Research Reflections
Enjoying a sunrise on the hill behind UMU's campus
As I continue to formalize and reflect upon my findings, my biggest challenge since returning home has been coming to terms with my role as a student researcher in Nnindye, Uganda over the past two summers. I approached this research with a similar mindset that anthropologist Akihiro Ogawa describes as action research. I wanted to engage in “a social research strategy that combines collaborative research and an impulse toward social change with a strong democratic emphasis.”[1] During the course of my research in Uganda, I felt confident that in speaking with the people of Nnindye about the challenges they faced in the UPFORD program, I could successfully call attention to their problems and highlight potential avenues for program improvement. However, after writing and submitting my report to the UPFORD program, I began to doubt the impact my research would actually have. I doubted both the effectiveness of my research tool, as well as the actual scope of impact it would have on UPFORD operations. The process of overcoming these doubts has been essential in taking my research to the next level.
Doubts regarding my research tool – both the selection of my informants, as well as the questions from my interviews – began to surface as I read more about similar research projects that have been conducted in rural communities throughout the developing world. For instance, in her book entitled Planning Development with Women: Making a World of Difference, Kate Young points out the following:
"Data collection techniques are faulty, particularly when it comes to the measurement of women’s (and informal) economic activity; conceptualizations of the household can give an erroneous picture of some household members’ economic situation… Planners still tend to be more concerned with information reflecting women’s mothering and family-centered activities than their position in society."[2]
I began to question whether I gathered information regarding the whole range of roles and responsibilities women in Nnindye surely have. Most of my questions focused on women’s involvement with agriculture and food production/management/storage. Thus, the scope of the information I gathered was likely quite limited.
I also began to doubt the quality of the questions I posed and responses I received. As Katie Young explains, “simply asking women to list their needs [or explain their problems] is not enough.”[4] She notes that in addition to women fearing that they might upset the men or other people in society in positions of authority, they sometimes do not even realize the reality of the oppression:
"Women in many cultures are socialized in such a way as to lack any sense of having rights or needs except in relation to others; women typically want things for others – their children, their family. Powerlessness not only impedes the powerless from getting their demands placed on the agenda, it often makes articulating such demands unimaginable."[5]
The bulk of my research involved formal interviews and focus group discussions. It seems as though the ability to acquire information that my female informants could not even articulate would require substantial participant observation. Especially as I began to read ethnographies by anthropologists like Clifford Geertz who recounts how fleeing with the Balinese people from the police after a cockfight “led to a sudden and unusually complete acceptance into a society extremely difficult for outsiders to penetrate,” I began to wish I made more of an effort to join in village life in Nnindye.[6] Geertz notes how this rapport gave him “the kind of immediate, inside-view grasp of an aspect of ‘peasant mentality’ that anthropologists not fortunate enough to flee headlong with their subjects from armed authorities normally do not get.”[7]
Doubts regarding my research tool – both the selection of my informants, as well as the questions from my interviews – began to surface as I read more about similar research projects that have been conducted in rural communities throughout the developing world. For instance, in her book entitled Planning Development with Women: Making a World of Difference, Kate Young points out the following:
"Data collection techniques are faulty, particularly when it comes to the measurement of women’s (and informal) economic activity; conceptualizations of the household can give an erroneous picture of some household members’ economic situation… Planners still tend to be more concerned with information reflecting women’s mothering and family-centered activities than their position in society."[2]
I began to question whether I gathered information regarding the whole range of roles and responsibilities women in Nnindye surely have. Most of my questions focused on women’s involvement with agriculture and food production/management/storage. Thus, the scope of the information I gathered was likely quite limited.
I also began to doubt the quality of the questions I posed and responses I received. As Katie Young explains, “simply asking women to list their needs [or explain their problems] is not enough.”[4] She notes that in addition to women fearing that they might upset the men or other people in society in positions of authority, they sometimes do not even realize the reality of the oppression:
"Women in many cultures are socialized in such a way as to lack any sense of having rights or needs except in relation to others; women typically want things for others – their children, their family. Powerlessness not only impedes the powerless from getting their demands placed on the agenda, it often makes articulating such demands unimaginable."[5]
The bulk of my research involved formal interviews and focus group discussions. It seems as though the ability to acquire information that my female informants could not even articulate would require substantial participant observation. Especially as I began to read ethnographies by anthropologists like Clifford Geertz who recounts how fleeing with the Balinese people from the police after a cockfight “led to a sudden and unusually complete acceptance into a society extremely difficult for outsiders to penetrate,” I began to wish I made more of an effort to join in village life in Nnindye.[6] Geertz notes how this rapport gave him “the kind of immediate, inside-view grasp of an aspect of ‘peasant mentality’ that anthropologists not fortunate enough to flee headlong with their subjects from armed authorities normally do not get.”[7]
Moving Forward
Starting the journey home - Entebbe airport, July 2012
I am in a unique and privileged position as the current student assistant to the Ford Family Program with lasting ties at Uganda Martyrs University so that my various research doubts and regrets need not linger in vain. Specifically, I hope to share my research reflections with my research partner from this summer Bridget. Because of her involvement with my research this summer, she is continuing conversations with the women of Nnindye for her senior dissertation. Thus, I plan to point out to her many of the gaps my research lacked to fill. For instance, we need a better understanding of household organization and divisions of labor within the community. She might also attempt to gather information regarding additional barriers women face in entering development programs like UPFORD. I would also suggest that she broaden the demographic scope of her informants. The majority of the people we spoke with were UPFORD members. I think it would be extremely beneficial to speak with more women not involved in the UPFORD program to find out their views on the projects. Finally, I would suggest she spend more time interacting with the women of Nnindye – cooking, gardening, and developing relationships. The information she gathers from these interactions will undoubtedly be of that precious variety, which cannot be articulated, but only observed through active participation in village life.
I believe whole-heartedly in the Ford Family program's commitment to community-driven development and engaging in a dialogue so that people might become agents of their own change. However, throughout my summers and post-research reflections, I have realized just how complex and challenging this process is. In continuing to promote awareness through projects like my website and senior thesis and suggesting further research to individuals like Bridget, I also realize my role as student researcher did not end when I flew back home this past July. Rather, I must continually emphasize to as many people as I can the need to remain dedicated to the alleviation of poverty and promotion of human development, founded in human dignity for all, especially the most marginalized in society. Perhaps I might join Ogawa in “suspending my objectivity as a researcher, [and] sett[ing] off on a mission of action.”[8]
[1] Ogawa, Akihiro. “Initiating Change: Doing Action Research in Japan” Ed. Andrew Gardner and David Hoffman. Dispatches From the Field: Neophyte Ethnographers in a Changing World. Long Grove: Waveland, 2006. 207-221. Print, p. 208.
[2] Young, Kate. Planning Development With Women: Making a World of Difference. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993. Print, p. 152.
[3] Nuttall, Kristyn. “We Are Very Capable: Women and Development in Santa Catarina Ixtahuacán.” Provided online by Professor Smith-Oka. P. 207.
[4] Young, Kate. Planning Development With Women: Making a World of Difference. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993. Print, p. 148.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Geertz, Clifford. “Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.” Ed. R. L. McGee, Richard L. Warms. Anthropological Theory: An Introductory History. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. 467-487. Print, p. 470
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ogawa, Akihiro. “Initiating Change: Doing Action Research in Japan” Ed. Andrew Gardner and David Hoffman. Dispatches From the Field: Neophyte Ethnographers in a Changing World. Long Grove: Waveland, 2006. 207-221. Print, p. 208.
I believe whole-heartedly in the Ford Family program's commitment to community-driven development and engaging in a dialogue so that people might become agents of their own change. However, throughout my summers and post-research reflections, I have realized just how complex and challenging this process is. In continuing to promote awareness through projects like my website and senior thesis and suggesting further research to individuals like Bridget, I also realize my role as student researcher did not end when I flew back home this past July. Rather, I must continually emphasize to as many people as I can the need to remain dedicated to the alleviation of poverty and promotion of human development, founded in human dignity for all, especially the most marginalized in society. Perhaps I might join Ogawa in “suspending my objectivity as a researcher, [and] sett[ing] off on a mission of action.”[8]
[1] Ogawa, Akihiro. “Initiating Change: Doing Action Research in Japan” Ed. Andrew Gardner and David Hoffman. Dispatches From the Field: Neophyte Ethnographers in a Changing World. Long Grove: Waveland, 2006. 207-221. Print, p. 208.
[2] Young, Kate. Planning Development With Women: Making a World of Difference. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993. Print, p. 152.
[3] Nuttall, Kristyn. “We Are Very Capable: Women and Development in Santa Catarina Ixtahuacán.” Provided online by Professor Smith-Oka. P. 207.
[4] Young, Kate. Planning Development With Women: Making a World of Difference. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993. Print, p. 148.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Geertz, Clifford. “Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight.” Ed. R. L. McGee, Richard L. Warms. Anthropological Theory: An Introductory History. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. 467-487. Print, p. 470
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ogawa, Akihiro. “Initiating Change: Doing Action Research in Japan” Ed. Andrew Gardner and David Hoffman. Dispatches From the Field: Neophyte Ethnographers in a Changing World. Long Grove: Waveland, 2006. 207-221. Print, p. 208.