65 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2019
    1. Liberal and Conservative Representations of the Good Society: A (Social) Structural Topic Modeling Approach

      I chose this article, because it is timely, relevant, easy-to-follow (because it is intuitive), and innovative (using data sources, Twitter, and an innovative method, textual analysis). I hope you enjoy the reading. Please follow my annotations (comments + questions) and respond to the questions I pose. Try to answer them in your own words.

    1. It is generally agreed that literature surveys and descriptive compilations do not meet the contribution-to-knowledge re-quirement for the dissertation

      What is not accepted.

    2. Positivist versus postpositivist.

      My research is postpositivist

    3. Experimental versus descriptive.

      My research is going to be descriptive.

    4. Quantitative versus qualitative.

      My research is qualitative.

    5. NEW OR IMPROVED ANALYSIS Analysis may be based on existing evidence or include new data.

      Maybe my research leads in this way, but I think is more the previous one.

    6. The evidence may be collected by an experiment, simulation, observations, questionnaire, interviews, or measurements.

      Maybe my research goes in this way: new or improved evidence.

    7. The additive contribution of a dissertation may arise from 1. new or improved evidence; 2. new or improved methodology; 3. new or improved analysis; 4. new or improved concepts or theories.

      Four kind of contributions

    8. The dissertation should be based on a significant question, problem, or hypothesis.

      The power of a good question. That's why we need to learn how and what to ask.

    9. Different approaches to testing of important results. If a researcher has reported interesting results with one research technique and a given research population, a doctoral student may consider replicating the experiment, altering either the research technique or the research population.

      Open science and reproductible science is key here.

    10. Writers of disserta-tions commonly describe further research that needs to be done.

      Work on the results of others.

    11. If there is likely to be a continuing interest, either academically or otherwise on the topic, then a student can continué to maintin scholarly capability in the área and continué to be a significant authority on the subject.

      This is like Bret Victor's Inventing on principle and the question is: what is your principle?

    12. A research project will typicaliy have more than one potential outcome. For example, a research experiment may fail to dis-prove the nuil hypothesis, it may disprove it, or it may be incon-clusive.

      A database of unsuccessful cases is a good thing to have too.

    13. The exploratory investigation, definition of problem, and writing normally take about half of the total time.

      I can use this to measure my time.

    14. If no theory base can be identified, the topic should be rejected

      Theory is mandatory

    15. Observations lead to theory to classify, explain, and predict the observations.

      Sounds like grounded theory, or at least the prediction is something very useful.

    16. Research needed and interesting

      Why my research is needed and interesting?

    17. In reading dissertations, the student should begin to formúlate a general understanding of the structure and scope of a disserta-tion, and the meaning of contribution to knowledge as applied to doctoral dissertations.

      Structure and scope.

    18. The Selection of a Dissertation Topic

      The selection of a dissertation topic

    1. . To summarize: Your aim is to explain 1. what you are writing about —I am working on the topic of... 2. what you don't know about it—because / want tofind out... 3. why you want your reader to know and care about it—m order to help my reader understand better...

      Short and sweet.

    2. add a second indirect question that explains why you asked your first question.

      Here is the so what? in the sentence you are building.

    3. When you add that because I want tofind out how/why/whether clause, you state why you are pursuing your topic: to answer a question important to you.

      Back to the beginning: a question important to you.

    4. because I want to find out who/what/when/where/whether/ why/how .

      This is the flavour: the indirect question.

    5. start by naming your project:

      Put a name to that baby.

    6. SO WHAT?

      Miles Davis was right.

    7. If you are an experienced researcher, look for questions that other researchers ask but don't answer.

      Remember: the idea is to make it interesting. It can lead you where nobody else knows.

    8. How does your topic fit into the context of a larger structure or function as part of a larger system?

      Structure and composition.

    9. Ask about the History of Your Topic

      History of the topic

    10. So the best way to begin working on your focused topic is not to find all the information you can on it, but to formúlate questions that direct you to just that information you need to answer them

      What is my question to find information?

    11. If a writer asks no specific question worth asking, he can offer no specific answer worth supporting.

      The power of the questions.

    12. Caution: Don't narrow your topic so much that you can't find information on it

      Where to stop while you are narrowing.

    13. We narrowed those topics by adding words and phrases, but of a special kind: conflict, description, contribution, and developing. Those nouns are derived from verbs expressing actions or relation-ships: to conflict, to describe, to contribute, and to develop. Lacking such "action" words, your topic is a .static thing.

      Be careful: you need words that describes actions.

    14. A topic is probably too broad if you can state it in four or five words

      How to narrow a topic.

    15. Few experi-enced researchers trust Wikipedia, so under no circumstances cite it as a source of evidence (unless your topic is Wikipedia itself).

      Lucky me! I can cite Wikipedia.

    16. Google your topic,

      Or use DuckDuckGo if you care about your privacy.

    17. Once you have a list of topics, choose the one or two that inter-est you most and explore their research potential. Do this:

      Choose one or two topics.

    18. Start by listing as many interests as you can that you'd like to explore.

      Make a list

    19. But also ask yourself: What interests me about this tapie? What would interest others?

      I should answer this questions.

    20. Some questions raise problems; others do not.

      Question and problems are not the same.

    21. But other questions may intrigue only the researcher:

      Write an interesting question is key.

    22. A subject is a broad área of knowledge (e.g., climate change), while a topic is a specific interest within that área (e.g., the effect of climate change on migratory birds).

      The hierarchy is:

      • Subject
        • Topic
    23. As you begin a research project, you will want to distinguish a topic from a sub-ject.

      There is a difference between topic and subject.

    24. From Topics to Questions

      Lectura de Research Design in Social Sciences (GH)

  2. Mar 2019
    1. Perhaps, he realized, these viruses don’t actually need to unite their segments in the same host cell. “If theory was saying that this is impossible, maybe the viruses just don’t do it,” he says. “And once we had this stupid idea, testing it was very easy.”

      This is different from the theory of evolution or the theory of electromagnetism. It's a smaller things, like an assumption. Evolution, also in biology, is a more encompassing set of ideas. So the theoretical framework has a hierarchy. Perhaps at the top is a Kuhnian paradigm or a Lakatosian research program.

      Does this hierarchy different between sciences, though? Like, how hard is it to take a new assumption and grow it into a fully-fledged theory? Biology is more complex than physics, with more "facts" and forms to understand. Evolution is different from electromagnetism because it doesn't limit as much. EM clearly prescribes what's possible and what isn't, whereas evolution doesn't make the distinction so clearly.

  3. Feb 2019
    1. But the greatest drawback of our educational methods is that we pay an excessive amount of altention to the natural sciences and not enough to ethics.

      How would society be different if we paid more attention to ethics as opposed to the natural sciences? What would an ethics-oriented society look like?

  4. Oct 2018
  5. Oct 2017
    1. but the occupation reported as having the largest number of former master’s students was kindergarten–Grade 12 (K–12) teacher. These results demonstrate that master’s degree graduates in learning sciences have the potential to influence practice in a diverse range of applied settings.

      Considering that 31% of master graduates are in the K-12 teachers or educational leaders and administrators, it would be interesting to see what would happen if they implement the learning theories into their classrooms and schools.

    1. Some good men, and even of respectable information, consider the learned sciences as useless acquirements; some think that they do not better the condition of men; and others that education like private & individual concerns, should be left to private & individual effort

      In this quote, there is this all or nothing mentality; many of the founders seem to take different stances. The question: is the teaching and education of "learned sciences" beneficial? Universities in the 21st century seem to promote goals aimed at developing deeper thinkers, people with a desire and curiosity to continue learning, even after college. The fact that there was such a debate over whether "learned sciences" were an important factor of the UVA curriculum is shocking to me since the University seems to be so centered around creating "informed citizens" nowadays. I have a hard time understanding how learned sciences are useless since I believe they do "better the conditions of men." Learned sciences promote engagement throughout all disciplines and create better students and sharper thinkers as they have stronger abilities to collaborate with others. I think they included this statement to avoid criticism; they decided to ultimately leave the decision of whether or not to include learned sciences to the “private and individual effort,” exhibiting that this decision would be less contested if left to the specific individuals (i.e. professors and students). This surprised me to read because it’s easy to see how much values have changed to bring us to today’s version of the University of Virginia. From my “Doing Fieldwork” engagement, it is easy to see how much other people influence our own perceptions and ideas, so I think that Learned Sciences are an essential part of a college education.

  6. Apr 2017
  7. Feb 2017
    1. professional forums

      I'm curious how platforms like Hypothesis, and more broadly the social practices afforded by open annotation, help create the conditions for new types of professionally-relevant (online) forums. I think a stance toward engagement with the political dimensions of learning is complementary to the work organizations like Hypothesis who are building tools and partnerships for a more democratic, peer-reviewed web. https://youtu.be/QCkm0lL-6lc

    2. to prompt and engage a dialogue

      One means of engaging such dialogue is through the public annotathon scheduled for February 27th through March 3rd, and which will occur right here - in the margins of this pre-print turned blog post. See my post for more information about the annotathon, and how to join and use Hypothesis.

    3. This pre-publication version of "The Learning Sciences in a New Era of U.S. Nationalism" is the featured text of an annotathon, scheduled for Monday, February 27th through Friday, March 3rd, in collaboration with The Politics of Learning Writing Collective and Cognition & Instruction. Thanks to Thomas Phillip, Susan Jurow, Shirin Vossoughi, Megan Bang, and Miguel Zavala for graciously agreeing to participate in the annotathon of their article, and to Noel Enyedy and Jamie Gravell for their assistance in organizing and promoting the event.

      Questions can be addressed here via Page Notes (a type of annotation attached to an entire document/URL, and not in-line), or via Twitter (@remikalir).

  8. Oct 2016
    1. ValuesIn striving to achieve our mission, we place high value on:Providing client-oriented services characterized by personal, professional, and organizational integrity. Producing quality work products anchored in science.Creating a nurturing environment responsive to individual needs for growth and professional development.Maintaining a spirit of openness, constructive communication, collegiality, and teamwork in all our work.Striking an appropriate balance between the demands of work and the private lives of our staff.Diversity of ideas, opinions, backgrounds, life styles, and experiences of our staff.Individual initiative and entrepreneurship on the part of our staff.Making a better world while enjoying work.

      Example of values articulated by the American Institutes for Research

  9. Jul 2016
    1. Page 204

      Borgman on the different types of data in the social sciences:

      Data in the social sciences fall into two general categories. The first is data collected by researchers through experiments, interviews, surveys, observations, or similar names, analogous to scientific methods. … the second category is data collected by other people or institutions, usually for purposes other than research.

    2. Page 202

      Borgman on information artifacts in the social sciences

      like the sciences, the social sciences create and use minimal information. Yet they differ in the sources of the data. While almost all scientific data are created by for scientific purposes, a significant portion of social scientific data consists of records credit for other purposes, by other parties.