A quick question. I am taking a qualitative research course and we have to go do observation research, pick a problematic, and write about it, discussing the pros and cons of the method in which I chose.

I understand the basics of these two methods, but I am still a bit lost on how to do objective observational research, and then write about it. I know I want to do objective, because that's what my PhD thesis will consist of. Do I simply sit in the corner, and write about what I see, and that's it???

Help please!

I would say qualitative observation is not objective as your interpretation and what you see may differ to others, thus making it subjective. Usually you need to make clear your role in the research and how your mere being there impacts the dynamics of what is observed. As long as you ake your subjectivities clear observation is then as 'representative' (rather than objective) of what is observed as it can be (as long as you planned and did your observation well! Usually you would discuss your persepctive e.g realist, constructivist, feminist etc. And yes, you can just sit in the corner and write what's observed (withing the scope of your question) if that's what you want to do and it is appropriate to generating the data you want and will answer your research question ;-p

So, to write this, in an "objective" way, I would simply report what was observed, attempting to leave my opinion out? The downsides being?? I suppose by not coming at this from a subjective standpoint, I won't be able to go in-depth and understand the actions of the participants in the context of the location. Is that a fair statement?

Data generation is not the main objective, but rather trying to understand how to write from different a problematic.

Hey,

If you wanted to be 'objective' you would go down the same route as those that advocate anthropology is a 'science'. While if you wanted to be 'subjective' you would go down the same route as those that advocate anthropology is an 'art'.

But seriously, even if you "simply report what was observed" your (literal) perspective is subjective in that it highlights some aspects over others. Like Haraway says, there's no such thing as a God-view: an innocent view from no-where.

Relating to this, I guess you've read Geertz's piece about winking and blinking?