TASK N° 4 Due date: Dec. 23, 2006 Group D  Group Leader: Sara De Simoni

Ethnographic Report Evaluation Form

Formally, students' writing should be in British academic style. Besides using SBE (South-east British English or Standard British English) as the norm-giving variety for lexico-syntax, it should have the 6 discourse characteristics indicated here. In particular it should make abundant use of the connectives indicated here.
POINTS: 1 = the paper seems written by a British academic: 0 = the style is conversational or follows Italian discourse conventions; too few connectives..

Content-wise, the Report should be marked as follows.

POINTS FOR THE SOCIOMETRIC QUESTIONNAIRE FINDINGS: 1 = quantitatively categorized data. 0 = raw data.
Explanation: 1 means that the findings of the Sociometric Questionnaire give a quantitative hold on the “reality” reported (for example: “2 out of 3 students interviewed said X to question 5” or, if only 1 student was interviewed, “The student confirmed male dominance in 2 out of 3 questions regarding male/female power ploys” 0 means that the findings of the Sociometric Questionnaire are expressed only in general terms. For example: ”The interviewee said she would speak first to a boy at a party but would not ask for his phone number” or “The interviewee confirmed my impression that Americans are mostly like Italians.” 

POINTS FOR THE EPISTEMOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF FINDINGS: 1 = explicit, falsifiable premises; 0 = implicit or purely intuitive premises.
Explanation. 1 means that the student explains in explicit terms the social model implicit in the questionnaire and thus defines what the “reality” reported consists of. 0 means that the student gives generic considerations about quantitative vs. qualitative methods, or says (untrue) banalities like “Numbers don't give a true picture”.

POINTS FOR RESULTS OF THE ETHNOGRAPHIC INTERVIEW: 1 = verifiable qualitative data. 0 = impressionistic data.
Explanation: 1 means that the student explains variation between her/his initial hypotheses (her/his positioning of Trinity students within Hofstede's cultural dimensions) and her/his actual findings; moreover, s/he justifies the “empathetic intuitions” that s/he gleaned from her/his interviewee's narrations. 0 = The student gives impressionistic opinions that are undocumented and impossible to replicate or invalidate.

POINTS FOR THE ACCOMPANYING EPISTEMOLOGICAL JUSTIFICATION: 1 = the “knowledge” that the student professes to have gained from the interview is presented problematically and, at the same time, in ways permitting some kind of verification 0 = implicit or purely intuitive premises.
Explanation. 1 means that the student demonstrates an awareness of the inevitable subjectivity of her/his findings and shows how s/he limited the risk of distortion through authentic empathy with her/his interviewer. 0 means that the student took her impressions as “real” and therefore described her/his interviewees behavior and values as “objective” facts.
WRITE STUDENTS' NAMES ON LINE, CIRCLE POINTS FOR EACH CATEGORY, GIVE TOTAL.

                                                                                                  1.    
1.   Roberta Manus       Form = 1  Content = 1 0 0 0 Total = 2
Comment: Good grammar, she interviewed a person only, she didn’t made Hofstede’scheme, she didn’t justify neither the empathetic intuitions nor the subjectivity and how she limited the risk of distortion, always if she limited it.

2.   Sara El Sawabi       Form = 0  Content = 1 0 1 1  Total = 3

Comment: Grammar is not good, she decides to follow the first point even if she does not exlain it well, in fact she only makes an example. She made Hofstede’s scheme but she does not expresse clearly empaty.

3.  Sabrina Nonno        Form = 1  Content = 1 1 1 1  Total = 5  
Comment: She decides to follow point by point and so my correction is easier, grammatically speaking, too clear.

4.  Melissa Maurizi     Form = 0  Content = 1 1 1 0 Total = 3

Comment: Her work is confused, bad grammar, she doesn’t explain well the empathy and the way she has used to limit the subjectivity; she only makes conjectures. Scarce attention to write on computer.

5. Cecilia Reddel  Form = 1  Content = 1 1 0 0  Total = 3

Comment: Good grammar, she followed very well the first and the second point, but for the third point I was indecided, in fact she made Hofstede’scheme but she didn’t justifies the empathetic intuitions, at the end I decided to give 0 points because all or nothing.

6. Sara De Simoni     Form = 1  Content = 1 1 1 1   Total = 5

Comment:  I follow point by point, I expressed what I wanted to say in clear way, good grammar and tidy work.