Search for: All records

Writing winning proposals for funding research is an essential skill for doctoral students in the social sciences. Still, most anthropology programs lack formal instruction on this, relying instead on informal mentorship. To advance this, we evaluated the Value Proposition framework in teaching anthropology Ph.D. students to write proposals. Our findings from the feedback from students and faculty in the NSF-funded Cultural Anthropology Methods Program (CAMP) offer insights for using this framework to bridge the proposal-writing gap in the training of cultural anthropologists. 

Communities of color have been historically excluded and marginalized in the ongoing conversations about climate preparedness and resilience at local, national, and global levels. Using focus groups composed of Boston communities of color (Asian American, Black, Latino, and Native American), this study aimed to understand their perspectives on climate change, providing in-depth knowledge of its impact and their views on preparedness and resilience. Research shows that these communities have long been concerned about climate change and emphasize the urgent need to improve climate preparedness. A multi-pronged approach is crucial: listening to communities of color to leverage local knowledge and leadership, engaging in community organizing, advocating for policy change, redirecting attention to institutional resources, and addressing systemic inequalities that exacerbate vulnerabilities. The findings of this study highlight the need for policy changes driven by collaboration and collective action, which can benefit those most negatively impacted by climate change and the lack of preparedness and resilience in Boston and beyond. 

Ethnography is a core methodology in anthropology and other disciplines. Yet, there is currently no scholarly consensus on how to teach ethnographic methods—or even what methods belong in the ethnographic toolkit. We report on a systematic analysis of syllabi to gauge how ethnographic methods are taught in the United States. We analyze 107 methods syllabi from a nationally elicited sample of university faculty who teach ethnography. Systematic coding shows that ethics, research design, participant observation, interviewing, and analysis are central to ethnographic instruction. But many key components of ethical, quality ethnographic practice (like preparing an IRB application, reflexivity, positionality, taking field notes, accurate transcription, theme identification, and coding) are only taught rarely. We suggest that, without inclusion of such elements in its basic training, the fields that prioritize this methodology are at risk of inadvertently perpetuating uneven, erratic, and extractive fieldwork practices. 

Abstract American anthropology is engaged in significant self‐reckonings that call for big changes to how anthropology is practiced. These include (1) recognizing and taking seriously the demands to decolonize the ways research is done, (2) addressing precarious employment in academic anthropology, and (3) creating a discipline better positioned to respond to urgent societal needs. A central role for ethnographic methods training is a thread that runs through each of these three reckonings. This article, written by a team of cultural, biocultural, and linguistic anthropologists, outlines key connections between ethnographic methods training and the challenges facing anthropology. We draw on insights from a large‐scale survey of American Anthropological Association members to examine current ethnographic methods capabilities and training practices. Study findings are presented and explored to answer three guiding questions: To what extent do our current anthropological practices in ethnographic methods training serve to advance or undermine current calls for disciplinary change? To what extent do instructors themselves identify disconnects between their own practices and the need for innovation? And, finally, what can be done, and at what scale, to leverage ethnographic methods training to meet calls for disciplinary change?