Caseudvælgelse og Indsamling af Kvalitativt Materiale

2227 Responsible: Morten Brænder, Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet & Rasmus Brun Pedersen, Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet
From: 2010/09/13 to: 2010/10/04
Subscription Deadline: 2010/07/05
Place: Aarhus University
Link to full program: here
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 5
Further information: agg@ps.au.dk

KURSUSBESKRIVELSE

Analyser af et begrænset antal cases er en vigtig del af statskundskaben, og i den forbindelse er udvælgelsen af cases helt central. Det samme gælder den efterfølgende udvælgelse og anvendelse af empirisk materiale i form af fx arkivmateriale, eliteinterviews, taler, avisartikler, aftaler og rapporter.  Endelig introduceres til historisk metode i forbindelse med indsamlingen og vurderingen af historiske kilder.

FORELØBIG KURSUSPLAN

13. september 2010

Introduktion til kurset. Casebegrebet. Forskellige kvalitative designs og strategier samt betydningen heraf for caseudvælgelsen.

20. september 2010

Teknikker til caseudvælgelse.

27. september 2010

Planlægning og gennemførelse af kvalitative interviews, herunder eliteinterview.

4. oktober 2010

Teknikker til udvælgelse af tekstmateriale. Kildebegrebet og kildekritik.
Introduktion til arkivstudier

 FORELØBIG LITTERATURLISTE

• Collier and Mahoney (1996) "Insights and Pitfalls: Selection Bias in Qualitative Research", World Politics, 49: 56-91.
• Collier, David, Henry Brady & Jason Seawright (2003) “Qualitative vs. Quantitative: What might this distinction mean?”, p. 4-8 in Qualitative Methods. Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section on Qualitative Methods, 1(1).
• Geddes, Barbara (2006). “How the cases you choose affect the answers you get: selection bias in comparative politics”, Political Analysis, 2(1): 131-150.
• George, Alexander L. & Andrew Bennett (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Sciences, Cambridge, Massachusetts, MIT Press. (Købes)
• Gerring, John (2007). Case Study Research. Principles and practices, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• King, Gary, Robert O. Keohane & Sidney Verba (1994). Designing Social Inquiry. Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research, Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, kap. 3+4.
• Kvale, Steinar (1998). Interview. En introduction til det kvalitative forskningsinterview, Hans Reitzel, pp. 129-147.
• Lebow, Richard Ned (2001) "Social Science and History: Ranchers versus Farmers?", in Colin Elman and Miriam Fendius Elman (eds) Bridges and Boundaries: Historians, Political Scientists, and the Study of International Relations. Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 111-136.
• Lofland et al (2006) Analyzing Social Settings. A Guide to Qualitative Observation and Analysis (4. ed), Thomson Wadsworth.Lustick (1996) "History, Historiography and Political Science.", APSR, 90(3): 605-618.
• Mahoney, James and Gary Goertz (2006). “A Tale of Two Cultures”, Political Analysis, 14(2): 227-249.
• “Symposium: Interview Methods” (2002) Political Science and Politics, 35(4): 665-682.

The object of the course is to present and discuss research design and methodology preliminary in connection with Ph.D.-projects

2242 Responsible: Ruth Emerek and Gunnar Scott Reinbacher
From: 2010/09/14 to: 2010/09/17
Subscription Deadline: 2010/08/16
Place: Aalborg University
Fee: 1500
Link to full program: here
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 6
Further information: emerek@ihis.aau.dk

Combining Qualitative and Quantiative methods to address Network Governance Research Questions

2253 Responsible: Prof Jenny Wilson, Roskilde University
From: 2010/09/24 to: 2010/09/24
Subscription Deadline: 2010/09/20
Place: 25.1. Klyngerum, Roskilde University
Further information: jennyl@ruc.dk

Precarious prospects: Youth, violence and politics

2245 Responsible: Graduate school International Development Studies, Roskilde University, Graduate school Social Anthropology, University of Copenhagen & VOPY, Rehabilitation and Research Centre for Torture Victims (RCT)
From: 2010/09/29 to: 2010/09/30
Place: City Campus, Faculty of Social Sciences, Copenhagen University
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 2
Further information: jacobra@ruc.dk

The workshop encourages theoretical and methodological debates on how youth, violence, and politics intersect. Recent research has shown that these intersections often centre on issues of individual and collective aspirations and prospects; on futures, social possibilities and becoming. This prospective focus is related to hopes and fears. It directs our attention toward the way people imagine the unfolding of social life and to how they position themselves in and influence their social environments. Tying together issues such as praxis, ideology and materiality the workshop aims at addressing the theoretical and methodological aspects of the study of youth, conflict and/or politics. We invite Ph.D. Students with a scholarly interest in the topic to participate in the workshop

Participant must submit a short abstract when applying for participation in the workshop, and must subsequently submit papers they wish to have discussed at the workshop (max
6000 words).

Deadline for abstracts:     

Monday 2^nd of August 2010

Deadline for Papers:

Monday 20^th of September 2010

Introduction to Nvivo - Introductory course to "Advanced Analysis of Qualitative Data using Software"

2249 Responsible: Polforsk, Professor Merete Watt Boolsen, University of Copenhagen & Dr. Christina Silver, University of Surrey
From: 2010/10/04 to: 2010/10/04
Subscription Deadline: 2010/09/15
Place: University of Copenhagen
Fee: 150 kr
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 1
Further information: sek@polforsk.dk

Course overview

This introductory course is for the Ph.d students who are not familiar with using CAQDAS. It takes place 26 days before the advanced part of the course so that the participants can get hands-on experience with using CAQDAS before they participate in the advanced course. It is a requirement that the participants bring a laptop with Nvivo installed to the course. It must work. A free trial of Nvivo 8 may be downloaded from: http://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo_free-trial-software.aspx

It is recommended that you at least one week before the course check out that you can bring a computer with a working Nvivo installed. In case you have problems with this, please get hold of us at least one week before the course. If you intend to use the trial version of Nvivo, ensure that it will not expire before October 30.

The introduction day will teach you the basic stuff about how to use Nvivo in your project. You will get an overview of the software and learn to prepare your data for Nvivo. Moreover, you will learn to make annotations, to search, to code, to recode, as well as to establish code schemes and retrieve data. However, you are expected to make yourself familiar with these concepts by studying ch. 1-8 of Lewins & Silvers book: "Using software in qualitative research"

Program

4 th October 9am – 12pm

1pm – 4pm

Merete Watt Boolsen : Introduction to NVivo (Part One) 9am – 10.30am : Introduction Basic Principles : Powerpoint Presentation Overview Demonstration : Volunteering Project Installation 10.45am – 12pm : Getting started using sample interview data Module 1: Familiarize and project set up Familiarise with the interface and customise settings Create and save a project Data Preparation: recognizable units of context Making folders, blank documents, memos Importing interview data, make cases

1pm – 2.30pm : Organising, exploring and commenting on data Module 2: Getting Started with sources 2.1. Case nodes and attributes 2.2. Explore data : making annotations 2.3. Making analytic memos 2.45pm - 4pm : Categorising data Module 3: Nodes and coding 3.1. creating codes deductively and inductively 3.2. coding textual data 3.3. retrieving coded data 3.4. coded data – recoding – uncoding

In order to prepare for the remainder of the course, Ph.d-students need to practice the tasks covered in Introduction day on their own data before attending to the course starting on 27^th October.

Litterature

• Ann Lewins and Christina Silver, 2007: Using Software in Qualitative Research. Sage. Chapters 1 – 8.

Social Network Analysis in Political Science

2214 Responsible: Dr Dimitrios C Christopoulos, Visiting Professor, CEPS/INSTEAD, Senior Lecturer, Department of Politics, Bristol - UWE. Associat professor Michael Strange, Department of Society and Globalisation, Roskilde University,
From: 2010/10/11 to: 2010/10/15
Subscription Deadline: 2010/09/26
Place: Roskilde University
Fee: 100 Euro
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 5 (2,5)
Further information: bjerke@polforsk.dk

A formal network analysis perspective can be employed to understand political, economic and social organisations and individuals. The networks examined can be internal or external to institutional context; they can be formal or informal. Social Network Analysis (henceforth SNA) can be employed to:

• examine the interactions between nodes (actors, groups or institutions);

• measure the resource flows between nodes and

• measure the information flows between nodes.

SNA can also provide measures of the structural constraints of actors dependent not only on their own relations but also on the way other actors are related. Embedding actors within the set of their interactions allows for insights on the distribution of power and the effective influence of social and political action.

All social interaction can be viewed in network terms. This is because networks account for the relations between actors. Formal network analysis assists in examining individuals within their institutional context and relational contacts. Indeed some sociologists examine all interactions that relate to individuals, social groups or society as dependent on their networks (see Wellman, 1999).

The approach comprises a paradigm in as far as it is based on mathematical foundations of graph theory and the insights allowed by relational theories of social interaction. It is also a methodology that can be applied across scientific disciplines and has a well developed set of predominantly descriptive statistics. Most widely used are measures of centrality, density, transitivity, reciprocity and brokerage. Measures also examine the way groups cohere, fraction or cluster. Hundreds of algorithms are available for the examination of network properties (see the attached list of software).

SNA can be employed along other methodology tools in the study of political institutions and actors. It easily complements more traditional qualitative and quantitative techniques and is conducive to method triangulation.

Preliminary program

Monday Oct. 11

Introduction
Network analysis in the social sciences.
Elementary graph theory.
Theoretical foundations of employing network analysis.

Network Governance - Lecture byJacob Torfing at 2pm

Tuesday Oct. 12

Applications and Examples
Innovation dissemination.
Political networks and influence.
Social movements.
Agency, leadership and entrepreneurship.

Wednesday Oct. 13

Software
UCINET
Netdraw
ORA
Pajek

Thursday-Friday Oct. 14-15

Workshop Presentations
Participant presentations.

Dead-line for submitting paper?
Sunday Oct. 26

Participants that submit a paper will be preferred in case of overbooking. The paper should be 10-15 pages and must be relevant for using social network analysis. It may be a project description.

Participants that do not submit a paper will be reward 2,5 ECTS, only.

Preliminary literature

• Burt, Ronald S. (2005). Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital. New York: Oxford University Press.

• Brandes, U. Erlebach T. (2005) Network Analysis Methodological Foundations.  Springer Verlag.

• Carrington, P. J. J. Scott and S. Wasserman (eds) (2005) Models and Methods in Social Network Analysis.  Cambridge: CUP.

• Christopoulos, D. (2006) ‘Relational Attributes of Political Entrepreneurs: A Network Perspective’ Journal of European Public Policy, August 2006, vol 13, n5 pp. 757-78.

• Christopoulos, D. (2008) ‘The Governance of Networks: Heuristic or Formal Analysis?’ in Political Studies vol. 56, Issue 2, 2008.

• Christopoulos, D. & L. Quaglia (2009) ‘Influence and Brokerage: Network Constraints in EU Banking Regulation’ (2009) Journal of Public Policy, Vol 29, Issue 2, 179-200.

• Coleman, James (1990) Foundations of Social Theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

• Della Porta, Donatella and Diani, Mario (2006) Social Movements: An Introduction.  Blackwell Publishers.

• Diani, Mario and McAdam, Doug eds. (2002) Social Movements and Networks: Relational Approaches to Collective Action.  Oxford University Press.

• Johnson, J. and Orbach, M. (2002) “Perceiving the political landscape: ego biases in cognitive political networks” Social Networks Vol24, pp291-310.

• Knoke, D. (1990) Political Networks; The Structural Perspective. Cambridge UP.

• Knoke, David, Franz Urban Pappi, Jeffrey Broadbent and Yutaka Tsujinaka. (1996). Comparing Policy Networks: Labor Politics in the U.S., Germany, and Japan. New York: Cambridge University Press.

• Kriesi, H., Adam, S. & Jochum, M. (2006) ‘Comparative Analysis of Policy Networks in Western Europe’ Journal of European Public Policy vol.13/3, pp.341-361.

• Lin, Nan. (2001). Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. New York: Cambridge University Press.

• Pappi, F. U. and Henning, C. 1999. “The Organization of Influence on the EC’s Common Agricultural Policy: A Network Approach.” European Journal of Political Research, Vol 36, Issue 2, p. 257-281.
  

• Punam, Robert (2000) Bowling Alone: the Collapse and Revival of American Community. NY: Simon & Schuster.

• Scott, John (2000) Social Network Analysis: A Handbook. 2nd ed. Sage.

• Stokman, F.N. and Van den Bos J.M. (1992) “A Two Stage Model of Policy Making with an Empirical Test in the U.S. Energy-Policy Domain”.  Research in Politics and Society 4:219-253.

• Valente, Thomas W. (1995). Network Models of the Diffusion of Innovations. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

• Wasserman, s. and Faust, K. (1994) Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. CUP.

Digital Media and Collective Action: Changing modes of citizenship and participation in national and transnational settings

2252 Responsible: Doctoral course teacher: Lars Hierta & Professor Michele Micheletti, michele.micheletti@statsvet.su.se
From: 2010/10/13 to: 2010/12/16
Subscription Deadline: 2010/10/04
Place: Department of Political Science, Stockholm University
Fee: 3600 SEK
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 7,5
Further information: michele.micheletti@statsvet.su.se

In the late 20th century the northern democracies experienced great changes in social structure, economies, communication systems and personal lives. These changes include declines in group and institutional identifications as society becomes organized around flexible social networks dominated by lifestyle and consumer values. The emerging order is organized through communication technologies that operate largely outside conventional mass media systems. These changes are accompanied by a new politics of lifestyle values shared across social networks that sometimes intersect with parties and interest organizations, but more often take forms such as shopping and affiliating loosely with causes that mobilize publics beyond national borders. The growing demand for personalized relations with causes and organizations makes various digital media technologies increasingly central to the organization and conduct of collective action. Digital technologies enable loosely tied relations between individuals, causes, and organizations, while often giving individuals considerable autonomy in making choices about how, when, where, and with whom to affiliate and act. The individual control of such connections to the terms of action creates the potential for more diverse and personalized identifications than may be characteristic of the collective framing of identifications commonly associated with social movements based on more organization-centered and leader-driven collective action.

This workshop examines these trends in the transformation of citizenship, how we conceive of information and political participation, and how they lead to creative uses of information and communication technologies to organize collective action in the now familiar transnational networks that address increasingly interrelated and complex aspects of environment, trade and economic justice, human and labor rights, and corporate power and responsibilities. At the same time that these changes enable more flexible and creative individual agency, they place further strains on existing modern institutions in terms of relevance, legitimacy and capacity to engage increasingly fragmented and personalized publics. These developments suggest an agenda of key questions about the legitimacy of national democratic institutions and civil society organizations, and the capacity of loosely organized collective action networks to sustain effective political action outside of conventional institutions. This workshop addresses these issues through the lens of digital media and collective action.

Scholars interested in the workshop theme are welcome to participate in all workshop seminars or to attend selected seminars and events. We request that you register your participation with the workshop contact person (see above). Participants must cover their own travel costs, accommodation etc.

For doctoral students

The workshop can be taken as a 7.5 ECTS credit course. To receive credits doctoral students must attend the seminars on October 13-14 and December 15-16, present literatures reviews orally, and write a final paper.

Doctoral students are welcome to attend the other workshop seminars and events. Some of the other sessions will be available as pod casts on the workshop’s website.

The fee for doctoral students wanting to receive ECTS credits for the course is 3600:- SEK. The fee is payable after the notice of acceptance. Each doctoral student is responsible for ensuring that the course is approved by her/his department.

To receive the 7.5 ECTS credits the doctoral student must write a paper between 5000 and 8000 words that builds on the readings, required lectures, and the doctoral students’ own research interests. This paper is due on December 3. It should be sent to Michele.micheletti@statsvet.su.se.

Doctoral students must cover their own travel costs, accommodation etc.

Registration: No later than October 4, 2010

Workshop Schedule of Seminars and Events

October 13: 10-12 Introduction

October 13: 13-15 Public Sphere: Discussion based on joint readings

Seminar room: F 702

October14: 10-12. Collective Action: Discussion based on joint readings

October 14: 13-15. Challenges: Discussion based on joint readings

Seminar room: F 702

October 29: 13-15 Installation lecture by Professor Lance Bennett, 2010 Olof Palme Professor

Lecture hall: D 9

Reception afterwards: Venue TBA

November 11: 13-16. Theme decided by workshop participants

Seminar room: F 702

November 25: 13-16. Theme decided by workshop participants

Seminar room: F 702

December 15: 10-12. Theme decided by workshop participants

December 15: 13-15. Discussion together with doctoral students participating in the workshop

Seminar room: F 702

December 16: 10-12. Discussion together with doctoral students participating in the workshop

December 16: 13-15. Theme to be jointly decided

Seminar room: F 702

RECOMMENDED BACKGROUND READING

• Chadwick, Andrew. (2006). Internet Politics: States, Citizens, and New Communication Technologies. New York: Oxford University Press.

• Buchanan, Mark. (2003). Nexus: Small Worlds and the Groundbreaking Science of Networks. New York: W.W. Norton; *or * Watts, Duncan J. (1999). Small Worlds: The Dynamics of Networks between Order and Randomness. Princeton studies in complexity. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.

• Jenkins, Henry. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York: New York University Press, (chapters 3, 6, 7).

JOINT WORKSHOP READINGS

• Benkler, Yochai. (2006). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven [Conn.]: Yale University Press. (chapters 3,4, 6, 7) (available online at http://www.benkler.org/Benkler_Wealth_Of_Networks.pdf).

• Bennett, W. Lance. (2003). Communicating Global Activism: Strengths and Vulnerabilities of Networked Politics. Information, Communication & Society. 6(2): 143-168.

• Bennett, W. Lance. (2005). Social Movements beyond Borders: Organization, Communication, and Political Capacity in Two Eras of Transnational Activism. In Donatella della Porta and Sidney Tarrow (eds.) Transnational Protest and Global Activism. Boulder CO: Rowman & Littlefield: 203-226.

• Bimber, Bruce, Flanagin, Andrew J., and Cynthia Stohl. (2005). Reconceptualizing Collective Action in the Contemporary Media Environment. Communication Theory, 15: 389 – 413.

• Chadwick, Andrew. (2009). Web 2.0: New Challenges for the Study of Democracy in an Era of Informational Exuberance. I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 5(1): 9-41.)

• Flanagin, Andrew J., Stohl, Cynthia & Bruce Bimber (2006). Modelling the Structure of Collective Action, Communication Monographs, Vol. 73, No. 1, pp. 29 – 54.

• Jenkins, Henry. (2007). Transmedia Storytelling 101. http://henryjenkins.org/2007/03/transmedia_storytelling_101.html

• Jenkins, Henry. (2009) The Revenge of the Origami Unicorn: Seven Principles of Transmedia Storytelling (http://henryjenkins.org/2009/12/the_revenge_of_the_origami_uni.html); + Revenge of the Orgami Unicorn: The Remaining Four Principles of Transmedia Storytelling. (http://henryjenkins.org/2009/12/revenge_of_the_origami_unicorn.html)

• Papacharissi, Zizi, (2010). A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age. Cambridge: Polity.

• Sunstein, Cass R. 2007. Republic.com 2.0. Princeton: Princeton University Press (chapters 1-6).

+ extracts to be distributed.

Advanced Analysis of Qualitative Data using Software

2250 Responsible: Polforsk, Professor Merete Watt Boolsen, University of Copenhagen & Dr. Christina Silver, University of Surrey
From: 2010/10/27 to: 2010/10/29
Subscription Deadline: 2010/09/20
Place: University of Copenhagen
Fee: 450 kr
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 3
Further information: sek@polforsk.dk

Requirements and course overview

This Ph.d course not only teaches you advanced use Computer Assisted Qualitative Data AnalysiS (CAQDAS), but also teaches how to integrate the use of CAQDAS into your Ph.d project and dissertation while taking the theory of science into consideration. It focuses on how to get the maximum advantage from using CAQDAS?

The course consists of two parts:
1. Introduction to Nvivo, October 15. This day is for Ph.d students who are not familiar with using NVivo. It takes place 12 days before the advanced part of the course so that participants can get hands-on experience with using NVivo before they participate in the advanced course. It is a requirement that participants bring with them a laptop with Nvivo already installed and fully working. A free trial of Nvivo 8 may be downloaded from:
http://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo_free-trial-software.aspx

It is recommended that at least one week before the course you check out that you can bring a computer with a working Nvivo installation. In case you have problems with this, please get hold on us at least one week before the course. If you intend to use the trial version of Nvivo, ensure that it will not expire before October 30.

The introduction day will teach you the basics about how to use Nvivo in your project. You will get an overview of the software and learn to prepare your data for Nvivo. Moreover, you will learn to make annotations, to search, to code, to recode, as well as to establish coding schemes and to retrieve data. However, you are expected to make yourself familiar with these concepts by studying ch. 1-8 of Lewins & Silvers book: "Using software in qualitative research".

 2. The advanced course, October 27-29. It is a condition for participating in this course that you have hand-on experience with using NVivo. If you do have such experience, you need not participate in the introduction day. It is a precondition that you bring a computer with a working NVivo installation. You are expected to be familiar with the concepts of annotations, searching, coding, recoding, code schemes and retrieval of data. If you are not, you must make yourself familiar with the concepts by studying ch. 1-8 of Lewins & Silver book. The course introduces advanced retrieval and coding schemes, as well as how to use memos to manage the writing process. The use of CAQDAS to handle literature and audio-visual data (e.g. TV-clips) is also introduced. To direct the attention to how Nvivo and other CAQDAS interface with your practical and theoretical work, Nvivo is compared to other CAQDAS packages. The purpose is also help Ph.d students make informed choices between CAQDAS packages for his/her project. The course focuses on Ph.d students’ own projects and helps them move towards advanced use of CAQDAS to interrogate data and make reports. Eventually, the use of CAQDAS is related to the methodological principles of grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative analysis, analysis of interviews.

Programme

27 th October 9am – 12pm

1pm – 4pm

Christina Silver : Using NVivo to analyse your data (Part Two) This session will consist of teacher input, discussions and hands-on work with software. During this session the tutors will spend time with each student to support work with their own data. 9am - 10.30am : Reminders and individual support The importance of memoing Coding schema structures : principles Advanced coding and retrieval 10.45am – 12pm : NVivo as a project management tool Using NVivo for your literature review Analysing audio-visual data using NVivo Autocoding for structure and content LITTERATURE: Ann Lewins and Christina Silver, 2007: Using Software in Qualitative Research. Sage. Chapters 9 – 12.

Ph.d-Presentations of projects and use of software in English. Your project will be discussed by the professors. By October 11 you must send a description of your project and data to the Polforsk secretariat – in English and max. 4 pages. The structure and content of your description should answer the following questions: (1) Problem under investigation (plus theory). (2) Time schedule of project. (3) Data collection and type of data: what data do you want to work with during the course? (4) your proposed analytic strategy (5) your previous experience, if any, with qualitative software With regard to feedback: CS will give feedback with regard to the relevance of using NVivo or other of the programmes that will be looked at during the course in each project.  MWB will give feedback with regard to (possible) theoretical and analytical methods in each project The feedback will be in writing (summarised) and put forward in a discussion ‘mode’ during the afternoon.

28 th October 9am – 12pm

1pm – 4pm

Christina Silver : Choosing the right software package for your study Discussion and demonstration of the range of software options available to support qualitative data analysis. These will be discussed in terms of practical utility and methodological contexts. Examples from students’ projects will be used to illustrate some of the differences. Software packages discussed include ATLAS.ti, MAXqda, NVivo, QDA Miner, and Transana. 9am – 9.30am : Overview of qualitative software options Principles of using qualitative software Summary of similarities and differences 9.30am – 12pm Demonstrations of Selected CAQDAS packages 9.30am – 10am : Demonstration of MAXqda 10am – 10.30am : Demonstration of ATLAS.ti 11am – 11.30am : Demonstration of QDA Miner 11.30am – 12pm : Demonstration of Transana Demonstrations will focus on distinguishing elements of each packages and are designed to provide a ‘flavour’ of each to enable students to make an informed choice. This session will be accompanied by documentation providing further written detail about differences between packages. LITTERATURE: Ann Lewins and Christina Silver, 2007: Using Software in Qualitative Research. Sage, Appendices. Also see http://caqdas.soc.surrey.ac.uk/softwareoptions.html for up-to-date reviews

Christina Silver : Using NVivo to analyse your data (Part Three) This session consists of teacher input, discussions and hands-on work with software. During this session the tutors will spend time with students to support work with their own data. 1pm – 2.30pm : Interrogation Moving forwards : using sets and models to theorize Interrogating the dataset using the Query Tool Representing data : Charts and Output functions Mapping ideas and organising data. 2.45pm – 4pm : Reminders, Questions and Discussion Reminders of key principles of qualitative software Reminders about early set-up procedures Questions from students Discussion of the value of NVivo for individual projects This session will be designed around the needs of students according to the work they have achieved working with NVivo so far. Each student will be asked to briefly outline the key ways in which they expect the software to facilitate their analysis and to ask any specific questions they may have. LITTERATURE: Ann Lewins and Christina Silver, 2007: Using Software in Qualitative Research. Sage. Chapters 9 – 12.

29 th October 9am – 12pm

1pm – 4pm

Christina Silver Discussion about the role of software in different project contexts, with a focus on audiovisual data and common qualitative approaches.:  Analysing audiovisual data using software : 9am – 12pm Discussion and demonstration of the range of software options for the analysis of audiovisual data. A critique of current options will be provided in the context of methodological approaches and practical needs. 9am – 10am Overview of software options for audiovisual analysis Similarities and differences between packages Critique of software tools 10.30am – 12pm Demonstration and Practice working with audiovisual data in NVivo Data Handling Data Analysis Data Representation

Merete Watt Boolsen: Ph.D. The role of software for qualitative data analysis in different research designs.: Different analytical theories applied: grounded theory, discourse analysis, narrative analysis, analysis of taped recorded interviews, etc. Examples of NVivo in research projects. LITTERATURE: Martin Bauer & George Gaskell, 2000: Qualitative Researching with text, image and sound. Sage. Part II. Pages 131-281 Summing up Conclusions and consequences for Ph.D. projects - where do you go from here? What are adequate next steps ... etc.

Literature overview

• Ann Lewins and Christina Silver, 2007: Using Software in Qualitative Research. Sage. Chapters 9 – 12 (can be purchased at this link: http://www.amazon.com/Using-Software-Qualitative-Research-Step/dp/0761949232)
  
• Ann Lewins and Christina Silver, 2007: Using Software in Qualitative Research. Sage, Appendices

• Martin Bauer & George Gaskell, 2000: Qualitative Researching with text, image and sound. Sage. Part II. Pages 131-281 (can be purchased at this link: http://www.amazon.com/Qualitative-Researching-Text-Image-Sound/dp/0761964819)
  

PLEASE NOTE:
POLFORSK WILL NOT MAKE A COMPENDIUM  FOR THIS COURSE AND YOU WILL HAVE AQQUIRE THE LITERATURE BY YOURSELF.

Deadlines

• Registration deadline is on the 20th September 2010
• Paper deadline is 6th October 2010
  

Dybdegående Analyse af Kvalitativt Materiale

2228 Responsible: Morten Brænder, Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet & Rasmus Brun Pedersen, Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet
From: 2010/11/01 to: 2010/11/22
Subscription Deadline: 2010/07/05
Place: Arhus Universitet
Link to full program: here
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 5
Further information: agg@ps.au.dk

KURSUSBESKRIVELSE

Nogle videnskabelige studier kan med fordel fokusere den empiriske analyse på en eller få cases, eller på et begrænset kvalitativt materiale, der analyseres ”i dybden”. Dette kan være en fordel, når der arbejdes eksplorativt, eller det kan være nødvendigt givet kompleksiteten af det fænomen, man studerer. Det er imidlertid ikke let at få systematiseret sådanne dybdegående analyser, og ofte sammensætter man sin analysestrategi, så den er tematisk relevant og bedst muligt kommer til bunds i det konkrete materiale.

FORELØBIG KURSUSPLAN

1. november 2010:

Introduktion: Single-case-studier og dybdegående analyse. Muligheder og begrænsninger ved dybdegående analyseteknikker. Målingsvaliditet som særligt relevant forskningskriterium i dybdegående kvalitative analyser.

8. november 2010:

Mening, praksis og teknikker til hermeneutisk orienterede analyser.

15. november 2010:

Tekstbegrebet og teknikker til dybdegående analyse af tekster / diskursanalyse.

22, november 2010:

Proces-tracing / analyser af historiske processer.

FORELØBIG LITTERATURLISTE

• Beck (2006). "Is Causal-Process Observation an Oxymoron?", Political Analysis, 14(2): 347-352.

• Bennett and Elman (2006). "Complex Causal Relations and Case Study Methods: The Example of Path Dependence." Political Analysis, 14(2): 250-267.

• Bennett (2006). "Stirring the Frequentist Pot with a Dash of Bayes", Political Analysis, 14(2): 339-344.

• Brady, Collier and Seawright (2006). "Towards a pluralist vision of methodology.", Political Analysis, 14(2): 353-368

• Fairclough, Normann (2003). Analyzing Discourse. Textual Analysis for Social Research, Oxon: Routledge.

• Fearon (1991). "Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science", World Politics, 43, Issue 2): 169-195.

• Feldman, Martha S. (1995). Strategies for Interpreting Qualitative Data, SAGE.

• Geertz, Clifford (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures, Basic Books, kap. 1, pp. 3-30.

• Laclau, Ernesto & Chantal Mouffe (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics, London: verso, kap. 3, pp. 93-148.

• Lebow (2000). "What's so different about a counterfactual?", World Politics, Issue 52(4, s. 550-585.

• Ricouer, Paul (1971). ”The Model of the Text: Meaningful Action Considered as a Text”, Social Research 38(3): 529-562

• Rueschemeyer "Can One or a few cases yield theoretical gains?" i Mahooney ogRueschemeyer, (red) Comparative Historical Analysis in the Social Sciences, kap. 9): 305-336.

• Charles Taylor (1979). ”Interpretation and the Sciences of Man”, in Rabinow, Paul & William M. Sullivan, Interpretive Social Science. A Reader, University of California Press, p. 25-72 (48 s.)

The Negotiation, Design and Implementation of Climate Agreements

2247 Responsible: MILEN
From: 2010/11/22 to: 2010/10/26
Link to full program: here
Further information: jon.hovi@stv.uio.no

Post- secular conditions - Challenges to citizenship, democracy, law and social cohesion

2198 Responsible: Christel Stormhøj and Anni Greve, The research group The significance of religion - from global to local. Department of Society and Globalisation, Roskilde University, Denmark
From: 2010/12/08 to: 2010/12/10
Subscription Deadline: 2010/11/10
Place: Roskilde University, Universitetsvej 1, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark.
Fee: DKK 600,-
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 3 (2)
Further information: anni@ruc.dk

Theme

Currently, the concepts of secularization and secularism are highly contested in the humanities and social sciences. Neither the concept of secularization, nor that of de-secularization is able to cover fully or to address our historical condition in all its dimensions. Moreover, the political doctrine of secularism, premised on the separation of powers, a separation that carves out a genuine political space said to be independent of religious norms, is questioned. Worldwide we are witnessing a resurgence of religion: faith communities and religious movements seem to be gaining political importance as contributors to the provision of moral, political and legal norms. Also in Europe, religious revivalism challenges the seemingly secular basis of the nation-states and their, albeit different, regimes for citizenship, democracy, law and social cohesion.

Thematic foci

Religion, citizenship, and democracy

Contemporary European societies are characterized by multi-religiosity and the co-existence of religious and secular groups and citizens. Secularism, which advocates a separation of politics and religion with reference to ideals of tolerance, impartiality, universality, liberty, and equality, has established a common and independent ground for public deliberation and contestation. Minority and majority religious groupings challenge the separation that constitutes an opposition between religion (private belief systems) and political citizenship (public domain) as they seek to influence the foundations of the polity. Increasingly, conflicts between religious and secular worldview, values and practices arise, such as conflicts around religious symbols in public spaces, women’s and gay’s equality rights, the right to free speech and the universality of human rights. Key themes are: Secular-religious conflicts; possible translations between religious and secular vocabularies; the relationship between secularism and democracy; and, the development of new citizenship identities that cut across the religious/secular divide

Religion and law relations

Western law is based on the normative approach of being secular, that is: without any religious influence. This understanding of law also seems to influence a global concept of ‘the rule of law’. This theme considers how modern distinctions between religious and secular categories form the basis of models that regulate law & religion systems in the Nordic countries, in Europe and worldwide. Recognizing that state-building in post-secular times also have normative underpinnings opens for a post-secular recognition of possible intertwinements within these categories with the possible consequence of being able to explore a role of religion in public legal spheres. There is thus a need of rethinking relations between state and religion to understand the practical and principal changes within the content of different dimensions of the legal system, and to reflect on how the concept of ‘rule of law’ might be defined in a new globalized and multi-religious context, concepts like ‘(soft) legal pluralism’ comes into the scope here.

Religion and the city

The modern city is the place in which the dynamics of religious attachment are revealed and expressed with greatest intensity and at the same time the locus for an international culture. How these two aspects interact is at focus. On the one hand the negative and threatening dimension of this interrelatedness: Religious fundamentalism as connected to a wider social construction of faith communities transmitted by trans-national religious networks; locally with the risk of ghettoization and disengagement, and globally with the risk of terrorism. On the other hand the positive and enabling dimension of this interrelatedness: Belief, faith and sacredness recognized as collective phenomena of utmost importance in running also modern societies; in particular to demonstrate the enduring importance of sanctuaries for coming to terms with modernity. Key themes are: Large cities as hotspots for split loyalties and demands; culture trauma and citizens attachment to sanctuaries; memory, desire and the sacred; and, the impact of new places of worship on the urban space.

Target group:

European PhD. students and other interested researchers within the field of sociology, law, culture studies, theology, gender studies, urban studies, and moral- and political philosophy

Max 25 participants

ECTS:

ECTS: Participation in the course: 3 ETCS

Presentation of paper: 2 ETCS (when the paper has been accepted)

Post doc’s and senior reseachers may participate with or without presenting a paper.

Deadlines:

Registration and abstract: Not later than 10 November 2010

Paper: Not later than 29 November 2010.

Accomodations:

Scandic Hotel - 7 km from Roskilde University - prices from 449 DKK

Motel Roskilde - 7 km from Roskilde University - prices from 300 DKK

Danholstel Roskilde - 7 km from Roskilde University - prices from 400 DKK

Arguments and Advances in Democratic Theory

2251 Responsible: Democracy: A Citizen Perspective (D:CE), Åbo Akademi University
From: 2010/12/13 to: 2010/12/16
Subscription Deadline: 2010/11/12
Place: Åbo Akademi University
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 5 / 2
Further information: maiset@utu.fi

The course will introduce the key concepts of the normative theory of democracy, such as individual rights, political equality and democratic participation. As democratic theory is currently dominated by theories of deliberative democracy, the course will focus on these theories. The theory of deliberative democracy is understood as a 'macro' theory which addresses questions pertaining to the state of democracy, such as the polarization of public opinion and disconnection between civil society and public decision-making. However, it is also maintained that the theory of deliberative democracy can be applied in the analysis of 'micro' processes, that is, communication in particular institutional and social contexts.

At the 'macro' level, the course looks at the prospects of democratic deliberation in modern societies. The representative model of democracy is currently challenged by the growing complexity of policy-making and increasing need for supra-national decision-making, which can also set hurdles for deliberative democracy. As a response to criticism of so-called consociational model of democracy, the prospects of deliberative democracy in multicultural and multinational societies are explored.

The course will also examine the possibility of analyzing the quality of public deliberation in various 'micro' contexts. Questions pertaining to the relationship between institutional design and democratic deliberation are dealt with. The final lecture of the course will analyze the prospects of so-called deliberative mini-publics to enhance democratic deliberation in policy-making and in civil society. It is argued that, in addition to the institutional context, deliberation at 'micro' level is likely to depend on such 'macro' level factors as the character of political conflicts at stake and the prevailing political culture.

THE SCHEDULE OF THE COURSE

The course will consist of 16 hours of lectures and 6 hours of seminar sessions where students' own papers will be discussed. Papers can either deal with purely theoretical issues or they can be more empirical papers applying democratic theoretical concepts and arguments. Participation in the course will give 2 ECTs, while participation and the presentation of a paper will give 5 ECTs. Students should, however, agree on their credit points with their own supervisors/home universities.

The course is coordinated by Dr. Maija Setälä (University of Turku). In addition to Setälä, the course is taught by Dr. André Bächtiger and Dr. Ian O'Flynn who will also act as commentators on students' papers at Thursday's seminar. Dr. Bächtiger has developed empirical measures of deliberation and was a part of a team introducing the Discourse Quality Index (DQI). Dr. O'Flynn has researched democratization and the possibilities of deliberative democracy in deeply divided societies. Dr. Setälä has studied various democratic innovations, including deliberative mini-publics.

The deadline for the registration for the course is Friday, the 12 of November. Registrations should be sent to Maija Setälä (maiset@utu.fi).

Monday, 13 December

13.00 14.30 Lecture 1 Introduction: From classical to confused democracy (Maija Setälä)

This lecture will review the conceptual history of democracy from the classical Athenian democracy to modern conception of representative democracy. Following Sartori (1987), it is argued that despite of the almost universal approval of democracy, the meaning of the concept is increasingly hard to define. Further, democratic theories contain a mix of description and prescription which further increases the risk of confusion.

15.00 16.30 Lecture 2 Key issues in modern democratic theory (Ian O'Flynn)

In recent years, democratic theorists have sought to respond to a range of political challenges - both to the idea of democracy itself and to its applicability in a rapidly changing world. This lecture will consider three such challenges. First, it will consider the vexed relationship between democracy and rights; secondly, it will consider the relationship between democracy, fairness and majority rule; and finally it will consider the idea of 'exporting' democracy to non-democratic states.

Tuesday, 14 December

9.00 10.30 Lecture 3 Deliberative turn in democratic theory (Ian O'Flynn)

This lecture will explore the origins of the recent 'deliberative turn' in democratic theory. Philosophically, it will contrast deliberative democracy with republican and liberal models of democracy and evaluate their respective strengths and weaknesses. Practically, it will consider the actual, empirical conditions that led to a revival of interest in deliberative democracy, and will conclude by reflecting on its future.

11.00 12.30 Lecture 4 Deliberation and democracy in modern political systems (Maija Setälä)

This lecture focuses on deliberative democracy as a macro-political system. Different models of the relationship between civil society and policy-making are reviewed, including those emphasizing deliberative democracy as a system based on "division of labour" and those emphasizing the connection between discourses in civil society and at policy-making forums. Further, the lecture will explore reasons for and consequences of the disconnection between the spheres of civil society and policy-making.

14.00 15.30 Lecture 5 What does deliberative democracy have to offer multicultural and multinational societies? (Ian O'Flynn)

In this lecture, we will consider how deliberative theory might help to deepen democratic politics in multicultural and multinational societies. In particular, we will consider the ways in which deliberative norms and principles might shape the design of democratic institutions in ways that might make them more inclusive of minority views. We will also consider how deliberative democracy might encourage the members of particular groups to take a broader view of political decisions than merely consulting their own sectional interests in them.

Wednesday, 15 December

9.00 10.30 Lecture 6 Measuring the quality of deliberation (André Bächtiger)

The empirical turn in deliberative democracy has generated a need for measuring the extent and quality of deliberation by social science methodology. In the past decade, three major instruments have been developed to measure the quality of the deliberative process: speech act analysis (Holzinger 2001), the Discourse Quality Index (DQI; Steenbergen et al. 2003; Bächtiger et al. 2010) and Stromer-Galley's (2007) coding scheme for measuring deliberation's content. These instruments have been applied to a wide variety of settings, including parliamentary debates, expert and citizen fora, as well as experimental communication in deliberative polls. In this lecture, we will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the different measurement instruments and apply them to a concrete example.

11.00 12.30 Lecture 7 Deliberative democracy and the design of institutions (André Bächtiger)

One key challenge in deliberative theory consists of the fact that deliberative ideas are still not clearly defined as far as practical realization is concerned. In this regard, institutions have always contained the idea that political institutions can influence actors' behavior in normatively attractive ways. According to Mark Warren and Hilary Pearse (2008) institutions "are the kinds of things that can be changed directly, whereas cultures and psychological dispositions are less subject to collective intervention and experimentation". In this lecture, we shall discuss whether institutional design can promote desired deliberative ideals in the political and civic sphere. At the same time, we shall explore the effects of rival factors on deliberation, especially cultural and psychological variables.

14.00 15.30 Lecture 8 Democratic innovations (Maija Setälä)

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in so-called democratic innovations. Graham Smith (2009, 1) defines democratic institutions as "institutions that have been specifically designed to increase and deepen citizen participation in the political decision-making process". This lecture will provide an overview of different types of democratic innovations, with specific focus on so-called democratic mini-publics. The lecture analyses different designs of mini-publics as well as their prospects to enhance democratic deliberation in policy-making and in civil society.

Thursday, 16 December

9.00 10.30 Seminar session I

11.00 12.30 Seminar session II

14.00 15.30 Seminar session III

LITERATURE:

Lecture 1 Introduction: From classical to confused democracy

Dahl, Robert A. (1989): Democracy and its Critics. New Haven & London: Yale University Press, parts 1-4 and 6.

Sartori, Giovanni (1987): The Theory of Democracy Revisited. Chatham, N.J.: Chatham House Publishers, chapter 1.

Lecture 2 Key issues in modern democratic theory

Habermas, J. (2001): Constitutional Democracy: A Paradoxical Union of Contradictory Principles?, Political Theory 29(6): 766-781.

Jones, P. (1983): Political Equality and Majority Rule. In David Miller & Larry Siedentop (eds): The Nature of Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 155-182.

Archibugi, D. (2008): The Global Commonwealth of Citizens: Toward Cosmopolitan Democracy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 206-225.

Lecture 3 Deliberative turn in democratic theory

Habermas, J. (1994): Three Normative Models of Democracy. Constellations, 1 (1): 1-10. (Reprinted in J. Habermas (2000): The Inclusion of the Other (Trans. C. Cronin and P. De Greiff). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 239-252.)

Dryzek, J. (2000): Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1-30.

Bohman, J. (1998): Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 6 (4): 400425.

Thompson, D. (2008): Deliberative Democratic Theory and Empirical Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science, 11: 497-520.

Lecture 4 Deliberation and democracy in modern societies

Chambers, Simone (2009): Rhetoric and the Public Sphere. Political Theory, 37: 323-350.

Dryzek, John (2000): Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gutmann, Amy; Thompson, Dennis (1996): Democracy and Disagreement. Harvard: Belknap Press, chapters 1-4.

Sunstein, Cass R (2002): The Law of Group Polarization. The Journal of Political Philosophy 10 (2): 175-195.

Lecture 5 What does deliberative democracy have to offer multicultural and multinational societies?

Deveaux, M. (2003): A Deliberative Approach to Conflicts of Culture. Political Theory 31 (6): 780-807.

Noel, A. (2006): Democratic Deliberation in a Multinational Federation. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 9 (3): 419444.

O'Flynn, Ian (2007): Review Article: Divided Societies and Deliberative Democracy. British Journal of Political Science, 37 (4): 731-751.

Festenstein, M. (2005): Negotiating Diversity: Culture, Deliberation, Trust. Cambridge: Polity, pp. 119-136.

Lecture 6 Measuring the quality of deliberation

Steenbergen, Marco R., André Bächtiger, Markus Spörndli, and Jürg Steiner (2003): Measuring Political Deliberation. A Discourse Quality Index. Comparative European Politics 1: 21-48.

Holzinger, Katharina (2005): Bargaining by Arguing. An Empirical Analysis Based on Speech Act Theory. Political Communication 21: 195-222.

Lecture 7 Deliberative democracy and the design of institutions

Bächtiger, André and Dominik Hangartner (2010): When Deliberative Theory Meets Political Science. Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in the Study of a Philosophical Ideal. Political Studies, forthcoming.

Goodin, Robert E. (1996): Institutionalizing the Public Interest: The Defense of Deadlock and Beyond. American Political Science Review 90: 331-43.

Landwehr, Claudia and Katharina Holzinger (2010): Institutional Determinants of Deliberative Interaction. European Political Science Review, forthcoming.

Lecture 8 Democratic innovations

Fung, Archon (2003): Survey Article: Recipes for Public Spheres: Eight Institutional Design Choices and Their Consequences. The Journal of Political Philosophy 11: 338-367.

Grönlund, Kimmo; Setälä, Maija; Herne, Kaisa (2010): Deliberation and Civic Virtue -

Lessons from a Citizen Deliberation Experiment, European Political Science Review 2 (1): 95-117.

Smith, Graham (2009): Democratic Innovations. Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-110.