Send message to Contributor

Contribution short abstract:

The present work aims to contribute to the discussion on the anthropology of education through a self-reflective exercise in Faculty of Education of the University of Brasília, Brasil.

Contribution long abstract:

The anthropology of education is still a field in formation in Brazil, it occupies a smaller place in the agenda of Brazilian anthropology, despite its recent advances, there are also hierarchies in this field (Oliveira 2021). The present work aims to contribute to the discussion on the anthropology of education through a self-reflexive exercise, starting from a particular case in this area over the last 25 years at the Faculty of Education of the University of Brasília, Brazil. Our objective is to reflect on the possible articulations of Anthropology with Education as a field that articulates different knowledge and research traditions, but also as a field that articulates the different collectives and their practices that make up the diversity of Brazilian society such as minorities represented by indigenous peoples, communities traditional and other poor and peripheral segments in large urban centers with an intersectional approach. In the last decade there has been a great demand from undergraduate courses for Anthropology references. The inclusion of this discipline in the programs of most courses has become required due to its theoretical potential, which necessarily involves understanding the Other, considering their values and their culture. It is in this scenario that Anthropology is inserted and everything indicates that, more and more, its practitioners, particularly teachers, will be asked for contributions to the understanding of what has become its legacy: the study of humans and respect for differences.

Send message to Contributor

Contribution short abstract:

Moving from an educational anthropology department where I felt like the ugly duckling, to a design department where I was called "the anthropologist," I began to claim my disciplinary identity and found value in dusty theories when presenting them as new ideas in a different disciplinary context.

Contribution long abstract:

Nathaniel Hawthorne wrote: "Human nature will not flourish, any more than a potato, if it be planted and replanted, for too long a series of generations, in the same worn-out soil. My children have had other birthplaces, and, so far as their fortunes may be within my control, shall strike their roots into unaccustomed earth."

Likewise, theories, ideas, and methods that have become naturalized or taken for granted can find new life in foreign settings. At home in my anthropology department, I was insecure in my identity as an anthropologist. My research was remarkable only because it ventured beyond the more familiar territory of studying institutions and formal education, and because it involved experimental methods from other fields.

When I began my PhD in a design department, I was defined not by my empirical interests, but by my disciplinary grounding in anthropology. During my Master’s education, I had rejected most of the seminal works of famed anthropologists as being outdated and too far from the contemporary subjects I was studying. A surprising turn came when a design team at a large health devices manufacturing company asked for help in bringing these anthropological concepts and theories into the analysis of their user data. My PhD work ultimately involved embedding classic anthropological ideas, like gift relations and reciprocity theories of kinship, into material objects to be used as elicitation tools for developing more nuanced understandings of user experiences, helping the diverse team to work transdisciplinarily.

Send message to Contributor

Contribution short abstract:

Reflecting on teaching anthropology globally outside traditional departments, I emphasize the misunderstood nature of the field in post-Soviet academia. Drawing from my habilitation defense in literature, I address challenges in Azerbaijan regarding the reception of interdisciplinary studies.

Contribution long abstract:

This submission reflects on my personal experiences as an anthropologist securing a teaching position in a non-anthropology department within the global academic sphere, where conventional departmental structures may be absent. I explore the unique challenges and implications of this dynamic, aiming to unravel the complex relationship between my individual career, the discipline of anthropology, and the broader structures of academia.

In the context of the post-Soviet academic landscape, where anthropology is a relatively new entrant and often misunderstood, I will emphasize the need for a nuanced understanding of its essence. Drawing from my specialization in life-writings with a focus on gendered and cultural identities, I will share insights gained from defending my habilitation in literature. This journey was marked by encounters with skepticism from the defense committee regarding its adherence to traditional literary parameters.

Talking about the attitude to interdisciplinary studies in Azerbaijan which is a post-Soviet country, I will shed light on the challenges faced in a milieu where such approaches are not always warmly embraced. Through this submission, I aim to contribute a personal perspective to the broader discourse on the evolving role of anthropology in diverse academic environments. I invite a closer examination of the dynamic interplay between my individual career, teaching methodologies, and the intellectual trajectory of the discipline.

Send message to Contributor

Contribution short abstract:

I will discuss my experiences as an educational anthropologist working in a political science department. Specifically, I'll highlight the continuous boundary work needed to advocate for the relevance of anthropological analysis and methodological toolbox in the face of social science hierarchies.

Contribution long abstract:

In my current role, I am often the sole educational anthropologist navigating research on policy, academia, and related areas. This position prompts a fundamental question: What defines me as an anthropologist while I engage with various empirical fields and frequently publish in sociological outlets? My research extends beyond the confines of traditional education studies, and I often question whether my work aligns with the expectations of anthropological outlets.

Working as an anthropologist of higher education in the current academic landscape requires continuous boundary work, navigational work, and disciplinary shapeshifting. My research is primarily defined by my methodological toolbox and as an educational anthropologist, my training encompasses ethnographic methods and fostering an anthropological perspective, consistently making the familiar unfamiliar. However, within the social sciences, hierarchies exist. Interdisciplinary work often values disciplines and epistemic approaches that can decontextualise knowledge for a broader audience and demonstrate social impact (Fishberg and Kropp, forthcoming). This preference can be at odds with the highly contextual nature of anthropological work.

In this roundtable discussion, I aim to discuss this boundary work and explore how I adapt to disciplinary boundaries and approaches that may not always align with my own. Specifically, I would like to discuss the continuous and pragmatic boundary work required to advocate for the relevance and value of anthropological analysis in the face of social science hierarchies.

Send message to Contributor

Contribution short abstract:

Data from interviews with residential doormen in Manhattan indicates that during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, doormen became regarded increasingly as unwanted outsiders intruding in the residential environments of employers while also dealing with new complexities in their labor environment.

Contribution long abstract:

The labor environment of residential doormen in New York City has long been distinguished by its complexity, demanding the performance of a range of functions along with sensitivity to residents of contrasting socioeconomic backgrounds. The pandemic only intensified the cross-category character of this unique role, as more residents staying at home added increased and novel pressure to an already complex work environment. This study undertook long-form interviewing of residential doormen in Manhattan. Doormen of tenures ranging from six months to twenty-five years working in a variety of apartments of different sizes were identified. The interviews addressed topics such as the impact of COVID-19 on the frequency and length of day-to-day interactions, the workload of a typical day, and stress levels during working hours. To classify the main vectors of pandemic-related change in the workplace, responses were categorized on the basis of shifts in job priorities, social relations in the building, and changes in building policy. The findings indicate that longer-tenured doormen who were hired before the pandemic experienced more workplace dissatisfaction than those hired subsequently, a reflection of a larger culture of discontent due to the enhanced complexities of the pandemic-era labor environment. The data also reveals that, as tenants spent more time at home, doormen came to be regarded increasingly as unwanted outsiders intruding in the residential environments of their employers. These results together suggest that while some changes following COVID were felt unequally on the basis of prior tenure, other impacts were more widely distributed across the profession.

Send message to Contributor

Contribution short abstract:

This autoethnographic account describes the experience of an educational anthropologist situated in a department of educational administration and has managed to carve out a “third space” (Gutierrez, 1999) as one who is not an educational administrator but who studies educational administration.

Contribution long abstract:

This autoethnographic study (Ellis et al., 2011; Hughes et al., 2012) draws upon Harry Wolcott’s (1973) distinction between “being a principal” and “studying the principalship” (p. 317). As a teacher, who earned a PhD in educational studies whose inquiry has included ethnographically informed work in education policy and its implementation in schools, I never once imagined that my academic career would situate me in a department of educational administration. I describe the ways that an identity that is ‘not being an educational administrator’ but studying educational administrators as an educational anthropologist has impacted my career, from my time on the job market, landing my first tenure-track position, and transitioning to a different institution and navigating the tenure process. I discuss the role anthropology and my identity as an educational anthropologist plays in my teaching, scholarship, and service at my current institution. As one who is hardly the first to position oneself as an outsider as an academic in the field of educational administration (e.g., Marshall, 1984; Wagner, 1989; Wilkinson & Eacott, 2013) I discuss the experience of being a boundary crosser who has carved out a “third-space” (Gutierrez, 1999) between anthropology of education and educational administration.