Suchergebnisse

Shifts in the ways that science is being undertaken and marshaled toward social change argue for a new kind of professional competence. Taking the view that the science of social work is centrally about the relationship of research to social impact, the authors extend Fong's focus on transdisciplinary and translational approaches to science, illustrating ways that national and international priorities are exerting enormous influence in structures for and expectations of science relevant to social work. The authors also emphasize the growing centrality of transformational research, focusing in particular on the interdependence of education and impact. The intent is to stimulate reflectiveness regarding social work's preparedness to support and indeed amplify a robust culture of high impact science, including more confident, clearly articulated roles and skills in this contemporary scientific landscape.

This interdisciplinary volume explores the relationship between history and a range of disciplines in the humanities and social sciences: economics, political science, political theory, international relations, sociology, philosophy, law, literature and anthropology. The relevance of historical approaches within these disciplines has shifted over the centuries. Many of them, like law and economics, originally depended on self-consciously historical procedures. These included the marshalling of evidence from past experience, philological techniques and source criticism. Between the late nineteenth and the middle of the twentieth century, the influence of new methods of research, many indebted to models favoured by the natural sciences, such as statistical, analytical or empirical approaches, secured an expanding intellectual authority while the hegemony of historical methods declined in relative terms. In the aftermath of this change, the essays collected in History in the Humanities and Social Sciences reflect from a variety of angles on the relevance of historical concerns to representative disciplines as they are configured today.

AbstractRising wealth and social inequalities around the world place great pressure on social researchers to interpret and explain the impact. However, it is equally important to recognise that scientists too have been part of the reproduction of social inequalities. This article expands on Burawoy's (2015) appeal to social scientists to acknowledge that social inequalities are not only external to the social science community specifically – and the scientific community more generally – but they also pervade academic labour and the way universities are managed and reformed. By taking the case of Indonesia, the largest economy in understudied Southeast Asia, this article reveals types of social inequalities reproduced and sustained through policies and practices within universities. These inequalities are the exclusionary effects of internationalisation, selective inclusion and corporatist bureaucracies, as well as regional inequalities in terms of infrastructure and capacity. We problematise the detrimental effects of marketisation in higher education on academic imagination and how it extends authoritarian developmentalism (1966–1998) to suit neoliberal demands. The article ends with propositions on how academics from the Global South can better understand their social position in an increasingly networked yet disconnected world skewed by multiple configurations of social inequalities.

« Comment démarrer efficacement une recherche en sciences sociales et formuler son projet? Comment procéder au travail exploratoire pour se mettre sur la bonne voie? Quels sont les principes méthodologiques essentiels à respecter? Quelles méthodes d'enquête choisir pour recueillir et analyser les informations utiles, et comment les mettre en oeuvre? Comment progresser pas à pas sans se perdre en chemin? Comment, enfin, conclure la recherche en présentant les apports de connaissance dont elle est la source? Ces questions sont celles que se posent tous les étudiants en sciences sociales, en sciences politiques, en communication, en travail social ... qui doivent s'initier à la méthodologie de recherche et eux-mêmes s'y lancer. Après bientôt 30 années de succès, plusieurs traductions et des centaines de milliers d'utilisateurs à travers le monde, la 5e édition de ce Manuel a été profondément retravaillée et complétée pour répondre encore mieux aux besoins des étudiants et des enseignants d'aujourd'hui : les illustrations et applications concrètes portent sur des questions en rapport avec les problèmes actuels; les méthodes quantitatives et qualitatives sont couvertes, tant pour le recueil que pour l'analyse des informations; les démarches inductives et déductives sont exposées. »--

A survey of major models used in past human thought is presented. Models serve the following functions by which their performance value may be judged: organizing, heuristic, predictive, mensurative. In a discussion of genuine vs. pseudomodels, the author states a problem posed by the fact that those who are best equipped to construct models frequently know least about social science. All analytic work in the social sciences is tied to judgements of relevance, evaluating the realism of assumptions. Since communication and control are decision processes in an organization, if the pathways by which information is communicated and by which it is applied to the behavior of the organization are mapped, the essential elements of the organization will be understood. Cybernetics, with its concepts of formal and informal communication channels, memory storage and feedback, primary information and secondary symbols, and steering, can be applied to the study of an organization. The author concludes with a concept of the characteristics of growth by which an organization may be evaluated: (1) increase in openness; (2) efficiency with which information is transmitted: (3) ability to change the environs of the organization in accordance with its projected inner policies and needs; and (4) increase in learning capacity. R. S. Halpern.

3. Modeling minorities in social networks -- 4. Measuring voting power and behavior in liquid democracy -- 5. Conclusions -- Science of success: An introduction -- 1. Introduction -- 2. Performance and success -- 2.1. Performance drives success -- 2.2. Perfomance is bounded -- 3. Success as a collective phenomenon -- 3.1. Success or recognition is unbounded -- 3.2. Success breeds success -- 3.3. Quality times previous success determines future success -- 4. Science of science -- 4.1. Quantifying long-term scientific impact -- 4.2. The Q-model -- 4.3. Credit is based on perception, not performance

This study examines the differences in Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) skills between 3rd-grade science and social studies students at SMA X Soe City, South Central Timor Regency. The total population for this study was 386 students, with a sample of 196 students from SMA X Kota Soe, South Central Timor Regency, determined using the Slovin formula. The sample was further divided into 94 science class students and 104 social studies class students. The Self-Regulated Learning questionnaire comprises 39 question items that have undergone validity testing and have been deemed valid. The questionnaire has a high reliability coefficient of 0.955. Science students exhibit a mean value of 116.4255 for Self-Regulated Learning skills, which is higher than the mean value of social studies students, which is only 107.9510. The data analysis technique employed was Independent Sample T-Test. The results per aspect of Self-Regulated Learning (Motivation, Metacognition, Behavior) suggest that science students outperformed social studies students, indicating a difference in Self-Regulated Learning between the two classes. It can be concluded that the level of Self-Regulated Learning is higher in the science class than in the social studies class.

M. Weber's argument for value-freedom in the social sciences, though almost universally accepted in the United States & some other countries, is not valid. Weber's arguments involve several different understandings of value-freedom: excluding moral judgments as explanatory factors, isolation of value judgments, & nonpartisanship. These are not in fact equivalent. Weber insists that all scientific claims should be acceptable to all rational people; however, it seems that all rational people would accept some moral judgments, eg, condemnation of Hitler's treatment of the Jews. Some moral judgments are more compelling than some factual judgments. K. Marx offers an example of a practice of social science at once partisan, & not taking value judgments as explanations. Further, partisanship may lead to more useful results than those acceptable on Weberian grounds. In the context of the present United States, however, Weber's first two concepts of value-freedom should be practiced, though nonpartisanship is neither needed nor desirable. W. H. Stoddard.

This paper seeks to explicate the widely used but largely unworked concept of levels of analysis in social psychology by examining its origin, need, and place in the discipline. Following Schneirla's distinction between levels of organization and levels of analysis, it outlines the problem of varied relationships between the two kinds of levels and discovers among social psychologists distinctly reductive, anti-reductive, and interdisciplinary attitudes toward the idea of levels. The presentation culminates in a paradigm of levels which generates not only the ideal typical approaches, but also clarifies the actual patterns of interdisciplinary relations, in social sciences.