Philosophy of science academic methodology reports_papers
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Philosophy of science academic methodology reports_papers

on

  • 1,018 views

WRITING A SCIENTIFIC REPORT IN E-CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

WRITING A SCIENTIFIC REPORT IN E-CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,018
Slideshare-icon Views on SlideShare
1,018
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
3
Downloads
46
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Philosophy of science academic methodology reports_papers Philosophy of science academic methodology reports_papers Presentation Transcript

    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE  METHODOLOGY, THEORY AND ACADEMIC APPROACH WRITING A SCIENTIFIC REPORT IN E‐CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT Caspar David Friedrich: Der Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer  (Wanderer above the sea of fog, 1818)VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANG
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory Keywords: How to work with‐ and write an academic report with a relevant  and Approach use of the subject of philosophy of science (PoS) in e‐concept development. Introduction Scope: Reflection on learning. The scientific work with: concepts, research to the Concepts and the design of the solution in the given subject area and in the academia. Note on Literature to be Used International class: Danish class: Lisa Bartolotti (2010):  Carsten Rønn (2006):  An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science.  Almen introduktion for  Polity, UK.  professionsuddannelserne. Alinea, DK. Author’s profile: www.lisabortolotti.com Se også: www.samfundsviden.dk under  Philosophy ressource: http://www.iep.utm.edu/ teorier og metoder finder du videnskabsteori
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach The extended stratification model. Carsten Rønn 2006 A Good Theory Is Practical Meta theory Meta level Analysis of the epistemological (knowledge, why do we know),  ontological (being, existense and reality),  ethic and scientific basis of the theory. Level of theory Analysis of the strength of the formal,  SCIENCE functional, pragmatic type of theory.  What are the emperical variables,  the hypothetic variables? Data level Analysis of the emperical level Reality
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach A Good Theory By studying multiple theories you can understand different relations Is Practical between ways of creating several perspectives on the same concept. By looking at the meta theoretical aspects, the science of theory, you can develop a critical approach to knowledge as a network between the  investigator and the investigated concepts. Knowledge as a network means coherent knowledge: Models, theory and  research fit together and validates each other consistently.
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach A Good Theory A model of the construction Is Practical of critical knowledge through the dynamic relations between empirical data and theory Meta theory (Rønn 2006) Meta theories ontology, epistemology, ethics methodology Space of reflexivity THEORY  EMPIRICAL DATA KNOWLEDGE
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach ABSTRACTION For example concepts, theories A Good Theory and models of reality and relations Is Practical REDUCTION  OF COMPLEXITY CONCRETE From the concrete The reality we meet per se.  to abstraction. Validated knowledge is produced by a scientific approach. When I analyze I keep in mind a certain coherent structure for my thinking. That is a relation between analysis and produced synthesis. When I make a synthesis, a structure of analytic work, I use the several parts of my former analyses as grounds for further development.
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach Feedback loop Feedback loop Via: Thomas Markussen Ph.D: Designviden. Form, erfaring og erkendelse. Lecture (ppt). Academic  Hypothesis Test Approach Falsification Falsification (PoS) Verification Verification Collecting data Interviews Time: Idea     Research                 Identify problem     Design + test Creative work: Sketching user experience Engage culture E‐Design Experience design Project management: Pre‐analysis + Research  Design + usertests Assess project paradigm Assess test methods Risks Stakeholders Assess test paradigm (qualitative etc.) Personas and user scenarios
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach Argumentation Report Structure The Report INTRODUCTION (1/5): This is the context of the report • Presentation of: the topic + assigment as seen in relation to: Relevance relevance (now) and education, Educational subject relation the relevant challenges you have  • Problem introduction + questions you need to ask  • Problem statement + what you initially state as an relevant  • Hypothesis (initial) hypothesis and how you can make a  • Demarcation demarcation based on:  deadlines, the current educational conditions and stakeholders Explained • The structure of the report. + a good, graphic overview
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach Argumentation Report Structure The Report METHOD AND THEORY (2/5): This is the scientific introduction • Presentation and legitimation of of the report.  the report in relation to: In this section you present: PoS‐tradition, background. 1. Scientific paradigm (PoS tradition). Your use of theory for the concepts. 2.Concepts and theoretical framework. Practical approach 3.Investigation method (independent  and why you choose, for example, qualitative variables for concepts) and chosen research (3 can be linked to 1: traditions in this research paradigm. area of science and 2: your theoretical design).  If you are using a segmentation tool and other models that dominate your reseach scope and method, then assess its scientific paradigm and verify its use.   
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach Argumentation Report Structure The Report INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN (3/5): This is the documentation part  • Test evaluation and documentation of the report. of results (dependent variables) • Analysis of data: Theoretical analysis. Reliability of sources and data. The knowledge obtained through research may New knowledge. alter parts of the hypothesis and lead to aprecise identification of the objective and what to do. • Evaluation of hypothesis (falsification) • Identification of the problem In the section design of solution you present  • Design of solution other aspects such as: project paradigm, creative • Project management. work, cultural analysis, SWOT, Marketing,  • ??? Etc. elements. Communication ideas,  etc. 
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach Argumentation Report Structure The Report METHOD EVALUATION (4/5): This is the discussion‐ and method • Evaluation of the method evaluation part of the report. and its impact on the results. • Theory and method:  Strengths and weaknesses • Other variables and events that impacted the result.
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach Argumentation Report Structure The Report CONCLUSION (5/5): This is the conclusive, contextual part  • Evaluation of the hypothesis and the  of the report. Although it’s not a final  problem fomulation: falsifications and  conclusion, as there are possibly many verifications. other variables to account for. • Results of design. Conclusion. PERSPECTIVATION • Evaluation of the project and our effort. • The use of our work. • Knowledge, skills and competencies:  Before and after this project. • Future actions.
    • PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE VIDENSKABSTEORI > METODE > TEORI > RAPPORTEN > AKADEMISK TILGANGMethod, Theory and Approach INTRODUCTION INVESTIGATION AND DESIGN • Presentation of: the topic + assigment • Test evaluation and documentation Relevance. of results (dependent variables) Educational subject relation. • Analysis of data: The Report • Problem introduction. Theoretical analysis. • Problem statement. Reliability of sources and data. (Summary): • Hypothesis (initial). New knowledge. • Demarcation. • Evaluation of hypothesis (falsification). • The structure of the report. • Identification of the problem. • Design of solution. METHOD AND THEORY • Project management. • Presentation and legitimation of • ??? Etc. elements … the report in relation to: 1. Scientific paradigm (PoS tradition). CONCLUSION 2. Concepts and theoretical framework. • Evaluation of the hypothesis and the problem  3. Investigation method (independent  fomulation: falsifications and verifications. variables for concepts) and chosen • Results of design. Conclusion. research paradigm. PERSPECTIVATION • Evaluation of the project and our effort. • The use of our work. • Knowledge, skills and competencies: Before and after this project. • Future actions.