180077 SE Methodenkolloquium (2024S)
Prüfungsimmanente Lehrveranstaltung
Labels
An/Abmeldung
Hinweis: Ihr Anmeldezeitpunkt innerhalb der Frist hat keine Auswirkungen auf die Platzvergabe (kein "first come, first served").
- Anmeldung von Sa 10.02.2024 10:00 bis So 18.02.2024 23:59
- Anmeldung von Fr 23.02.2024 10:00 bis Di 27.02.2024 23:59
- Abmeldung bis So 31.03.2024 23:59
Details
max. 25 Teilnehmer*innen
Sprache: Englisch
Lehrende
Termine (iCal) - nächster Termin ist mit N markiert
The colloquium starts 05.03.2024 with an online class. The link will be in Moodle course site.
Dienstag
05.03.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
19.03.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
09.04.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
16.04.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
23.04.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
30.04.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
N
Dienstag
07.05.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
14.05.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
21.05.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
28.05.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
04.06.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
11.06.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
18.06.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Dienstag
25.06.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Information
Ziele, Inhalte und Methode der Lehrveranstaltung
This course introduces EST students to methods used within the philosophy of science and science and technology studies. The course will address conceptual analysis, modelling, as well as methods of empirical social research most commonly used in these two fields. It will also discuss the significant overlaps between methodological practices in both fields, as well as explore differences. Data management and research ethics will also be covered. In addition to text based discussions, students will practice some of the discussed methods in group projects.
Art der Leistungskontrolle und erlaubte Hilfsmittel
- careful reading and active discussion of the literature
- questions and discussion on them in the Moodle platform
- (co-)chairing group discussion in the class
- a group project
- individual reflection of the methods taught in the course
- questions and discussion on them in the Moodle platform
- (co-)chairing group discussion in the class
- a group project
- individual reflection of the methods taught in the course
Mindestanforderungen und Beurteilungsmaßstab
1) Participation (10%)
2) Question on the weekly readings to the Moodle platform including co-chairing (10%)
3) Group project (40%):
a) Project design (after Easter break)
b) presentation in class
c) written summary (research questions, methodological approach, key findings, discussion, ethical reflection and data management plan)
4) Individual reflection (1.500 - 2.000 words) (40%)All aforementioned components of the course have to be fulfilled for the successful completion of the grade.Attendance mandatory: one unexcused absence is permitted.Grading table
1 – (excellent) 90 – 100 points
2 – (good) 81 – 89 points
3 – (satisfactory) 71 – 80 points
4 – (sufficient) 61 – 70 points
5 – (insufficient) 0 – 60 points
2) Question on the weekly readings to the Moodle platform including co-chairing (10%)
3) Group project (40%):
a) Project design (after Easter break)
b) presentation in class
c) written summary (research questions, methodological approach, key findings, discussion, ethical reflection and data management plan)
4) Individual reflection (1.500 - 2.000 words) (40%)All aforementioned components of the course have to be fulfilled for the successful completion of the grade.Attendance mandatory: one unexcused absence is permitted.Grading table
1 – (excellent) 90 – 100 points
2 – (good) 81 – 89 points
3 – (satisfactory) 71 – 80 points
4 – (sufficient) 61 – 70 points
5 – (insufficient) 0 – 60 points
Prüfungsstoff
The course has a group work, and a final reflection in English to be submitted after the course. The instructions are given in the class.
Literatur
READINGS:Case Studies in Philosophy & Social ScienceCurrie, Adrian. 2015. “Philosophy of Science and the Curse of the Case Study.” In The Palgrave Handbook of Philosophical Methods, edited by Chris Daly, 553–72. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137344557_22.
Mizrahi, Moti. 2020. “The Case Study Method in Philosophy of Science: An Empirical Study.” Perspectives on Science 28(1): 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1162/posc_a_00333.
Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2006 “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12(2): 219–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363.Research & Question Design, Ethics, DataJensen, Eric A., and Laurie, Charles. 2016. ”Get Started on Your Research Design. In Doing real research.”, in A practical guide to social research, 4-11. Sage
Jensen, Eric A., and Laurie, Charles. 2016. ”Choose Between Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Methods Approaches.” In Doing real research. A practical guide to social research, 11-14. Sage
Jensen, Eric A., and Laurie, Charles. 2016. How to Be an Ethical Researcher. In Doing real research. A practical guide to social research, 47-66. Sage
Ethics Commission at Uni Wien: https://ethikkommission.univie.ac.at/en/application-procedure/
Data Ethics in Research from ERC. 2013. European Commission. Directorate General for Research. Ethics for researchers: Facilitating research excellence in FP7, 11-15. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/7491
FAIR and CARE Principles: https://rdm.univie.ac.at/research-data-management/fair-and-care-principles/InterviewsJensen, Eric A., and Laurie, Charles. 2016. ”Introduction & Conduct Qualitative Interviews.” In Doing real research. A practical guide to social research chaps. 8.1 and 8.2, 172-86). Sage.
Silverman, David. 2006. “Interviews.” In Interpreting Qualitative Data. Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction, 109-149. Sage.Participant observation and ethnographyHarrison, Anthony K. 2020. Ethnography. In The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by Patricia Leavy, 329-58. Oxford University Press.
Nersessian, Nancy J., and Miles MacLeod. 2022. “Rethinking Ethnography for Philosophy of Science.” Philosophy of Science 89(4). Cambridge University Press: 721–41. doi:10.1017/psa.2022.8.Document Analysis and Computational Methods in PracticeLean, Oliver M., Luca Rivelli, and Charles H. Pence. 2021. “Digital Literature Analysis for Empirical Philosophy of Science.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, April. https://doi.org/10.1086/715049.
Jensen, Torben Elgaard. 2022. “How to Zig-Zag between Digital Methods and Traditional Methods in Ethnography.” Qualitative Research, 10 November. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221138405.
Asdal, Kristin, and Reinertsen, Hilde. 2021. Doing Document Analysis: A Practice-Oriented Method (2, 3, 7, 15-55, 145-155). Sage.Philosophical method and progressGilbert, Paul, Stephen Burwood, and Søren Overgaard, eds. 2013. “What Is Philosophy?” In An Introduction to Metaphilosophy, 17–44. Cambridge Introductions to Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139018043.003.
Dellsén, Finnur, Insa Lawler, and James Norton. 2022. “Thinking about Progress: From Science to Philosophy.” Noûs 56(4): 814–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12383.Conceptual analysisWilliamson, Timothy. 2020. “Clarifying Terms.” In Philosophical Method: A Very Short Introduction, edited by Timothy Williamson, 32–44. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198810001.003.0004.
Knuuttila, Tarja, and Andrea Loettgers. 2017. “What Are Definitions of Life Good for? Transdisciplinary and Other Definitions in Astrobiology.” Biology & Philosophy 32(6): 1185–1203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-017-9600-4.TBC in the course syllabus containing some articles on modelling, and analysing empirical material and writing about research.
Mizrahi, Moti. 2020. “The Case Study Method in Philosophy of Science: An Empirical Study.” Perspectives on Science 28(1): 63–88. https://doi.org/10.1162/posc_a_00333.
Flyvbjerg, Bent. 2006 “Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research.” Qualitative Inquiry 12(2): 219–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800405284363.Research & Question Design, Ethics, DataJensen, Eric A., and Laurie, Charles. 2016. ”Get Started on Your Research Design. In Doing real research.”, in A practical guide to social research, 4-11. Sage
Jensen, Eric A., and Laurie, Charles. 2016. ”Choose Between Quantitative, Qualitative and Mixed Methods Approaches.” In Doing real research. A practical guide to social research, 11-14. Sage
Jensen, Eric A., and Laurie, Charles. 2016. How to Be an Ethical Researcher. In Doing real research. A practical guide to social research, 47-66. Sage
Ethics Commission at Uni Wien: https://ethikkommission.univie.ac.at/en/application-procedure/
Data Ethics in Research from ERC. 2013. European Commission. Directorate General for Research. Ethics for researchers: Facilitating research excellence in FP7, 11-15. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/7491
FAIR and CARE Principles: https://rdm.univie.ac.at/research-data-management/fair-and-care-principles/InterviewsJensen, Eric A., and Laurie, Charles. 2016. ”Introduction & Conduct Qualitative Interviews.” In Doing real research. A practical guide to social research chaps. 8.1 and 8.2, 172-86). Sage.
Silverman, David. 2006. “Interviews.” In Interpreting Qualitative Data. Methods for Analysing Talk, Text and Interaction, 109-149. Sage.Participant observation and ethnographyHarrison, Anthony K. 2020. Ethnography. In The Oxford Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by Patricia Leavy, 329-58. Oxford University Press.
Nersessian, Nancy J., and Miles MacLeod. 2022. “Rethinking Ethnography for Philosophy of Science.” Philosophy of Science 89(4). Cambridge University Press: 721–41. doi:10.1017/psa.2022.8.Document Analysis and Computational Methods in PracticeLean, Oliver M., Luca Rivelli, and Charles H. Pence. 2021. “Digital Literature Analysis for Empirical Philosophy of Science.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, April. https://doi.org/10.1086/715049.
Jensen, Torben Elgaard. 2022. “How to Zig-Zag between Digital Methods and Traditional Methods in Ethnography.” Qualitative Research, 10 November. https://doi.org/10.1177/14687941221138405.
Asdal, Kristin, and Reinertsen, Hilde. 2021. Doing Document Analysis: A Practice-Oriented Method (2, 3, 7, 15-55, 145-155). Sage.Philosophical method and progressGilbert, Paul, Stephen Burwood, and Søren Overgaard, eds. 2013. “What Is Philosophy?” In An Introduction to Metaphilosophy, 17–44. Cambridge Introductions to Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139018043.003.
Dellsén, Finnur, Insa Lawler, and James Norton. 2022. “Thinking about Progress: From Science to Philosophy.” Noûs 56(4): 814–40. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12383.Conceptual analysisWilliamson, Timothy. 2020. “Clarifying Terms.” In Philosophical Method: A Very Short Introduction, edited by Timothy Williamson, 32–44. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780198810001.003.0004.
Knuuttila, Tarja, and Andrea Loettgers. 2017. “What Are Definitions of Life Good for? Transdisciplinary and Other Definitions in Astrobiology.” Biology & Philosophy 32(6): 1185–1203. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-017-9600-4.TBC in the course syllabus containing some articles on modelling, and analysing empirical material and writing about research.
Zuordnung im Vorlesungsverzeichnis
Letzte Änderung: Do 29.02.2024 19:06