教學大綱 Syllabus

每周課程進度與作業要求 Course Schedule & Requirements

教學週次Course Week	彈性補充教學週次Flexible Supplemental Instruction Week	彈性補充教學類別Flexible Supplemental Instruction Type
16+2週16+2 weeks	第 17 週 Week 17	完成指定課後作業或作品Completion of designated after-course assignment or work
	第 18 週 Week 18	完成指定課後作業或作品Completion of designated after-course assignment or work

相關教學活動與作業皆為授課、討論、辯論、提問。

第一週 2月21日 開學週課程講解、議題討論

第二週 2月28日 二二八放假 無課

第三週 3月6日 混合研究方法與方法論典範辯論

當週指定讀物 Required readings：

1 Bennett, A. (2015). Found in Translation: Combining Discourse Analysis with Computer Assisted Content Analysis. Millennium, 43(3), 984-997. https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/0305829815581535

2 Barkin, J. S. (2015). Translatable? On Mixed Methods and Methodology. Millennium, 43(3), 1003-1006. https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/0305829815581534

3 專題緒論Lacatus, C., Schade, D., & Yao, Y. (Joanne). (2015). Quo vadis IR: Method, Methodology and Innovation. Millennium, 43(3), 767-778. 

https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/0305829815587822

4 Mutlu, C. E. (2015). Of Algorithms, Data and Ethics: A Response to Andrew Bennett. Millennium, 43(3), 998-1002. https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/0305829815581536

5 Sjoberg, L. (2015). What’s Lost in Translation? Neopositivism and Critical Research Interests. Millennium, 43(3), 1007-1010. https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/0305829815581632

參考：

Neumann, C. B., & Neumann, I. B. (2015). Uses of the Self: Two Ways of Thinking about Scholarly Situatedness and Method. Millennium, 43(3), 798-819. https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/0305829815576818

 

第四週3月13日 方法論典範之爭？依然從混合研究法論起

當週指定讀物：

1  Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a Definition of Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112-133. https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/1558689806298224

(此文  argue that mixed methods research is one of the three major “research paradigms” (quantitative research, qualitative research, and mixed methods research). The authors hope this article will contribute to the ongoing dialogue about how mixed methods research is defined and conceptualized by its practitioners)待找

2     Alise, M. A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). A Continuation of the Paradigm Wars? Prevalence Rates of Methodological Approaches Across the Social/Behavioral Sciences. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(2), 103-126. https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/1558689809360805

（待找）

3  Schoonenboom, J. (2018). Designing Mixed Methods Research by Mixing and Merging Methodologies: A 13-Step Model. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 998-1015. https://doi-org.proxyone.lib.nccu.edu.tw:8443/10.1177/0002764218772674

（待找）

 

第五週3月20日量化質化方法論，認識典範

當週指定讀物：

1. Nataša Matović & Kristinka Ovesni (2023) Interaction of quantitative and qualitative methodology in mixed methods research: integration and/or combination, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 26:1, 51-65, DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2021.1964857
2. Kuhn, Thomas.  (1973).  The Structure of Scientific Revolution.  Chicago, IL: The Univ. of Chicago Press, Chap. I – Chap. VIII, pp. 1-91. 線上

參考：何志青（2018）知識論的轉折。台北市：台大出版中心。

第六週 3月27日 認識典範

當週指定讀物：

1. Kuhn, Thomas.  (1973).  The Structure of Scientific Revolution.  Chicago, IL: The Univ. of Chicago Press, Chap. IX – Chap. X, pp. 92-135. 線上
2. Kuhn, Thomas. (ed.) (2000). The Road Since Structure. University of Chicago Press, Chapter 6 Reflections on My Critics, pp.123-175. 線上

Brief introduction of the book:

A highly condensed account of the author's present view of some philosophical problems unresolved in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The concept of incommensurability, now considerably developed, remains at center stage, but the evolutionary metaphor, introduced in the final pages of the book, now also plays a principal role (https://philpapers.org/rec/KUHTRS-2)

 

第七週 4月3日校際活動週，停課

當週週三晚間10點，上傳期末計畫第一版

 

第八週4月10日 實證取向 Positivism

當週指定讀物：

1. Hughes, J.A., & Sharrock, W.W. (1990). The Philosophy of Social Research (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315840710
2. Fuchs, C. (2017). From digital positivism and administrative big data analytics towards critical digital and social media research! European Journal of Communication, 32(1), 37–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116682804

參考:

1戴東源（2012）為何科學知識需要社為學的分析？科學知識社會學初探。出自黃之棟、黃瑞祺、李正風主編，科技與社會：社會建構論、科學社會學和知識社會學的視角。台北市：群學，頁3-31.

2 Ryan, P. (2015). Positivism: paradigm or culture? Policy Studies, 36:4, 417-433,  DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2015.1073246

 

第九週 4月17日詮釋取向1 Interpretive Approach 1

當週指定讀物:

1. Bevir, Mark & Blakely, Jason(2018). Interpretive Social Science: An Anti-Naturalist Approach. Oxford: Oxford University, Chap.1-Chap.4, pp.1-87.

Brief introduction of the book:

In this book Mark Bevir and Jason Blakely set out to make the most comprehensive case yet for an 'interpretive' or hermeneutic approach to the social sciences. Interpretive approaches are a major growth area in the social sciences today. This is because they offer a full-blown alternative to the behavioralism, institutionalism, rational choice, and other quasi-scientific approaches that dominate the study of human behavior. In addition to presenting a systematic case for interpretivism and a critique of scientism, Bevir and Blakely also propose their own uniquely 'anti-naturalist 'notion of an interpretive approach. This anti-naturalist framework encompasses the insights of philosophers ranging from Michel Foucault and Hans-Georg Gadamer to Charles Taylor and Ludwig Wittgenstein, while also resolving dilemmas that have plagued rival philosophical defenses of interpretivism. In addition, working social scientists are given detailed discussions of a distinctly interpretive approach to methods and empirical research. The book draws on the latest social science to cover everything from concept formation and empirical inquiry to ethics, democratic theory, and public policy. An anti-naturalist approach to interpretive social science offers nothing short of a sweeping paradigm shift in the study of human beings and society. This book will be of interest to all who seek a humanistic alternative to the scientism that overwhelms the study of human beings today. (https://philpapers.org/rec/BEVISS)

參考:

張鼎國著，汪文聖、洪世謙編（2011）詮釋與實踐。台北市：政大出版社。

 

第十週 4月24日 詮釋取向 2 Interpretive Approach 2

當週指定讀物:

1 Bevir, Mark & Blakely, Jason(2018). Interpretive Social Science: An Anti-Naturalist Approach. Oxford: Oxford University, Chap.5-Chap10, pp.87-202.

2 Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Culture, New York: Basic Books, Chap. 1,         “Thick description”, pp. 3-32; Chap. 15, “Deep play: Notes on the Balinese cockfight”, pp. 412-53.

 

第十一週 5月1日 建構取向 Constructivism

當週指定讀物：

1. Burr, Vivien.  (1995).  An Introduction to Social Constructionism.  London and New York: Routledge, Chap. 1, pp. 1-16; Chap. 5, pp. 79-94; Chap. 8, pp. 125-139.
2. Kratochwil, F. (2008). Constructivism: What it is (not) and how it matters. In D. Della Porta & M. Keating (Eds.), Approaches and Methodologies in the Social Sciences: A Pluralist Perspective (pp. 80-98). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511801938.006
3. Latour, B.(2003). The Promises of constructivism. Ihde Don, Selinger Evan. Chasing Technoscience: Matrix for Materiality, Indiana University Press, pp.27-46, 2003. 

參考：

Zahle, J. & Collin, F. (2014). Rethinking the Individualism-Holism Debate: Essays in the Philosophy of Social Science. Springer.

 

第十二週 5月8日批判取向 Critical Approach

當週指定讀物：

1. Comstock, Donald E. (1994). “A method for critical research” In Martin, Michael; & McIntyre, Lee C. (Eds.), Readings in the Philsophy of Social Sciences, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, pp. 625-640.
2. Faiclough, N. (1997).  Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse.  Discourse and Society, 4

 

第十三週 5月15日 後現代取向

當週指定讀物:

1Ritzer, G. and D. Goodman (2002). Postmodern Social Theory. Handbook of Socioloigical Theory. In J. H. Turner. New York, Plenum: 151-169.

2 Polkinghorne, D. E. (1992). Postmodern epistemology of practice. In Psychology and Postmodernism. S. Kvale. London, Sage: 146-165.

 

第十四週 5月22日 來賓演講 （週次(時日待確定)

外賓演講可能會另外調整週刺、時間，未必就是5月下旬，也可能調到開學初。請多留意確實時間。

 

第十五週 5月29日方法論總結

當週指定讀物:

1 Alvesson, Mats.; Karreman, Dan. (2011).

Qualitative research and theory development : mystery as method / Mats Alvesson, Dan Karreman. Thousand Oaks, Calif. : Sage Publications.

2 Lorena Salud Gadella Kamstra (2022) Transforming a methodological dilemma into a rewarding research opportunity, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 25:6, 741-755, DOI: 10.1080/13645579.2021.1933062

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2021.1933062

3 Cook, T. (2009). The purpose of mess in action research: Building rigour though a messy turn. Educational Action Research, 17(2), 277–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790902914241

4 McArthur, J. (2012). Virtuous mess and wicked clarity: Struggle in higher education research. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(3), 419–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2011.634380

 

 

第十六週 6月5日 研究心得論文發表 個人期末作品發表

6月5日之後，期末晤談