Good Research Questions and Appropriate Frameworks
Responsible: Georg Sørensen & Kasper Lippert Rasmussen, Department of Political Science, University of Aarhus
From: 2010/01/26 to: 2010/03/03
Registration Deadline: 2010/01/06
Place: Department of Political Science, University of Aarhus
ECTS (Get approval from your own department!!!): 5
Short description: This course wants to emphasize the necessity and core relevance of problem-driven and theory-driven research as crucial undertakings in the study of politics. In so doing the course raises a series of metatheoretical and other issues relevant for any research project. It will help students clarify what kind of ambitions and directions are the most productive and helpful ones in their own research. It will also elucidate major aspects of the ontological and epistemological context that is necessary for any project.
Lecturers: Georg Sørensen & Kasper Lippert Rasmussen, Department of Political Science, University of Aarhus
Further information: agg@ps.au.dk
Georg Sørensen & Kasper Lippert Rasmussen Department of Political Science, University of Aarhus
This course wants to emphasize the necessity and core relevance of
problem-driven and theory-driven research as crucial undertakings in
the study of politics. In so doing the course raises a series of
metatheoretical and other issues relevant for any research project. It
will help students clarify what kind of ambitions and directions are
the most productive and helpful ones in their own research. It will
also elucidate major aspects of the ontological and epistemological
context that is necessary for any project.Good Research Questions and Appropriate Frameworks
Time: 10.00-12.30 on the following days:
26 January • 3 February • 10 February • 17 February • 24 February • 3 March
COURSE DESCRIPTION
How to do the best possible political science— what are the criteria
for a successful project? Do those criteria concern the employment of
certain methods, the engagement with particular substantial issues, or
are some other criteria more relevant? In recent years, there has been
a tendency to focus on the employment of a certain set of methods;
those methods, in turn, are frequently reduced to techniques that most
often concern various aspects of data processing.
We want to argue that any research project should begin with
theoretically informed questions about substantial issues. This can be
called problem-driven and theory-driven research. Such research has
room for all kinds of methodologies of course, but it sets those
methodologies in a larger framework which reflects on theory,
substance, and the choice of appropriate approaches.
COURSE
PLAN
26 January
2010
1. Where does a good research question come from? The debate about
research design in political science and the possible advantages of a
study driven by problems and theory rather than
method.
• Rogers Smith (2002). ‘Should we make political science more of a
science or more about politics?’, PS, Political Science and Politics,
35(2): 199-204.
• Susanne Hoeber Rudolph (2002): ‘In defense of diverse forms of knowledge’, PS, Political Science and Politics, 35(2): 193-97.
• Robert Keohane (2003). ‘Disciplinary Schizophrenia: Implications for
graduate education in political science’, Qualitative Methods, Spring,
9-12.
• Samuel Barkin (2007). ‘What defines research as qualitative?’, International Studies Review, 9: 754-58.
• Gerry Stoker and David Marsh (2002). ‘Introduction’, pp. 1-17 in
Stoker and Marsh (eds), Theory and Methods in Political Science,
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Richard Snyder (2007). ‘The Human Dimension of Comparative Research’,
PP. 1-31 in GL Munck and R Snyder, Passion, Craft, and Method in
Comparative Politics, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins. Student assignment:
write a 2-3-page essay on the basis of the major sources of the
research question(s) you intend to explore. Reflect briefly on what are
the best sources of good research
questions.
3 February 2010
2. Ontology and epistemology: where do I belong and why? We take the
cue from Samuel Barkin: “We should begin with the principles of
epistemology, methodology, and research design. The major issues
confronting political science scholars do not correlate with a
quantitative/qualitative design” and from Robert Keohane: “Ontology
suggests that students should study contingency, unintended
consequences of historical conjunctures, leadership, and models of
complexity. … Be broad – work across subfields … think about concepts
and theorizing before grabbing operational indicators and running
regressions”. In other words, we need the broadest possible ideas about
our options in terms of interesting questions and different ways of
approaching them.
• David Marsh and Paul Furlong (2002). ‘A Skin not a sweater: Ontology
and Epistemology in Political Science’, pp. 17-45 in Stoker and Marsh
(eds), Theory and Methods in Political Science, Basingstoke: Palgrave
Macmillan.
• Jonathon Moses and Torbjørn Knutsen (2007). ‘Introduction’, pp 1-19
in Moses and Knutsen, Ways of Knowing, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Steve Smith (1995). ‘The self-images of a discipline: A genealogy of
international relations theory’, pp. 1-37 in Ken Booth & Steve
Smith (eds), International Relations Theory Today, Pennsylvania: Penn
State University
Press.
• Atul Kohli, Peter Evans, Peter Katzenstein, Adam Przeworski, Susanne
H. Rudolph, James C. Scott, Theda Skocpol (1996). ‘The role of theory
in comparative politics: A Symposium’ World Politics, 48(1): 1-49.
Student assignment: write a 2-3-page essay situating your project in
the ontological and epistemological landscape; why have you made these
choices?
10 February 2010
3. Values in political science: Values have an uncertain and contested
place in political science. On the one hand, like ontological
assumptions, value assumptions play an important and ineradicable role
in political science. Clearly, epistemic values do as well when
political scientists favor one explanation over another because it is
more fruitful, more economical, or, for other reasons, better.
Moreover, moral values often define, and legitimately so, research
questions asked and explanations offered (as when moral values lie
behind the sorting of different causally relevant conditions into
causes, on the one hand, and background factors, on the other hand). On
the other hand, many political scientists believe that values, unlike
facts, express mere personal preferences, are not truth-apt, and in the
end cannot be discussed rationally. This session explores this tension.
It offers illustration of the different ways in which values
assumptions play a role in political science and reflects on the extent
to which such influence is avoidable and illegitimate. Also, it offers
a brief survey of some of the recent reflections on the epistemic
justifiability of value judgments.
• Daniels, N. (1979). ‘Wide Reflective Equilibrium and Theory Acceptance in Ethics' Journal of Philosophy, 76(5): 256-82.
• Mackie, J. Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong, excerpts.
• Brink, David (1989). Moral Realism and the Foundation of Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, excerpts.
• Various brief excerpts from political science articles etc.
• Myrdal, Gunnar (1969). Objectivity in Social Research, New York: Pantheon Books.
Student assignment: Identify one or more value assumptions that seem to
underpin your research project. Reflect on how it(/they)
influences(/influence) your project and whether this influence is
problematic.( 2-3 page essay).
17 February 2010
4. Are there benefits of mixing it up? In recent years a number of
scholars argue in favour of some form of eclecticism, mixing approaches
coming from different traditions. Others argue that this is an
impossible undertaking because once a certain framework is adopted it
excludes other frameworks based on different premises and assumptions.
Where should we stand on this?
• Sanford F Schram (forthcoming). Political Science Research: From
Theory to Practice, International Encyclopedia of Political Science
• Nuno P. Monteiro and Keven G. Ruby (2009). ‘IR and the false promise
of philosophical foundations’, International Theory, 1(1): 15-48.
• Peter Katzenstein and Rudra Sil (2008). ‘Theorizing in the Study and
Practice of International Relations’, pp. 109-31 in C. Reus-Smit and D.
Snidal, The Oxford Handbook of International Relations, Oxford: OUP.
• Jack Levy (2001). ‘Explaining Events and Developing Theories:
History, Political Science, and the Analysis of International
Relations’, pp. 39-83 i C. Elman and MF Elman, Bridges and Boundaries,
Cambridge: MIT.
• Georg Sørensen (2008). ‘The Case for Combining Material Forces and
Ideas in the Study of IR’, European Journal of International Relations,
14(5): 5-32.
• Jörg Friedrichs and Friedrich Kratochwil (2009). ‘On Acting and
Knowing: How Pragmatism Can Advance International Relations Research
and Methodology’, International Organization, 63(Fall): 701-31.
Student assignment: Are you mixing up your project in terms of
combining different approaches and theories from different traditions?
Why or why not? Write a 2-3- page essay on the subject.
24 February 2010
5. Major contributions in political science: What did they say and how
did they say it? This session looks at some of the most quoted
contributions to our discipline over the last 25 years, seeking to
clarify their qualities in terms of problem- focus, ontological and
epistemological foundation, use of theory and method, etc.
• Francis Fukuyama (1989). ‘The end of history?’ The National Interest.
• Samuel Huntington (1993). ‘The Clash of Civilizations?’, Foreign Affairs
• Terry Moe (1984). ’The New Economics of Organization’, http://www.jstor.org/stable/2110997
• Charles Taylor (1994). ’The Politics of Recognition’, in Amy Gutmann
(ed), Examining the Politics of Recognition, Princeton: Princeton UP.
• Pierre Bordieu (1997). ‘I statens ånd’, pp. 97-135 i Bordieu, Af praktiske grunde, København: Hans Reitzel.
Student assignment: Which of these contributions is the best and why? 2-3 page essay.
3 March 2010
6. Defining your own contribution: What do I have to say and how will I
say it? This session uses your own work as basis. You must provide a
2-3 page overview defining your project and thedebate to which you want
to contribute. The samples will be discussed in light of the seminars’
insights on problems, theory, and method.
• Stephen van Evera: ‘Helpful hints on writing a political science
dissertation’, pp. 97-128 in Guide to methods for students of political
science, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
• Papers from students, 4-5 pp.
Registration
Tilmelding til alle kurser senest 6. januar 2010
Tilmeldingsskema på
http://www.samfundsvidenskab.au.dk/da/forskning/phd-skolen/fagligeprogrammer/statskundskab/kurser/kurser-foraar-2010/
Yderligere oplysninger kan fås hos:
Anne-Grethe Gammelgaard • Institut for Statskundskab • Aarhus Universitet •
Bartholins Allé • Bygning 1331 • 8000 Århus C