Observations

• Overt Observations

  Researcher reveals their true identity and purpose known to those being studied. The sociologist is open about what they are studying.
• Overt Observations: Advantages

  It avoids the ethical problem of obtaining information through deceit, and when studying dangerous groups it stops the expectation of joining in on their activities. It allows the researcher to ask naïve questions that only an outsider would ask. The observer can take notes openly. It allows the researcher to use interview methods to check insights derived from observations.
• Overt Observations: Disadvantages

  A group may refuse the researcher permission; or may prevent them from seeing anything. Two of the Amsterdam Police officers Punch studied stated that 'When you were with us, we only let you see what we wanted you to see' after the study.

  It risks the Hawthorne Effect; where those who know they are being observed begin to behave differently as a result- undermining the validity of the research.
• Covert Observations

  The study is carried out 'undercover', the real researcher's identity and purpose are kept concealed from the group being studied. The researcher takes on a false role, usually posing as a genuine member of the group.
• Covert Observations: Advantages

  The main advantage is that it reduced the Hawthorne Effect, people are less likely to alter their behaviour, and sometimes this is the only way to obtain valid information. This is particularly true when engaging in activities which are kept hidden from the public. Humphreys, who studied gay men's sexual encounters in public toilets notes: 'There is only one way to watch highly discreditable behaviour and it is to pretend to be in the same boat as those engaging in it'. This preserves the naturalness of people's behaviour. Allows rapport to be built.
• Covert Observations: Disadvantages

  The researcher has to maintain the act, and may need detailed knowledge of the group's way of life before joining- e.g. Patrick was almost found out when he paid for a suit in cash and not credit; the gang wouldn't behave this way which could raise suspicion and end the study. The sociologist cannot take notes openly, reliant on memory and opportunity- e.g. Ditton, studying theft among bread deliverymen, wrote notes in the toilet which raised suspicion. They cannot ask naïve questions or combine observation with other research methods for further depth.
• Covert Observations: Ethical Issues

  It is immoral to deceive; meaning researchers should try to obtain the informed consent of subjects and reveal the purpose of the study, and the use of the findings- though this is usually done afterwards with covert research. They may have to take part in immoral or illegal activities as part of their 'cover' role. As witnesses to such activities, they may have a moral or legal duty to intervene or report them to police.
• Participant Observation

  Preferred by Interpretivists as they are less structured, more flexible and produce qualitative data- this allows us to gain insight into the motives and meanings people give to behaviour and situations.

  The researcher actively takes part in the event, or the everyday life of the group, whilst observing.
• Participant Observation: Practical Issues

  Schools are complex places, meaning they are more time-consuming to observe- e.g. it took Lacey 2 months to familiarise himself with the school. Though it may be easier to gain permission to observe lessons rather than complete interviews. The headteacher from Fuller's study decided that it would be good to have a non-teaching adult present, and parental permission isn't required for her to observe normal school behaviour.
• Participant Observation: Practical Issues

  Personal characteristics such as age, gender and ethnicity can affect the process of observation; Wright found that there were few Black teachers, and found her ethnicity produced antagonistic reactions from some White teachers. Though, conversely, many Black pupils held her in high esteem and would ask her for support.

  Schools are busy, privacy is needed to take notes of observations- Hammersley observed staffroom conversations and stated that he may have made mistakes or relied on his own interpretation of the general sense of what was said.
• Participant Observation: Ethical Issues

  Delamont states that every observer in a school sees and hears things which could get pupils into trouble, in some cases involving the law (like from stealing). What to do with this 'guilty knowledge' is an ethical and practical dilemma: as ethically they are obliged to report wrongdoings, but this does breach trust, so pupils may not cooperate with the research. Given the harm that could be done, Delamont argues that additional care should be done to keep their identity confidential; this is even more evident in a marketised education system.
• Participant Observation: Validity

  Interpretivists argue it gives an authentic understanding of the world-views of social actors. However the power difference between young people and adults is a major barrier to uncovering real attitudes and behaviours of pupils. Presenting a false image when being observed. Also, teachers may feel skilled in disguising their feelings and altering behaviour when being observed- impression management. Meaning data lacks validity. Finally, the language of the pupil may differ from the researcher- making it difficult to analyse.
• Participant Observation: The Hawthorne Effect


  Most classroom observation has to be overt- however, this makes it difficult to avoid the HE- e.g. King tried to blend in at an infant school by spending short periods of time in the class to allow them to familiarise themselves. Though to not be seen as a teacher, he avoided eye contact and politely refused their requests for help. To be unobtrusive, he used the Wendy House as a 'hide'- this demonstrates the difficulty of an observer reducing their presence on pupils' behaviour, this behaviour then undermines the validity.
• Participant Observation: Representativeness

  The scale of the education system is vast; over 4,000 secondary schools and over 30,000 primary schools- the average secondary school has around 70 classes occurring at one time. There is then a huge amount of educational activity. Most observational studies focus on an idiographic sample in one school- e.g. Willis studied a core group of 12 working class boys. This is due to the time taken to build rapport. Samples are then unlikely to be representative- limiting the generalisability.
• Participant Observation: Reliability

  These studies tend to lack reliability; data recording is often unsystematic and hard to replicate- e.g. Hammersley found that on one occasion he had to record his notes on a newspaper when observing staffroom discussions covertly.

  Secondly the personal characteristics may evoke different responses- e.g. Wright found she was met with hostility from some researchers, but accepted by Black pupils. Each individual can then produce a different response.
• Non-Participant Observation

  Where the researcher simply observes the group or event without taking part in it. For example, they could use a two-way mirror to observe children playing. Highly structured observations use pre-categorised observational schedules. Positivists prefer these as they enable them to gain quantitative measurements of behaviour patterns.
• Non-Participant Observation: Practical Issues

  One example, favoured by Positivists is the Flanders System of Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC). This is used to measure pupil and pupil-teacher interaction quantitatively. Observed using a standard chart to record interactions at 3 second intervals, placing each interaction into 1 of 10 categories. It found that in American classrooms 68% of time was teacher talking, 20% pupil talk, and 12% silence or confusion. Relatively simple method makes it quicker, cheaper and require less training.
• Non-Participant Observation: Reliability


  Structured observational techniques, like FIAC, are easy to replicate as there are only 10 behavioural categories, making it relatively easy for other researchers to apply in a standardised way. This generates quantitative data, making the findings easily comparable to other studies.
• Non-Participant Observation: Validity

  Interpretivist Sociologists criticise structured observations of classroom activity for its lack of validity; Delamont argues it is simply counting classroom behaviour and classifying it into a limited number of pre-defined categories- this ignores the meanings that pupils and teachers attach to their interactions.
• Non-Participant Observation: Bias and Objective

  By not participating, the sociologist avoids 'going native', allowing them to continually remain objective and presenting an unbiased view of the group. They have no loyalties to the group, therefore they have no reason to conceal sensitive information- increasing the validity of their accounts.
• Observations: Lack of a Concept of Structure

  Interactionists favour the use of participant observation as they see society as constructed through the small-scale, face-to-face interactions of its members and the meanings that individuals give to their situation. PO is then a useful tool in examining these micro-level social interactions and meanings at first hand.
• Observations: Lack of a Concept of Structure

  However, structural sociologists such as Marxists and Functionalists see the use of PO as inadequate. They argue that because it focuses on 'micro' level of actors' meanings, it then ignores the wider structural forces which shape our society (such as class inequality or socialised norms and values). In a structuralist view, seeing things through actors' eyes gives an incomplete picture- many individuals are unaware of the structural forces shaping their behaviour, making their accounts a partial view.
• Observations: Bias and Lack of Objectivity

  Risk of becoming too involved and 'going native'- e.g. Punch wanted to be accepted by a patrol group, so over-identified with them by acting as a policeman (searching houses/people, shouting at those abusing his police colleagues)- the researcher has then become bias as after a while they will cease to notice unusual or noteworthy behaviour as they did in the earlier stages. They become non-observant. Willis sympathised with the underdog after only hearing their side, making him bias in their viewpoint yet the 'lads' verbally abused other students.