research, it is

a much more desire-centered approach, focusing on what Indigenous knowledge can bring as

an equal. There is respect for elders and an acknowledgment that Western knowledge is not

important. There is a right to know the culture and practices before being able to conduct the

research and an intention to work with the elders involved.

References

Chilisa, B. (2020). Indigenous Research Methodologies (pp. 18-28). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Collins, P.
(2000). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of Empowerment (2nd ed;
pp. 251-271). New York: Routledge.

Peers, D. (2012) Interrogating disability: the (de)composition of a recovering Paralympian, Qualitative

Roger, K. and Mignone, J. (2018). Living your ethics: It’s not just a dusty document. In S. Kleinknecht, L.
van den Scott, and C. Sanders (eds.), The Craft of Qualitative Research: A Handbook (pp. 46-52). Toronto:
Canadian Scholars Press.

Tuck, E. (2009). Suspending damage: A letter to communities. Harvard Educational Review, 79,3, 409-
427.