Sociology 616
Advanced Research Methods Dr. Stephen Sills
WEEK Date Topics Assignment Training/ Research Activity
1 14-Jan Introduction to Course & Conducting a literature review Endnote Training
21-Jan NO CLASS DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING JR. HOLIDAY
2 28-Jan
Why do we do empirical research? Positivism, the Science Wars, & the Philosophy of Science…
3 4-Feb Ethics of human subject research
NIH Training Certificate Due (Online)
4 11-Feb Conceptualization and Research Design Annotated Bibliography Due IRB Training Feb 13th
5 18-Feb Interviewing I
6 25-Feb Interviewing II
Research question, testable hypothesis, 1-3 open-ended questions to add to interview (linked to survey questions) Interview Protocol
7 3-Mar Observing 10-Mar NO CLASS SPRING BREAK
8 17-Mar Visual Methods 9 24-Mar Analysis I - Qualitative Data 10 31-Mar Sampling Sampling Tools
11 7-Apr Survey design I
Research question, testable hypothesis, 3-5 questions (or scale) to add to student survey Remark Office Tutorial
12 14-Apr Survey design II
Research question, testable hypothesis, 3-5 questions (or scale) to add to faculty survey
13 21-Apr Analysis II – Mixed Data Data entry using Remark Office & Quantitative analysis
14 28-Apr Data Processing
Data Entry and Analysis of survey responses (descriptive, bivariate, multivariate)
15 5-Apr Writing Synthesis of research findings 7-May FINAL RESEARCH REPORT DUE
Instructor: Stephen J. SillsOffice: Graham Building 320
Office Hours: T/TH 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm & by appointment
Email: [email protected] Location: Graham Building 402
Class Times: M 6:00 pm ‐ 8:50 pm Texts: No required text; all required readings online or in
course reserves
SOCIOLOGY 616 ADVANCED RESEARCH METHODS (3:3)
The function of theory in research, concept formation, study design, data collection and analysis.
Course Overview This course is designed to cover general methods and stages of social research including: project conceptualization and design, ethics of human subject research, conducting a literature review, basic sampling techniques, survey design and administration, interviewing, textual analysis, observation, and research report writing. The three hour weekly seminars will be divided into two parts: a student‐lead reading and discussion group and an applied practical research project.
Course Objectives This course has two objectives. The first is to develop an understanding of and basic skills in the design and execution of empirical research for answering social science research questions. In this regard, the course complements required courses in Advanced Data Analysis and Sociological Theory. By building on those courses, and the information and methods covered during this semester, you should be able to design and execute empirical research for your Master’s Thesis. The second objective is to learn to critically evaluate empirical research. Using the material covered during the semester you will be in a better position to discern good research from bad research.
A few recommendations for success with this course and others… 1. Get a Google mail account and activate the virtual desktop features including the
calendar, documents & spreadsheets, etc. This will give you the ability to work on your files from any computer. You will never have a situation in which you left an important file on another machine. It will also give you the ability to collaborate on spreadsheets and documents as well as share calendars.
2. Get on a few listservs. I recommend EVALTALK . Although it is geared towards professional evaluators there is a lot of useful discussion on methods. Another that I like for its discussions on qualitative methods is QUALRS-L (Qualitative Research for the Human Sciences). Here are a few lists of listservs:
a. http://www.mtsu.edu/~baustin/mailto.htm b. http://www.uga.edu/squig/listservs.html
3. Ask questions often. Others in the class may already know the answers. Even if no one knows the answers to your particular questions, we can search for them.
4. Find some good music; you’ll spend some time in front of the computer in this course. I like http://www.pandora.com .
Reading Discussion Group The reading and discussion group will require attendance and advanced reading by all. Attendees are expected to have studied the assigned selections for the week in advance of the seminar meeting. There will be a discussion leader for each meeting. The role of the discussion leader is two‐fold. First, they are expected to prepare a 5‐10 minute overview of the reading (PowerPoint slides or a handout may be useful). The overview should contain the following information:
• a brief overview of the major point(s) of the assigned reading; • a critique of the reading (i.e., what the discussion leader thinks that people
should take away from the reading); and • points of contention with the reading
In all the critique should entail roughly 4‐8 PowerPoint slides or one page of notes for distribution to the other students. The purpose of the overview is intended to give context to the subsequent discussions, not to act as a substitute for reading. The second major role of the discussion leader is to moderate the discussion. This involves preparing questions and discussion points to open the discourse as well as facilitating the informal discussion of the readings. The discussion leader should work to ensure that all attendees at the seminar are involved in the discussion (whether they want to be involved or not). Special emphasis should be given to discuss the positive aspects of the readings, since people have a natural tendency to concentrate on perceived failures.
Applied Research Project This semester we will engage in an project to study the International Global Studies program at UNCG. You will be involved in all phases of the research process: design, sampling, data collection, data cleaning, and analysis. You will conduct a survey of IGS students and an online survey with faculty teaching IGS cross‐listed courses. You will also conduct face‐to‐face interviews with a random sample of students in the program (stratified and representative of those new to the program, those who have been in the program for 1‐2 years, and those completing a capstone course in the program). Our research questions, literature review and data collection will be aligned with IGS mission and objectives: IGS Mission (10/18/2006) The mission of International and Global Studies (IGS) is to provide an interdisciplinary, international and global curriculum beyond that of traditional individual academic disciplines. The program as a whole seeks to enrich, complement, and coordinate departmental offerings and to support the University’s mission by enhancing students’ knowledge of the world. Objectives
1) Research and Analyze ‐ Students will be able to locate and analyze a broad range of information and source material related to international and global studies. 2) Synthesize and Evaluate ‐ Students will be able to synthesize and critically evaluate scholarly literature related to international and global studies. 3) Application in Writing ‐ Students will be able to present clear and persuasive arguments in writing on general and specialized international and global topics. 4) Application in Speaking ‐ Students will be able to present clear and persuasive oral arguments on general and specialized international and global topics. 5) Foreign Languages ‐ Students will attain a third‐year‐level college proficiency in a foreign language. 6) Intercultural sensitivity ‐ Students will demonstrate intercultural sensitivity and cross‐cultural competency skills.
ASSIGNMENTS Complete each of the following individual assignments by the scheduled due dates. These assignments are designed to supplement the readings and lectures and train you for the tasks of the research project. Late assignments will be penalized ‐10% each day. Lecture Leaders (20%) An important part of the course will be facilitating the discussion on readings. On roughly five occasions you will be assigned a reading for which you will act as the discussion leader. Please e‐mail a 1‐page outline of the reading and 3‐5 questions for discussion to other class members PRIOR to class (allow enough time for printing, not 10 minutes before class). Lecture Participation (10%) Participation in the reading discussions is mandatory. Evidence of reading and contribution to the conversation are required. Human Subjects Research Trainings (10%) Please complete the computer‐based training provided by the NIH (http://cme.cancer.gov/clinicaltrials/learning/humanparticipant‐protections.asp ). The two‐hour tutorial is designed for those involved in conducting research involving human participants. It satisfies the NIH human subjects training requirement for obtaining Federal Funds. Once registered you may return to the site over several sittings to complete the course. Upon successfully answering the quiz questions at the end of each module, you will be given the option to print a certificate of completion. Print two copies of the certificate; keep one for your records (5%). If you have not already completed a UNCG IRB training, you will also be required to attend (an additional 5%, if you have already attended a training please bring a copy of your training certificate). Sign‐up for a workshop at: https://utlc.uncg.edu/workshops/list_by_category.jsp?cat_id=77000580 Everyone must be certified in order to participate in the class research project! Annotated Bibliography Assignment (10%) ‐ Using only academic (peer reviewed) journals find 5 empirical research articles on evaluation and assessment in higher education and aligned with the mission or objectives of IGS. Do not review theoretical, review, or meta‐research articles. Read the articles with special attention to the methods and findings. Submit a copy of the articles with your annotated bibliography (see http://www.library.cornell.edu/olinuris/ref/research/skill28.htm). Your annotation should include the following information:
• Citation in ASA Style; • research question; • population characteristics; • research method;
• primary findings; and • critique or comments.
Turn in your articles (I prefer stable URLs, DOI #, or digital copies such as PDfs), a list of the search terms you used, a list of the databases you queried, and an electronic copy of your bibliography (.doc, .rtf, or .pdf). DO NOT RELY ON THE ABSTRACT ALONE. Interview Assignment (20%.) ‐ You will write 2‐3 open‐ended questions that will be incorporated into the interview protocol. These questions should explore one of the goals of the IGS program. We will develop a random, stratified sample of individuals for interviews. You will be responsible for contacting the individual, scheduling a time for the interview, traveling to a mutually agreed upon location (I recommend the library, EUC, or other “neutral” location), conducting the interview, recording the interview (see me regarding availability of digital recorders), and transcribing the interview. We will use these transcripts both to inform the survey as well as in our final analysis reports. Transcripts and a copy of your recording will be needed on April 16th. Survey Assignment I (5%) – We will be conducting a survey of IGS students. You will develop a testable hypothesis aligned with one of the goals of the IGS program (for consistency use the same goal as in the Interview Assignment). You will then develop 3 to 5 survey questions to be included on the survey. We will workshop these questions in class then incorporate them into a final version of the survey. You will assist in the administration of the survey as well as data entry. Survey Assignment II (5%) ‐ We will be conducting an online survey of IGS faculty. You will develop a testable hypothesis aligned with one of the goals of the IGS program (for consistency use the same goal as survey assignment I). You will then develop 3 to 5 survey questions to be included on the survey. We will workshop these questions in class then incorporate them into a final version of the survey. Final Report (20%) ‐ Using SPSS you will analyze the survey results (descriptive, bivariate, multivariate). You will specifically focus on your proposed hypothesis. You will write a research report (intro, lit review, methods, findings, and discussion) incorporating literature from the annotated bibliography, the survey, and interviews. This report will be due on May 7th.
READINGS
Review Readings: If it has been a while since you took a methods course or just need a refresher, I recommend the following texts and web resources for general reading:
• Babbie, Earl R. 2002. The Basics of Social Research. 2nd Edition. Wadsworth. $1 used on Half.com http://search.half.ebay.com/The‐Basics‐of‐Social‐Research_W0QQmZbooks
• Child Care & Early Education Research Connections Website. “Research Methods” http://www.childcareresearch.org/servlet/DiscoverResourceController?displayPage=methods.jsp and “Assessing Research Quality” http://www.childcareresearch.org/servlet/DiscoverResourceController?displayPage=researchquality.jsp
o Quantitative Research Assessment Tool http://www.childcareresearch.org/discover/datamethods/downloads/quantitativeresearch.pdf
o Qualitative Research Assessment Tool http://www.childcareresearch.org/discover/datamethods/downloads/QualitativeResAssessTool.pdf
• Checklists and Tools for Use in School Evaluation • Evaluation for Learning • Wolfer, Loreen 2007. Real Research: Conducting and Evaluating Research in the Social
Sciences. Allyn and Bacon $28 used on Amazon http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer‐listing/0205416624/sr=1‐4/qid=1166724709/ref=sr_1_4/002‐1891161‐7501644?ie=UTF8&s=books
• Trochim, William. 2006 The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd Edition. http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/contents.htm.
• Resources for Methods in Evaluation and Social Research
WEEK ONE Getting Started
• Introduction to the course & the research project • Introduction to writing literature reviews using Endnote
Conducting a literature review Required Readings:
1. McInerney, D. M. “Writing Your Literature Review For An Effective Article” Chapter 4 in Publishing Your Psychology Research: A Guide to Writing for Journals in Psychology and Related Fields [Blackboard] Also available as e‐book via Jackson Library
2. Fink, Arlene. 2005. “Chapter 4: Doing the Review” In Conducting research literature reviews : from the Internet to paper 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA. Sage Publications. [Blackboard]
Required Online Tutorial
• Endnote http://www.endnote.com/training/tutorials/EndNoteX_tutorial/EndNote.asp • Additional materials under “External Links – Week One” on Blackboard
WEEK TWO Required Readings:
Why we do empirical research 3. Whyte, William Foote. 1986. ʺOn the Uses of Social Science Research.ʺ American
Sociological Review 51:555‐563. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003‐1224%28198608%2951%3A4%3C555%3AOTUOSS%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐1
4. Blumer, Herbert. 1954. ʺWhat is Wrong with Social Theory?ʺ American Sociological Review 19:3‐10. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003‐1224%28195402%2919%3A1%3C3%3AWIWWST%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐G
5. Becker, Howard S. 1996. ʺThe Epistemology of Qualitative Researchʺ in Jessor, Richard, Anne Colby, and Richard Schweder, eds., Essays on Ethnography and Human Development. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. http://home.earthlink.net/~hsbecker/qa.html
6. Ragin, Charles and David Zaret. 1983. ʺTheory and Method in Comparative Research: Two Strategies.ʺ Social Forces 61:731‐754. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0037‐7732%28198303%2961%3A3%3C731%3ATAMICR%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐F
Positivism, “the Science Wars,” and Social Epistemology 7. Baldus, Bernd. 1990. ʺPositivismʹs Twilight?ʺ Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers
canadiens de sociologie 15:149‐163. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0318‐6431%28199021%2915%3A2%3C149%3APT%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐%23
8. Hilgartner, Stephen. 1997. ʺThe Sokal Affair in Context.ʺ Science, Technology, & Human Values 22:506‐522. URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0162‐2439%28199723%2922%3A4%3C506%3ATSAIC%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐N
9. Wylie, Alison. 2000. ʺQuestions of Evidence, Legitimacy, and the (Dis)Unity of Science.ʺ American Antiquity 65:227‐237. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002‐7316%28200004%2965%3A2%3C227%3AQOELAT%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐Y
Optional Readings:
• Bryant, Joseph M. 1992. ʺTowards a Respectable, Reflexive, Scientific Sociology: A Note on the Reformation Required.ʺ Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie 17:322‐331. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0318‐6431%28199222%2917%3A3%3C322%3ATARRSS%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐G
• Charney, Davida. 1996. ʺEmpiricism Is Not a Four‐Letter Word.ʺ College Composition and Communication 47:567‐593. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0010‐096X%28199612%2947%3A4%3C567%3AEINAFW%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐S
• Cooper, Marilyn M. 1997. ʺDistinguishing Critical and Post‐Positivist Research.ʺ College Composition and Communication 48:556‐561. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0010‐096X%28199712%2948%3A4%3C556%3ADCAPR%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐I
• Goldman, Alvin. 2006. “Social Epistemology.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Access online at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology‐social/
• Lenski, Gerhard. 1991. ʺPositivismʹs Future: And Sociologyʹs.ʺ Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie 16:187‐195. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0318‐6431%28199121%2916%3A2%3C187%3APFAS%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐7
• Thornton, Stephen. 2006. ʺKarl Popper.ʺ The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta (ed.), Access online at: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/popper/
WEEK THREE Ethics of human subject research Required Readings:
10. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 1979. The Belmont Report Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. http://ohsr.od.nih.gov/guidelines/belmont.html
11. Lincoln, Yvonna S. and William G. Tierney. 2004. ʺQualitative Research and Institutional Review Boards.ʺ Qualitative Inquiry 10:219‐234. [Blackboard]
12. LeCompte, Margaret and Jean Schensul. 1999. “Ethical treatment of research participants and care for human relationships.” Chapter 9 in Designing and Conducting Ethnographic Research (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit, Vol 1). Altamira. [Blackboard]
Films • Zimbardo, Philip 1971 Quiet Rage: The Stanford Prison Experiment Online at
http://www.guba.com/watch/3000048452 • Obedience: The Milgram Experiment Online at:
http://myspacetv.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=5512184 Optional Readings:
• Buchanan, Elizabeth A. 2004. Readings in Virtual Research Ethics: Issues and Controversies Hershey, PA Idea Group Publishing. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?87303
• Trochim, William. 2006 The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd Edition. [http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/contents.htm]. Read the following topics and the subsections within:
o Ethics ‐ http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/ethics.htm WEEK FOUR Required Readings:
Conceptualization and Research Design 13. Trochim, William. 2006 The Research Methods Knowledge Base, 2nd Edition. Read the
following topics and all subsections within: a. Conceptualizing Research ‐
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/resprob.htm b. Design - http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/design.htm
14. Babbie, Earl R. 2005. “Chapter 4 Research Design” in The Basics of Social Research. Wadsworth. [Blackboard]
15. LeCompte, Margaret and Jean Schensul. 1999. “An overview of research design.” Chapter 4 in Designing and Conducting Ethnographic Research (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit, Vol 1). Altamira.
16. Blumer, Herbert. 1956. ʺSociological Analysis and the ʺVariableʺ.ʺ American Sociological Review 21:683‐690. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003‐1224%28195612%2921%3A6%3C683%3ASAAT%22%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐E
Optional Readings:
• Adcock, Robert and David Collier. 2001. “Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research,” American Political Science Review 95(3): 529‐546. http://journals.cambridge.org/article_S0003055401003100
• Schensul, Stephen, Jean Schensul, and Margaret LeCompte. 1999. “Validity and Reliability in Ethnographic Research.” Chapter 11 in Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit , Vol 2). Altamira.
• Stinchcombe, Arthur. 1968. ʺThe Logic of Scientific Inferenceʺ Constructing Social Theories. pgs 15 to 56.
• Tourangeau, Roger and Tom W. Smith. 1996. ʺAsking Sensitive Questions: The Impact of Data Collection Mode, Question Format, and Question Context.ʺ The Public Opinion Quarterly 60. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=9701143845&site=ehost‐live
WEEK FIVE Interviewing I Required Readings:
17. Johnson, John M. 2001. ʺIn Depth Interviewing,ʺ Chapter 5 in Jaber F. Gubrium and James A. Holstein, eds, Handbook of Interviewing Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. [Blackboard]
18. Schensul, Stephen, Jean Schensul, and Margaret LeCompte. 1999. “Semistructured Interviewing.” Chapter 7 in Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit , Vol 2). Altamira. [Blackboard]
19. Pawson, Ray. 1996. ʺTheorizing the Interview.ʺ The British Journal of Sociology 47:295‐314. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0007‐1315%28199606%2947%3A2%3C295%3ATTI%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐6
20. Schober, Michael F. and Frederick G. Conrad. 1997. ʺDoes Conversational Interviewing Reduce Survey Measurement Error?ʺ The Public Opinion Quarterly 61:576‐602. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=272781&site=ehost‐live
Optional Readings:
• Darling, Rosalyn Benjamin. 2002. “ Chapter 7 ‐ Identification Techniques II: Interviewing” The Partnership Model in Human Services: Sociological Foundations and Practices Clinical Sociology New York Kluwer Academic Publishers. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?66720
• DiCicco‐Bloom, Barbara and Benjamin F. Crabtree. 2006. ʺThe qualitative research interview.ʺ Medical Education 40:314‐321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2929.2006.02418.x
• Knapik, Mirjam. 2006. “The Qualitative Research Interview: Participants’ Responsive Participation in Knowledge Making.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods. Vol 5 no 3 http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/5_3/PDF/knapik.pdf
• Pini, Barbara. 2005. ʺInterviewing men: Gender and the collection and interpretation of qualitative data.ʺ Journal of Sociology 41:201‐216. http://find.galegroup.com/itx/infomark.do?&contentSet=IAC‐Documents&type=retrieve&tabID=T002&prodId=ITOF&docId=A134162652&source=gale&srcprod=ITOF&userGroupName=gree35277&version=1.0
• Schensul, Stephen, Jean Schensul, and Margaret LeCompte. 1999. “In‐Depth, Open‐Ended Interviewing.” Chapter 6 in Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit , Vol 2). Altamira. [Blackboard]
• Sturges, Judith E. and J. Hanrahan Kathleen. 2004. ʺComparing Telephone and Face‐to‐Face Qualitative Interviewing: a Research Note.ʺ Qualitative Research 4:107‐118.
• Warren, Carol A. B. and Tracy X. Karner. 2005. “Chapter 1 ‐ Introduction to Qualitative Methods” Discovering Qualitative Methods Field Research, Interviews, and Analysis First Edition http://roxbury.net/images/pdfs/QMFchap1.pdf
WEEK SIX Interviewing II No Required Readings: Please bring your interview questions. We will assemble these into the interview protocol and practical interview techniques. WEEK SEVEN Observational Research Required Readings:
21. Whyte, William Foote. 1949. ʺThe Social Structure of the Restaurant.ʺ The American Journal of Sociology 54:302‐310. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002‐9602%28194901%2954%3A4%3C302%3ATSSOTR%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐J
22. Vidich, Arthur. 1955.ʺParticipant observation and the collection and interpretation of data.ʺ American Journal of Sociology 60: 354‐360. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002‐9602%28195501%2960%3A4%3C354%3APOATCA%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐R
23. Erikson, Kai T. 1967. “A Comment on Disguised Observation in Sociology” Social Problems, Vol. 14, No. 4. pp. 366-373. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0037-7791%28196721%2914%3A4%3C366%3AACODOI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-Y
24. Fry, Lincoln J. 1973. “Participant Observation and Program Evaluation” Journal of Health and Social Behavior Vol. 14, No. 3 274‐278 http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022‐1465%28197309%2914%3A3%3C274%3APOAPE%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐S
25. Schensul, Stephen, Jean Schensul, and Margaret LeCompte. 1999. “Exploratory or Open‐Ended Observation.” Chapter 5 in Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit , Vol 2). Altamira. [Blackboard]
Optional Readings:
• Gardner, Burleigh B. and William Foote Whyte. 1946. ʺMethods for the Study of Human Relations in Industry.ʺ American Sociological Review 11:506‐512. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0003‐1224%28194610%2911%3A5%3C506%3AMFTSOH%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐CKolaja, Jiri. 1956. ʺA Contribution to the Theory of Participant Observation.ʺ Social Forces 35:159‐163. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0037-7732%28195612%2935%3A2%3C159%3AACTTTO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-B
• Ostrower, Francie. 1998. ʺNonparticipant Observation as an Introduction to Qualitative Research.ʺ Teaching Sociology 26:57‐61. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0092‐055X%28199801%2926%3A1%3C57%3ANOAAIT%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐R
• Pohland, Paul. 1972. ʺParticipant Observation as a Research Methodology.ʺ Studies in Art Education 13:4‐15. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039-3541%28197221%2913%3A3%3C4%3APOAARM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G
• Schensul, Stephen, Jean Schensul, and Margaret LeCompte. 1999. “Entering the Field.” Chapter 4 in Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit , Vol 2). Altamira. [Blackboard course documents]
• Whyte, William Foote. 1993. ʺRevisiting ʺStreet Corner Societyʺ.ʺ Sociological Forum 8:285‐298. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0884-8971%28199306%298%3A2%3C285%3AR%22CS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0
• Jackson, Jane. 2006. ʺEthnographic Preparation for Short‐Term Study and Residence in the Target Culture.ʺ International Journal of Intercultural Relations 30(1):77‐98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.07.004
WEEK EIGHT Visual Sociology Readings:
26. Becker, Howard, 1995. ʺVisual sociology, documentary photography, and photojournalism: itʹs (almost) all a matter of context.ʺ Visual Sociology 10: 1/2. http://home.earthlink.net/~hsbecker/visual.html
27. Epstein, Iris, Bonnie Stevens, Patricia McKeever, and Sylvain Baruchel. 2006. “Photo Elicitation Interview (PEI): Using Photos to Elicit Children’s Perspectives.” International Journal of Qualitative Methods Vol 5 no 3 http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/5_3/PDF/epstein.pdf
28. Ruby, Jay. 2005. ʺThe last 20 years of visual anthropology; a critical review.ʺ Visual Studies vol. 20: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14725860500244027
29. Wang, Caroline. 2006. PhotoVoice http://www.photovoice.com/index.html (read Background and Methods, look at Projects and Gallery)
Film:
• Sills, S. and Miles, B. 2002. “Street Life on Mill: Homeless youth on Tempe Arizona’s Mill Avenue”
Optional Readings:
• Harper, Douglass, 1988. ʺVisual Sociology: Expanding Sociological Visionʺ The American Sociologist. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=5331997&site=ehost‐live
• Margolis, Eric.1994. “Video Ethnography: Toward a Reflexive Paradigm for Documentary” Jump Cut 39. http://courses.ed.asu.edu/margolis/videth2001.html
• Shahidul Alam 1994. “The Visual Representation of Developing Countries by Developmental Agencies and the Western Media” ZoneZero (online magazine) http://zonezero.com/magazine/articles/shahidul/shahidul.html
WEEK NINE Analysis I – Qualitative Data (Note we will concentrate on qualitative analysis in the readings/assignments as Soc 618 Advanced Data Analysis covers mostly quantitative techniques) Required Readings:
30. Bird, Cindy M. 2005. “How I Stopped Dreading and Learned to Love Transcription.” Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 11, No. 2. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1077800404273413
31. LeCompte, Margaret and Jean Schensul. 1999. “Data analysis: How ethnographers make sense of their data.” Chapter 7 in Designing and Conducting Ethnographic Research (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit, Vol 1). Altamira. [Blackboard]
32. Dick, B. 2005. ʺGrounded theory: a thumbnail sketchʺ, Action Research International http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/grounded.html
33. Bruce, Catherine D. 2007. “Questions Arising about Emergence, Data Collection, and Its Interaction with Analysis in a Grounded Theory Study” International Journal of Qualitative Methods 6 (1) http://www.ualberta.ca/%7Eiiqm/backissues/6_1/bruce.pdf
Software:
• Atlas.ti Demo http://www.atlasti.com/demo.html [Note Atlas.ti Full Version is available in UNCG Computer Labs]
• MAXqda2 Full Version 30day Demo http://maxqda.com/2_demo.htm • Express Scribe Transcription Playback Software http://www.nch.com.au/scribe/
Optional Readings: • Altheide, David 1987. Ethnographic Content Analysis,” Qualitative Sociology, 1987,10:
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=10949092&site=ehost‐live
• Altheide, David and John Johnson. 1994. ʺCriteria for Assessing Interpretive Validity in Qualitative Research,ʺ in Norman K. Denzin, Yvonna Lincoln eds., Handbook of Qualitative Methodology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. 485‐499. [Blackboard E‐reserves]
• Atlas.ti 5 Manual http://www.atlasti.com/manual.html • dresing‐pehl.de Free transcription software – how to transcribe
http://www.audiotranscription.de/transcribing.htm • Jacelon, Cynthia S. and Katharine K. OʹDell. 2005. ʺAnalyzing Qualitative Data.ʺ Urologic
Nursing 25:217‐220. • Morgan, George A. 2004. SPSS for Introductory Statistics: Use and Interpretation.
Mahwah, N.J Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?112901
• Power, Elaine M. 2004. ʺToward Understanding in Postmodern Interview Analysis: Interpreting the Contradictory Remarks of a Research Participant.ʺ Qualitative Health Research 14:858‐865.
WEEK TEN Required Readings:
Sampling 34. Stephan, Frederick F. 1950. “Sampling” The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 55, No. 4.
pp. 371‐375. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9602%28195001%2955%3A4%3C371%3AS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C
35. Mangione, Thomas W. 1995. Chapters 4‐5. Mail Surveys: Improving the Quality. Sage [Blackboard]
36. Schensul, Stephen, Jean Schensul, and Margaret LeCompte. 1999. “Ethnographic Sampling.” Chapter 10 in Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires (Ethnographerʹs Toolkit , Vol 2). Altamira. [Blackboard]
37. Guest, Greg, Arwen Bunce and Laura Johnson. 2006. ʺHow Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability.ʺ Field Methods 18(1). [Blackboard]
Optional Readings:
• Biemer, Paul P. 2003. Introduction to survey quality. Hoboken, N.J. : Wiley. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?85511
• Bradley, N. 1999. “Sampling for Internet surveys. An examination of respondent selection for internet research. “ Journal of the Market Research Society, 41(4).
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=04‐13‐2003&FMT=TG&DID=000000051903515&REQ=1&Cert=ENWsL6ScYcTULylhrnnPpTgGcutcpaaJuK1H9MrQ9SJohfFekkyQsbVKyALO1M5VshpUCuHikDb9HgVKdAdpLA‐‐
• Chaudhuri, Arijit. 1992. Survey sampling: theory and methods. New York: M. Dekker. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?46955
• Foreman, E.K. 1991. Chapters 2 & 11. Survey sampling principles. New York : M. Dekker. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?47121
• Lehtonen, Risto. Practical methods for design and analysis of complex surveys. Chichester; New York : Wiley, c1996. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?17870
• Som, Ranjan Kumar. 1996. Practical sampling technique. 2nd ed. New York : M. Dekker. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?12747
WEEK ELEVEN Survey design I Required Readings:
Designing Questionnaires 38. Dillman, Don A. 1991. ʺThe Design and Administration of Mail Surveys.ʺ Annual Review
of Sociology 17:225‐249. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0360‐0572%281991%2917%3C225%3ATDAAOM%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐I
39. Biemer, Paul P.; Lyberg, Lars. 2003. “Chapter 10 Practical Survey Design for Minimizing Total Survey Error” Introduction to Survey Quality. Wiley Series in Survey Methodology. Hoboken, N.J. John Wiley & Sons. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?85511
40. Schonlau, Matthias.; Fricker, Ronald D.; Elliott, Marc N. 2002. “Ch 5 Guidelines For Designing And Implementing Internet Surveys.” Conducting Research Surveys Via E‐mail and the Web. Santa Monica, Ca: Rand. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?72770
41. Couper, M. P. 2000. “Web surveys: a review of issues and approaches”. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64(4). http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=4224007&site=ehost‐live
Software:
• Remark Office OMR Demo http://www.gravic.com/remark/officeomr/downloads.html Optional Readings:
• Arsham, Hossein. 1996 Questionnaire Design and Surveys Sampling http://home.ubalt.edu/ntsbarsh/Business‐stat/stat‐data/Surveys.htm
• Boone, Kevin 2004. How to conduct a survey brief guide http://www.kevinboone.com/howto_survey.html
• Couper, M. P., Traugott, M. W., & Lamias, M. J. 2001. Web survey design and administration. Public Opinion Quarterly, 65(2), 230‐253. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=sih&AN=4939116&site=ehost‐live
• Crawford, S. D., Couper, M. P. & Lamias, M. J. (2001). Web Surveys: Perceptions of Burden. Social Science Computer Review, 19(2), 146‐162. http://ejournals.ebsco.com/Journal.asp?JournalID=103767
• DeRouvray, C. & Couper, M. P. 2002. Designing a Strategy for Reducing ʺNo Opinionʺ Responses in Web‐Based Surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 20(1) http://ejournals.ebsco.com/Journal.asp?JournalID=103767
• Dillman, Don A. and Dennis K. Bowker. 2001. “The Web Questionnaire Challenge to Survey Methodologists.” in Ulf‐Dietrich Reips & Michael Bosnjak, eds. Dimensions of Internet Science. Pabst Science Publishers, Lengerich, Germany. http://www.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/zuma_paper_dillman_bowker.pdf
• Dillman, Don A. And Leah Melani Christian. 2005. ʺSurvey Mode as a Source of Instability in Responses Across Surveys.ʺ Field Methods 17:30‐52. http://www.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers/Mixed%20Mode%20Submission%20to%20Field%20Methods.pdf
• Dillman, Don. Available Papers website http://www.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers.htm • Dillman, Don. Available Papers website http://www.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers.htm • Don A. Dillman and Leah Christian. 2002. “The Influence Words, Symbols, Numbers,
and Graphics on Answers to Self‐Administered Questionnaires: Results from 18 Experimental Comparisons.” http://www.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers/single_space_fig_table.pdf
• Foreman, E.K. 1991. Chapters 12. Survey sampling principles. New York : M. Dekker. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?47121
• Frary, Robert B. 1996. “Hints for designing effective questionnaires.” Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 5(3). http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=5&n=3
• Hiskey, S. & Troop, N.A. 2002. Online Longitudinal Survey Research: Viability and Participation. Social Science Computer Review, 20(3). http://ejournals.ebsco.com/Journal.asp?JournalID=103767
• Mangione, Thomas W. 1995. Chapters 2‐3; 7‐8. Mail Surveys: Improving the Quality. Sage [copy of book with Dr. Sills]
• Paul Barribeau et al. 2005. Survey Research. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University Department of English. http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/survey/
• Walonick, David S. 2004. Excerpts from: Survival Statistics. http://www.statpac.com/surveys/surveys.doc
WEEK TWELVE Survey Design II No Required Readings: We will spend this period working on the survey design and preparing for fielding both the faculty and student versions of the survey.
WEEK THIRTEEN Analysis II –What to do with mixed data
42. Greene, Jennifer C.; Valerie J. Caracelli; and Wendy F. Graham. 1989. “Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed‐Method Evaluation Designs” Educational Evaluation
and Policy Analysis 11: 3 255‐274 http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0162‐3737%28198923%2911%3A3%3C255%3ATACFFM%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐F
43. Ivankova, Nataliya, Creswell, John W. , and Stick, Sheldon. 2006. “Using Mixed-Methods Sequential Explanatory Design: From Theory to Practice.” Field Methods; Feb2006, Vol. 18 Issue 1, p3-20 [Blackboard]
44. Morgan, David. 1998. “Practical Strategies for Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Applications to Health Research.” Qualitative Health Research. DOI: 10.1177/104973239800800307 [Blackboard]
45. Silverstein, Gary and Laure Sharp. 1997. “Ch 7. Reporting the Results of Mixed Method Evaluations” User-Friendly Handbook for Mixed Method Evaluations http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/EHR/REC/pubs/NSF97-153/CHAP_7.HTM
WEEK FOURTEEN & WEEK FIFTEEN No Required Readings: We will spend this period working on survey data entry and analysis.
Optional Module: Focus Groups Required Readings:
• Edmunds, Holly. 1999. Chapters 1‐4. The Focus Group Research Handbook Lincolnwood, Ill. NTC Contemporary http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?13311
• Goebert, Bonnie.and Rosenthal, Herma M. 2001. Chapters 4‐5. Beyond Listening: Learning the Secret Language of Focus Groups New York John Wiley & Sons, Inc. http://library.uncg.edu/cgi/ebooks.pl?72386
• Morgan, David L. 1996. ʺFocus Groupsʺ Annual Review of Sociology Vol. 22 129‐152 http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0360‐0572%281996%2922%3C129%3AFG%3E2.0.CO%3B2‐Q
Optional Readings:
• Woodring, Jonathan C., Susan M. Foley, Gabriella Santoro Rado, Keith R. Brown, and Doris M. Hamner. 2006. ʺFocus Groups and Methodological Reflections.ʺ Journal of Disability Policy Studies 16:248‐258. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=19899277&site=ehost‐live
• Barbour, Rosaline S. 2005. ʺMaking sense of focus groups.ʺ Medical Education 39:742‐750. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐2929.2005.02200.x