> There is no such thing as trivial sites from the perspective
> of this class. There is nothing wrong with anohter barroom setting or
> such as long as they put in the time, interact with people,
> interview, see how difficult it is to gain entree and develop
> rapport, etc
Good point for two reasons. 1) While we may have seen a zillion barroom
or other mundane settings, it's new to the students; 2) The trick is to get
students to see culture in a new/different way, especially if it's something
related to their daily life.
P&P's point about differing expectations is a good one. For undergrads,
such a course can be little more than an intro to the numerous tasks
required. I put about 1/3 of a course into nuts/bolts stuff (logic of
inquiry, ethics, varieties of ethnography/qual research), 1/3 into
explaining data gathering (which they do for about 2/3s of a 16 week
course), and 1/3 into analysis (which they do for half the course).
> It's a crime to mass out this
> course, but at CU we often find ourselves with 45 or more students in
> a class. This changes the dynamic.
15 students is about our max for both grad and undergrad methods. Because
of the time investment required on the individual projects by the prof,
and the constant reading/critique of work-in-progress, many more than that
would be fatal. Part of the value of a smaller course is the interaction
and sharing of work/problems/ideas/resources by students. 45 is an
astounding number (for which I'm sure places are reserved in heaven for the
instructors).
jt