Kvalitativt metodekursus A: Caseudvælgelse og indsamling af kvalitativt materiale

2171 Responsible: Gitte Sommer Harrits og Derek Beach, Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet
From: 2009/09/18 to: 2009/10/09
Subscription Deadline: 2009/07/03
Place: Aarhus University
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 5
Further information: agg@ps.au.dk

Tid: Kl. 10.15-15.00 på følgende dage: 18. september 25. september  2. oktober  9. oktober 2009

Foreløbig kursusplan

18. september 2009

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

25. september 2009

Teknikker til caseudvælgelse.

2. oktober 2009

Planlægning og gennemførelse af kvalitative interviews, herunder eliteinterview.

9. oktober 2009

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.

Kurser i kvalitative metoder

I efteråret 2009 udbyder Institut for Statskundskab tre kurser i kvalitative metoder. Kurserne kan med fordel følges i forlængelse af hinanden, men de kan også tages enkeltvis. Hvert af de tre kurser giver 5 ECTS. Undervisningen ligger i alle tilfælde fredag fra 10.15-15.00 (inkl. 1 times frokostpause).

Kurserne fokuserer på at forbedre deltagernes forskningsmæssige og praktiske færdigheder. Derfor skal deltagerne løbende bruge de gennemgåede metoder på konkrete politologiske problemstillinger. På hvert kursus løser deltagerne to opgaver skriftligt. Underviserne giver en faglig tilbagemelding på hver opgave, herunder om den kan godkendes, men der gives ikke karakter.

Aktiv deltagelse og aflevering samt godkendelse af de to skriftlige opgaver er en forudsætning for, at kurset bestås. Der er ingen yderligere eksamen.

Såfremt der er plads, fyldes kurserne op med overbygningsstuderende, men det faglige niveau sættes efter, at deltagerne efter kurserne på kvalificeret vis skal kunne lave en ph.d.-afhandling med brug af de på kurset gennemgåede metoder. Undervisningen er lagt an på, at kursisternes eget materiale og egne problemstillinger spiller en stor rolle. Kurset egner sig derfor bedst for kursister, der er i gang med eller står overfor at skulle lave et større videnskabeligt arbejde (ph.d. afhandling eller speciale). Undervisning og opgaver vil blive differentieret efter deltagernes forudsætninger og forskningsfelt.

Tilmeldingsskema på
http://www.samfundsvidenskab.au.dk/da/forskning/phd/faglige-programmer/statskundskab/kurser/kurser-efteraar-2009/

Videregående kvantitative metoder

2174 Responsible: Rune Stubager og Søren Risbjerg Thomsen, Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet
From: 2009/09/24 to: 2009/12/03
Subscription Deadline: 2009/07/03
Place: Aarhus University
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 10
Further information: agg@ps.au.dk

For at kunne forstå og anvende avancerede kvantitative metoder er det ofte nødvendigt at have et vist kendskab til det matematiske og statistiske grundlag for metoderne. Dette grundlag er der desværre sjældent mulighed for at arbejde med i den almindelige metodeundervisning. Kurset her er tilrettelagt med henblik på at fylde dette hul i undervisningen. Kurset giver således en introduktion til anvendelse af videregående statistiske metoder til samfundsvidenskabelig dataanalyse. Vægten lægges på en indføring i det matematiske og sandsynlighedsteoretiske grundlag for disse metoder. Kurset giver færdigheder som muliggør, at deltageren efterfølgende i vidt omfang kan tilegne sig mere avancerede metoder på egen hånd eller ved deltagelse i mere avancerede kurser. Kurset forudsætter i øvrigt ikke matematiske eller statistiske færdigheder ud over, hvad der opnås i gymnasiet og ved at gennemføre metode med statistik på grunduddannelsen. Deltagerne kan med fordel opfriske deres matematiske færdigheder vha. ”Matematik for Statskundskabsstuderende, 3. udg.” (Institut for Statskundskab, Århus Universitet, 2008) og deres statistiske færdigheder fx vha. Gujarati (DNG), kapitel 1-5 eller Agresti og Finlay.

Kurset gennemføres over ni uger med fire sammenhængende timer om ugen, hvor de første tre timer bruges til egentlig undervisning og den sidste time bruges til praktiske øvelser med anvendelse af programpakken STATA med vejledning i edb-undervisningslokalet. Deltagerne får hver uge (undtagen den sidste uge) nogle praktiske opgaver, som det forventes, at man løser inden den næste undervisningsgang. Fire af disse opgavesæt er obligatoriske og skal afleveres senest mandag kl. 12 inden næste undervisning. Hver uge (undtagen den første uge) gennemgås først den foregående uges opgaver, evt. med inddragelse af de afleverede opgaver. Dernæst gennemgås pensum, og der gives oplæg til øvelserne og næste uges opgaver. Deltagelsen i edb-øvelserne i den sidste time er frivillig, da den er beregnet på de deltagere, som har særlig brug for øvelsesvejledning.

Kurset bestås ved at man består alle fire hjemmeopgaver.

Tid: Kl. 10.00-14.00 på følgende dage: 24. september, 1. oktober, 8. oktober, 29. oktober, 5. november, 12. november, 19. november, 26. november, 3. december 2009

Foreløbig kursusplan

Pensum i parentes skal læses inden undervisningen.

24. september 2009:

Sandsynligheds- og fordelingsteori. Fordelingsanalyse (DNG, Appendix A). Introduktion til STATA.

1. oktober 2009:

Vector og matrix operationer ved multivariat analyse (CGC: kap. 1-2;

DNG: Appendix B). Obligatorisk opgave 1 udleveres.

8. oktober 2009:

Geometrisk fortolkning af multivariat analyse (CGC: kap. 3-4).

29. oktober 2009:

Klassisk regressionsanalyse (CGC, kap. 6, afsnit 1-3. DNG: Appendix C).
Obligatorisk opgave 2 udleveres.

5. november 2009:

Videregående regressionsanalyse (DNG: kap. 10-11).

12. november 2009:

Faktoranalyse (CGC, kap. 5, kap. 6, afsnit 4). Obligatorisk opgave 3 udleveres.

19. november 2009:

Stokastiske processer (DNG: kap. 12-13).

26. november 2009:

Kategoriske respons-modeller (DNG: kap. 15). Obligatorisk opgave 4 udleveres.

3. december 2009:

Introduktion til mere avancerede metoder (Kursorisk læsning: DNG: kap. 18-21).

Litteratur

• CGC: J. Douglas Carroll, Paul E. Green, and Anil Chaturvedi, Mathematical Tools for Applied Multivariate Analysis, Revised Edition, Academic Press, 1997.

• DNG: Damodar N. Gujarati, Basic Econometrics, Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill, 2003.

Der vil endvidere blive udleveret supplerende artikler og noter.

Tilmeldingsskema på
http://www.samfundsvidenskab.au.dk/da/forskning/phd/faglige-programmer/statskundskab/kurser/kurser-efteraar-2009/

Analysis of Employment policies – European employment policies and changes in national governance and implementation structures

2180 Responsible: Flemming Larsen, Aalborg University
From: 2009/10/05 to: 2009/10/07
Subscription Deadline: 2009/09/23
Place: Aalborg University (CARMA, Centre for labour market studies)
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 3
Further information: sek@polforsk.dk

The course consists of two interrelated parts on European employment policies: “European integration and diversity” and the analysis of some of the common trends in the recent changes in governance and implementations structures in the public employment services also related to organisational practises: “The interrelation between changes in employment policies and new governance and implementation structures”

Part 1: European integration and national diversity

Few would disagree that the European integration project is having big difficulties at the moment. You must take account of growing Euro-scepticism and political and social resistance. The relationship between European policy developments and decisions and policy programmes at the national level is decisive as to the future of the European integration. The economic dimension of this – the “negative integration” (to use the wordings of Fritz W. Scharpf) – is not challenged seriously compared to the political and social aspects – the “positive integration”. The different national social protection systems and the policies giving profile to these do not comply easily with common European policy programmes developed during the last 10-15 years. Legally, the Member States have discretionary power in respect to social and labour market policies and when describing existing social protection systems diversity must be stressed. European policy developments since the mid-1990´es do, however, represent efforts to place common policies at the forefront – also by the use of a new decision method: The Open Method of Coordination (OMC). But tensions between the national and the European level are to be recorded; and they must be explained. This is also what we will try to deliver within this part of the Ph.D. course.

Interventions:

European industrial relations and labour market policy systems (Henning Jørgensen, CARMA, Aalborg University))

The European Employment Strategy, OMC and Employment Friendly Policies (Henning Jørgensen, CARMA, Aalborg University)

Taking stock of the Lisbon strategy from a social, political and economic point of view. (Université Paris 1 CNRS Centre d’économie de la Sorbonne)

The European Integration Process: The political-cultural dimension (Université Paris 1 CNRS Centre d’économie de la Sorbonne)

Flexicurity and the European Employment Strategy (Per Kongshøj Madsen, CARMA, Aalborg University)

Part 2: The interrelation between changes in employment policies and new governance and implementation structures

This part of the course deals with the question why and how transformation of employment and social policy is linked to changes in governance and implementation systems. Most would agree that changing from passive to active employment and social policies will have far-reaching consequences for the public agencies involved in the provision of services for unemployed, and that the same agencies are often seen as a major obstacle to making this policy shift happen as they have traditionally, to some extent, been able to control the implementation process. But the process could also be analysed the other way around: Policy shifts can also be initiated by changes in governance and implementation structures, both deliberately and unintentionally, and this calls for new ways of understanding the interaction between policy making and implementation in this field. The relation between reforms of the public employment services and policy shifts in employment and social policies call for more in-depth analyses. This part of the course shall try to deliver the first attempt to do so.

Interventions:

“Reforming the governance of activation policies in Europe” (Rik Van Berkel, Utrecht University)

“How new governance and operational reforms can transform employment policies towards work-first – Lessons from the implementation of employment policies in the Danish municipalities” (Flemming Larsen,

"From activation policies to activation practices - A Dutch case study of policy
reforms, governance reforms and implementation" (Rik Van Berkel, Utrecht University)

Deadline for submission of papers:  September 23. Applicants with papers will be preferred. Papers should be between 8 to 15 pages in length and address topics related to the themes of the course. Each paper will be commented on by one of the other Ph.D.-students and by one of the invited keynote speakers

Studying Politics, Society and International Relations of the Middle East: Analytical and theoretical challenges

2094 Responsible: The Danish Institute for International Studies (DIIS) and the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies in Cairo. And it is supported by the Danish Egyptian Dialogue Institute in Cairo.
From: 2009/10/05 to: 2009/10/09
Subscription Deadline: 2009/08/30
Place: The first part of the course takes place at DIIS, Strandgade 56, 1401 Copenhagen K.
Fee: -
Further information: kpu@diis.dk

Aim

The course has a two-fold objective:

• Firstly, it seeks to address concrete analytical and theoretical challenges which participants experience in relation to their own thesis, and to discuss the empirical implications of the analytical choices made.

• Secondly, it intends to foster fruitful networks among Ph.D.-students and scholars from Denmark and Egypt; introducing young academics to leading scholars and academic institutions in Denmark and in Egypt.

Content and organization

The course has both an empirical and an analytical dimension. The main focus is on questions of analytics related to the participants' specific empirical fields. These may deal with either society; politics or international relations of the Middle East.

During the course there will be two student presentations and two lectures by recognized scholars each day. The course proceeds by a combination of student presentations and discussions between the invited speakers and the participating students. The course asks students as well as the keynote speakers to present their research topic, and in particularly to reflect on "how to questions" and their related ramifications for their field of study.

Prior to the course all participants will distribute a short written paper that specifies the overall research problématique of his/her thesis, and the main analytical challenges, which the participants currently confront (This might be partly based on the students original Ph.D.-project description). Each paper will be commented on by one of the other Ph.D.-students and by one of the invited keynote speakers.

Invited keynote speakers:

Dietrich Jung
Stefano Guzzini
Sune Haugbølle
Morten Valbjørn
Dina Shehada
Hanaa Ebeid
Lars Erslev Andersen
Helle Malmvig
Laurence Louer
Ian Manners
Michael Hudson (not confirmed)

The invited speakers will cover several thematic fields and disciplines - in part dependent on the projects of the selected Ph.D.-students. These themes may include the role of political Islam, the new security architecture of the Middle East, EU relations with the Mediterranean/Middle East, terrorism, political and democratic reform, new transnational actors, ideologies and media in the Middle East or proliferation of WMD.

The invited speakers are explicitly asked to reflect on some of the main analytical/methodological questions, which they currently grabble with in their own research, and what kind of implications their analytic has for the conclusions reached. The course strives in this way to create a stimulating platform for analytical dialogue and reflection between scholars and students. It therefore requires active participation and should not be seen as a mere introduction to different methods and theories of the Social Sciences.

Conditions and requirements

The course is open to Ph.D.-students enrolled at Universities in Denmark who are working within the broad fields of Political Science, International Relations, Sociology and Area Studies. Applicants should, however, have a focus on the Middle East/relations with the Middle East.

The course is open to five Ph.D.-students from Denmark and five from Egypt. The limited number of places should allow sufficient time for reflection and discussion of the Ph.D.-students' own projects. Students should commit themselves to both courses in Copenhagen and Cairo.

Students should register for the course no later than August the 30^th by mail to Research Assistant Karina Pultz kpu@diis.dk The registration should include the title and main question of the thesis, in addition to a short justification for why the student wishes to participate in this particular course.

Other practicalities

This course is supported by Danish Egyptian Dialogue Institute (DEDI), Danish Institute of International Studies (DIIS) and is offered free of charge. The first part of the course takes place at DIIS, Strandgade 56, 1401 Copenhagen K.

The course will include some social and cultural events in the evening.

Introduktion til komparativ forskning og komparative metoder

2175 Responsible: Jørgen Møller og Svend-Erik Skaaning Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet
From: 2009/10/06 to: 2009/11/24
Subscription Deadline: 2009/07/03
Place: Aarhus University
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 10
Further information: agg@ps.au.dk

Tid: Kl. 8.00-13.00 på følgende dage: 6. oktober, 13. oktober, 20. oktober, 27. oktober, 3. november, 10. november, 17. november, 24. november 2009

Tilmeldingsskema på
http://www.samfundsvidenskab.au.dk/da/forskning/phd/faglige-programmer/statskundskab/kurser/kurser-efteraar-2009/

"Hvad ved han om England, der kun kender England?” Sådan lyder en af den engelske forfatter Rudyard Kiplings berømte udsagn. Pointen er, at enhver vurdering altid er relativ i den forstand, at den afhænger af en implicit målestok. I dette kombinerede Ph.d.-kursus og kandidatseminar skal vi stifte bekendtskab med værktøjer, der kan bruges i forbindelse med eksplicitte forklaringer af ligheder og forskelle mellem lande.

En systematisk brug af den komparative tilgang kræver systematiske konceptualiseringer og operationaliseringer af de teoretisk relevante begreber. Første del af forløbet forsøger at besvare spørgsmålene ”hvorfor sammenligne?” og ”hvad kan sammenlignes?” Deltagerne vil her blive præsenteret for generaliseringsstigen, logikken bag klassifikationer og typologier samt redskaber og særlige problemer knyttet til operationalisering af komplekse begreber på tværs af forskellige kontekster.

I forløbets anden og tredje del bevæger vi os videre til en systematisk introduktion af forskellige ikke-statistiske komparative metoder. Deltagerne skal her først diskutere most-similar-systems design, most-different-systems design og komparativ historisk sociologi. Derefter vil deltagerne blive introduceret til logikken bag og den praktiske anvendelse af nyere tilgange i form af typologisk teori, crisp-set og fuzzy-set QCA samt mixed-methods strategier. Endelig vil deltagerne få mulighed for at præsentere og diskutere metodiske styrker og svagheder ved egne projekter (afhandling, speciale eller seminaropgave).

Forløbet består af otte 4-5 timers sessioner. De inkluderer almindeligvis praktiske øvelser, der skal gøre deltagerne i stand til selv at anvende de omtalte metoder. Der forventes aktiv deltagelse i seminaret, herunder deltagelse i de praktiske øvelser. Forløbet afsluttes ikke med en egentlig eksamen, men der er obligatoriske små hjemmeopgaver knyttet til de enkelte emner.

Kursusplan

Session 1 (4 timer) 6. oktober, kl. 9-13

• Hvorfor sammenligne? Hvad kan sammenlignes? Hvordan sammenligne?

Session 2 (4 timer) 13. oktober, kl. 9-13

• Begrebshåndtering og måling af komplekse begreber

Session 3 (4 timer) 20. oktober, kl. 9-13

• Typologisk teori og komparative historiske analyser

Session 4 (4 timer) 27. oktober, kl. 9-13

• Empiriske eksempler på komparative analyser

Session 5 (5 timer) 3. november, kl. 8-13

• Crisp set QCA

Session 6 (5 timer) 10. november, kl. 8-13

• Fuzzy-set QCA

Session 7 (4 timer) 17. november, kl. 9-13

• ‘Mixed-methods’ strategier og kausalitet i komparativ forskning

Session 8 (5 timer) 24. november, kl. 8-13

• Diskussion af komparative aspekter ved egne forskningsprojekter

Foreløbig liste over emner og litteratur

1. Hvorfor sammenligne? Hvad kan sammenlignes? Hvordan sammenligne?

• Sammenligne for at kontrollere

• Sammenligne via egenskaber ikke objekter

• Fra logiske betragtninger til nyttebetragtninger

• Overblik over komparative metoder

• Gerring, John (2001). Social Science Methodology: A Critical Framework, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 200-229.

• Mahoney, James (2004). ”Comparative-Historical Methodology”, Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 30, pp. 81-101.

• Ragin, Charles (1987). The Comparative Method, Berkeley: University of California, pp. 1-18.

• Sartori, Giovanni (1991). “Comparing and Miscomparing”, Journal of Theoretical Politics, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 243-257.

2. Begrebshåndtering og måling af komplekse begreber

• Abstraktionsniveauer og generaliseringsstigen

• Forskellige typer af begreber

• ‘Rejse’-problematikken, udstrækning af begreberne

• Fra begreber til måling og aggregering

• Trade-offs i komparativ forskning

• Adcock, Robert & David Collier (2001). ”Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research”, American Political Science Review, Vol. 95, No. 3, pp. 529-546.

• Collier, David & James E. Mahon, Jr. (1993). “Conceptual ‘Stretching’ Revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis”, American Political Science Review, Vol. 87, No. 4, pp. 845-855.

• Gerring, John (2001). Social Science Methodology: A Critical Framework, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 35-88.

• Goertz, Gary (2006). Social Science Concepts, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 25-156.

• Munck, Gerardo & Jay Verkuilen (2002), “Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy”, Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 5-34.

• Møller, Jørgen & Svend-Erik Skaaning (2009). ”Beyond the Radial Delusion: Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy and Non-democracy”, International Political Science Review (under udgivelse).

Praktiske øvelser

3. Typologisk teori og komparative historiske analyser

• Logikken bag klassifikationer og typologier

• Fra deskriptive typologier til typologisk teori

• Typologisk teori, MSSD, MDSD og case-studier

• Komparative analyser inden for historisk sociologi

• Tid og sammenligninger

• Bailey, Kenneth D. (1994), Typologies and Taxonomies. An Introduction to Classification Techniques, Series: Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences 102, Sage University, pp. 1-34.

• Elman, Colin (2005). “Explanatory Typologies in Qualitative Studies of International Politics”, International Organization, Vol. 59, No. 2, pp. 293-326.

• Kitschelt, Herbert (2003), ‘Accounting for Postcommunist Regime Diversity. What Counts as a Good Cause?’, in Grzegorz Ekiert and Stephen E. Hanson (eds.), Capitalism and Democracy in Central and Eastern Europe. Assessing the Legacy of Communist Rule, Cambridge University Press, pp. 49-86.

• Tilly, Charles (1984). Big Structures, Large Processes, Huge Comparisons, New York: Norton, pp. 1-16, 87-147.

Praktiske øvelser

4. Empiriske eksempler på komparative analyser

• Sammenligninger: praktiske eksempler

• Hvad kan vi lære af de kendte analyser?

• Kritik af kendte analyser

• Darden, Keith & Anna Grzymala-Busse (2006). “The Great Divide: Literacy, Nationalism, and the Communist Collapse”, World Politics, Vol. 59, No. 1, pp. 83-115.

• Ertman, Thomas (1998). Birth of the Leviathan, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1-34, 317-324.

• Kitschelt, Herbert (1988). “The Rise of Left-libertarian Parties in Western Democracies: Explaining Innovation in Competitive Party Systems”, World Politics, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 194-234.

• Skocpol, Theda (1976). “France, Russia, China: A Structural Analysis of Social Revolutions”, Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 175-210.

Praktiske øvelser

5. Crisp set QCA

• Sandhedstabeller

• Mængdelære (set theory)

• Kvalitativ komparativ (crisp set) analyse

• Rihoux, Benoit & Charles Ragin (2008). Configurational Comparative Methods, London: Sage, pp. 1-18, 33-68, 147-166.

Praktiske øvelser

6. Fuzzy set QCA

• Delvist medlemskab i mængder (partial set-membership)

• Kvalitativ komparativ (fuzzy-set) analyse

• Kritik og svar

• Ragin, Charles (2008). Redesigning Social Inquiry, Princeton: Princeton University Press, pp. 13-175.

• Rihoux, Benoit & Charles Ragin (2008). Configurational Comparative Methods, London: Sage, pp. 87-122

Praktiske øvelser

7. ‘Mixed-methods’ strategier og kausalitet i komparativ forskning

• Kombination af forskellige metoder

• Bringe ontology og metodologi i overenstemmelse

• Hvordan man tackler kausalitsproblematikker?

• Rohlfing, Ingo (2009). “(2008): What You See and What You Get: Pitfalls and Principles of Nested Analysis in Comparative Research”, Comparative Political Studies, Vol. 41, No. 11, pp. 1492-1514.

• Gerring, John (2001). Social Science Methodology: A Critical Framework, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 128-151.

• Hall, Peter A. (2003). “Aligning Ontology and Methodology in Comparative Research”, in James Mahoney & Dietrich Rueschemeyer (eds.), Comparative Historical Analysis: New Approaches and Methods, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 373-406.

• Hedström, Peter & Richard Swedberg (1996). ”Social Mechanisms, Acta Sociologica, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 281-308.

• Møller, Jørgen & Svend-Erik Skaaning (2009). ”The Three World of Post-Communism: Revisiting Deep and Proximate Explanations”, Democratization, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 318-342.

8. Diskussion af komparative aspekter ved egne forskningsprojekter

Kvalitativt metodekursus B: Dybdegående analyse af kvalitativt material

2172 Responsible: Gitte Sommer Harrits og Derek Beach, Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet
From: 2009/10/23 to: 2009/11/13
Subscription Deadline: 2009/07/03
Place: Aarhus University
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 5
Further information: agg@ps.au.dk

Tid: Kl. 10.00-15.00 på følgende dage: 23. oktober, 30. oktober, 6. november, 13. november 2009

Foreløbig kursusplan

23. oktober 2009:

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

30. oktober 2009:

Mening, praksis og teknikker til hermeneutisk orienterede analyser.

6. november 2009:

Tekstbegrebet og teknikker til dybdegående analyse af tekster / diskursanalyse.

13. november 2009:

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 og

• 
  

• Rueschemeyer, (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.)

Kurser i kvalitative metoder

I efteråret 2009 udbyder Institut for Statskundskab tre kurser i kvalitative metoder. Kurserne kan med fordel følges i forlængelse af hinanden, men de kan også tages enkeltvis. Hvert af de tre kurser giver 5 ECTS. Undervisningen ligger i alle tilfælde fredag fra 10.15-15.00 (inkl. 1 times frokostpause).

Kurserne fokuserer på at forbedre deltagernes forskningsmæssige og praktiske færdigheder. Derfor skal deltagerne løbende bruge de gennemgåede metoder på konkrete politologiske problemstillinger. På hvert kursus løser deltagerne to opgaver skriftligt. Underviserne giver en faglig tilbagemelding på hver opgave, herunder om den kan godkendes, men der gives ikke karakter.

Aktiv deltagelse og aflevering samt godkendelse af de to skriftlige opgaver er en forudsætning for, at kurset bestås. Der er ingen yderligere eksamen.

Såfremt der er plads, fyldes kurserne op med overbygningsstuderende, men det faglige niveau sættes efter, at deltagerne efter kurserne på kvalificeret vis skal kunne lave en ph.d.-afhandling med brug af de på kurset gennemgåede metoder. Undervisningen er lagt an på, at kursisternes eget materiale og egne problemstillinger spiller en stor rolle. Kurset egner sig derfor bedst for kursister, der er i gang med eller står overfor at skulle lave et større videnskabeligt arbejde (ph.d. afhandling eller speciale). Undervisning og opgaver vil blive differentieret efter deltagernes forudsætninger og forskningsfelt.

Tilmeldingsskema på
http://www.samfundsvidenskab.au.dk/da/forskning/phd/faglige-programmer/statskundskab/kurser/kurser-efteraar-2009/

Doing Discourse Analysis in Political Science: Applications, Strategies, Methods & Techniques

2161 Responsible: David Howarth & Aletta Norval Department of Government University of Essex
From: 2009/10/26 to: 2009/10/30
Subscription Deadline: 2009/08/28
Place: Roskilde University, Departement of Society and Globalisation
Further information: sek@polforsk.dk

Doing Discourse Analysis in Political Science:

Applications, Strategies, Methods & Techniques

David Howarth & Aletta Norval, Department of Government, University of Essex

This course sets out an approach for doing discourse analysis in political science. It is thus concerned with the way we can articulate and apply discourse analysis to problematized empirical cases in the name of critical explanation. It will also serve as a forum to discuss practical research strategies, methods and techniques that are consonant with the emerging field of discourse analysis. The course focuses on the definition of research objects and problems; the construction of appropriate theoretical frameworks; the requisite character and collection of empirical data; the logics of rhetorical and textual analysis; as well as the different modes of argumentation and presentation within discourse theory.

More precisely, the course puts forward a logic of critical explanation, which comprises five basic elements: problematization; retroduction; logics; articulation; and critique. In so doing, it examines the philosophical underpinnings of a poststructuralist approach to social and political analysis, and also concentrates on actual instances of discursive research. With respect to the theoretical aspects, attention is focused on Michel Foucault’s method of problematisation; Laclau and Mouffe’s logics of discourse analysis; as well as certain psychoanalytical themes explored by Lacan and Zizek. We also draw on discussions in speech act theory and their extension to political analysis in the works of Austin, Derrida, Butler and Cavell. The concrete illustrations of discourse analysis will draw on research on apartheid and popular democratic discourse in South Africa; New Right discourses on race and sexuality in Britain; the changing governance of airports in the UK, and the ensuing logics of popular protest; the transformation of ( UK) universities; and various instances of community economies and populist politics. Participants will also be encouraged to discuss their own ongoing research or research proposals/plans.

The course runs for five days with three sessions on each day. The course arises from our recent books: Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory (Abingdon, Routledge, 2007) and Aversive Democracy (Cambridge, 2007). All asterisked readings are essential, and (apart from our books) are included in our reading pack (unless available from the library). During the course, and especially in the last sessions, we will also discuss the research projects of individual participants. Those interested in doing this should send short presentations of their projects (1500 words max) at least one week before our summer school sessions start, so that we can build them into the programme.

Day 1. Introducing Poststructuralist Discourse Theory: A Problem-Driven Approach

The first day introduces poststructuralist discourse theory (PDT) in general terms, by charting the “discursive turn” in the contemporary social sciences. Session 1 presents a brief genealogy of the development of PDT, focusing on its ever-widening ontological and methodological scope, and by situating PDT in relation to positivist, hermeneutical and naturalistic approaches to social science research. After outlining the content and rationale of the course a whole, we set out the core concepts and logics of post-structuralist discourse theory, concentrating on the categories of discourse, dislocation, subjectivity and hegemony, as they have been developed by Laclau and Mouffe in texts like Hegemony and Socialist Strategy, New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time, and On Populist Reason.

We also analyse the formation and dissolution of frontiers in political discourse and the role that the logics of equivalence and difference play in these processes. Drawing on the work of Laclau and others, we concentrate on the analysis of the articulation of political demands, and the different ways in which political frontiers are constructed and managed. Session 2 is devoted to clarifying the conceptual basis of the discussion. The focus is on the development of the conceptual tools for the analysis of political frontiers in Laclau and Mouffe’s work. Session 3 focuses on a discussion of work putting Laclau’s insights to use in political analysis. In this session we will concentrate on some practical examples, where course participants will be analysing the articulation of political frontiers in selected political speeches, such as speeches by Barack Obama and Nelson Mandela.

Main readings

* E. Laclau and C. Mouffe, Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (London: Verso, 1985), Chapters 3 and 4.

* A. J. Norval, ‘Frontiers in Question’, Acta Philosophica, 2 (1997), pp. 51-76.

* A. J. Norval, 'Social ambiguity and the crisis of apartheid', in Laclau, E. (ed.) The Making of Political Identities. London: Verso (1994).

* S. Griggs and D. Howarth, ‘Populism, Localism and Environmental Politics: The Logic and Rhetoric of the Stop Stansted Expansion Campaign in the United Kingdom’, Planning Theory, (2008), Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 123-44.

* D. Howarth and Y. Stavrakakis ‘Introducing Discourse Theory and Political Analysis’, in D. Howarth, A. J. Norval and Y. Stavrakakis, Discourse Theory and Political Analysis (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000). (Several chapters in this book deploy Laclau’s conceptualization of political frontiers in the analysis of concrete cases.)

* D. Howarth, Discourse (Open University Press, 2000), Chapter 6.

* E. Laclau, On Populist Reason (London: Verso, 2005), especially chapters 4 and 5.

Additional readings

J. Torfing, New Theories of Discourse (Oxford: Blackwell, 1999).

A. Keenan, Democracy in Question. Democratic Openness in a Time of Political Closure (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003), chapter 3.

Fairclough, N. Discourse and Social Change (Cambridge: Polity, 1992).

Mills, S. Discourse (London: Routledge, 1997).

Parker, I. Discourse Dynamics (London: Routledge, 1994).

Day 2. A Post-Positivist Approach to Political Analysis: Problematization, Retroduction, Logics & Articulation

The second day turns to the role of problematization and logics in the practice of applying discourse theory in political science. We begin by discussing Michel Foucault’s efforts to develop a method of discourse analysis that goes beyond traditional hermeneutics, without relapsing into naturalism, positivism, or a methodological anarchism adopted by some proponents of post-modernism and post-structuralism. Attention is paid to the archaeological method, which Foucault employed in his early writings (The Birth of the Clinic, The Order of Things), after which we concentrate on the genealogical approach of his later studies. Participants will be given the opportunity to problematize a set of themes and issues related to their own research, and to construct a short research problem or proposal.

We then turn to the dominant logics of explanation in political science, namely the causal law paradigm or its surrogates. These lectures begin by briefly and critically interrogating two opposed responses to the causal law model: the ‘interpretive turn’ (e.g. Charles Taylor; Mark Bevir and Rod Rhodes) and the recourse to ‘causal mechanisms’ (e.g. Roy Bhaskar; Jon Elster). We then elaborate an ontology in terms of which we develop three types of logic – social, political, and fantasmatic – showing how they enable the process of characterising and explaining social phenomena.

Having outlined the content of a distinctively discourse-theoretical account of critical explanation, we turn to the retroductive form of explanation and the question of linking together different elements (logics and concepts plus specific empirical circumstances) into concrete accounts of problematized phenomena. This involves articulation as a particular mode of explanation.

Main readings

* J. Glynos and D. Howarth, Logics of Critical Explanation (Abingdon: Routledge, 2007), Introduction, Chapters 1, 2, 3.

* M. Foucault, ‘Orders of Discourse’, Social Science Information, 10, 1971, pp. 7-30.

* M. Foucault, ‘Nietzsche, Genealogy, History’, in M. Foucault, Language, Counter-Memory and Practice (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1977). (Also published in P. Rabinow, The Foucault Reader, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1984).

* C. S. Peirce, Collected Papers, Vol. 1, Principles of Philosophy, (Cambridge, Mass: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1960), pp. 28-31.

* D. Howarth, Discourse (Buckingham: Open University Press, 2000), Introduction & Chapters 3-7.

Additional readings

D. Howarth (2002) ‘An Archaeology of Political Discourse? Evaluating Michel Foucault’s Explanation and Critique of Ideology’, Political Studies, 50(1): 117-135.

D. Howarth, ‘Discourse Theory and Political Analysis’ in E. Scarborough and E. Tanenbaum (eds), Research Strategies in the Social Sciences (Oxford: OUP. 1998), Chapter 12.

M. Foucault, ‘Politics and the Study of Discourse’, in G. Burchell, C. Gordon and P. Miller (eds), The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, Hemel Hampstead: Harvester, 1984, Ch 2.

H. Dreyfus and P. Rabinow, Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics, Brighton: Harvester, 1982, Chapters 4, 5M. Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge, London: Tavistock, 1972.

P. Dews, ‘Althusser, Structuralism and the French Epistemological Tradition’, in G. Elliot (ed), Althusser: A Critical Reader, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1994, Ch 5.

J. Habermas, The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity, Cambridge: Polity, 1985, Chapters 9, 10.

Howarth, D., A. J. Norval and Y. Stavrakakis (eds), Discourse Theory and Political Analysis: Identities, Hegemonies and Social Change (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000).

S. Benhabib, Critique, Norm and Utopia (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), Preface, Introduction.

R. Bernstein, The New Constellation (Cambridge: Polity, 1991), Chapters 1, 5, 10

J. Glynos and D. Howarth, Logics of Critical Explanation (Abingdon: Routledge, 2007), Chapter 1.

I. Shapiro, ‘Problems, Methods, and Theories in the Study of Politics, or: What’s Wrong with Political Science and What to do About it’, in I. Shapiro, R. M. Smith, and T. E. Masoud (eds) (2004) Problems and Methods in the Study of Politics (Cambridge: CUP, 2004).

W. Connolly, ‘Method, Problem, Faith’ in I. Shapiro, R. M. Smith, and T. E. Masoud (eds) (2004) Problems and Methods in the Study of Politics (Cambridge: CUP, 2004).

Day 3. Theories and Techniques of Discourse Analysis: Speech Acts, Rhetoric, and Textual Analysis

Day 3 is devoted to a discussion of different theories and techniques of discourse analysis. We start with a consideration of speech act theory and deconstruction. We then move on to the ways in which it has been taken up in a range of analytical techniques that consider the analysis of rhetoric and rhetorical strategies to be central to political analysis. Students will be invited to employ these techniques in a consideration of selected texts and documents.

Main Readings

* J. Austin, How to do Things with Words.

* H. Gottweis, ‘Rhetoric in policy making: between logos, ethos, and pathos’, in F. Fischer, Handbook of Public Policy (London: Taylor and Francis, 2006).

* A. Finlayson, ‘From beliefs to arguments: interpretive methodology and rhetorical political analysis’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 9 (4), 2007, pp. 545-563.

* Ernesto Laclau, ‘The politics of rhetoric’, in T. Cohen, J.H. Miller, A. Warminski and B. Cohen (eds), Material Events: Paul de Man and the Afterlife of Theory (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2001). Also published in Pretexts, 7 (2), 1998.

* Aletta J. Norval, Aversive Democracy, chapter 2.

* J. Butler, Excitable Speech: A Politics of the Performative (New York: Routledge, 1997), Chapter 1.

* Aletta J. Norval, ‘Passionate Subjectivity, Contestation and Acknowledgement: Rereading Austin and Cavell’, in Andrew Schaap (ed.) Law and Agonistic Politics (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2009), pp. 163-78.

* M. Hajer and Justus Uitermark, ‘Performing Authority: Discursive politics after the assassination of Theo van Gogh’ Public Administration Vol. 86 (1), pp. 5-19 (2007).

* Gottweis, H., ‘Stem Cell Policies in the United States and in Germany: Between Bioethics and Regulation’, Policy Studies Journal 30: 444-469, 2002.

Additional readings

J. Bender and D.E. Wellbery (eds), The Ends of Rhetoric (Standford: Stanford University Press, 1990).

Moya Lloyd, ‘Performativity, Parody, Politics’, Theory, Culture & Society, 16(2), (1999), 195-213.

M. Hajer and H. Wagenaar (eds), Deliberative Policy Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).

J. Pocock, ‘Verbalising a Political Act: Towards a Politics of Speech’ in M. Shapiro (ed.) Language and Politics.

Q. Skinner, 'Meaning and understanding in the history of ideas' in J. Tully (ed), Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics.

Q. Skinner, ‘A reply to my critics’ in J. Tully (ed), Meaning and Context: Quentin Skinner and his Critics.

James Bohman, ‘Emancipation and rhetoric: the perlocutions and illocutions of the social critic’, Philosophy and Rhetoric 21 (3), (1988).

B. Fontana, C.J. Nederman and G. Remer (eds), Talking Democracy. Historical Perspectives on Rhetoric and Democracy (University Parkm: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004), Introduction, pp. 1-19.

Day 4. Developing Research Strategies: Democracy, Governance, and Populism

On the fourth day we discuss the general principles of research strategy, and then present some concrete empirical applications. We will focus on forms of governance and resistance, mainly in South African politics and UK environmental politics. More specifically, we focus on the construction of apartheid discourse and popular-democratic forms of protest, and the dialectical logic of airport expansion and local protest in the UK. The day concludes with the development of practical research strategies for ongoing research projects.

Main Readings

* J. Glynos and D. Howarth, Logics of Critical Explanation (Abingdon: Routledge, 2007), Chapter 6.

* D. Howarth, ‘Complexities of Identity/Difference: Black Consciousness Ideology in South Africa’, Journal of Political Ideologies, Vol. 2 (1), 1997 [available on-line via library].

* D. Howarth, ‘The Difficult Emergence of a Democratic Imaginary: Black Consciousness and Non-Racial Democracy in South Africa’, in D. Howarth, A. J. Norval and Y. Stavrakakis (eds) Discourse Theory and Political Analysis: Identities, Hegemonies and Social Change, Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2000.

* A. J. Norval, 'Social ambiguity and the crisis of apartheid' in Laclau, E. (ed.) The Making of Political Identities, Chapter 5.

* S. F. Griggs and D. Howarth, ‘A Transformative Political Campaign? The New Rhetoric of Protest Against Airport Expansion in the UK’, Journal of Political Ideologies, (2004), Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 167-87 [available on-line via library].

* J. Glynos (2008) ‘Ideological Fantasy at Work’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 13(3): 275-296.

Addional readitions

J. Glynos, and Howarth, D. (2008) ‘Critical Explanation in Social Science: A Logics Approach’, Swiss Journal of Sociology, 34(1): 5-35.

D. Howarth, ‘Populism or Popular Democracy? The UDF, Workerism and the Struggle for Radical Democracy in South Africa’, in F. Panizza (ed) Populism and the Mirror of Nature, London: Verso, 2005.

A. J. Norval, Deconstructing Apartheid Discourse, Chapter 6.

S. F. Griggs and D. Howarth, ‘An Alliance of Interest and Identity? Explaining the Campaign against Manchester Airport’s Second Runway’, Mobilization, (2002) Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 43-58.

S. F. Griggs and D. Howarth, “Populism, Nimbyism and Environmental Politics: The Logic And Rhetoric Of The Stop Stansted Expansion Campaign”, paper will be made available.

J. Glynos, and Stavrakakis, Y. (2008) ‘Lacan and Political Subjectivity’ Subjectivity: International Journal of Critical Psychology, 24: 256-274.

J. Glynos (2003) ‘Self-Transgression and Freedom’, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 6(2): 1-20.

E. Laclau, On Populist Reason (London: Verso, 2005).

Day 5. Presentations, Questions & Future Directions

The final day will draw together the main elements of the approach, and explore future trajectories of research in discourse theory. The sessions will also be devoted to the discussion of the research projects of participants. Those interested should send presentations of their projects (1500 words max) at least one week before our summer school sessions start, so that we can build them into the programme. By way of conclusion, these sessions will also act as a forum to raise and discuss general issues and questions arising out of earlier sessions.

Institutionalism in Political Science: From Rational Interests, Historical Structures, and Cultural Frames to Ideas and Discourse

2159 Responsible: Professor Vivien A. Schmidt, Boston University
From: 2009/11/09 to: 2009/11/13
Subscription Deadline: 2009/09/20
Place: Roskilde University
Fee: 150 EURO
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 5
Further information: sek@polforsk.dk

Over the past three decades, ‘new institutionalism’ has become a main methodological battleground among political scientists. This is because political scientists differ in their preferred ‘new institutionalist’ approach to explanation and research in political science. There are four basic institutionalist approaches: three older ‘new institutionalisms—rational choice institutionalism (RI), historical institutionalism (HI), and sociological institutionalism (SI)—that have predominated since the 1990s, plus a fourth newer ‘new institutionalism’—discursive institutionalism (DI)—which has recently come to the fore. RI focuses on rational actors pursuing their interests according to a ‘logic of calculation’ within political institutions, defined as structures of incentives. HI concentrates instead on political institutions defined as historical regularities and rules which develop over time according to a ‘logic of path-dependence’ or ‘incremental change’ following an initial ‘critical juncture.’ SI sees political institutions as socially constituted and culturally framed, with political agents acting according to a ‘logic of appropriateness.’ Finally, DI explores the ideas that actors convey through discourse according to a ‘logic of communication’ in institutional context. The DI institutional context itself refers first and foremost to the construction, structure, and communication of meaning and ideas. This gives DI its supplementary capacity.  However, DI should also be understood as treating the results of the other institutionalist approaches as background information with which discursive institutionalists may engage, and from which their results often emerge.

Discursive institutionalism in theory and in practice.

The course begins with an examination of discursive institutionalism in theory and in practice: what it is and how it works in a wide range of approaches. Discursive institutionalism itself is presented as an umbrella concept that encompasses a great variety of approaches that share a focus on discourse and ideas as well as an overall ‘constructivist’ viewpoint but nevertheless may differ from one another in the finer points of ontology and epistemology. Readings in this section include essays that provide definitional overviews of discursive institutionalism and more focused considerations of the substantive content of ideas — cognitive and normative — and the interactive processes of discourse — both the coordinative discourse among policy actors and the communicative discourse between political actors and the public.

How discursive institutionalism complements other institutionalisms

Course Outline

I. Discursive Institutionalism in Theory

II. Discursive Institutionalism in Practice

1. Explaining the Substantive Content of Ideas

2. Explaining the Interactive Processes of Discourse

III. Institutionalisms in Perspective

1. Rational Choice & Discursive Institutionalism

2. Historical & Discursive Institutionalism

3. Sociological & Discursive Institutionalism

IV. Putting discursive institutionalism to work

Deadline for submission of papers

October 18. Applicants with papers will be preferred. Papers should be between 8 to 15 pages in length and discuss both theoretical questions related to institutionalisms—discursive as well as others—and empirical applications if at all possible.

Course Program and Readings

Session 1: (Nov. 9, 9.30-12.30; PhD presentations 14.00-16.00)

I. Discursive Institutionalism in Theory

Schmidt, Vivien A. “Discursive Institutionalism: The Explanatory Power of Ideas and Discourse,” Annual Review of Political Science vol. 11 (2008): 303-26

II. Discursive Institutionalism in Practice

1. Explaining the Substantive Content of Ideas

Hall, Peter .1993. ‘Policy Paradigms, Social Learning and the State: The Case of Economic Policy-Making in Britain’. Comparative Politics, 25: 275–96

Ove Pederson .2009. “Discourse Analysis” in Encyclopaedia of Political Science, General Editors Bertrand Badie, Dirk Berg-Schlosser, and Leonardo Morlino. Sage, forthcoming

Howarth, David and Yannis Stavrakakis. 2000. “Introducing Discourse Theory and Political Analysis” in Howarth, D., Norval, A. J. and Stavrakakis, Y. (eds) (2000) Discourse Theory and Political Analysis: Identities, Hegemonies and Social Change (Manchester: Manchester University Press).

Session 2: (Nov.10, 9.30-12.30; PhD presentations 14.00-16.00)

2. Explaining the Interactive Processes of Discourse

Haas, Peter M. .1992. ‘Introduction: Epistemic Communities and International Policy Coordination’. International Organization, 46: 1–35.

Sabatier, Paul and Jenkins-Smith, H. C. , eds. 1993. Policy Change and Learning: An Advocacy Coalition Approach. Boulder, CO: Westview (Chapter 1)

Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn .1998.. ‘International Norm Dynamics and Political Change’. International Organization, 52: 887–917.

Risse, Thomas (2000) ‘Let’s argue. Communicative action in world politics’ International Organization 54(1) Winter: 1-39

Art, David .2006. The Politics of the Nazi Past in Germany and Austria. New York: Cambridge University Press, Ch. 1-2.

Session 3: (Nov.11, 9.30-12.30; PhD presentations 14.00-16.00)

III. Institutionalisms in Perspective

Schmidt, Vivien A. “Give Peace a Chance: Reconciling the Four (not Three) New Institutionalisms” in Ideas and Politics in Social Science Research eds. Daniel Béland and Robert H. Cox (forthcoming).

a. Rational Choice & Discursive Institutionalism

Green, Donald and Shapiro, Ian .l994. The Pathologies of Rational Choice New Haven: Yale University Press (Chapter 1-3)

Druckman, James N. 2004. “Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation, and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects.” American Political Science Review vol. 98, no. 4: 671-686.

Rothstein, Bo .2005. Social Traps and the Problem of Trust Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Chapter 7

Blyth, Mark .2002. Great Transformations New York: Cambridge University Press, Chapters 1- 2

Session 4: (Nov.12, 9.30-12.30; PhD presentations 14.00-16.00)

b. Historical & Discursive Institutionalism

Streeck, Wolfgang and Thelen, Kathleen .2005. “Introduction,” in Beyond Continuity Eds. Wolfgang Streeck and Kathleen Thelen, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hall, Peter and Thelen, Kathleen .2009. “Institutional Change in Varieties of Capitalism.” Socioeconomic Review

Schmidt, Vivien A. “From Historical Institutionalism to Discursive Institutionalism: Explaining Institutional Change in Political Economy.” Paper prepared for presentation for the American Political Science Association Meetings, Boston MA Aug. 28- Sept. 1, 2008.

b. Sociological & Discursive Institutionalism

Hay, Colin .2006. “Constructivist Institutionalism” in R. A. W. Rhodes, Sarah Binder, and Bert Rockman, eds. Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Finnemore, Martha .1996. “Norms, Culture, and World Politics: Insights from Sociology’s Institutionalism International Organization vol. 50, no. 2: 325-47.

Campbell, John L. 2004. Institutional Change and Globalization Princeton: Princeton University Press, Chapter 4.

Session 5: (Nov.13, 9.30-12.30; PhD presentations 14.00-16.00)

IV. Putting discursive institutionalism to work

Schmidt, Vivien A. “How, Where, and When does Discourse Matter in Small States’ Welfare State Adjustment?” New Political Economy vol. 8, no. 1 (March 2003): 127-46.

Schmidt, Vivien A. The Futures of European Capitalism (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002, Ch. 5.

Schmidt, Vivien, Democracy in Europe (Oxford 2006), Ch. 5

Hay, Colin “The ‘Crisis’ of Keynesianism and the Rise of Neoliberalism in Britain: An Ideational Institutionalist Approach” in The Rise of NeoLiberalism and Institutional Analysis eds. John L. Campbell and Ove Pedersen. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.

Woll, Cornelia .2008. Firm Interests: How Governments Shape Business Lobbying on Global Trade Ithaca: Cornell University Press (Chapters 1-2)

Kvalitativt metodekursus C: Systematisk kvalitativ analyse med NVIVO

2173 Responsible: Marie Østergaard Møller Institut for Statskundskab, Aarhus Universitet
From: 2009/11/27 to: 2009/12/18
Subscription Deadline: 2009/07/03
ECTS (Danish Ph.D. students only): 5
Further information: agg@ps.au.dk

Tid: Kl. 10.15-15.00 på følgende dage: 27. november, 4. december, 11. december, 18. december 2009.

Foreløbig kursusplan

27. november 2009

Introduktion: Systematiske analyser af forskellige dokumenttyper. NVivo som hjælpemiddel. Teoretiske og operationelle definitioner og diskussion af målingsvaliditet.

NVivo I: Overblik over programmet samt projekthåndtering.

4. december 2009:

Induktive analysestrategier: Åben og fokuseret kodning og memoer.

NVivo II: Kodning

11. december 2009:

Deduktive analysestrategier: Deduktiv kodning, displays og modeller.

NVivo III: Queries og modeller

18. december 2009:

Gennemførelse og formidling af konkrete analyser.

Foreløbig litteraturliste

• Andersen, Lotte Bøgh & Anne Binderkrantz (2008). Specialudviklet vejledning i brugen af analyseprogrammet Nvivo. Århus: Institut for Statskundskab. 3. udgave.

• Charmaz, Kathy (2006): Constructing Grounded Theory: A practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. London, Thousand Oaks & New Delhi: Sage (købes).

• Dahler, Peter (2008): ”Kvalitativ metode. Status og problemer”, Politica 39(3): 317-334.

• Dahler-Larsen, Peter (2002): At fremstille kvalitative data. Odense: Odense Universitetsforlag, s. 32-60.

• Eisenhardt, Kathleen M. (1989) Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy o/Management Review, 1989 14(4): 532-550.

• Lofland, John; David Snow, Leon Anderson, Lyn H. Lofland (2006) Analyzing Social Settings. A guide to qualitative observation and analysis. Fourth Edition. Belmont, Singapore, Southbank, Toronto, London, Mexico & Madrid: Wadsworth/Thomson. Page 195-229.

• Miles, Matthew B. & Michael A. Huberman (1994): Qualitative Data Analysis, 2. udg. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: SAGE, (uddrag, købes gerne).

• Olsen, Henning (2002): Kvalitative kvaler – Kvalitative metoder og danske interviewundersøgelsers kvalitet. København: Akademisk Forlag, s. 103-143.

Kurser i kvalitative metoder

I efteråret 2009 udbyder Institut for Statskundskab tre kurser i kvalitative metoder. Kurserne kan med fordel følges i forlængelse af hinanden, men de kan også tages enkeltvis. Hvert af de tre kurser giver 5 ECTS. Undervisningen ligger i alle tilfælde fredag fra 10.15-15.00 (inkl. 1 times frokostpause).

Kurserne fokuserer på at forbedre deltagernes forskningsmæssige og praktiske færdigheder. Derfor skal deltagerne løbende bruge de gennemgåede metoder på konkrete politologiske problemstillinger. På hvert kursus løser deltagerne to opgaver skriftligt. Underviserne giver en faglig tilbagemelding på hver opgave, herunder om den kan godkendes, men der gives ikke karakter.

Aktiv deltagelse og aflevering samt godkendelse af de to skriftlige opgaver er en forudsætning for, at kurset bestås. Der er ingen yderligere eksamen.

Såfremt der er plads, fyldes kurserne op med overbygningsstuderende, men det faglige niveau sættes efter, at deltagerne efter kurserne på kvalificeret vis skal kunne lave en ph.d.-afhandling med brug af de på kurset gennemgåede metoder. Undervisningen er lagt an på, at kursisternes eget materiale og egne problemstillinger spiller en stor rolle. Kurset egner sig derfor bedst for kursister, der er i gang med eller står overfor at skulle lave et større videnskabeligt arbejde (ph.d. afhandling eller speciale). Undervisning og opgaver vil blive differentieret efter deltagernes forudsætninger og forskningsfelt.

Tilmeldingsskema på
http://www.samfundsvidenskab.au.dk/da/forskning/phd/faglige-programmer/statskundskab/kurser/kurser-efteraar-2009/