Annals of Anthropological Practice最新文献

Development projects present ambiguous ethical terrain for anthropologists to navigate. Particularly in relation to WaSH (Water, Sanitation, Hygiene) infrastructures which mediate human and environmental health. Our interdisciplinary team of anthropologists and engineers initially set out to design context-sensitive on-site wastewater treatment infrastructures for homes along Belize's Placencia Peninsula. The project's beginning coincided with the announcements of a government sponsored centralized wastewater infrastructure project and the construction of a cruise ship port on a nearby island, however. Soon the wastewater project's promises—economic opportunity, improved human and environmental health, modernization - came crashing into its pratfalls—exacerbating existing inequalities, loss of livelihoods, and diminished local governance. Our team was left with uncertain decisions about how to engage with improving infrastructure, given the emerging community dynamics. By detailing the imperfect trade-offs at play, we highlight ethical complexities inherent when communities’ development futures are at stake. Anthropology's fraught history includes legacies of unintended harms from entanglement in others’ inequities. However, avoiding involvement out of excessive caution risks leaving marginalized voices unheard and extant problems unresolved. This case immersed our team in the inherent optimism and ethical experimentation which underlie development contexts. Our analysis adopts the structure from Whiteford and Trotters’ (2008) “Ethical-Problem Solving Guide” to reveal the layered tensions that underly critical WaSH infrastructures.

We use a mix of qualitative and quantitative analyses to examine 1354 survey responses from members of the American Anthropological Association about their practice and teaching of cultural anthropology research methods. Latent profile analysis and an examination of responses to open-ended survey questions reveal distinctive methodological clustering among anthropologists. However, two historical approaches to ethnography remain prominent: deep hanging out and a mixed methods toolkit, with the former remaining central to the practice and teaching of all forms of contemporary cultural anthropology. Further, many anthropologists are committed to advancing research methods that account for power imbalances in fieldwork, such as through community-based and participatory approaches. And a substantial number also teach a wider array of methods and techniques that open new career pathways for anthropologists. Overall, our study reveals a core set of ethnographic practices—loosely, participant-observation, informal interviews, and the experiential immersion of the ethnographer—while also highlighting the great breadth of cultural anthropological research practice and pedagogy. The findings presented here can help inform how current and future anthropological practitioners and educators position themselves to meet the ever-changing demands of community members, funders, clients, collaborators, and students.

We examine the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on teaching and learning in an Engineering School of a large US research university. We focus on the adjustment of instructors as they converted their courses to distance teaching and learning formats (e.g., virtual sessions, online forums) and on bachelor student experiences with those changes. While both instructors and students experienced liminality, the pandemic affected these groups differently. Instructors attempted to form communitas with their students by prioritizing their teaching responsibilities, increasing the accessibility of course materials, and being more available to students compared to pre-pandemic times. However, students struggled to adapt to online learning contexts which lacked the sense of togetherness previously offered by in-person classes, study-groups, tutorial sessions, and communal study spaces. Unable to interact with their peers and create communitas, learning online proved to be an ineffective “solution.” Interacting with classmates and working in study groups are among the practices that can help students adjust to course delivery changes, even if it means those cultural practices go virtual. We argue that higher learning institutions, regardless of type (e.g., R1, R2, liberal arts, community colleges), should strengthen their remote teaching approaches. However, those strategies should incorporate: building strong relationships within and across roles, designing inclusive teaching and learning practices that take the contexts in which students learn into account, increasing spaces for peer-to-peer learning, and becoming proficient in the technologies needed to teach virtually.