Dr. Julian Dierkes
271 Choi, 822-6237
j |dot| dierkes |at| ubc |dot| ca
Office hourse: Wed 12-13h
Click here for more specific information on the course and on readings.
All social science research is comparative. Whether a statistical model compares coefficients in a multiple regression to a null-model, or a researcher is conducting a qualitative analysis of archival documents, social science research is always based on a comparative standard. This seminar is intended to examine the underpinnings of research that is explicitly comparative. While most of the approaches examined will focus on cross-national comparisons, these examinations apply equally to cross-regional research and - in some cases - to longitudinal comparisons as well.
The seminar aims to familiarize participants with some prominent formulations of the methods and conceptualization of causality in a comparative framework. This familiarization will be achieved through an introduction of the methodological literature as well as of exemplary comparative monographs and articles drawn from a number of disciplines and focusing on - though not limited to - cases from research on Northeast Asia. Substantively, these examples will be primarily drawn on the literatures in the sociology of culture, economic sociology, organizational analysis and political economy.
While the seminar is an element of the Master in Asia Pacific Policy Studies (MAPPS) programme and the sociology graduate programs in the Department of Anthropology and Sociology, it is hoped that it will be of interest to and a useful addition to the methodological training of graduate students in other social science disciplines.
"Higher education" implies that students acquire applicable skills, but especially that they learn to understand the world around them more thoroughly. While such an understanding does require specific techniques (writing and analytical tools, etc.), the biggest leap that social science students make is to find ways in which social relations can be analyzed to arrive at conclusions that can be accepted by other analysts and that can therefore form the basis of further research or applications.
This view of higher education dictates that the central objective of teaching is to foster a familiarity with the fundamental logic of social-scientific reasoning and to use applications of such reasoning to equip students with some specific tools, but to also enable them to apply such reasoning to other areas of inquiry.
I see my role in graduate seminars as providing a structured framework for the investigation of the research literature on a particular topic, guiding discussions towards an analytical understanding, and being available for further discussions and applications of the materials covered.
Following my focus on the development of analytical reasoning skills, I expect seminar participants to be self-directed learners and to come to discussions very well-prepared and eager to engage in an analysis and evaluation of reading materials. Accordingly, I use the majority of seminar meetings to lead participants in challenging some of the knowledge transmitted and to develop more complex analytical reasoning skills in the process of this challenge. My role is primarily that of a facilitator.
The course outline below suggests readings for the three parts envisioned for the seminar, (1) a brief look at classical formulations of the advantages of explicitly comparative research, (2) a look at contemporary methodological debates among comparativists, and (3) an examination of exemplary comparative works based on a variety of methodological and disciplinary approaches.
Given its aim at participants from a number of disciplines across the social sciences, the syllabus leaves room for customization according to participants' regional, methodological, and disciplinary interests. The readings for Part 3 listed below will be complemented by additional required readings selected by participants on the basis of their interests and research plans. Such additional readings will therefore opportunities to broaden the coverage of the course beyond the geographic and substantive regions suggested above.
The goal of the seminar is to enable participants to formulate a research plan or policy analysis that makes the most productive use of explicitly comparative research. Requirements for the seminar are geared toward this goal in that participants will be required to submit written work that mimics the iterations of developing a policy analysis or research proposal, but with a particular focus on comparative methodology.
Peer-evaluation of policy analyses and research proposals is intended both, to foster collective learning, and to replicate evaluation mechanisms for future writing. A familiarity with the evaluation of others' analyses and proposals will deepen participants' familiarity with particular approaches, as well as allowing them to conduct an evaluation exercise based on a catalogue of criteria derived from readings and their discussion.
As a significant number of participants will have to write policy analyses or project proposals in their professional or academic careers, the course requirements will be tailored to such aims in terms of their length and format. While the format for policy analyses and research proposals is generally flexible, seminar participants should discuss their plans with the instructor to determine the most useful format for analyses and proposals (e.g., meeting the requirements of a specific target audience). Policy analyses will be expected to include a brief "executive summary" of the analysis and to be no longer than fifteen pages. Research proposals should be no longer than ten pages and include an abstract as well. Participants preparing SSHRC doctoral fellowship applications should include the two-page descriptions of a "course of study" required with their application.
Last updated: January 2007