180077 SE Methods Colloquium (2024S)
Continuous assessment of course work
Labels
Registration/Deregistration
Note: The time of your registration within the registration period has no effect on the allocation of places (no first come, first served).
- Registration is open from Sa 10.02.2024 10:00 to Su 18.02.2024 23:59
- Registration is open from Fr 23.02.2024 10:00 to Tu 27.02.2024 23:59
- Deregistration possible until Su 31.03.2024 23:59
Details
max. 25 participants
Language: English
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
The colloquium starts 05.03.2024 with an online class. The link will be in Moodle course site.
Tuesday
05.03.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
19.03.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
09.04.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
16.04.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
23.04.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
30.04.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
07.05.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
14.05.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
N
Tuesday
21.05.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
28.05.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
04.06.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
11.06.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
18.06.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
25.06.
15:00 - 18:15
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Information
Aims, contents and method of the course
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.
Assessment and permitted materials
- 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
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
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
Examination topics
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.
Reading list
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.
Association in the course directory
Last modified: Th 29.02.2024 19:06