7043

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research
Special issue: The first-year experience
Methodology:
Innovative
approaches
to research
BSc (Hons)Business
Computing
Internet
Spring
2010Systems
INNOVATION NORTH
PRESENTING
NEW
RESEARCHERS AT LEEDS MET
LEEDS SCHOOL OF
ACCOUNTANCY
www.leedsmet.ac.uk
ISSN 2043-698X

EDITORS:
REVIEWERS:
Katie Hill
Karen Horwood
Sally Jones
Ko Koens
Paul Abbot
Musaed A. M. Al-mutairi
Colin Avison
Tim Bickerstaffe
Peter Branney
Janet Cochrane
David Devins
Bronwen Edwards
Salima Y Awad Elzouki
Taptik Emre Erkoc
Fabian Frenzel
Shelia Haugh
Dave Hufton
Fatih Isik
Alexandra J Kenyon
Mary Leung
Juliet Macdonald
David Moore
Stefanos Nachmias
Dave OBrien
David Pollard
Muthu Ramachandran
Shelia Scraton
Aneela Sheikh
Jim Stewart
Tan Bee Tin
Gabrielle Tree
Louise Warwick-Booth
John Willot
Chris Whitworth
EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD:

Birgit Braasch
Sally Brown
Carlton Cooke
Samantha Holland
Andrea Rayner
Julie Shaw
Desmond Wee
Chris Whitworth
Scope
This peer reviewed publication presents a selection of short papers on innovative approaches to research
being pioneered by postgraduate and early career researchers at Leeds Metropolitan University. It is an
incubator journal meant for new writers, editors and reviewers with little or no publishing experience,
and provided an opportunity to be mentored by more senior colleagues. The papers deal with research
methodologies and are practice-based, reflective and pragmatic.
Cover image: Another Place by Antony Gormley. Photo credit: Gavin Freeborn
Contents
Foreword..............................................................................................................................2
Editorial................................................................................................................................3
On writing a conceptual, hermeneutic thesis....................................................................5
Johanna Fawkes
Working with Words: A Bourdieuian Approach to Researching HE Entrepreneurship

Education and Gender.......................................................................................................8
Sally Jones
Critical Race Feminism as Outsider Method: Personal Praxis as Pedagogy..................11

Gabrielle Gopie Tree
Unpacking ways of seeing: Using a poststructural discourse theoretical

approach within an empirical field..................................................................................14
Karen Horwood
A Methodology for Design Leads: a re-evaluation of contemporary processes

of design thinking and making and their potential impact on HE writing culture.
An evolutionary, multi-method approach..........................................................................17
Harriet Edwards
Action Research: determining boundaries between participatory and

non-participatory approaches.........................................................................................21
Sarah Copeland and Katie Hill
Researching Political Tourists: A Case Study Approach.................................................24

Fabian Frenzel
Talking about History: Experience and Memory in Qualitative Research.......................27

Birgit Braasch and Claudia Andrea Mller
Grounded theory: experiences of two studies with a focus on axial coding

and the use of the NVivo qualitative analysis software...................................................30
Andrea Gorra and Marianna Kornilaki
Issues of access: beyond the insider-outsider perspective............................................33

Ko Koens and Tom Fletcher
Foreword
I am grateful for the opportunity to write a foreword to
this new journal Methodology: Innovative approaches
to research as it allows me to thank and congratulate
all the postgraduate researchers and staff of the
University who have contributed to making it happen.
The journal represents an opportunity for new
researchers to write and submit a paper on research
methodology for peer review within the boundaries
of their own University Community. It also gives
postgraduate researchers and staff the opportunity
to collaborate on all aspects of the production of a
journal, which brings together individuals from across
the University. Writing for this journal, specifically
set up with emerging researchers in mind, provides
an excellent progression toward submitting for
mainstream peer review in national and international
journals in specialist subject areas. Postgraduates
and staff involved in running the journal are a
combination of those new to such processes working
alongside staff with considerable experience of
reviewing and editing. Some of the postgraduates
who are contributing in different ways to the content
and production of this journal will go on to academic
careers and become part of the next generation
of reviewers and editors of journals and other
scholarly publications. The journal therefore provides
a stepping stone for progression in a number of
mutually beneficial ways for all involved and reflects
well on our research community.
The contributions that appear, having emerged
successfully through the process of peer review
which is a rite of passage for all those who publish
research, represents a small snap shot of the range of
eclectic research that is underway across Leeds Met.
Postgraduates are supervised and supported in their
research by active researchers who have demonstrated
internationally excellent and world-leading research
across all the Faculties of the University, as evidenced
by the most recent Research Assessment Exercise
in 2008; I am sure that many of those who may be
publishing their first papers in this and future editions
will follow in their footsteps.
I would like to thank all the postgraduates and staff of
the University who have worked with such enthusiasm
to bring this journal to print.
Professor Carlton Cooke
Director of University Research
The past few years have seen the Leeds Met PhD
community grow apace, particularly with the arrival of
our centenary students, and we have seen research
increasingly become more significant across the
University as a whole. With the increased numbers
of students came the need for shifts in provision for
them. In 2006 I suggested and co-organised the
first Postgraduate Research Conference. As I wrote
in a Research Reflection at the time: postgraduate
research students commonly find the PhD experience
an isolating experience, often coming into a University
department to see their supervisor but not really getting
involved in more of the life of their faculty and the idea
of a conference was an attempt to lessen that sense
of isolation. And in 2008 I suggested a postgraduate
journal to give our students a taste both of reviewing
and being reviewed, the latter particularly often being
one of the hardest lessons in an academic career.
The journal currently in your hands was edited by
a dedicated core team consisting of postgraduate
researchers Katie Jane Hill, Karen Horwood, Sally
Jones and Ko Koens, all new to the editing process,
but who worked hard to bring the journal to fruition;
from issuing initial calls for papers, to putting
seasoned and new reviewers together, to choosing
a cover image and liaising with printers. It could
also not have happened without the volunteer staff
and student reviewers working together to provide
constructive feedback on the papers received by
other postgraduates and to give experience of peer
reviewing from both sides. This journal, then, is truly
the result of peers and colleagues working collectively
and successfully to produce value, both within and
outside of Leeds Met. So I would like to thank the
editorial team, and the contributors and the reviewers,
for working so hard on this publication.
2010 sees the University welcome a new VC, Professor
Susan Price, as well as the fifth Postgraduate
Research Conference and the completion of the
Centenary PhDs, so this journal connects perfectly
with those events to celebrate and acknowledge
the work and the contribution of our postgraduate
students. The articles in it focus on a range of original
research which uses innovative methods. We very
much hope you enjoy reading them, and that they
interest, and even inspire, you.
Dr Samantha Holland
Carnegie Research Institute
Editorial
In 2008 staff and postgraduate researchers were
invited to join an editorial advisory board to discuss
the formation of a postgraduate journal to showcase
work of new researchers at Leeds Met. As well as
giving voice to the new research being carried out
within the university, this was seen as an opportunity
to provide a developmental space in which staff and
postgraduates could learn by going through the whole
process of producing and publishing a journal.
2010 is an important time for postgraduate research
at Leeds Met as many of the Centenary postgraduate
researchers will graduate as the largest cohort of
postgraduates in the history of the University. More
widely, it seems to be a time in the UK when there
are many important discussions taking place about
the nature of doctoral studies, and of academic
publishing, such as those hosted by the ESRC seminar
series New Forms of Doctorate. It therefore seems
appropriate to mark this time with a publication that
shows the breadth and quality of research at Leeds
Met, as well as the ways in which our new researchers
are contributing to the development of new ways to do
research.
We are joining a growing sector of student publishing,
and this caused us to reflect on how we can contribute
to this sector, and what makes research at Leeds Met
interesting and special. As postgraduate students, we
have found that the openness and diversity of research
culture at Leeds Met has provided a space in which we
can be experimental in our approaches.
The papers in this journal are all qualitative,
reflecting the papers submitted rather than the
focus of the journal per se. This gives the journal a
particular lens in that the papers explore, debate
and highlight the difficulties of making sense of the
complexity of the human experience. The papers
also reflect the authors experiences of finding
a way through the multitude of theoretical and
methodological approaches to qualitative research
and the rationale for choosing particular approaches
to research. In structuring this publication we have
tried to reflect some of the challenges for new and
emerging researchers in a way that acknowledges
some key stages in the research process. Papers
are presented in an order that, we feel, reflects the
process of working through a piece of research.
We therefore start with the struggle of defining
theoretical foundations, linking these to appropriate
methodologies and methods and ending with a
reflection on the research process itself and our role
as researchers within this.
The opening paper by Johanna Fawkes describes

the process of identifying an appropriate theoretical
approach and where to position it methodologically
within the wider field. This is particularly difficult
when working within a field that has traditionally used
empirical research methods and her paper gives
some insights into how conceptual, cross-disciplinary
research can be undertaken. Also it sheds light on the
decision and sense making process behind thinking
your way to a PhD using a hermeneutical approach.
Both Sally Jones and Gabrielle Tree use established
(if somewhat contested) theoretical concepts as
frameworks to inform and guide multidisciplinary
research that explores the margins and ask
questions about whose knowledge is valued and
reproduced within historical framings of fields such
as Entrepreneurship and Law. Sally Jones outlines
the reasoning behind her use of Pierre Bourdieus
theory of practice, exploring habitus, capital and field
theory in her feminist informed research on gender
and entrepreneurship. Whilst Gabrielle Tree provides
an overview of critical race feminism and how it has
informed her research on developing legal responses
to the subordination of Black Women; drawing on Black
and Chicana feminist theory and methodologies to
account for the experiences of non-White Women. She
also suggests its application outside the legal academy,
to support research with Outsider students. Karen
Horwoods paper illustrates her use of a poststructural
discourse theoretical approach within the field of urban
planning; its relevance, application and some potential
criticisms of it as a methodology. In doing so she
outlines the development of discourse theory and its
focus on the role of language in meaning-making and
the practicality of its use to explore the development of
discourses of urban green space.
Moving from methodology to methods are papers that
highlight how methodology informs and shapes data
production and analysis methods. Harriet Edwards
charts her research journey from methodology to
method using an emergent evolutionary, multimethod approach. Her work draws on ethnography
and narrative research to explore the ways that
students of design write about the design process
and issues around the academic articulation of
elusive creative processes and their potential impact
on HE writing culture. Sarah Copeland and Katie
Hill outline their experiences of working within an
action research tradition on their individual projects;
a rural, intergenerational project and a community
design practice project. They compare and contrast
the development of Action Research and Participatory
Action Research, their own understandings of their
differences and their experiences of working in

the interstices of these, with a particular focus on
the challenges of encouraging the on-going active
involvement and input of research participants
suggested by proponents of Participatory Action
Research. Fabian Frenzel also writes about
Participatory Action Research, as it informs his case
study based approach to researching political tourism.
He outlines some of the criticisms of case studies
as a method, focusing on issues of generalisability,
bias and ethics and reflects on how these can be
acknowledged and addressed. Historians, Birgit
Braasch and Claudia Muller present their experiences
of using narrative methods for their research on
tourism history in the form of a reflective research
conversation. They compare their experiences of
using oral history as a data production method and
explore differing approaches to analysis based on
experience and memory. They discuss these issues as
they manifest themselves in participant recollections
of events described during oral history interviews and
the related methodological challenges that this brings
to their research. The next paper focuses on the data
analysis process as tourism researcher Marianna
Kornalaki and information technology researcher
Andrea Gorra, outline their experiences of analysing
data with (and without) the software QSR NVivo. They
outline their approaches, both of which are based on
grounded theory, and the practical and theoretical
difficulties and possibilities of computer assisted
qualitative data analysis they encountered.
The journal closes with a reflective account of the
positioning of the researcher within the field and
the research process with Ko Koens and Thomas
Fletchers thoughts on the role of the researcher;
challenging the notion of a dichotomous insideroutsider perspective and exploring ways to bridge the
gaps between the researcher, the researched and
the wider field of enquiry. They offer insights into how
researchers gain access and build relationship with
research participants and how to negotiate their role
as researchers within these complex relationships
that cannot be adequately described using an
insider-outsider binary.
As Editors we would like to thank our Editorial
Advisory Board of staff and postgraduates, our panel
of Reviewers, our Authors, and for all of the support
that we have received that has made this publication
possible.
Sally Jones and Katie Hill on behalf of the Editors.
On writing a conceptual, hermeneutic thesis

Johanna Fawkes, MA, MCIPR
PhD Researcher, Faculty of Business and Law, j.fawkes@leedsmet.ac.uk
Getting started
Hermeneutics to the rescue
Most PhDs are built on empirical research, whether

qualitative or quantitative. This is particularly true in
newer universities, though conceptual theses are the
norm in older and continental European universities.
I understand mine is the first conceptual thesis at
Leeds Met, though others are already in train.
So I was relieved when a superviso r suggested that I

was taking a hermeneutical approach: that sounded
much more scientific and proper. The only problem
was I had no idea what hermeneutical meant! So off to
the literature which, unlike that on conceptual theses,
is extensive.
My thesis proposes a new approach to professional

ethics based in Carl Jungs (1875-1961) idea of
wholeness, rather than the traditional good/bad
foundation of most professional ethics. This involves
exploring the sociology of professions, investigating
current debates in professional ethics; considering
whether Jungs complex and contradictory ideas
constitute an ethic; extending concepts from the
individual to the professional sphere; and finally
discussing whether these ideas can be applied to the
particular profession of public relations, in which I
have practised and taught for the past 30 years.
Hermeneutics is sometimes called the philosophy

of interpretation and has been developed in the past
few decades primarily by Riceour (e.g. 1981) and
Gadamer (e.g. 1989), building on earlier works by
Heidegger and others. Hermeneutics is centrally
involved with understanding in all its various forms.
Bleicher (1980) summarises the development of
traditional hermeneutic theory as a) technological
understanding of language, vocabulary, grammar etc;
b) exegesis of sacred texts, such as biblical study; and
c) to guide jurisdiction. Hermeneutic philosophy, as
developed by Heidegger, questioned deeper aspects of
understanding, such as the impossibility of objectivity
when subject and object are bound together in Being,
or Dasein. The goal of hermeneutic investigation is
understanding through interpretation, in which the
subjective limitations and frameworks historical and
linguistic are part of the process. It does not aim
for scientific replication of interpretation Heidegger
called it extrascientific knowledge. Hermeneutics
can be seen as a reaction to what Smith (1997) calls
enlightenment fundamentalism, an over-reliance on
rationality and the scientific method as the primary
means for obtaining truth. Although Sikka (2008)
argues that Gadamer is not so much jettisoning as
rearticulating; enlightenment values, Taylor (2002)
suggests that Gadamers hermeneutics offers a
fundamental alternative to the discredited model
of scientific truth, namely that of understanding,
acquired though conversation with the other, in which
some measure of control is ceded so that the other
becomes less other in the process.
The prospect of doing all that and then interviewing

practitioners was impossible and, frankly, pointless,
because practitioners reflect current attitudes
whereas I am interested in furthering a debate by
introducing new (or newly adapted) ideas to existing
discourse. It was clear from the beginning that this
project extends beyond the PhD into post-doctoral
research. In early discussion with supervisors it was
agreed that a conceptual approach was the most
appropriate, especially given the quantity of crossdisciplinary reading in professional sociology,
professional ethics, and Jungian studies - required to
construct the central thesis.
I set off to discover the rudiments of writing a
conceptual thesis with zero results, despite asking
for help from librarians and extensive online searches.
Library shelves groaned under the weight of empirical
research approaches and arguments, qualitative and
quantitative. But there was nothing about just thinking
your way to a PhD. This is the central challenge of a
conceptual approach there is no existing framework
or literature to draw on for guidance, you have to build
your ideas and incorporate arguments against them
as you go, testing your concepts as you develop them.
As Gadamer (1975) puts it:

the task of hermeneutics is entering into dialogue
with a text. To understand something is to reach an
understanding with another about it, and that can only
be achieved through a conversation that sustains the
interplay of question and answer
(cited in Sikka, 2008, p235).
The question and answer exists within the reader as

well as between readers, according to Gadamer, who
was particularly concerned with the pre-understandings
(also termed prejudices) a reader brings to the text;
the interplay of expectation, realization and adjustment
leads to realignments of their frames of interpretation
(Jensen, 2002).
The theme of communicative dialogue is also central
to Jurgen Habermas who sees understanding as
based on intersubjective mutuality, trust, and shared
knowledge (Sikka, 2008, p228). He takes issue with
what he terms the idealism of Gadamers approach,
pointing out that barriers to understanding can be
ideological and resistant to sharing. Habermas thus
develops critical hermeneutics, questioning the power
structures in understanding and communication.
From the 1960s Paul Riceour explored the
linguistic aspects of hermeneutics and semiotics
by investigating the meaning of signs and then
developing a theory of interpretation which bridged
some of the conflicts between the hermeneutical
theory of Gadamer and critical hermeneutics.
Davey (2004) explores the tension between the
hermeneutics of suspicion (in which text always
means something other than the author intended)
and the hermeneutics of conversation (in which the
text always means something more than the author
intended). The critical theorists tend to fall into the
former camp, the idealists the latter. Schweiker (2004)
can be called an idealist as he uses hermeneutics
to search for common meaning in a time of global
turmoil. He outlines the main hermeneutical
approaches from the pre-critical (literal
interpretations of the Bible, for example), through
historical-critical hermeneutics (which contextualise
interpretation). Finally he proposes a post-critical
hermeneutics which examines the assumptions
underpinning texts, as in critical approaches,
but then moves on to construct new meanings or
interpretations: The point of interpretation for any
post-critical theory is to show the contemporary
meaning and truth of the work. It is to open the text or
symbol of event for renewed engagement within the
dynamics of current life (pxx).
his own) to construct new meanings and concepts

(Jones, 2007, Papadopoulos, 2006, Brooke 2000).
There is also a strong connection between subjectbased hermeneutics and the concerns raised about
post-modern ethics; several scholars have used
hermeneutical approaches of varying types to
question the experience of ethics in contemporary life
(Schweiker 2004; Smith, 1997; Smith, 1991).
Conclusions
My reading showed that hermeneutics is not the
methodology I originally sought but a research
philosophy, placing human experience at the centre
of the research or reflection process and honouring
variety of interpretation above provability. It has
offered me a framework rather than a system, a way
of looking at literature and my own role as interpreter
of that literature. There are of course other nonempirical approaches to conceptual theses which I
have not taken but the emphasis on hermeneutics
has been particularly appropriate for interpreting
professional ethics through a Jungian psychology, and
may be appropriate for others in arts and humanities,
as well as business subjects. There is not space here
to consider the pitfalls subjectivism and relativism in
particular but it is clear that if one comes to the text
with ones full self, something of meaning to others
may be generated. As Vanhoozer (2005) describes
Ricoeurs central insight:
understanding comes from situating ourselves in front
of texts that display the full range of human possibilities
and capacities. . creative language gives to thought
something that reason cannot discover on its own.
(p.27).
My thesis draws on the latter approach, in that I

am building a bridge of meaning between different
bodies of literature and seeking to find value and
relevance for contemporary practice. This approach
also seems closer to Jungs subject and methods,
as he saw himself as both a phenomenologist
learning from patients without presuppositions and
a hermeneut, interpreting their experiences (and
References
Bleicher, J. (1980) Contemporary Hermeneutics:
Hermeneutics as Method, Philosophy and Critique,
London, Routledge, Kegan and Paul.
Brooke, R. (ed) (2000) Pathways into the Jungian World:
Phenomenology and Analytical Psychology, London
Routledge.
Davey, N. (2004) On the polity of experience: towards a
hermeneutics of attentiveness, Renascence Vol 56:
4 pp.217 - 234
Gadamer, H.-G. (1989) Truth and method (2nd rev. ed.).
New York: Crossroad.
Jensen, K.B. (2002) A Handbook of Media and
Communication Research: Qualitative and Quantitative
Methodologies London: Routledge.
Jones, R. A. (2007). Jung, Psychology, Postmodernity.
Hove, East Sussex: Routledge.
Papadopoulos, R. (ed.) (2006), The Handbook of Jungian
psychology: theory, practice, and applications, Hove:
Routledge.
Riceour, P., (1981) Hermeneutics and the Human
sciences: essays on language, action and interpretation,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Sikka, T. (2008). Pragmatics, poststructuralism
and hermeneutics: an examination of discursiveconsensus formation and its ethical elements, Journal
of Pragmatics, Vol 40 pp 227-243
Schweiker, W. (2004). Theological ethics and global
dynamics : in the time of many worlds. Malden ; Oxford:
Blackwell Pub.
Smith, N. H. (1997) Strong Hermeneutics: Contingency
and Moral Identity. London: Routledge,
Smith, P.C. (1991) Hermeneutics and Human Finitude:
Toward a Theory of Ethical Understanding. New York,
Fordham University Press.
Taylor C. (2002) Understanding the Other: a
Gademerian view on conceptual schemes in Malpas,
J., Arnswald, U., & Kertscher, J. (2002). Gadamers
century : essays in honor of Hans-Georg Gadamer.
Cambridge, Mass. ; London: MIT.
Vanhoozer K.J,. (2005) The Joy of Yes: Ricoeur
Philosopher of Hope. The Christian Century. Vol 122.
Issue: 17.pp 27+.
Working with Words: A Bourdieuian Approach to Researching HE Entrepreneurship

Education and Gender
Sally Jones, PhD Researcher, Centre for Research into Higher Education
Carnegie Faculty of Sport and Education, s.a.jones@leedsmet.ac.uk
Introduction
Bourdieus perspective... represents a strong singlesystem view of social reproduction and change. It offers
the ideal framework for theorizing about the way in
which social, cultural and material forces intersect to
produce particular types of social action.
Elam (2008, p.18)
This paper outlines the methodological approach to
PhD research influenced by Bourdieus concepts of
habitus, capital and field, providing an overview of
Bourdieus theoretical framework which facilitates
the exploration of gender whilst allowing for agency
and change. Bourdieus theory of practice is explored
in relation to the field of HE and the entrepreneurship
education classroom and the dispositions and
capital that women might bring to this field; how
the interaction of these affect individual behaviour
and aspirations and the congruence of individual
aspirations and societal expectations as they relate to
gendered chances of entrepreneurial success.
An overview of Bourdieus concepts

Bourdieus theory of practice (Bourdieu, 1984) outlines
how the interplay of habitus - the socially produced
self (Lawler, 2004) - and forms of capital (or individual
and external resources) play out in certain fields or
spaces of social struggle (Shi, 2001, p.55) to inform
behaviour. In Distinction (1984, p.101) Bourdieu
suggests the following as an illustration of how
habitus, field and capital interact to inform behaviour:
[(habitus) (capital)] + field = practice
Swartz sums up the social reality of this equation
saying (1997, p.141) ...action is the product of
class dispositions intersecting with the dynamics
and structure of particular fields. Practices occur
when habitus encounters those competitive arenas
called fields, and actions reflect the structure of that
encounter.
This is a non-dualistic, anti-essentialist stance,
suggesting that individual and collective notions
should be viewed as interrelated and not mutually
exclusive, allowing these symbiotic relationships to
be acknowledged and explored; that the personal
and the collective are intertwined and in constant
negotiation rather than separate, and in constant
opposition (Bourdieu, 1998). Bourdieu offers the
possibility of the co-existence of two social worlds
the individual and the collective and gives an
insight into how their interaction can lead to change.
A Bourdieuian approach therefore highlights the
interplay between the objective and subjective; agency

and structure; realism and relativism. Its non-dualism
allows us to explore the interplay of traditionally
polarised concepts; suggesting possibilities for
change and militating against the traditional
oppositions of methodological individualism and
collectivism. It undermines prescribed notions about
the incompatibility of a critical realist ontological
perspective with a social constructionist (or relativist)
epistemological approach, both of which form the
theoretical foundations of my research. This is also
consistent with a feminist approach that rejects
gender-based essentialism as based on socially
constructed differences between male and female
that have developed to the disadvantage of women.
Bourdieus work therefore supports exploration of the
socially constructed nature of HE as a field and the
analysis of it from a gendered perspective based on
the capital and habitus that female undergraduates
bring to this field. His ideas also support a critical
analysis of how institutional factors and the wider
political and historical context have shaped and
constructed entrepreneurship education and ideas of
the entrepreneur.
Ultimately, Bourdieuian concepts support exploration
of gender as a social construction, with masculine
and feminine being subsets of the class system.
Moi (1999, p.267) agrees, asserting that employing a
Bourdieuian approach enables us to reconceptualize
gender as a social category in a way which undercuts
the traditional essentialist/non-essentialist divide.
This allows us to view gender within the arena
of social mores and collective and individual
expectations rather than an explicit set of immutable
characteristics. We can then explore habitus, field
and capital based on these ideas and how education
systems might affect the choices of the habitus in
particular fields or, as Bourdieu (1998, p. 83) puts it,
environments that lead women to contribute to
their own exclusion from the places which they are in
any case excluded.
Exploring the Discourses of

Entrepreneurship
It is not merely a question of improving the chances of
women to compete in a mans worldbut to demand a
radical change in the nature of what is being offered...
and at least an equal recognition that what is important
about womens experience of the world is as valid as
mens.
(Thompson,1983 p.93)
My research analyses situated perceptions and

understandings within HE entrepreneurship education
and investigation starts with a broad international,
national and historical perspective and how this
view from above is arbitrated and constructed via
institutional and staff meaning-making (the view
from the middle) to inform the localised and situated
experience of students in the classroom (the view
from below).
As this research takes Bourdieus theory of practice
as a conceptual and analytical guide it follows
that it should also engage with his ideas around
methodology. Swartz (1997, p.142) sums these up:
1. Research must relate the particular field of
practices to the broader field of power
2. Research should identify the structure of objective
relations between the opposing positions occupied
by individuals or groups as they compete for
legitimation.
3. Research must analyse the class habitus brought
by agents to their respective positions and the
social trajectory they pursue within the field of
struggle
In response to these methodological issues, I explore
the practices in a particular institution and relate this
to gendered aspects of the historical and theoretical
development of entrepreneurship through analysing
the legitimisation of power in the classroom and
staff and student perceptions of what enterprise and
entrepreneurship is, who can be an entrepreneur
and who is sanctioned to reproduce or challenge these
discourses. It also explores the ways that government
agencies, institutions, staff and students position
themselves within the discourses of entrepreneurship
in HE and what and who is legitimised by these
discourses, through identifying the forms of capital
suggested in texts, interactions and perceptions
surrounding enterprise and entrepreneurship.
In keeping with Bourdieus methodological emphasis
on the exploration of power, legitimacy and social
struggle, one of the early methods used was critical
discourse analysis (CDA), to identify themes and
discourses in the field of HE which are enacted and
mediated by staff and institutions. Indeed, the research
project as a whole is based on identifying, producing
and analysing qualitative data: the spoken word;
student and staff perceptions and descriptions of
their experiences in interviews; and analysis of policy
documents, course materials and other official texts.
I utilise CDA to focus on how ... discourse structures
enact, confirm, legitimate, reproduce, or challenge
relations of power and dominance in society (Van

Dijk, n.d., p. 353, authors emphasis) and to critique
some of the taken-for-granted knowledge allied to
enterprise and entrepreneurship discourses. Through
combining CDA with Bourdieus theoretical framework
this research phase attempts to identify some of the
dominant discourses of entrepreneurship education
as a basis for later exploration of staff and female
student perceptions of entrepreneurship, their desire
to become entrepreneurs and how their responses to
the language or discourses presented in the classroom
might be in tension with their sense of self and the
habitus and capital that they bring to this field.
A Faircloughian approach to CDA links discourse
development to the realities of the material
elements of the social sphere as well as peoples lived
experience of engaging with and accepting or rejecting
discourses around entrepreneurship and gender
which have developed over centuries of studies on
men, by men and for men (Carter & Marlow, 2003).
Fairclough (2003, p.202) suggests that:
critical discourse analysis (is) a form of critical
social research. Critical social research begins from
questions such as: how do existing societies provide
people with the possibilities and resources for rich and
fulfilling lives, how on the other hand do they deny people
these possibilities and resources?
Faircloughs possibilities and resources echo
Bourdieus habitus and capital and perceptions of
the future in the present (Grenfell, 2004) and what
people like me do. In this respect I am interested in
how these discourses inform womens perceptions
of reality; how this fits with their personal sense
of identity, their life chances and their ability to
re-imagine themselves and their positions; and
how that can have a meaningful impact on the
fields in which they are situated and the capital
which they can accrue in those fields. Sunderland
(2004, p. 20) suggests that discourse is gendered
and that discourse analysis offers an ability to
challenge traditional essentialist and reductionist
understandings of gender, offering opportunities for
curriculum and pedagogical change to encourage
not only a critical engagement with entrepreneurship
theory but a more inclusive approach, encouraging
alternative imaginings of who is socially sanctioned to
be entrepreneurial.
Conclusion
Bourdieu provides a set of methodological tools for
thinking through gender (Skeggs, 2004 p.24) with
his non-dualism and anti-essentialism offering
opportunities to explore the interplay of collective
ideas and individual experience that are traditionally
polarised. In this way his concepts support the
questioning and exploration of gender and HEee,
offering possibilities for agency and change and
allowing for the fact that actors interact differently
in different situations depending on the fit between
habitus, capital and the structure of the spaces of
social struggle.
References
Elam, A. B. (2008) Gender and Entrepreneurship: A
Multilevel Theory and Analysis Cheltenham, UK &
Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar
Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of
the Judgement of Taste Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press
Shi, C (2001) Mapping Out Gender Power: A

Bourdieuian Approach Feminist Media Studies, 1:1,
2001 pp.55 59
Skeggs, B. (2004) Context and Background: Pierre
Bourdieus analysis of class, gender and sexuality
in Adkins, L. and Skeggs, B. (Eds.) Feminism After
Bourdieu Oxford, Malden MA: Blackwell Publishing/
The Sociological Review pp. 21 - 33
Sunderland, J. (2004) Gendered Discourses
Basingstoke & New York: PalgraveMacmillan
Swartz, D. (1997) Culture and Power: The Sociology of
Pierre Bourdieu Chicago, London: The University of
Chicago Press
Thompson, J. L. (1983) Learning Liberation: Women s
Response to Mens Education Kent: Croom Helm Ltd
van Dijk T. A . (n.d.) Principles of Critical Discourse
Analysis Available at: http://www.discourses.
org/OldArticles/Principles%20of%20critical%20
discourse%20analysis.pdf [Accessed 22nd November
2008]
Bourdieu, P. (1998) Masculine Domination Stanford:

Stanford University Press
Fairclough, N. (2003) Analysing Discourse: Textual
analysis for social research Abingdon, New York:
Routledge
Carter, S. & Marlow, S. (2003) Accounting for
Change: Professionalism as a challenge to gender
disadvantage in entrepreneurship In Butler, J (ed.)
Women Entrepreneurs Greenwich, Connecticut:
Information Age Publishing pp.181 202
Grenfell, M. (2004) Pierre Bourdieu: Agent Provocateur
London & New York: Continuum
Lawler, S. (2004) Rules of Engagement: Habitus,
power and resistance in Adkins, L. and Skeggs, B.
(eds.) Feminism After Bourdieu Oxford, Malden MA:
Blackwell Publishing/The Sociological Review
pp. 110 128
Moi, T. (1999) What is a Woman? Oxford, New York,
Athens, Auckland, Bangkok, Bogot, Buenos Aires,
Cape Town, Chennai, Dar es Salaam, Delhi, Florence,
Hong Kong, Istanbul, Karachi, Kolkata, Kula Lumpur,
Madrid, Melbourne, Mexico City, Mumbai, Nairobi,
Paris, Sao Paulo, Shanghai, Singapore, Taipei, Tokyo,
Toronto, Warsaw: Oxford University Press
10
Critical Race Feminism as Outsider Method: Personal Praxis as Critical Pedagogy

Gabrielle Gopie Tree, PhD Researcher, Centre for Diversity in the Professions
Faculty of Business and Law, gabi.tree@yahoo.ca
Critical Race Feminism: An Overview

Critical race feminism (CRF) is the methodology that
I have been using to research and analyze Black
Womens experiences of subordination and possible
legal remedies note that I capitalize identity
names such as Black, Chicana, and Men of Colour to
emphasize the artificially constructed nature of the
terms. CRF is a pragmatic and theoretical discourse
against subordination that centralises race and
gender in its analysis of social inequality in order to
encourage justice for this group. The framework has
been spearheaded by legal scholar Adrien Katherine
Wing who published the theorys foundational texts
(2000; 2003). CRFs methodology draws on Black and
Chicana feminisms, feminist legal theory, and critical
race theory to suggest approaches to legal research
and legal practice that can address the issues of
multiply subordinated groups. Black feminism is
a movement and a methodology that originated in
America during the 1970s in response to domination
of the contemporary womens liberation struggle by
middle-class White Women and the Black liberation
movement by Black Men/Men of Colour; it has sought
to account for the experiences of diverse groups
of Black Women/Women of Colour (Lorde, 1978;
Hull, Scott, and Smith, 1982; hooks, 1984). Chicana
feminism grew out of the 1960s Chicano civil rights
movement which succeeded in fostering ethnic pride
within the Mexican-American community but was
dominated by male perspectives and approaches. In
the contemporary period chicana feminism addresses
issues of identity, colonialism, and immigration
(Moraga, 1981, 1983). Similarly, critical race theory
grew out of the critical legal studies (CLS) movement
which developed in the 1970s within the American
legal academy as a critique of laws tendency to
reproduce domination. CLS was dominated by
White male experiences and voices, prompting the
development of feminist legal theory and critical race
theory. In spite of this history, critical race theory
came to be dominated by the voices of Men of Colour
and feminist legal theory by White Womens stories,
compelling the development of critical race feminism
to account for the experiences of non-White Women
(Wing, 2000). Both CRT and CRF are products of the
American legal academy. While CRT in the UK is
in its early stages of development, it has garnered
interest primarily in the education field and has been
popularized through the work of David Gilborn. CRF
is still less known and this article hopes to generate
awareness of its presence and potential as both a
research and analytical tool.
Although CRF has been developed in the legal

academy, it is transferable to other disciplines and
useful to both those working inside and outside of the
academy. The methodology is particularly useful for
Outsider students. Outsider student refers to those
who are excluded in the academy due to social status,
philosophical perspective, or combinations thereof;
Insider students are advantaged by social location
and/or opinions.
Methods
Counter-storytelling
Both dominant and marginalized groups tell stories;
however the accepted stories typically belong to
dominant groups. Counter-storytelling is the story of
marginalized peoples knowledge. It serves to articulate
subordinated experiences which are often unheard or
dismissed for contradicting generally accepted views.
It centers the experiences of Outsider groups and
challenges mainstream knowledge with the ontological
question: how do we know what we know? Counterstorytelling also allows for accessible communication,
the discussion of issues in a specific yet nonconfrontational manner, and the framing of possible
solutions in pragmatic terms. Critical race theorist and
legal scholar Richard Delgado has used this method
(1989; 1995) and has defended counter-storytelling as
an important Outsider method for destroying dominant
group perspectives which legitimize social exclusion.
Gloria Ladson-Billings (1996) utilizes narrative to
explore issues of dominance in educational settings.
Early founder of critical race theory Derrick Bell
has also used storytelling with his character Geneva
Crenshaw (1987). Yet, this methodology remains
contested terrain.
Critical race feminist educator Sherene Razack
has reflected on the significance of story-telling for
social change and as a type of anti-subordination
pedagogical practice. Razack believes that in the
context of social change storytelling refers to an
opposition to established knowledge (Razack, 2001:
36). As the placement of subordinated people as
un-sources of knowledge is an existing obstacle to
their knowledge claims, storytelling is construed
as less authoritative than dominant knowledge
paradigms. Razack further explains the prevalent
attitude toward storytelling as:
Often uncritically understood as sentimental, personal
and individual horizon as opposed to objective, universal,
societal, limitless horizon; often attributed to women, the
other of man, and natives, the other of the west.
(2001: 36-7)
11
To illustrate, Kathy Abrams (1991) references legal

scholar Patricia Williams story of being barred from a
global clothing retailer to demonstrate the suspicion
often directed at counter-storytelling. She notes
the curious criticism of Williams account that she
should have given equal weight to the retailers
perspective as well her own. Thus, the knowledge of
subordinated people is contested both through their
construction as un-knowers a group incapable of
knowledge and hostility to their methodologies
mainly because they are the source of the information.
Critical Historicizing
The second element of CRF is critical historicizing
which excavates circumstances and phenomena, and
recognizes the role played by the past in constructing
contemporary understandings and relationships.
In order to fill informational gaps with regard to
Black Women, I use critical historical methodology
throughout my research. Analyzing and interrogating
the past ensures that contemporary knowledge,
which is also taken-for-granted knowledge, is
contextualized. Examples of critical historicizing
include Ivan van Sertimas (1976) anthropological
work on pre-Columbian relationships between various
non-White populations, Edward Scobies (1988)
research on attitudes toward, and experiences of,
Black Women in 16th and 17th century England,
and Karen Flynns (2003) PhD dissertation on Black
Canadian nurses.
Transdisciplinarity
The third element of CRF is a transdisciplinary
approach. CRF is applicable across disciplines and
draws on various disciplinary tools in the development
of its discourse. The objective of utilizing an array of
disciplines is in the interest of more holistic analysis
and critique of contemporary social issues which can
facilitate more appropriate responses. In addition to
law, my thesis draws upon political science, Womens
studies, psychology and history in order to support
understanding of Women of Colours experiences of
subordination, and enhance the creation of effective
solutions.
Praxial Approaches
Praxial approaches use Outsider knowledge, and
experiences of subordination as a basis for social
change (Freire, 1970; hooks, 1994). They are grounded
in transformative theory and action, and achieved
through the acts of looking to the bottom, empathizing
with the oppressed and maintaining a connection
with ones community; all of which foster an ethic of
personal accountability (Wing, 2000). At the core of
these methods is dialogue with subordinated people
which is achieved via empathy with the oppressed,
including ones community, and accountability for
12
ones knowledge claims. Personal accountability for

ones knowledge claims is also a characteristic of
Patricia Hill Collins Black feminist epistemology.
Collins notes that assessments of an individuals
knowledge claims simultaneously evaluate an
individuals character, values and ethics (2009: 284).
Simply put, an individuals claims are indicative of
personal values which are suggestive of personal
practices; discord between knowledge claims and
personal practice diminishes the credibility of the
individual making the claim. A focus on individual
behaviours distilled from knowledge claims assists in
locating those practices which improve the world and
those which need to be transformed.
Looking to the Bottom
Among other things, a praxial approach considers
the experiences and issues of some of the most
marginalized groups of women (Wing, 2000: 3). While
located within critical race feminist theory, this
method bears some similarity to lived experience
as a criterion of meaning one of the methods of
the Black feminist epistemology which is based
on the idea that the life experiences of marginalized
people generates knowledge which is integral to their
survival (Collins, 2009: 275). This view is also intrinsic
to Chicana feminism (Anzalda, 1987: preface;
Moraga, 1983: 52-53), and relates to CRFs rationale
for concern with the plight of some of the most
disadvantaged segments of society.
Empathizing with the oppressed
An attempt to look to the bottom without empathizing
with the oppressed is compromised by the
maintenance of relations of domination via a failure
to recognize the intersubjective relationship of
human beings. Empathy allows for recognition of
human interconnection through which concern and
understanding can develop.
Maintenance of connections with ones community
For Outsider scholars like those working within
critical race feminism, looking to the bottom and
empathizing with the oppressed is often encouraged
through the maintenance of a connection with the
community that nurtured them. I recall once going
to another Outsider a White queer feminist legal
scholar in my law school for support when the
pressure of the environment became more than I
could bear. She told me: whatever it was that you
were doing sustained you and got you into a good
legal program so hang on to that. At the time, so
overwhelmed by my challenging environment, I did
not quite understand her advice. Now, years later I
understand it very well and have gained a greater
appreciation for the experiences and knowledge
attributable to my Outsider status.
Conclusion
Critical race feminism is a useful tool for challenging
epistemological and social hierarchies and validating
the experiences and concerns of marginalized groups.
Its focus on transdisciplinarity ensures it is accessible
to, and incorporates, a variety of disciplines. Using
critical race feminism Outsider students, scholars,
and anti-subordinationists can explore the margins
and articulate hybridity (Anzalda, 1987), as well
as apply and contribute to a methodology of the
oppressed (Sandoval, 2000) in law and a range of
other disciplines.
References
Abrams, K. (1991) Hearing the Call of Stories, California
Law Review 79 (4) pp. 971-1052.
Anzalda, G. (1987) Borderlands/La Frontera: The
New Mestiza. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.
Bell, D. A. (1987) And We Are Not Saved: The Elusive
Quest For Racial Justice, New York: Basic Books.
Collins, P. H. (2009) Black Feminist Thought:
Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of
Empowerment, 10th anniversary edition, New York:
Routledge Classics.
Delgado, R. (1995) Rodrigos Chronicles: Conversations
About America and Race, New York: New York
University Press.
Delgado, R. (1989) Storytelling for Oppositionists and
Others: A Plea for Narrative, Michigan Law Review 87:
pp. 2411-2441.
Flynn, K. (2003) Race, Class and Gender: Black Nurses
in Ontario, 1950 -1980, Ph.D. Thesis, York University.
Freire, P. (1970) Pedagogy of the Oppressed, London:
Penguin Books.
hooks, b. (1984) Feminist Theory from Margin to Center,
U.S.A: South End Press.
hooks, b. (1994) Teaching to Transgress: Education as a
Practice of Freedom, New York: Routledge.
Hull, G., Bell Scott, P., & Smith, B. (1982) All the
Women are White, All the Blacks are Men, But some of
us are Brave: Black Womens Studies, New York: The
Feminist Press.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1996) Silences as Weapons:
Challenges of a Black Professor Teaching White
Students, Theory into Practice 35 (2): pp. 79 85.
Lorde, A. (1978) The Black Unicorn, New York: W.W.
Norton & Co.
Moraga, C and Anzalda, G. (1981) This Bridge Called

My Back: Writings by Radical Women of Color, San
Francisco: Aunt Lute Press.
Moraga, C. (1983) Loving in the War Years: Lo Que
Nunca Paso Por Sus Labios, Boston: South End Press.
Razack, S. (1998) Looking White People in the
Eye: Gender, Race and Culture in Courtrooms and
Classrooms, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Sandoval, C. (2000) Methodology of the Oppressed,
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Scobie, E. (1988) African Women in Early Europe. In:
Van Sertima, I. (ed.) Black Women in Antiquity, New
Brunswick: Transaction Press, pp. 203-222.
Van Sertima, I. (1976) They came Before Columbus:
The African Presence in Ancient America, New York:
Random House.
Wing, A.K. (2000) Introduction: Global Critical Race
Feminism for the Twenty-First Century. In: Wing, A.K.
(ed.) Global Critical Race Feminism: An International
Reader, New York: New York University Press, pp. 1-26.
Wing, A.K. (ed.) (2003) Critical Race Feminism: A Reader,
2nd edition, New York: New York University Press.
Gabrielle Gopie Tree
In spite of changes to diversify legal education and
practice, law retains its race, sex/gender and class
hegemony. For these reasons, law school can be an
especially difficult place for Black women. This was
borne out by my experience at law school in Canada
and propelled me into postgraduate research of
Black womens experiences of subordination and
laws remedial role in the paradigm. I needed to
know that law was more than just the application of
purportedly neutral rules; it had to have the capacity
to challenge social subordination. I also needed to
locate Black women discussing their experiences of
marginalization. I sought a methodology that would
make these objectives possible and found it in critical
race feminism (CRF).
Research into Black womens experiences of
domination with them as sources of knowledge is
characteristic of a critical race feminist approach
that sees marginalized experience as worthwhile and
instructive. Using CRF methods, I have been able to
document and analyze Black womens experiences of
gendered racism, as well as offer legal remedies and
suggestions for personal agency.
I have found no notable obstacle to the use of critical
race feminism and see it as an eminently useful
methodology.
13
Unpacking ways of seeing: Using a poststructural discourse theoretical approach within an

empirical field
Karen Horwood, PhD Researcher, The School of the Built Environment
Faculty of Arts and Society, k.horwood@leedsmet.ac.uk
This article seeks to explore the use of a
poststructural discourse theoretical approach in the
field of urban planning. This is a field that can be
seen to have a largely empirical basis (Allmendinger,
2001). Using a practical research project example,
the article explains the basis of this approach, how it
can be applied, and how criticisms can potentially be
addressed within the approach itself. Methodological
issues in the use of discourse theory have been
described as receiving less attention (Howarth and
Torfing, 2004). This article seeks to frame some of
these methodological issues, and how they can be
addressed, within a specific research project example.
Discourse theory, and within it the activity of
discourse analysis, can be seen as an area gaining
increasing interest within the social sciences
(Howarth and Torfing, 2004). Whilst there are several
epistemological roots of discourse analysis this
article focuses on poststructural discourse theory.
Poststructuralism developed in the 1960s and 70s
in response to events and intellectual developments
that were seen to undermine mainstream theories
such as positivism and Marxism. There was a
challenge to the validity of principles such as
objectivity, neutrality and causal mechanisms, the
response being the openness, fluidity and contingency
of poststructuralism (see Davoudi and Strange,
2009; Howarth and Torfing, 2004; Murdoch, 2006).
Poststructuralism opens the way for an approach to
research where rather than looking for underlying
structures or causal mechanisms, the way in
which meaning and knowledge are constructed
through language is brought to the forefront. Whilst
notoriously difficult to define, a poststructuralist belief
can be seen as:
Subjects are made through language; the idea that life
is essentially unstable, and only given stability through
language; the irrelevance of the distinction between the
real and simulacra[and]that there is nothing beyond
the text
(Hubbard et al quoted in Davoudi and Strange,
2009, p. 32)
This description gives prominence to the role of
language in the making of meaning, and that rather
than there being an underlying truth to be found,
this meaning-making is our way of making sense of
the world. This leads to an interest in language as the
research project. Howarth (Howarth and Torfing, 2004)
states that this research programme centres on
the idea that all objects and practices are meaningful,
and that social meanings are contextual, relational
and contingent (p.317). As such discourse theory
14
seeks to analyse language, or more broadly discourse,

and as such this meaning-making in order to better
understand the phenomena. So what does this mean
in practice?
My own research project is focusing on the
phenomena of green infrastructure, which can be
seen as a way of representing urban green space
that is gaining increasing purchase within policy and
strategy circles. The increasing frequency of the use
of this term across a variety of contexts means that
meaning is being continually made and remade. In
order for green infrastructure to make sense to policy
makers and practitioners and gather momentum, it
needs to be something that resonates with them as a
solution to their problems or provides something that
responds to the policy context. This is not to downplay
the complexity of this process that will contain a
myriad of complex drivers, but to recognise that
policy must fit within a context and make sense. The
reasons will be complex, changing and contingent.
However, the way in which green infrastructure as a
concept is framed will lead to changes in meaning,
and as such in the ways subsequent policies are
developed. This means that this changing and
contested meaning will have real implications for
people, in the way green space where they live
changes and develops.
Urban green space can be seen to have had a
changing history. Arguably its earliest incarnation
was within the Victorian parks movement where it
was seen to provide solutions to pollution, recreation
and class division, also critiqued as the imposition of
middle class values (Conway, 1991). Post World War
Two, garden city principles of green space located
within and surrounding the city were embedded in
new towns and green space was also seen to perform
a function by containing urban sprawl through the
introduction of green belts. With the increase in
the environmental movement, developments in the
approach to urban green space then included an
increased awareness of conservation and species
movement. As such the meaning and role of urban
green space can be seen as contingent, multiple and
changing. Within this context green infrastructure
can be seen as another way of viewing these types of
spaces.
Through this lens, the use of a discourse theoretical

approach can be seen to offer potential in
understanding this new concept. Whilst research
has been undertaken to understand the role of green
infrastructure (Mell, 2008) this relies on definitions
of green infrastructure within literature as adequate
for defining this phenomena. A discourse theoretical
approach on the other hand gives greater emphasis
to this meaning-making as important in itself for
understanding the phenomena and its practical
application. However, a poststructural discourse
theoretical approach brings with it its own issues for
consideration.
Post-structuralism and with it a discourse theoretical
approach, has been subject to many criticisms, and
has produced responses to these, too numerous to
do justice to here (for a brief discussion see Howarth
and Torfing, 2004). Briefly, within the limitations
of this article, criticisms focus around a perceived
failure and emptiness of the interpretive turn (Glynos
and Howarth, 2007). These criticisms have led to a
questioning of the worth of poststructural discourse
theory as a research strategy and the analytical value
of outcomes. Due to the rooting of my research within
an arguably highly empirical and practical urban
planning discipline there is a need to engage with
these concerns in my research strategy. This article
seeks to examine an approach that, whilst rooted in
a poststructural ontology, appears to provide a more
coherent and structured outcome that may fare better
in an empirical field.
Glynos and Howarth (2007) produce a strategy that
attempts to address these types of concerns. They
frame their work within critiques of poststrucutural
discourse theory, and also within critiques of the
realist or interpretivist alternatives. Their outcome
is to describe and implement a way of developing a
critical explanation that seeks to analyse discourse
in order to account for a phenomenon in terms of a
series of logics, or underpinnings of the way in which
a phenomena is constructed. They categorise these
logics as the social, political and fantasmic, or very
simply the what, how and why.
The social logics can be described as the what
or the logics that enable us to characterise the
practices in a particular social domain (Glynos
and Howarth, 2007, p. 133). To expand, by taking
the example of green infrastructure, discourse
in the form of documents and interviews can be
analysed to ascertain the ways in which it is being
defined, what it is being presented as and what these
phenomena can be understood as being. In keeping
with poststructuralism, this is not to ascertain the

definition of green infrastructure, but rather the
multiple and fluid ways in which it is represented.
The political logics or the how provide the
means to explore how social practices are instituted,
contested and defended (Glynos and Howarth, 2007,
p. 133). Using the example of green infrastructure,
discourse can be analysed in order to ascertain
how green infrastructure developed in this way, for
example the events, personalities, organisations and
so on that have contributed to its development. This
is not to create a linear history of the development of
green infrastructure, but rather to develop a picture
of the many fluid and contingent, and complexly
interrelated influences that have led to the current
picture.
Finally, the fantasmic logics or the why are
closely linked to the ideological dimension (Glynos
and Howarth, 2007, p. 134). This can be seen as
the underpinning values, principles, ways of seeing
and so on that make something make sense. The
identification of these logics will seek to explain why
green infrastructure makes sense to policy makers
and practitioners, rather than the other alternative
ways of seeing and describing urban green space.
Other discourses can also be analysed that surround
green infrastructure, for example environmental
concern such as flooding and climate change,
economic development drivers and sustainable
development, and the competitive cities within the
context of globalisation.
Glynos and Howarths (2007) final stage is to then
articulate these logics into a critical explanation.
Whilst this does not mean establishing causal
mechanisms to which this approach is ontologically
opposed, the combination of these logics and their
articulation in relation to one another, will enable
a coherent explanation of the phenomena. It is
hoped that within the context of the planning field,
this outcome will provide a more tangible and
practical explanation which, whilst rooted firmly
in poststructural discourse theory, also provides
something to which an empirical field can relate and
engage. Whilst still retaining its ontological roots,
rather than the outcome being something seemingly
too vague and abstract to relate to the field, it is hoped
that this process leading to a critical explanation will
provide a way of producing research both relevant to
the field and theoretically sound.
15
References
Allemendinger, P. (2001) Planning in Postmodern Times
London: Routledge.
Conway, H. (1991) Peoples Parks Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Davoudi, S. & Strange, I. eds. (2009) Conceptions of
Space and Place in Strategic Spatial Planning Abingdon:
Routledge.
Glynos, J. & Howarth, D. (2007) Logics of Critical
Explanation in Social and Political Theory Abingdon:
Routledge.
Howarth, D. & Torfing, J eds. (2004) Discourse Theory
in European Politics: Identity, Policy and Governance
Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Mell, I . (2008) Green Infrstructure: Concepts and
Planning [sic] FORUM ejournal, 8 June 2008 pp. 69-80.
Karen Horwood
I am examining Green Infrastructure policy in the UK.
Struck by the multiple meanings and complexity in
positioning of urban green space policy discourse, I
became interested in literature discussing contested
meanings, social constructivism and discourse theory.
This led to an engagement with Green Infrastructure
policy where this meaning-making is currently, and
increasingly, being played out, and in approaches that
engage with this multiplicity, fluidity and contingency.
I have a background in politics, philosophy and
urban regeneration, and am now working in a spatial
planning and geography context. These diverse
interests are reflected throughout the research
project, resulting in a multi-disciplinary approach.
The research strategy is rooted in a theoretical
context that draws upon these disciplines.
Murdoch, J. (2004) Post-structuralist Geography

London: Sage.
16

A Methodology for Design Leads: a re-evaluation of contemporary processes of design
thinking and making and their potential impact on HE writing culture
An evolutionary, multi-method approach
Harriet Edwards, PhD Researcher, The Leeds School of Architecture, Landscape and Design
Landscape and Design, Harriet.edwards@rca.ac.uk
Lead in
The Design Leads research project emerged from the
professional context of teaching academic writing to
Design students that included studio practice-related
outputs: statements, websites, blogs, narratives,
scripts. In 2003, I became a member of a Higher
Education project, Writing Purposefully in Art and
Design (www.writing-pad.ac.uk). This investigated the
place of writing in studio practice-based degrees. It
looked at obstacles that impeded students progress
with writing: moving from a visual to a written culture; a
lack of familiarity with academic conventions; the high
degree of dyslexia or dyspraxia; performing in a second
language, and so on. Members further discussed the
purposes of writing and exchanged both practices and
exemplary writings of creative student minds. The case
studies can be seen on the website above.
Fig. 1 Lateral and logical design spheres
logical
lateral
A methodology to suit
Methodology is variously defined as a set of
philosophical principles, a body of methods or a
rationale for the procedure of the PhD. What kind of
methodology was appropriate for the investigation
of these lateral design processes? In terms of
philosophical principles, I turned to those of social
sciences that acknowledged the place of experience
and with that, subjectivity. I was also inclined towards
those that promoted understanding and insight
humanistic principles. As for a body of methods,
the PhD proposal pointed to a simple framework of
several methods.
Fig. 2 Methods
interview method
(qualitative)
design leads
action research
drawing
inspiration
ordering
intuition
visualisation
ideation
sequencing
measuring
analysing
The research project thus has a strong connection

with my work and the Writing Purposefully in Art
and Design (PAD) project, a national, four-year
project sponsored by the Fund for the Development of
Teaching and Learning (FDTL, Phase 4). My project
is investigating design thinking and making (as
described by the design interviewees) by focusing on
the supra-rational, for example, the imaginative leaps
and connections that have something in common
with abductive logic, tending towards the intuitive and
heuristic that are sometimes neglected in academic
writings with their tendency to exercise the more
logical sphere (eg. inductive and deductive rather than
abductive reasoning). I also had a sense (approaching
a hypothesis) that the lateral sphere might not only
generate ideas and innovation but impact on writings
at university in interesting ways.
I gravitated towards an interview method as

experience taught me those in design are often
engaging speakers, trained to communicate
sketchbook content and designs. I also foresaw a
later stage of intervention, action research, to gauge
the potential impact of design thinking and making
on HE writing culture. The immediate task was to
extend horizons; later, to flesh out methods that
complemented aims and content. This brief account
traces process through qualitative, ethnographic,
reflective and narrative leads through to something
I would call a generative leap of creative practice.
The Evolutionary lead
As a design approach is often experimental and
open-ended even though there is a design brief
with a definite deadline, so is mine. In parallel to
the students methods of working, I have followed
what Pat Cryer (2005) calls an evolutionary route.
Precedents for articulating the research process in
this way exist in notions of the iterative - a re-visiting,
going over of material - and the emergent - a gradual
bringing together of elements to form a complex
whole. Importantly, these allow space for not knowing,
for doubt and mistakes along the route.
17
Qualitative leads
A second preference is for all things qualitative over
all things quantitative, while understanding that
the latter is sometimes essential (engineering and
medicine come to mind). From the PhD beginnings,
I knew I wanted to portray a richness and fu llness
of experience, with design voices forming a central
part of the research. One glance at Intute (online)
and qualitative research methods (http://www.intute.
ac.uk/cgi-bin/browse.pl?id=120997) revealed the
huge variety within interviewing itself: group, semistructured, ethnographic, creative, toolkit door
knocking etc. My eventual commitment was to semistructured, audio-recorded, individual interviews, with
some photographing of design processes. Compared
to the open approach that included website and filmed
presence of the Filipino rappers as part of Domingos
research (2008), my approach appeared conservative,
limited by fears around confidentiality.
The Ethnographic lead
Fig. 3 Participant-observer
Like everyone versed in a post-modern critique,

I can assert the impossibility of being neutral,
objective. I came to the research project with a bias
in favour of designing along with a whole set of
experiences that I will leave with (see Law, 2004, pp.
5). I was thus drawn to ethnography that appeared to
radically break down poles of objective researcher
and researched: subjects becoming participants,
and researchers moving from being disinterested
observers to being immersed themselves, as
conveyed by fellow researcher Swift (2009) who lived
as a member of a Japanese cult. Anxious about the
distanced interviewer role, I looked to a stage of more
reciprocity in the subsequent experiment stage.
18
The Design Lead

There is a line traceable from Schn (1983) that
recognises practitioners expertise and embraces its
validity as a form of research on an experiential level
rather than on a scholarly level. The implication is not
to deny theory but to reject an imposed theoretical
framework. Rather, there is a spiral process in the
research route that moves from (design) practice to a
more distant place of reflection or theorizing, followed
by a return to practice (as visualised diagrammatically
by Raien, 2005).
Fig. 4 From practice and back
reflection/theory
practice
practice
Ironically, the part that arrested me in Schns The

Reflective Practitioner (1983) was not about reflexivity
but about the conversation of architect and student
with its crossing from drawing to chat and back
again. The fact that drawing brings ideas into being
fascinated me, like other intuitive, visual elements
of design practice that conflict with a culture of the
explicit, substantiated and accountable in words.
Part of the original research intention was to highlight
such design qualities in a form of appreciative
enquiry, or to avoid the American business
connotation, something of the ethos of strengthbased education (Pritchard, 2007).
The Narrative lead

Narrative approaches within research are also prolific
as illustrated by two recent overviews (Clandinin,
2007; Webster & Mertova, 2007). Convinced that
narrative could play an important role for design
students in visualising, making or communicating
design, I published on narratives within design student
research (2008), an article that saw an overlap with
ethnography. However, one drawback to narrative
is that it can be pervasive. Hence I reached a point
at which everything appeared to be narrative designing, the proposal, interview content, the PhD
process, the thesis, life! Nevertheless, in dealing with
interview material, I did adopt a narrative review
that allowed an open and flexible interpretation of
interview themes, named Lateral Leanings. The
original concept of lateral was modified through the
findings to denote a sphere of practice that contained
significant, emergent relations without being too fixed.
Fig. 5 Sphere of practice
emotions
the lateral leanings
space
rhythm
Retrospective of initial stages

Looking back at earlier stages of the PhD I realised
with some chagrin that, in aiming for a rich and
complete picture of my subject area, I had simply
arrived at a multi-methods approach. This was not
the cutting edge methodology I thought I might
be pioneering but one with many precedents (and
publications such as Sage, Journal of Mixed Method
Research). The filling out of the research picture
through interviewing, writing up, allowing for
constraints of time, place, numbers, confidentiality,
was likewise conventional. It was a crucial transition
to branding the PhD with a particular research
experience. However, I had overcome the addiction to
the panoply of methods, and had reached a point of
commitment. At this time, I aim to go beyond present
conceptions into both literature around Lateral
Leanings and back into the design community.
Writing Experiments: the leaps

Gunther Kress (1998) spoke of critique as being
necessarily backward-looking and therefore more
established while design is forward-looking and
therefore more speculative. Kress argues that we
are living in a design era and I would agree. This
focus also connects to the notion of the heuristic.
The leap over a gap is less rational and analytical;
it is more generative. I am treating the interview
findings, Lateral Leanings, as a basis for a series of
writing experiments. In other words, the thinking is
applied to a creative process involving imaginative
interpretation. This does not necessitate looking back
or looking over to generate findings but a leap ahead
to generating outputs. In order to test the design
qualities potential impact on HE writing culture, I am
calling upon the Writing PAD community itself and in
Autumn 2009, intend to trial the writing experiments
in various universities. To what degree this remains
as a creative experiment and to what degree it can be
described as action research, impacting on the status
quo, remains to be seen.
End leads
The methodology for Design Leads reveals an
emergent process that issues from experience
and bias and is as yet without a specific end result.
Methods have not produced a step-by-step guide
but have been entertained, wrestled with and
absorbed as a means of amplifying understanding
and possibilities of development. Professor Clarke
at the Creative Research day (Clarke, 2009) usefully
described this approach as creatively embodying the
creative practice of those in design. The filter for the
search has been the lateral practices of designing
and the need for a sympathetic methodology. With
this groundwork for the PhD, I now embark on the
uncertain experimentation ahead.
Fig. 6 Research progress
design
phd project
Interviews
Writing experiments
Website
19
References
Bergman, M. & Mertens, D. (eds.) (from 2007)
Journal of Mixed Methods Research London: Sage
Publications
Clandinin, D.J. (ed.) (2007) Handbook of Narrative
Inquiry: Mapping a Methodology. London: Routledge.
Clarke, M. (2009) Creative Practice as Research. In:
Creative Research Workshop Day, 3 June, 2009,
Leeds, Leeds Metropolitan University.
Cryer, P. (2006) The Research Students Guide to
Success. Maidenhead: OU Press.
Domingo, M. (2009) Migrating literacy transactions:
reconceptualizing text in the doctoral thesis. In New
forms of the doctorate; the influence of multimodality
and e-learning on the nature and format of doctoral
theses in Education and the Social Sciences seminar
series, 23 March, 2009, London, IoE.
Edwards, H. (2008) Ethnographic Leads for Design
Student Research In Houghton N. (ed.) Proceedings
of the 4th International conference Enhancing curricula
using research and enquiry to inform student learning in
the disciplines, CLTAD London: University of the Arts.
Kress, G. (1998) Visual and verbal modes of
representation in electronically mediated
communication: the potentials of new forms of text in
Snyder, I (ed.) Page to Screen, Taking Literacy into the
Electronic Era London: Routledge pp. 53-79.
Law, J. (2004) After Method: Mess in Social Science
Research. Oxon: Routledge.
Pritchard G. (2008) All students are talented: exploring
the strengths potential via a new lens for learning
and teaching, in Houghton N. (ed.) Proceedings of the
4th International conference Enhancing curricula using
research and enquiry to inform student learning in the
disciplines, CLTAD, London: University of the Arts.
Raien, M. (2005) in Survey of Practices, p.9, under
Resources, Reports. Writing Purposefully in Art and
Design (PAD), www.writing-pad.ac.uk
Schn, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How
professionals think in action New York: Basic Books.
Swift, P. (2009) Divinity and Experiment: conversion in a
Japanese jam jar. Association of Social Anthropology.
Webster, L. & Mertova, P. (2007) Using Narrative
Enquiry as a Research Method. Oxon: Routledge.
20

Action Research: determining boundaries between participatory and non-participatory
approaches
Sarah Copeland, PhD Researcher, Innovation North, s.copeland@leedsmet.ac.uk
Katie Hill, PhD Researcher, The Leeds School of Architecture
Landscape and Design, Faculty of Arts and Society, k.hill@leedsmet.ac.uk
This paper draws on methodological approaches

of two practitioner researchers who are working
on participatory digital media and design projects.
The authors have been exploring the use of Action
Research (AR) and Participatory Action Research
(PAR) methods in their work and the boundary
between the two approaches. In the first study, a rural
inter-generational project, PAR was investigated as a
means to include participants to the extent that they
become collaborators in the project design. A digital
storytelling method was used to address conflicts
as a community-building and learning exercise.
In the second study, a community design practice
project, AR and PAR were explored as frameworks
for investigating and developing emerging practices.
The researcher became a participant observer
in a professional group working on community
development projects where design processes were
used to find potential for community responses to
climate change. In developing our own Community of
Practice (Wenger, 1998) we have been able to explore
synergies and contrasts between the different studies.
We will start by looking at definitions of AR and PAR
that have been useful to us, then go on to discuss our
experiences of applying these approaches and the
practical challenges that we encountered and, finally,
establish where we found the boundary between
participatory and non-participatory AR to lie.
AR is a framework for developing practice and
generating knowledge about practice. Originating in
the 1930s (Lewin, 1948), the foundation of AR is the
Lewinian action-reflection cycle of planning, acting,
observing and reflecting. AR has developed as a
method across many disciplines, particularly those
with strong social contexts such as health, education
and policing. AR can be considered a systematic
approach to investigation that is concerned with
searching for localised solutions to specific situations,
rather than for more generalisable conclusions.
(Stringer, 2007, p.1). Greenwood and Levin (1998)
describe the social change agenda that AR holds
alongside the creation of valid social knowledge.
Reason and Bradbury describe AR as a participatory,
democratic process, where worthwhile human
endeavours are sought to be understood, particularly
while maintaining a participatory perspective (2001,
p.1). The process of AR, as described by Dick (2002) is
cyclical, where the researcher alternates action with
critical reflection (p.159). In both research projects
discussed in this paper, cycles of action and reflection
were included both for us as researchers and for the
participants.
Friedlander (2001) cites Reason and Bradbury (2001)

as reserving the term action research to describe
the whole family of approaches to inquiry which are
participative, grounded in experience, and actionoriented to define AR (Friedlander, 2001, p.2).
Whilst PAR is considered part of this AR family, it has
developed as a distinctive approach. William Foote
Whyte (1991) suggests that PAR evolved from three
streams of intellectual development and action:
social research methodology, participation in decision
making by low ranking people in organisations and
communities, and sociotechnical systems thinking
(p.7). At the time it was considered that the links
between social research and action were weak, and
PAR emerged as a powerful strategy compared with
other forms of applied social research.
In 1989, Robin McTaggart presented The 16 Tenets of
Participatory Action Research to the 3er Encuentro
Mundial de Investigacin Participativa, in Nicaragua.
This paper represents an important reflection and
distillation of the praxis of this method. Whilst
they present a clear, robust guide to the ethical
consideration of PAR, and act as a useful checklist for
researchers, a less structured view of PAR is given in
the Sage Dictionary of Qualitative Inquiry (Schwandt,
2007). Schwandt writes that to distinguish it from
other forms of social inquiry, PAR displays three
characteristics: Its participatory nature of cooperation
and collaboration, its democratic embodiment
of ideals and its engagement with empowering
participants through the process of constructing their
own knowledge.
In both studies we aspired to use PAR because of our
affinity with the democratic ideals it embodies and its
empowering of participants as has been successfully
implemented in other research led community
projects (for example, Day 2005). However, in practice
we found that the method that we were able to
implement was closer to AR. In our explorations of
AR and PAR the core difference in the application of
the methods is the extent to which participants are
involved in the full Lewinian cycle. In both projects
we found that our participants were more willing to
invest time in the tangible outcomes of the project
rather than in a reflective learning process; they were
more involved in planning and acting than in observing
and reflecting, despite efforts on our part to facilitate
participation in these latter processes.
21
We felt that the PAR processes described in the

literature were better suited to formal organisational
structures rather than the informal community groups
that the researcher encountered in the case of the
rural inter-generational project. In organisations,
members have a clearly defined mandate through
their identified roles and responsibilities. Community
group members with less formal ties have no such
mandate to act for the community once their own
needs have been met. Expecting such participants to
spend time observing and reflecting on their actions
could be viewed as unrealistic.
In organisations, members are more likely to have
ongoing involvement in multiple projects. Therefore,
they are more likely to be willing to invest time and
energy in the wider developmental process of a
PAR project, rather than focussing solely on project
outcomes. As such, the community design practice
project was more likely to yield ongoing involvement
because of the professional element. However, it was
difficult to engage participants in the full Lewinian
cycle for two reasons. Firstly, a lack of time to spend
on the project and a prioritisation of delivery over
reflective activity meant that participant take up of
practical reflective tools (such as keeping a journal)
was low. Further, the researchers given role in this
project was as evaluation and reflective learning
facilitator. It was observed that as other team
members associated these roles with the researcher,
they felt limited obligation to contribute to planning
and designing the reflective learning collaboration
themselves. Even though there were elements of
participation and collaboration in this project, the
division of roles helped to illustrate the extent of
participation in an action research project. We use this
distinction to identify where the boundary between
PAR and AR lies.
For both researchers there was a tension between our
ideological commitment to participatory practice, and
finding that PAR was not working for us in our research
projects. McTaggart (1989) addresses resistance to
change in his tenets, which is a hint at the conflicts that
may arise within the application of PAR, particularly in
complex community situations. Whilst PAR provides
a framework for dealing with conflicts between the
proposed new practices and the accepted practices
(McTaggart,1989), we found that it did not deal with
more pragmatic conflicts over levels of commitment
and availability of time to invest in the project.
22
A further tension was created between the motivation

to develop practice, and the requirements of achieving
a research qualification. It is the focus on improving
particular practices rather than the effort to produce
generalisable knowledge, as Schwandt (2007)
describes, that drives both of these projects. Yet,
both of the projects described have been undertaken
as part of PhD research, and as such the authors
have needed to maintain an element of control
over the research that in hindsight may have made
a participatory approach a difficult choice in this
context. Dick (2002) evaluates the implementation of
AR for postgraduate research, and highlights that a
student may plan either an action research, or an
action research project (p.162). Dick explains that
the action and research elements can complement
each other as objectives, and that a project need
not be one or the other. Both projects focus on the
research element as part of the PhD, and equally both
have action as an objective. Extended participation in
the research is not necessarily key to the continuity of
each project.
Finding the confidence to build upon established
methods to create our own methods has been an
important lesson. Cook (1998) raises the question
of whether models of AR methods can accurately
describe the messy processes that practitioner
researchers go through. We both seem to have fallen
between AR and PAR methods and found our own
messy methods between the two.
Finally, Stringer (2007) suggests that participation
is most effective when it enables significant levels
of active involvement [and] encourages plans
and activities that people are able to accomplish
themselves (p.38). If an intervention in the community
is being considered, drawing on both PAR and AR
as a framework gives the project the potential for a
sustainable, inclusive solution that all activists strive
towards. Above all researchers should be confident
in developing pragmatic approaches to the complex
and conflicting situations that they find themselves
working in.
References
Cook, T. (1998) The Importance of Mess in Action
Research Educational Action Research 6 (1) pp. 93-109.
Day, P. (2005) Sustainable Community Technology:
The symbiosis between community technology and
community research Journal of Community Informatics
1 (2): pp. 4-13.
Dick, B. (2002) Postgraduate Programs Using Action
Research. The Learning Organization 9 (4) pp. 159-170.
Friedlander, F. (2001) PAR as a Means of Integrating
Theory and Practice Proceedings: Fielding Graduate
Institute Action Research Symposium, Alexandria, VA
July 23-24, 2001.
Greenwood, D. J. & Levin, M (1998) Introduction to
Action Research Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Lewin, K. & Lewin, G. W. (1948) Resolving Social
Conflicts; selected papers on group dynamics New York:
Harper and Rowe.
McTaggart, R. (1989) 16 Tenets of Participatory
Action Research Presented to the 3er Mundial de
Investigacin Participativa (The Third World Encounter
on Participatory Research), Managua, Nicaragua,
September 39, 1989 Available at: http://www.
caledonia.org.uk/par.htm [Accessed 1 July.2009].
Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (2001) The SAGE Handbook
of Action Research. Participative Inquiry and Practice
1st ed. London: Sage.
Schwandt, T. A. (2007) The SAGE Dictionary of
Qualitative Inquiry 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Stringer, E. T. (2007) Action Research 3rd ed. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of Practice,
Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
Whyte, W. F. (1991) Introduction in Whyte (ed.),
Participatory Action Research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
pp. 7-15.
Sarah Copeland is investigating digital storytelling as

a cross-boundary method in rural inter-generational
communities. The digital storytelling workshops,
based heavily on the Center for Digital Storytelling
(CDS) model, offer a well tested formula for
encouraging sharing of voices from the community
to help to break down barriers of misperception.
Sarah is interested in social change resulting from
participatory action in informal learning situations.
The act of capturing these voices using digital media
allows the stories to be circulated more widely
and offers the potential to share the stories as a
campaigning tool. The project aims to be as much
about celebrating the community past and present as
it is about campaigning for a fairer future. This project
is rooted in the discipline of Community Informatics.
Katie Hill is investigating emerging design practices in

grass roots community development projects through
practice based research. These practices are developing
in response to environmental, social and economic
crises. The aim of the research is to develop an
understanding of the drivers that shape design practice,
be they political, personal or professional, and provide a
description of the professional attributes that enable us
to identify this kind of designer.
Because of her background as a designer in this
field she took the decision early on in her research
to investigate by being immersed in the projects.
AR seemed to be a natural choice of method
because it lends itself well to understanding and
developing practice. Because many of the practices
in question are participatory, the question was raised
as to whether the research approach should be
participatory. This led to the consideration of PAR as
a potential research method. For the completion of
her study Katie has chosen to develop a methodology
that draws upon a design research tradition of using
multiple methods to create an individual approach to
her research.
23
Researching Political Tourists: A Case Study Approach

Fabian Frenzel, Lecturer, Bristol Business School
University of the West of England, Bristol,
FabianFrenzel@uwe.ac.uk
Introduction
In this article I present the research methodology I
used in my PhD research. I conducted a case study
to examine political tourists within a framework of
participant action research (PAR). Here I explain my
choice of this approach in the light of some of the
major critiques voiced against case studies. Some
critics suggest that findings from case studies dont
allow generalising statements. I also discuss critical
questions regarding the role of bias and ethics
involved in using case-studies. While these two latter
ones are general concerns with research, they play a
central role in the field researched here. The role of
PAR in the case study is critical to this argument.
I explain how I relate to the field and how this relation
both enables a unique perspective but also involves
co-research with the research participants.
The Case Study Approach

I chose a case study approach to my PhD because it
was the best way to address my research objectives.
I wanted to generate hypotheses and theory, yet at
the same time better understand particular empirical
phenomena. The case study is a research approach
that enables both (Becker & Ragin, 2005; Yin, 1984;
Flyvbjerg, 2006). My research concerns the field of
political tourism, particularly certain forms of political
tourism like protest camping and solidarity travel.
These areas have been discussed mostly from the
perspective of social movement studies and political
science. The novelty of my approach was to discuss
them from the perspective of tourism. The field
that emerges here necessitates both empirical data
collection for the particular cases and the formation of
hypotheses and theory.
According to Yin the case study is
an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary
phenomenon within its real life context, when the
boundaries between phenomenon and context are not
clearly evident and in which multiple sources of evidence
are used
(1984, p.23).
Underlying the study of phenomena in relation to their
context are research philosophies that are critical
of positivism. There are a variety of methodologies
derived from this philosophy, like hermeneutics,
phenomenology or critical realism. I chose the
case study approach because it does not demand
subscription to a particular methodological paradigm,
but remains highly pragmatic. As much as the case
24
study approach is a methodological choice it also

operates as a flexible way of data collection which is
open to the use of a variety of methods and to a wide
range of interpretative attempts (Lamnek, 2005). The
case study approach was thus preferred over other
methodologies because 1) it supported a research
philosophy critical of positivism, 2) it allowed for
empirical research of particular phenomenon and the
generation of theory necessitated by the exploration of
a novel field and 3) it enabled the pragmatic used of a
variety of methods of data collection.
Generalisability
There are various problems with case study
approaches in general and with their application
in this study in particular. The main critique voiced
against case study approaches concerns the limited
ability to generalise from individual or multiple cases
(Campbell et al, 1966; Abercrombie et al, 1984). This
critique comes from a positivist perspective insofar
as it presupposes the superiority of theories that
are removed from context. However, the importance
of context to theorisation is arguably paramount.
Flyvbjerg (2006) points out the central role of
individual cases even in the natural sciences. Here
they enable both the falsification of existing theories
and the generation of new ones. Flyvberg refers to
Poppers (1968) example of the case of one black
swan as a way of falsification of the theory that all
swans are white. Flyvbjerg (2006, p.228) argues:
The case study is well suited for identifying black
swans because of its in depth approach: What appears
to be white often turns out on closer examination to be
black.
Walton (2005) confirms this and points out that the
potential of the case study to produce significant
examples makes it central to the development of
hypotheses and theory. He claims that case studies
are likely to produce the best theory (Walton, 2005,
p.129). Flyvbjerg (2006, p.242) concludes, in reference
to Kuhn, (1996) that a discipline without a large
number of case studies is lacking the systematic
production of examples. Without examples theorising
would be ineffective. There is then a case for a
stronger application of case studies in the social
sciences as a way to produce knowledge (Rosch, 1978;
Ragin, 1992; Flyvbjerg, 2006).
A second critique voiced in regards of case studies is
part of a more general critique of qualitative research
and is particularly important in this case.
Bias
Case study approaches have been criticised for their
bias towards the affirmation of the researchers
presumptions, therefore limiting the validity of the
research (Ragin, 1992; Flyvbjerg, 2006). However,
Geertz (1995, p.119) understands the field as a
disciplinary force that demands accuracy and care
from the researcher. In my study this role of the
field was exercised by the controlling, enhancing
and ultimatively profiting political tourists that
were the participants to my research. I pursued the
case study in the tradition of participatory action
research (PAR) (Kindon et al, 2007). In PAR the
researcher is not only participating passively in the
practices that are researched, but takes active part
in them. The participants share the researchers
concern with the activities, also search for ways to
improve the practices and approve of the conducted
research in a knowledgeable way. In this sense the
research is conducted as co-research between the
different participants. PAR furthermore focuses
on the activities and actions and tries to improve
practices, monitor their adaptation after research
and reflect further (Dick, 2002; McNiff, 2002; Kemmis
& McTaggart, 2005; Reason & Bradbury, 2008). I
found this approach very useful, because it enabled
me to study interactively and in co-operation with
the research participants, enhancing reliability
and validity of the results in reflective exchanges.
The political tourists I researched were practically
involved in the research process in all stages. A third
problem revolves around ethical issues.
Ethical Issues
The use of PAR importantly helps to build up some
protection against the most pressing problem of the
social researcher. I did not want to be an informer,
a spy (Allen, 1997) a function that social research
too often seems to serve. The issue with research
here is its systematic abuse for aims of controlling,
policing, and steering populations. This problem
has been brought to academic self-reflection by
Foucaults (1991) studies of governmentality, which
he understands to be a principle of domination that
extends beyond the institutions of governments (Dean,
1999). Research thus plays a vital role in governing
societies not only because it provides crucial
information to government agencies but in its very
own practices of rationalisations, gazes and measures
that it applies to its research objects.
The process of knowledge production in academia

is functionally knitted to the political domination of
certain paradigms of knowledge and therefore power
(Foucault, 1972).
The use of PAR helps prevent the parasitical
tendency of research of social movements (Urry, 1995,
p.34) as the intention to conduct the research comes
from within the researched field. The wish or need to
know is shared by all those involved in the research
process. The conscious and informed choices of
research participants to take part in the research
project are thus central ethical preconditions of my
work. This responds to the legitimate fear of activists
in contentious politics that their practices and actions
are exposed and traded, commercialised or even
handed over to security forces and police (Chatterton,
2008). But PAR also makes possible the tackling of
more fundamental issue of governmentality. In so far
as the research process is not only initiated but also
constantly followed by the research participants the
complex problems arising from the role of power in
modern society are becoming tangible and visible to
the research participants in the process. This may in
some cases lead to their departure from the research
process, but it may also enhance the understanding
and effectiveness of the research and its wider
political implications among participants.
Conclusion
The case study approach was a very useful tool for
my research into political tourists. As the field is
novel with few studies existing, there was a need
to look empirically at individual cases and also to
generate hypotheses and theories at the same time.
Its advantage for my study was particularly pertinent
in respect of the pragmatism it allowed in the use of a
variety of methods.
Problems with the case study method in general
relate to the underlying research philosophy. From
the perspective of positivism, results of case studies
cannot be generalised. However I made an argument
that rejected this critique. The particular problems
I encountered with the application of the case study
method related to bias and ethics. I addressed them
by mobilising PAR, involving the research participants
in every step of the research process.
25
References
Abercrombie, N., Hill, S. & Turner, B.S.(1984) The
Penguin Dictionary of Sociology Harmondsworth:
Penguin.
Allen, C. (1997) Spies Like Us: When Sociologists
Deceive their Subjects Available at: http://linguafranca.
mirror.theinfo.org/9711/9711.allen.html [Accessed
February 20, 2009].
Becker, H.S. & Ragin, C.C. (eds) (2005) What is a case?
: exploring the foundations of social inquiry Cambridge
[u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Campbell, D.T., Stanley, J.C. & Gage, N.L. (1966)
Experimental and Quasi-experimental Designs for
Research Chicago: R. McNally.
Chatterton, P. (2008) Demand the Possible: Journeys
in Changing our World as a Public Activist-Scholar
Antipode, 40(3), 421-427.
Dean, M. (1999) Governmentality : power and rule in
modern society, London; Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Dick, B. (2002) Action Learning and Action Research
Available at: http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/
arp/aandr.html [Accessed January 28, 2009].
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006) Five Misunderstandings About
Case-Study Research Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2),
219-245.
Foucault, M. (1991) Governmentality. In G. Burchell,
C. Gordon, & P. Miller (eds.) The Foucault effect :
studies in governmentality : with two lectures by and an
interview with Michel Foucault. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, pp. 87-104.
Foucault, M. (1972) The Archaeology of Knowledge New
York: Pantheon Books.
Geertz, C. (1995) After the fact: two countries, four
decades, one anthropologist, Cambridge Mass.:
Harvard University Press.
Kemmis, S. & McTaggart, R. (2005) Participatory
Action Research In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (eds.)
The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand
Oaks: Sage Publications, pp. 350-375.
Kindon, S.L., Pain, R. & Kesby, M. (eds.) (2007)
Participatory Action Research Approaches and Methods :
connecting people, participation and place, London; New
York: Routledge.
Kuhn, T. (1996) The Structure of Scientific Revolution
3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
McNiff, J. (2002) Action Research for Professional

Development Available at: http://www.jeanmcniff.com/
booklet1.html [Accessed January 28, 2009].
Popper, K. (1968) The Logic of Scientific Discovery 2nd
ed., New York: Harper & Row.
Ragin, C.C. (1992) Casing and the Process of Social
Inquiry In Ragin, C. C. & Becker, H. S. (eds.) What is
a case? : exploring the foundations of social inquiry.
Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press,
pp. 217-226.
Reason, P. & Bradbury, H. (eds.) (2008) The SAGE
Handbook of Action Research : participative inquiry and
practice, Los Angeles, CA; London: SAGE.
Rosch, E. (1978) Principles of categorization In Rosch,
E. & Lloyd, B. B. (eds.) Cognition and Categorization.
Hillsdale, N.J.; New York: L. Erlbaum Associates ;
distributed by Halsted Press, pp. 27-48.
Urry, J. (1995) Consuming Places, London; New York:
Routledge.
Walton, J.,(2005) Making the theoretical case. In
Becker, H. S. & Ragin, C. C. (eds.) What is a case? :
exploring the foundations of social inquiry. Cambridge
[u.a.]: Cambridge University Press, pp. 121-137.
Yin, R. (1984) Case Study Research : design and methods
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Fabian Frenzel recently completed his PhD at Leeds

Met. He is investigating political tourism, travels
done in the name of activism and social change. This
includes a variety of mobile practices, from political
mega-events to protest camps and solidarity tourism.
He is interested in the overlaps and relations between
the personal and the political in these practices, the
way they clash and converge, and shape contemporary
activism. The choice of topic was motivated by
experiences that he gained in active involvement in
social movements in Europe and in Africa. Becoming
an activist-researcher, he continued active
engagement with social movements in the course of
his doctoral research.
For an activist-researcher questions of positioning
are paramount. Do social movements gain from
research or it merely parasitical? Does a political
tendency compromise the reflective needs of
research? Certainly the identities of the activist and
the researcher cannot be conflated and often conflict.
Participant activist research (PAR) does not solve
the conflict but it addresses the issue and offers
approaches to deal with it constructively.
Lamnek, S. (2005) Qualitative Sozialforschung : Lehrbuch

(in German) 4th ed. Weinheim ;Basel: Beltz PVU.
26

Talking about History: Experience and Memory in Qualitative Research
Birgit Braasch, PhD Researcher, Centre for Tourism and Cultural Change, Faculty of Arts and Society,
b.braasch@leedsmet.ac.uk
Claudia Andrea Mller, PhD Researcher, Centre for Tourism and Cultural Change
Faculty of Arts and Society, c.mueller@leedsmet.ac.uk
Introduction
Writing PhD projects in the multidisciplinary
environment of tourism studies requires a strong
consciousness about methods which is best achieved
on the basis of an ongoing dialogue between different
researchers. As historians we both work with oral
history interviews and exchange many of our ideas
on methodology and approaches. This cooperative
work has proven to be fruitful for both of us. In this
article we aim to represent our joint process of
learning and understanding in a dialogical form. This
style of presenting our ongoing dialogue indicates
the major commonality between our cooperation as
academics and the interviews we conducted: Dialogue
provides the opportunity for mutual questioning which
enables researchers to reflect productively on their
assumptions. In this dialogical process different ideas
evolve into a new argument (Gadamer, 1983, p.384).
We will argue that for constructing a valid historical
narrative from oral history interviews one needs
to consider approaches from oral history and
memory studies, mainly concepts of experience and
memory. Understanding those two approaches, their
commonalities and differences will be the focus of
our discussion. In addition, we will take the argument
a step further by claiming that such an analysis of
interviews would benefit other social sciences. We are
proposing an analysis that considers the immediate
interview situation, the cultural context and the
experiences the interviewee refers to.
Claudia:
For my PhD I am researching how citizens of the former
German Democratic Republic (GDR) spent their holidays
between 1971 and 1989. During the Cold War they
were only allowed to travel to other socialist countries.
This situation shaped how they experienced their
holidays. Archival documents only partly address this
experience. In addition, those documents only represent
a very particular view. For example, in documents
of the state security of the GDR holidays abroad are
considered as a gap through which East Germans
could illegally leave the country. In order to explore
how tourists experienced holidays, I needed different
kinds of materials. Letters and diaries initially helped
me to approach tourists subjective views, but many of
the questions I had were left open. Because I work on
recent historical events, there is also the possibility to
ask people about their holiday experience in oral history
interviews. The method of oral history emphasises the
voice of subjects who otherwise would not be heard in
the writing of history. Ideally, the social situation of an

interview provides interviewee and interviewer with the
chance to mutually ask questions and exchange views
on the past.
Birgit:
I had people recounting their personal experiences in
my oral history project. They described their crossings
of the North Atlantic on ocean liners between the
1950s and 1970s. All of them were nostalgic about
their journeys by ship in contrast to present travels
by aeroplane. For example, John complained that air
travel is so uncivilised these days [] everything is
getting smaller and smaller. [] on the ship you have
room to walk around; you meet people. I think there
is a certain kind of person who loves ships. I had to
reflect on how to analyse such accounts with a critical
stance towards nostalgia.
Claudia:
I think you need to ask what people describe in those
interviews first. Is it experience?
Birgit:
Following theories of nostalgia this would rather
be called memory. Memory is a process that takes
place in the present and is also affected by present
cultural frames (Assmann, 2006, p.104). The way John
remembers ship travel is influenced by his evaluation
of present-day air travel. He perceives a lack of space
in aeroplanes and puts it in contrast to his memory of
the abundance of space on ships. As Susan Stewart
argues, nostalgia arises from a felt lack in the
present, which is then looked for in the past, so that
the past is narrated accordingly (Stewart, 1993, p.23).
Claudia:
Do you imply with this interpretation that his memory
is false that he never experienced this abundance of
space on an ocean liner?
Birgit:
I am not saying that the memory is false but that
it is influenced and modified during the time after
the experience and especially the present. Present
cultural frames and past individual experience
interact in the memory process. Both present and
past are considered in concepts of memory, which I
need for my analysis. I follow Niethammer, who sees
memory as an important tool for the analysis of
oral-history interviews, (2007, p.62)
27
Claudia:
The moment you talk about the interplay between an
initial experience and the present you imply that there
was an initial experience to begin with. Accordingly,
Dejung emphasises that memory always refers back to
a past reality, but the present and established collective
memories also play an important part in oral history
interviews (Dejung, 2008, p.104). In my work I emphasise
the need to take this experience seriously, and I follow
oral historians who rely rather on experience than on
memory as a concept. There is a strong recognition of
the subjectivity inherent in the process of experiencing.
Oral historians consider this subjectivity a valuable
corrective for writing history, as differences between
these accounts and the current historiography can
lead to interesting questions and challenge established
assumptions (Niethammer, 1985, p.411). For example,
the GDR economy is often described as a society of
scarcity, and scarcity is used in a strictly numerical
sense. On the one hand, my interviewees related to
this present discourse on scarcity and even used it as
a narrative device. On the other hand, their references
went far beyond the numerical availability of goods
when they told me how they experienced a lack of
holiday options. By taking both the present discourses
and past experiences into account, I could reconsider
the concept of scarcity in the GDR.
Birgit:
Arent those established assumptions a kind of
cultural memory? Such conceptualisation would
mean that we both consider experience and memory.
The major difference is that you challenge cultural
memory by using your tourists experiences, while I
deconstruct the nostalgic presentation of experience.
Other historiographic accounts and archival materials
enable me to critically assess the nostalgic aspect
related to the experience on the ocean liners.
28
Conclusion
We agree that for a critical analysis of oral history
interviews both concepts, memory and experience,
play an important role. Although the process between
an event and its memory is not linear, one can
imagine what happens between the initial experience
and an interview as follows: Someone experiences
an event. This event becomes meaningful for this
person in relation to former events, which underlines
the importance of former events in the process of
experience. Only experiences that become meaningful
can be remembered later (Throop, 2003, p.223).
However, the memory of this experience narrated in
an interview is not a duplicate of the initial meaningful
experience. The memory that is expressed in an
interview is influenced by present cultural frames
and the interview situation. Therefore, an analysis
of interviews needs to consider three aspects: the
initial events, peoples memories of them as well as
the wider and immediate context of the interview.
The task as a researcher is to measure the changing
relationship between those three aspects.
Considering these different aspects is not only
adequate in the analysis of oral history interviews
but can stimulate critical analysis of interviews in
qualitative research in general. Regardless of the
length of time between the initial experience and the
interview, similar processes are at work. Narrations
made in an interview always relate only to a part of
the complex experiences the meaningful ones and
are influenced by the cultural setting of the interview
situation.
We started our discussion coming from two
different angles: one emphasising the importance of
experience and the other of memory. In our dialogue,
we elaborated differences but also found strong
similarities by agreeing on the processes involved in
forming experience and memory. We noticed that a
discussion of our different ways of thinking is fruitful
for our analyses, since we agreed on the methods of
analysing interviews, albeit with different emphases.
References:
Assmann, A. (2006) Wie wahr sind unsere
Erinnerungen? In: Welzer, H. & Markowitsch,
H.J. (eds.) Warum Menschen sich erinnern
knnen. Fortschritte in der interdisziplinren
Gedchtnisforschung, pp. 95-110 Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
Dejung, C. (2008) Oral History und kollektives
Gedchtnis: Fr eine sozialhistorische Erweiterung
der Erinnerungsgeschichte, Geschichte und
Gesellschaft 34, pp. 96-115.
Gadamer, H.-G. (1983) Hermeneutik I Wahrheit und
Methode: Grundzge einer philosophischen Hermeneutik
Tbingen: J.C.B Mohr.
Niethammer, L. (1985) Fragen Antworten Fragen.
Methodischen Erfahrungen und Erwgungen zur Oral
History. In: Niethammer, L. & von Plato, A. (eds.) Wir
kriegen jetzt andere Zeiten: Auf der Suche nach der
Erfahrung des Volkes in Nachfaschistischen Lndern,
Lebensgeschichte und Sozialkultur im Ruhrgebiet 1930
bis 1960, Band 3, pp. 292-445. Berlin: Dietz-Verlag.
Niethammer, L. (2007) Was unterscheidet
Oral History von anderen interview-gesttzten
sozialwissenschaftlichen Erhebungs- und
Interpretationsverfahren? BIOS 20, pp.60-65.
Stewart, S. (1993) On longing: Narratives of the
Miniature, the Gigantic, the Souvenir, the Collection,
Durham, N.C.; London: Duke University Press.
Throop, C.J. (2003) Articulating Experience,
Anthropological Theory 3(2), pp. 219-241.
29
Grounded theory: experiences of two studies with a focus on axial coding and the use of
the NVivo qualitative analysis software
Dr Andrea Gorra, Lecturer, Business School, Faculty of Business and Law, a.gorra@leedsmet.ac.uk
Marianna Kornilaki, Lecturer, Events and Festival Research, UK Centre for Events Management
Leslie Silver International Faculty, m.kornilaki@leedsmet.ac.uk
Introduction
This article recounts personal experience of
one of the analytical steps followed in Grounded
Theory Methodology (GTM), based on the empirical
experience and theoretical knowledge of a tourism
and an information technology researcher. The
research aim of Mariannas PhD was to investigate the
factors that influence the decisions of small tourism
business owners to adopt sustainable practices in
their business operations. Andrea examined the
implications of the long-term storage and use of
mobile phone location data on individuals perceptions
of privacy (Gorra, 2007). Here we will illustrate how
we used the more abstract ways of coding, namely
axial coding, as well as our experiences of using the
qualitative analysis software QSR NVivo.
The analytical process in GTM involves different

coding strategies, which aim to break the raw data
down into units, uncover new concepts and novel
relationships and to systematically develop categories
which are then put back together to build a theory
(Charmaz, 2006; Goulding, 2002; Strauss and Corbin,
1998). The types of coding typically employed in a GTM
study are: open coding, focused or selective coding,
axial coding and theoretical emergence. Figure 2
provides a visual overview of the coding steps followed
in GTM according to Strauss and Corbin (1998).
Figure 2: Coding steps in grounded theory
(adapted from Strauss and Corbin, 1998)
Grounded theory and axial coding

GTM is an inductive and systematic qualitative
methodology that has been widely used in various
disciplines (see for example Bryant and Charmaz,
2007; Charmaz, 2006; Strauss and Corbin, 1998;
Glaser and Strauss, 1967). GTM originated in the USA
in the 1960s in the fields of health and nursing studies,
and through its inception Anselm Strauss and Barney
Glaser wanted to counter the dominance of positivistic
research that tested existing theories. Since then the
method has undergone various changes and different
flavours of GTM have emerged.
The data collections conducted by both authors
included several stages, following a cyclical process
of using early findings to shape the on-going
data collection and analysis in order to develop a
theoretical explanation of the phenomenon under
study (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Steps in developing a grounded theory
(adapted from Strauss and Corbin, 1998)
Axial coding in practice

This article focuses on axial coding and the
identification of the relationships between the
categories of concepts emerging from the data
analysis. The aim of axial coding is to add depth and
structure to existing categories. Charmaz (2006)
explains that axial coding re-assembles data that
has been divided into separate codes by open coding.
Strauss and Corbin use axial coding to investigate
conditions of situations described in the interview,
their actions and consequences by relating categories
to subcategories along the lines of their properties
and dimensions (Strauss and Corbin,
1998, p. 123).
Starting
point
interviews
transcribing
develop
theory
coding
(axia)
30
focused
open
memo
writing
Marianna applied Strauss and Corbins axial coding

and identified the characteristics, properties and
dimensions of each category along a continuum or two
axes. By taking, for example, transcripts relating to
one emerging concept, the Tour operators powerful
role, she was able to identify the properties and
their dimensional range. The following figure gives
an example of the category Tour Operators (TOs)
powerful role and its properties. These properties
and dimensions were derived from open coding of
the transcripts, from sentences, words and phrases
the participants used, which indicated an array of
influences and behaviour implications.
Figure 3: Mariannas category Tour operators
powerful role and its dimensions
Through this Marianna identified variations in

business owners behaviour depending on different
circumstances and environments, their different
prioritisation of actions and strategic responses
to events and problems. Linking categories at the
level of their properties and dimensions was a timeconsuming and difficult process which produced
rather descriptive results. However, this coding
helped her to understand how, when, where, why and
with what results the participants relate themselves
to the natural and cultural environment and how
they make sense of their world. Through all these
questions she was able to describe in more depth the
studied phenomenon and to specify the subcategories
of the core category.
Andrea aimed to utilise Strauss and Corbins

(1998) definition of a property (a general or specific
characteristic of a category) and dimension (location
of a property along a continuum or range). These
definitions seemed to make sense for the category
phone ownership which could be assigned to the
property spending with dimensions ranging from
low to high spending (see Figure 4).
Figure 4: Andreas category Use of phone to regulate
social interactions and its properties and dimensions
Category
Properties
Dimensions
Use phone to
regulate social
interactions
- Ring tone
settings
ring, vibrate,
silent, mutte
switched off
- Features of
phone used
voicemail
on/off
- Phone with
person
Yes, no, usually

rarely
However, for the remaining categories, it did not

seem beneficial to impose a continuum or scale
onto participants experiences or opinions. The rich
qualitative data seemed to be forced into a rigid
framework which did not add value to interpretation
and analysis. Andrea made the decision not to use
the approach of assigning properties and dimensions
to categories, and hence did not use axial coding.
Instead, she adopted a less formalised approach
as advocated by Charmaz (2006), consisting of
establishing connecting links between data and
reflecting on those. Grouping the codes under
different headings or themes, together with writing
memos, helped to make sense of the respondents
statements. Particularly relevant codes could then be
interlinked and related to other codes to devise more
abstract categories. Finally, survey data collected
were compared to the grounded theory categories
identified in the interviews in order to support the
analysis of findings. This process of triangulation
between qualitative and quantitative data was used to
confirm and validate the findings.
31
Using NVivo
Conclusion
Both authors used the qualitative analysis software

QSR NVivo, which was beneficial in some aspects
of the data analysis but was also restrictive in other
ways, as we will explain.
In this article we have shared our experiences of using

the grounded theory methodology by highlighting the
different ways in which we coded and analysed the
collected data. We both used open and focused coding
but only one followed Strauss and Corbins strategy
of axial coding, while the other adhered to Charmazs
advice to use a more flexible approach. We both
perceived the qualitative analysis software NVivo to be
a valuable tool that helped us to sort codes and made
it easier and faster to extract transcript quotations
for the discussion of the findings. However, a novice
researcher must also be aware of its difficulties. We
experienced for example that it can be time consuming
to learn how to use new software and that one must be
prepared to move away from it if necessary and go back
to the analysis of data using non-electronic means such
as pen, paper and Post-its.
Andrea used NVivo to streamline the often timeconsuming process of open coding from the outset,
while Marianna open coded the first four interviews
with paper and pencil. Marianna then put all the initial
codes into NVivo before continuing with the remaining
coding for consistency. Both experienced similar
limitations when using the software. Firstly, the codes
created in NVivo can only have a specific number
of characters for a code name, therefore we had to
spend time in rephrasing many of the initial codes.
Andrea also felt constrained by the available software
functionality to sort and categorise the codes. At the
end of the initial coding process both had too many
codes (300+) which meant finding the codes in NVivo
was unmanageable.
Therefore, before moving to the next stage of axial
coding Marianna spent time on sorting the codes
created in NVivo. In order to do so, she exported all
codes into Microsoft Word where she refined the
categories and the codes. She also transferred all the
codes onto coloured Post-it notes, where each colour
corresponded to a specific category (e.g. sustainable
practices - green). This was very useful as it gave a
more holistic picture of the codes and the categories.
As it was on Post-its Marianna found it easier and
more creative to move them around and get a better
sense of the theoretical issues emerging.
Andrea used a different approach after generating too
many codes in NVivo. She set aside several months
on conducting a survey and then started afresh by
re-coding her interviews using differently coloured
Post-it-notes. She used three A2 sheets to sort
her Post-it-notes containing categories and codes.
Following this, she devised a matrix in Ms Word to
hold the codes, properties and dimensions, as well as
some comments and quotations.
Finally, both authors moved the amended codes
into NVivo for coherence and to allow searching the
interviews, re-sorting of material and consistent
redefining of codes in order to support the later stages
of the analysis. Both agree that NVivo proved useful
in using codes that were already finalised but was
rather cumbersome to use and stifled creativity when
developing new codes.
32
To conclude, we believe that grounded theory is

a rewarding methodology to use since it allows
researchers to be innovative and flexible. As long
as the researcher remains loyal to the fundamental
principles of GTM, s/he can adapt the method
according to his/her studys needs.
References
Bryant, A. and Charmaz, K. (2007) (eds.) The Sage
Handbook of Grounded Theory London: Sage.
Charmaz, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: A
Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis London:
Sage.
Glaser, B.and Strauss, A. (1967) The Discovery of
Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Gorra, A., (2007) An Analysis of the Relationship
Between Individuals Perceptions of Privacy and Mobile
Phone Location Data - a Grounded Theory Study PhD
Thesis, Leeds Metropolitan University.
Goulding, C. (2002) Grounded theory: a Practical Guide
for Management, Business and Market Researchers
London: Sage.
Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1998) Basics of Qualitative
Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing
Grounded Theory London: Sage.
Issues of access: beyond the insider-outsider perspective

Ko Koens, PhD Researcher, International Centre for Responsible Tourism Leslie Silver International Faculty,
ko@kokoens.com
Tom Fletcher, PhD Researcher, Carnegie Faculty of Sport and Education, t.e.fletcher@hotmail.com
Introduction
The Insider/Outsider Perspective
While doing qualitative research that involves

ethnographic fieldwork and interviewing, researchers
aim to find out more about the people or culture
of interest. To do so, they attempt to bridge the
many gaps between themselves and those under
investigation (Duneier, 2004). In cases where cultural
differences are great, bridging the gaps has been
noted to be problematic. There is a general consensus
that not sharing cultural characteristics (e.g. race,
gender, class and sexuality) can hinder access,
whilst making rapport building increasingly difficult.
Indeed, in certain cases great differences may warrant
exclusion from certain people, places and information
(Gunaratnam, 2003). Traditionally, researchers who do
not share particular cultural characteristics of those
under exploration have been brandished outsiders,
struggling for access and always viewed with
suspicion. They are contrasted with trusted insiders
sharing similar cultural characteristics, privy to the
most intimate, and arguably, natural occurring and
authentic information (Young Jr., 2004). Some argue
therefore, that a process of cultural matching should
be adopted in order to optimise the researchers
insider status and increase the chance of successful
data collection (cf. Sin, 2007 on ethnic matching;
Wray and Bartholomew, 2008).
The degree to which a researchers insider or outsider

position actually impacts the research setting and/or
whether the status is in fact explicit or perceived, is
unknown (Young Jr. 2004). The diversity within ethnic
and cultural groups are often so great that it is not
very obvious who would be inside and who would be
outside the group. Researchers will invariably share
some characteristics with the participants such as
gender or nationality (making them insiders) while
differing on others such as race or class (making
them outsiders) (Bridges, 2002). No person can ever
be fully aware of which aspects of their identities
translate into insider or outsider status. It is possible
to surpass one symbolic boundary (Cohen, 1985),
and yet be faulted by another. Access to information
and meanings takes place at a number of different
levels (Spracklen, 1996). In spite of indications to the
contrary, a researcher may find herself never fully
insider nor outsider in relation to those studied.
As a result of this, it appears there is no such thing
as a truly authentic representation. As Carrington
(2008) mentions: being white and researching
white communities and cultures will not de facto
make the researcher an insider, any more than
researching Black communities will necessarily
make the researcher an outsider. Also academe
has begun to embrace the idea that an outside
status should not necessarily be greeted with an
unquestioned antipathy. In fact, some (De Andrade,
2000; Naples, 1996; Young Jr. 2004) have argued that
the researchers acknowledgement of social distance
or cultural dissimilarities between herself and the
individuals under study could overcome many of
the shortcomings associated with being a cultural
outsider and, in doing so facilitate access.
In the current article the authors reflect upon this

debate and challenge the notion of a dichotomous
insider-outsider perspective when trying to gain
access to participants and information. First the
insider-outsider perspective and its difficulties are
discussed; then the process of access to research
participants is examined including the importance of
role-playing and the adoption of multiple identities
for facilitating positive interactions between
researcher and participant (Reinharz, 1997). The
article ends with the conclusion that researchers
may never be aware of what decides the level of
their insider/outsider status as this revolves around
the construction, maintenance and/or crossing of
symbolic boundaries (Cohen, 1985).
Access to participants is arguably achieved through

a continuous process of (re)negotiation between
researcher and participants (Burdsey, 2007) and,
in many cases by gaining acceptance and trust of a
number of gatekeepers. It has been suggested this
can be done by adopting a myriad of positions and
statuses and through negotiations of power (Young
Jr. 2004). Bourdieu (1984) likens these processes to
building capital. For Bourdieu, capital represents the
raw materials researchers can draw upon to achieve
success within different social environments. Often
researchers build capital through the process of
reflexivity and abiding by the hegemonic values and
regulations of the dominant habitus (Bourdieu and
Waquant, 2002). Reinharz (1997) similarly suggests
how researchers need to develop multiple selves to
33
survive the field. Practically, researchers will often

adopt certain mannerisms and ways of behaving to be
more acceptable to their research group. By taking on
different roles it is possible to gain access to different
actors with different kinds of information (Adler et al.,
1986). However, researchers do not choose their roles
unilaterally. They are given their role by research
participants on the basis of their characteristics and
behaviour often on the basis of pre-existing role
categories (Harrington, 2003). As Johnson (1975, pp.
112-113) describes:
[The researchers] personal characteristics are
combined in a variety of ways to make imputations of
motive, intention and purpose and to evaluate moral
character. Numerous putative traits such as ones
sexual status, socio-economic background, educational
background and personal biography may be used
to make such determinations. Furthermore, these
are combined with other common-sense cultural
understandings about the observers deference,
demeanour and presentation of self as evaluations of
moral character and trustworthiness are made.
Within interviews and ethnographic work, negotiations
get even more complicated because the researcher
has more influence on how she is perceived when
entering an exchange with a participant. This
exchange involves the participant sharing information
while the researcher agrees to use that information
for a previously explained purpose. Because
researcher and participant are conversing with each
other, it opens up great possibilities for the adoption
of roles during the conversation or interview. Both
for ethical reasons and to maintain trust and rapport,
it is vital that these roles remain authentic and
believable, which requires skill and training on
behalf of the researcher (Hollway and Jefferson,
2000). By adopting a myriad of positions and statuses
during interviews and playing on differences as a
technique to encourage curiosity, a researcher may be
able to gain access to information that would not be
revealed to insiders (Young Jr. 2004). It appears that
access is a multifaceted process that can certainly not
be described sufficiently using the insider-outsider
perspective. Rather than thinking about (ethnographic)
fieldwork in terms of polar opposites (i.e., insider/
outsider), it appears to be more reasonable to view
it in terms of a third space (Bhabha, 1990). In this
third space partial, fluid and contingent statuses
are shared and different identities collaborate to
create new, more nuanced knowledges. At the same
time the inevitable limitations of these knowledges
need to be accepted as well (Fletcher, 2009). Viewing
cross-cultural research in terms of the third space,
34
can overcome many of the limitations associated with

treating researcher identities in essentialised terms;
i.e., as either insiders or outsiders.
In the end, a researchers access to, and subsequent
time spent in, the field will always be partial and
contingent, no matter how few or many characteristics
she shares with participants or how much use she
makes of role playing and identity switching. This
means all representations are partial. As Bridges
(2002, p. 74) mentions: even though individuals
from within a community may have access to a
particular kind of understanding of a participants
experience, this does not automatically attach special
authority to their representations of that experience.
Furthermore, researchers from outside a community
can still develop and present an understanding
that has academic value Bridges (2002, p. 74).
Regardless of the extent of researchers insiderness
or outsiderness, knowledge is always missed.
Unfortunately, there are no easy solutions to this
(Fletcher, 2009). However, even though biographical
differences between researchers can never be fully
overcome, it is possible to clarify the theoretical and
situational context from which their ideas emerge
(Hill Collins, 2000, p. viii). In combination with an
appreciation and clarification of the fluctuating
statuses of the researcher, it may become possible to
surmount these issues and do good research.
Conclusion
The insider or outsider status of a researcher is never
cut and dry; it is filled with dissonance and ambiguity;
is part of an ongoing performance; and is always in
a state of flux. Researchers with different cultural
characteristics are likely to be allowed different types
of access, depending on their (dis)similarity with the
research participants. Research participants choose
to disclose information depending on their perspective
of the characteristics of the researcher through
certain categories and labels as well as through
dialectic interaction (Harrington, 2003). Appreciating
and reporting on this allows for a more sophisticated
picture than the polarised insider-outsider perspective
and opens up possibilities for outsiders in research.
One way of doing this, is for future work to engage
more critically with Bhabhas (1990) conceptualisation
of the third space. This is not to say that access to
the field becomes unproblematic. Indeed failure to
recognise the significance of cultural differences
between researcher and participant demonstrates
methodological and epistemological naivety
(Burdsey, 2007, p. 8). Rather, it suggests that the
skill of the researcher in gaining access and building

rapport rather than ascribed cultural characteristics
will ultimately determine the success of the
research process. Researchers must acknowledge
that rather than being either inside or outside the
research field, their multiple identities (Reinharz,
1997) means they always are, both inside and outside
the field while gathering data.
Gunaratnam, Y. (2003) Researching Race and

Ethnicity: Methods, Knowledge and Power. London:
Sage.
Harrington, B. (2003) The Social Psychology of Access
in Ethnographic Research. Journal of Contemporary
Ethnography, 32, pp.592-625.
References
Hill Collins, P. (2000) Black Feminist Thought:

Knowledge, Consciousness, and the Politics of
Empowerment, 2nd edition. London: Routledge.
Adler, P., Adler, P., and Rochford JR., E.B. (1986) The
Politics of Participation in Field Research. Urban Life,
14, pp.363-376.
Hollway W. and Jefferson, T. (2000) Doing Qualitative

Research Differently: Free Association, Narrative and the
Interview Method. London: Sage.
Bhabha, H. (1990) The Third Space: Interview

with Homi Bhabha. In: J. Rutherford (ed.) Identity,
Community, Culture, Difference. London, Lawrence and
Wishart, pp.207-221.
Johnson, J. (1975) Doing field research. New York:

Free Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of

the Judgement of Taste. Harvard: Harvard University
Press.
Bourdieu, P. and Waquant, L. (2002) An Introduction to
Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Bridges, D. (2002) The Ethics of Outsider Research.
In McNamee, M.J. and David, B. (eds.) The Ethics of
Educational Research. Oxford, Blackwell publishing,
pp.71-88.
Naples, N.A. (1996) A Feminist Revisiting of the

Insider/Outsider Debate: the Outsider Phenomenon
in Rural Iowa. Qualitative Sociology, 19, pp.83-106.
Reinharz, S. (1997) Who am I? The Need for a Variety
of Selves in the Field. In: Hertz, R. Ed. Reflexivity and
Voice. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage, pp. 3-20.
Sin, C.H. (2007) Ethnic-Matching in Qualitative
Research: Reversing the Gaze on White Others and
White as Other, Qualitative Research, 7 (4), pp.477499.
Burdsey, D. (2007) British Asians and Football: Culture,

Identity, Exclusion. London: Routledge.
Spracklen, K. (1996) Playing the Ball: Constructing

Community and Masculine Identity in Rugby, PhD thesis,
Leeds Metropolitan University.
Carrington, B. (2008) Whats the Footballer Doing

Here? Racialised Performativity, Reflexivity and
Identity. Cultural Studies <=> Critical Methodologies,
8 (4), pp.423-452.
Wray, S., and Barholomew, M. (2008) Insider/Outsider?

Researching Ethnic and Cultural Diversity. Paper
presented at Leeds Metropolitan University, April 15,
2008, Leeds.
Cohen, A.P. (1985) The Symbolic Construction of

Community. London: Tavistock.
Young JR., A. (2004) Experiences in Ethnographic

Interviewing about Race: the Inside and Outside of it.
In Bulmer, M. and Solomos, J. (eds.) Researching Race
and Racism. London: Routledge, pp.187-202.
De Andrade, L.L. (2000) Negotiations from the Inside:

Constructing Racial and Ethnic Identity in Qualitative
Research. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 29 (3),
pp. 268-290.
Duneier, M. (2004) Three Rules I Go By in My
Ethnographic Research on Race and Racism. In.
Bulmer, M. and Solomos, J. eds. Researching Race and
Racism. London: Routledge, pp.92-103.
Fletcher, T. (2009) Being Inside and Outside the
Field. An Exploration of Identity, Positionality and
Reflexivity in Inter-racial Research. In: Leisure Studies
Association Conference, July 7, 2009, Canterbury. Paper
under Consideration for Publication.
35
36
Tom Fletcher
Ko Koens
My research is about racialised identities in cricket.

The focus is around how different cultures interact
with one another whilst playing the game and whether
opportunities to succeed within cricket are equal.
It also addresses wider contemporary debates
surrounding multiculturalism and the problematic
of assimilation and integration of ethnic minority
communities within wider British society, and whether
these problems spill over into micro-institutions
such as sport. Cricket has a long history of inequality
and continues to be a bastion for a certain type of
hegemonic white masculinity, which excludes many
ethnic minorities. As I embody that certain kind
of white hegemonic masculinity my positionality
within the field was always uncertain. From early
analysis my research suggests that a great deal
of tension exists between white people, who have
traditionally run the game, and Black and ethnic
minority communities (who have traditionally been
excluded). Due to these tensions it is understandable
why a degree of cultural segregation exists between
these communities. My research interacts with two
contrasting cricket clubs/communities one being
predominantly white and the other, predominantly
Asian in membership. While these tensions are
fascinating from a theoretical point of view, they raise
a number of pertinent intellectual, political and ethical
considerations for when researchers are working
within a cross-cultural context. This short piece is
primarily concerned with my experiences of gaining
access to and working alongside these communities
one of which is in some fundamental sense other
to myself. It addresses issues of suitability of the
researchers own identity or identities to strangers
and moreover, my constant awareness of my insider
and outsiderness at different times.
I am investigating small business owners and selfemployed people involved in tourism in the townships
surrounding Cape Town and their linkages with formal
businesses in the tourism sector. The research took
mostly place in Black townships where apartheid
has left a long lasting mark and this was certainly
noticeable during the research. Some research
participants explicitly mentioned their difficulties
in dealing with White people. Nevertheless, being
a Caucasian foreigner a true outsider as it were
made it easier for me to talk to some participants
since I was not part of the system (making me more
difficult to place within a predefined category). On
the other hand, I was constantly (made) aware that
I was other than the people I interviewed and this
did influence the interaction between myself and the
participants. I dealt with this by remaining
non-judgemental, humble and inquisitive when
interacting with participants. In this way I tried to
facilitate the creation of a third space in which it
was safe to share experiences. Furthermore I kept
a research diary in which I noted not only the daily
events, but also the relation between the participants
and myself during interviews. In this way I tried to
understand how I was viewed during the research
process and how that may have influenced the access
that was given to me.
37
CONTACT DETAILS
For more information please contact:
Katie Hill
Email: k.hill@leedsmet.ac.uk
Karen Horwood
Email: k.horwood@leedsmet.ac.uk
Sally Jones
Email: s.a.jones@leedsmet.ac.uk
Ko Koens
Email: ko@kokoens.com
This publication is available online at:
www.leedsmet.ac.uk/alt/publications
www.leedsmet.ac.uk
Leeds Metropolitan University 2010
7043

7043

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

7043

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Special issue: The first-year experience

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD:

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Working with Words: A Bourdieuian Approach to Researching HE Entrepreneurship

Critical Race Feminism as Outsider Method: Personal Praxis as Pedagogy..................11

Unpacking ways of seeing: Using a poststructural discourse theoretical

A Methodology for Design Leads: a re-evaluation of contemporary processes

Action Research: determining boundaries between participatory and

Researching Political Tourists: A Case Study Approach.................................................24

Talking about History: Experience and Memory in Qualitative Research.......................27

Grounded theory: experiences of two studies with a focus on axial coding

Issues of access: beyond the insider-outsider perspective............................................33

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

The opening paper by Johanna Fawkes describes

differences and their experiences of working in

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

On writing a conceptual, hermeneutic thesis

Hermeneutics to the rescue

Most PhDs are built on empirical research, whether

So I was relieved when a superviso r suggested that I

My thesis proposes a new approach to professional

Hermeneutics is sometimes called the philosophy

The prospect of doing all that and then interviewing

As Gadamer (1975) puts it:

The question and answer exists within the reader as

his own) to construct new meanings and concepts

My thesis draws on the latter approach, in that I

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Working with Words: A Bourdieuian Approach to Researching HE Entrepreneurship

An overview of Bourdieus concepts

interplay between the objective and subjective; agency

Exploring the Discourses of

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

My research analyses situated perceptions and

relations of power and dominance in society (Van

Shi, C (2001) Mapping Out Gender Power: A

Bourdieu, P. (1998) Masculine Domination Stanford:

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Critical Race Feminism as Outsider Method: Personal Praxis as Critical Pedagogy

Critical Race Feminism: An Overview

Although CRF has been developed in the legal

To illustrate, Kathy Abrams (1991) references legal

ones knowledge claims. Personal accountability for

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Moraga, C and Anzalda, G. (1981) This Bridge Called

Unpacking ways of seeing: Using a poststructural discourse theoretical approach within an

seeks to analyse language, or more broadly discourse,

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Through this lens, the use of a discourse theoretical

with poststructuralism, this is not to ascertain the

Murdoch, J. (2004) Post-structuralist Geography

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research

Methodology: Innovative approaches to research