BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Springshare//LibCal//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-MS-OLK-FORCEINSPECTOROPEN:TRUE
X-WR-TIMEZONE:Europe/London
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT15M
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART:20260127T173000Z
DTEND:20260127T193000Z
DTSTAMP:20260127T000000Z
SUMMARY:Theory and Methodology in Social and Educational Research (face-to-face)
DESCRIPTION:Prof Paul Dowling | Five two-hour sessions | Spring: 17:30 - 
 19:30 (UK time) Tuesday 27 January   3\, 10\, 17\, 24 February (Room A5.02 
 in the IOE)\n \n\nNB: This course accrues 3 training points.\n \n\nTheory 
 concerns the general\, theories as such\, but also concepts that may or may 
 not be articulated as theories. Theory stands in contrast with the 
 empirical\, which comprises local instances\, contexts\, settings. In 
 QUANTITATIVE research—which commonly describes experimental and most 
 survey research—at least some theoretical work generally precedes the 
 research design\, data collection and analysis and sampling is generally 
 designed to enable generalisation from a sample to a population. This 
 course\, however\, is primarily concerned with QUALITATIVE social and 
 educational research. In this mode\, the aim is usually to generate 
 theoretical categories—codes or themes—in transaction with the data\, 
 to 'let the data speak'. Starting out with theory already in place\, 
 forcing it on the data\, will tend to silence it. A second important 
 difference between qualitative and quantitative research is that the latter 
 does not generally allow for generalisation from a sample to a population. 
 Rather\, qualitative research generalises either by the generation of 
 theory or by the accumulation of cases.\n\nMethodology might be described 
 as the work that enables an argument to be made. The content of the 
 previous paragraph is essentially methodological. The observation relating 
 theory to qualitative research might be taken to entail that one can or 
 should avoid reading theoretical work in advance of one's study\, but this 
 would not be correct. Reading theoretical work and\, indeed\, research 
 generally contributes to what Barney Glaser (1978) refers to as one's 
 'theoretical sensitivity' and is indispensable for the researcher: one 
 would hardly be surprised to find that a sociologist\, a psychologist and a 
 historian would approach their research activities\, including the 
 generation of theoretical categories from data (or sources for the 
 historian) with different sensitivities to what that data or those sources 
 might tell them.\n\nThis seminar involves reflection on the analytic 
 distinctions between the theoretical\, the empirical and the methodological 
 in the context of participants’ own work and the research reported in the 
 set readings\, which is largely qualitative. It is unimportant what stage 
 of research you are at—previous participants have included students in 
 their first term and students close to completion others at just about 
 every point in-between and some have even attended the programme more than 
 once—but you must come prepared to talk about and discuss your interests 
 and to have some of your ideas opened up to critical scrutiny and to be 
 involved in the discussion and scrutinizing of the interests and ideas of 
 other participants.\n\nSuggested Reading\n\nChung\, S-y. (2011). ‘The 
 modality of the textual institutionalisation of literary studies: towards a 
 sociology.’ Sociological Research Online. 16/3/3. 1-14\n\nDouglas\, M. 
 (2002). Purity and Danger. London. Routledge.\n\nCollins\, H. & Pinch\, T. 
 (1998). The Golem: what you should know about Science. London. 
 CUP.\n\nDowling\, P. C. (2009). Sociology as method: Departures from the 
 forensics of culture\, text and knowledge. Rotterdam\, The Netherlands: 
 Sense Publishers.\n\nDowling\, P.C. (2013). 'Social activity method: a 
 fractal language for mathematics.' Mathematics Education Research Journal. 
 25: 317-340.\n\nDowling\, P.C. & Brown\, A.J. (2010). Doing 
 Research/Reading Research: Re- interrogating education. London. 
 Rutledge.\n\nGeertz\, C. (1989). Works and Lives: the anthropologist as 
 author. Cambridge. Polity.\n\nGeertz\, C. (2000 Edn (1977)). The 
 Interpretation of Cultures. New York. Basic Books. \n\nGlaser\, B. & 
 Strauss\, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for 
 qualitative research. New York. Aldine Publishing Company.\n\nWhiteman\, N. 
 (2012). Undoing Ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York. 
 Springer.
ORGANIZER;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
CATEGORIES:
CONTACT;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
STATUS:CONFIRMED
UID:LibCal-4459549
URL:https://dscal.ioe.ac.uk/event/4459549
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:BUSY
BEGIN:VALARM
TRIGGER:-PT15M
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:Reminder
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART:20260203T173000Z
DTEND:20260203T193000Z
DTSTAMP:20260203T000000Z
SUMMARY:Theory and Methodology in Social and Educational Research (face-to-face)
DESCRIPTION:Prof Paul Dowling | Five two-hour sessions | Spring: 17:30 - 
 19:30 (UK time) Tuesday 27 January   3\, 10\, 17\, 24 February (Room A5.02 
 in the IOE)\n \n\nNB: This course accrues 3 training points.\n \n\nTheory 
 concerns the general\, theories as such\, but also concepts that may or may 
 not be articulated as theories. Theory stands in contrast with the 
 empirical\, which comprises local instances\, contexts\, settings. In 
 QUANTITATIVE research—which commonly describes experimental and most 
 survey research—at least some theoretical work generally precedes the 
 research design\, data collection and analysis and sampling is generally 
 designed to enable generalisation from a sample to a population. This 
 course\, however\, is primarily concerned with QUALITATIVE social and 
 educational research. In this mode\, the aim is usually to generate 
 theoretical categories—codes or themes—in transaction with the data\, 
 to 'let the data speak'. Starting out with theory already in place\, 
 forcing it on the data\, will tend to silence it. A second important 
 difference between qualitative and quantitative research is that the latter 
 does not generally allow for generalisation from a sample to a population. 
 Rather\, qualitative research generalises either by the generation of 
 theory or by the accumulation of cases.\n\nMethodology might be described 
 as the work that enables an argument to be made. The content of the 
 previous paragraph is essentially methodological. The observation relating 
 theory to qualitative research might be taken to entail that one can or 
 should avoid reading theoretical work in advance of one's study\, but this 
 would not be correct. Reading theoretical work and\, indeed\, research 
 generally contributes to what Barney Glaser (1978) refers to as one's 
 'theoretical sensitivity' and is indispensable for the researcher: one 
 would hardly be surprised to find that a sociologist\, a psychologist and a 
 historian would approach their research activities\, including the 
 generation of theoretical categories from data (or sources for the 
 historian) with different sensitivities to what that data or those sources 
 might tell them.\n\nThis seminar involves reflection on the analytic 
 distinctions between the theoretical\, the empirical and the methodological 
 in the context of participants’ own work and the research reported in the 
 set readings\, which is largely qualitative. It is unimportant what stage 
 of research you are at—previous participants have included students in 
 their first term and students close to completion others at just about 
 every point in-between and some have even attended the programme more than 
 once—but you must come prepared to talk about and discuss your interests 
 and to have some of your ideas opened up to critical scrutiny and to be 
 involved in the discussion and scrutinizing of the interests and ideas of 
 other participants.\n\nSuggested Reading\n\nChung\, S-y. (2011). ‘The 
 modality of the textual institutionalisation of literary studies: towards a 
 sociology.’ Sociological Research Online. 16/3/3. 1-14\n\nDouglas\, M. 
 (2002). Purity and Danger. London. Routledge.\n\nCollins\, H. & Pinch\, T. 
 (1998). The Golem: what you should know about Science. London. 
 CUP.\n\nDowling\, P. C. (2009). Sociology as method: Departures from the 
 forensics of culture\, text and knowledge. Rotterdam\, The Netherlands: 
 Sense Publishers.\n\nDowling\, P.C. (2013). 'Social activity method: a 
 fractal language for mathematics.' Mathematics Education Research Journal. 
 25: 317-340.\n\nDowling\, P.C. & Brown\, A.J. (2010). Doing 
 Research/Reading Research: Re- interrogating education. London. 
 Rutledge.\n\nGeertz\, C. (1989). Works and Lives: the anthropologist as 
 author. Cambridge. Polity.\n\nGeertz\, C. (2000 Edn (1977)). The 
 Interpretation of Cultures. New York. Basic Books. \n\nGlaser\, B. & 
 Strauss\, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for 
 qualitative research. New York. Aldine Publishing Company.\n\nWhiteman\, N. 
 (2012). Undoing Ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York. 
 Springer.
ORGANIZER;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
CATEGORIES:
CONTACT;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
STATUS:CONFIRMED
UID:LibCal-4459550
URL:https://dscal.ioe.ac.uk/event/4459550
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:BUSY
BEGIN:VALARM
TRIGGER:-PT15M
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:Reminder
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART:20260210T173000Z
DTEND:20260210T193000Z
DTSTAMP:20260210T000000Z
SUMMARY:Theory and Methodology in Social and Educational Research (face-to-face)
DESCRIPTION:Prof Paul Dowling | Five two-hour sessions | Spring: 17:30 - 
 19:30 (UK time) Tuesday 27 January   3\, 10\, 17\, 24 February (Room A5.02 
 in the IOE)\n \n\nNB: This course accrues 3 training points.\n \n\nTheory 
 concerns the general\, theories as such\, but also concepts that may or may 
 not be articulated as theories. Theory stands in contrast with the 
 empirical\, which comprises local instances\, contexts\, settings. In 
 QUANTITATIVE research—which commonly describes experimental and most 
 survey research—at least some theoretical work generally precedes the 
 research design\, data collection and analysis and sampling is generally 
 designed to enable generalisation from a sample to a population. This 
 course\, however\, is primarily concerned with QUALITATIVE social and 
 educational research. In this mode\, the aim is usually to generate 
 theoretical categories—codes or themes—in transaction with the data\, 
 to 'let the data speak'. Starting out with theory already in place\, 
 forcing it on the data\, will tend to silence it. A second important 
 difference between qualitative and quantitative research is that the latter 
 does not generally allow for generalisation from a sample to a population. 
 Rather\, qualitative research generalises either by the generation of 
 theory or by the accumulation of cases.\n\nMethodology might be described 
 as the work that enables an argument to be made. The content of the 
 previous paragraph is essentially methodological. The observation relating 
 theory to qualitative research might be taken to entail that one can or 
 should avoid reading theoretical work in advance of one's study\, but this 
 would not be correct. Reading theoretical work and\, indeed\, research 
 generally contributes to what Barney Glaser (1978) refers to as one's 
 'theoretical sensitivity' and is indispensable for the researcher: one 
 would hardly be surprised to find that a sociologist\, a psychologist and a 
 historian would approach their research activities\, including the 
 generation of theoretical categories from data (or sources for the 
 historian) with different sensitivities to what that data or those sources 
 might tell them.\n\nThis seminar involves reflection on the analytic 
 distinctions between the theoretical\, the empirical and the methodological 
 in the context of participants’ own work and the research reported in the 
 set readings\, which is largely qualitative. It is unimportant what stage 
 of research you are at—previous participants have included students in 
 their first term and students close to completion others at just about 
 every point in-between and some have even attended the programme more than 
 once—but you must come prepared to talk about and discuss your interests 
 and to have some of your ideas opened up to critical scrutiny and to be 
 involved in the discussion and scrutinizing of the interests and ideas of 
 other participants.\n\nSuggested Reading\n\nChung\, S-y. (2011). ‘The 
 modality of the textual institutionalisation of literary studies: towards a 
 sociology.’ Sociological Research Online. 16/3/3. 1-14\n\nDouglas\, M. 
 (2002). Purity and Danger. London. Routledge.\n\nCollins\, H. & Pinch\, T. 
 (1998). The Golem: what you should know about Science. London. 
 CUP.\n\nDowling\, P. C. (2009). Sociology as method: Departures from the 
 forensics of culture\, text and knowledge. Rotterdam\, The Netherlands: 
 Sense Publishers.\n\nDowling\, P.C. (2013). 'Social activity method: a 
 fractal language for mathematics.' Mathematics Education Research Journal. 
 25: 317-340.\n\nDowling\, P.C. & Brown\, A.J. (2010). Doing 
 Research/Reading Research: Re- interrogating education. London. 
 Rutledge.\n\nGeertz\, C. (1989). Works and Lives: the anthropologist as 
 author. Cambridge. Polity.\n\nGeertz\, C. (2000 Edn (1977)). The 
 Interpretation of Cultures. New York. Basic Books. \n\nGlaser\, B. & 
 Strauss\, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for 
 qualitative research. New York. Aldine Publishing Company.\n\nWhiteman\, N. 
 (2012). Undoing Ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York. 
 Springer.
ORGANIZER;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
CATEGORIES:
CONTACT;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
STATUS:CONFIRMED
UID:LibCal-4459551
URL:https://dscal.ioe.ac.uk/event/4459551
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:BUSY
BEGIN:VALARM
TRIGGER:-PT15M
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:Reminder
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART:20260217T173000Z
DTEND:20260217T193000Z
DTSTAMP:20260217T000000Z
SUMMARY:Theory and Methodology in Social and Educational Research (face-to-face)
DESCRIPTION:Prof Paul Dowling | Five two-hour sessions | Spring: 17:30 - 
 19:30 (UK time) Tuesday 27 January   3\, 10\, 17\, 24 February (Room A5.02 
 in the IOE)\n \n\nNB: This course accrues 3 training points.\n \n\nTheory 
 concerns the general\, theories as such\, but also concepts that may or may 
 not be articulated as theories. Theory stands in contrast with the 
 empirical\, which comprises local instances\, contexts\, settings. In 
 QUANTITATIVE research—which commonly describes experimental and most 
 survey research—at least some theoretical work generally precedes the 
 research design\, data collection and analysis and sampling is generally 
 designed to enable generalisation from a sample to a population. This 
 course\, however\, is primarily concerned with QUALITATIVE social and 
 educational research. In this mode\, the aim is usually to generate 
 theoretical categories—codes or themes—in transaction with the data\, 
 to 'let the data speak'. Starting out with theory already in place\, 
 forcing it on the data\, will tend to silence it. A second important 
 difference between qualitative and quantitative research is that the latter 
 does not generally allow for generalisation from a sample to a population. 
 Rather\, qualitative research generalises either by the generation of 
 theory or by the accumulation of cases.\n\nMethodology might be described 
 as the work that enables an argument to be made. The content of the 
 previous paragraph is essentially methodological. The observation relating 
 theory to qualitative research might be taken to entail that one can or 
 should avoid reading theoretical work in advance of one's study\, but this 
 would not be correct. Reading theoretical work and\, indeed\, research 
 generally contributes to what Barney Glaser (1978) refers to as one's 
 'theoretical sensitivity' and is indispensable for the researcher: one 
 would hardly be surprised to find that a sociologist\, a psychologist and a 
 historian would approach their research activities\, including the 
 generation of theoretical categories from data (or sources for the 
 historian) with different sensitivities to what that data or those sources 
 might tell them.\n\nThis seminar involves reflection on the analytic 
 distinctions between the theoretical\, the empirical and the methodological 
 in the context of participants’ own work and the research reported in the 
 set readings\, which is largely qualitative. It is unimportant what stage 
 of research you are at—previous participants have included students in 
 their first term and students close to completion others at just about 
 every point in-between and some have even attended the programme more than 
 once—but you must come prepared to talk about and discuss your interests 
 and to have some of your ideas opened up to critical scrutiny and to be 
 involved in the discussion and scrutinizing of the interests and ideas of 
 other participants.\n\nSuggested Reading\n\nChung\, S-y. (2011). ‘The 
 modality of the textual institutionalisation of literary studies: towards a 
 sociology.’ Sociological Research Online. 16/3/3. 1-14\n\nDouglas\, M. 
 (2002). Purity and Danger. London. Routledge.\n\nCollins\, H. & Pinch\, T. 
 (1998). The Golem: what you should know about Science. London. 
 CUP.\n\nDowling\, P. C. (2009). Sociology as method: Departures from the 
 forensics of culture\, text and knowledge. Rotterdam\, The Netherlands: 
 Sense Publishers.\n\nDowling\, P.C. (2013). 'Social activity method: a 
 fractal language for mathematics.' Mathematics Education Research Journal. 
 25: 317-340.\n\nDowling\, P.C. & Brown\, A.J. (2010). Doing 
 Research/Reading Research: Re- interrogating education. London. 
 Rutledge.\n\nGeertz\, C. (1989). Works and Lives: the anthropologist as 
 author. Cambridge. Polity.\n\nGeertz\, C. (2000 Edn (1977)). The 
 Interpretation of Cultures. New York. Basic Books. \n\nGlaser\, B. & 
 Strauss\, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for 
 qualitative research. New York. Aldine Publishing Company.\n\nWhiteman\, N. 
 (2012). Undoing Ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York. 
 Springer.
ORGANIZER;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
CATEGORIES:
CONTACT;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
STATUS:CONFIRMED
UID:LibCal-4459552
URL:https://dscal.ioe.ac.uk/event/4459552
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:BUSY
BEGIN:VALARM
TRIGGER:-PT15M
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:Reminder
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART:20260224T173000Z
DTEND:20260224T193000Z
DTSTAMP:20260224T000000Z
SUMMARY:Theory and Methodology in Social and Educational Research (face-to-face)
DESCRIPTION:Prof Paul Dowling | Five two-hour sessions | Spring: 17:30 - 
 19:30 (UK time) Tuesday 27 January   3\, 10\, 17\, 24 February (Room A5.02 
 in the IOE)\n \n\nNB: This course accrues 3 training points.\n \n\nTheory 
 concerns the general\, theories as such\, but also concepts that may or may 
 not be articulated as theories. Theory stands in contrast with the 
 empirical\, which comprises local instances\, contexts\, settings. In 
 QUANTITATIVE research—which commonly describes experimental and most 
 survey research—at least some theoretical work generally precedes the 
 research design\, data collection and analysis and sampling is generally 
 designed to enable generalisation from a sample to a population. This 
 course\, however\, is primarily concerned with QUALITATIVE social and 
 educational research. In this mode\, the aim is usually to generate 
 theoretical categories—codes or themes—in transaction with the data\, 
 to 'let the data speak'. Starting out with theory already in place\, 
 forcing it on the data\, will tend to silence it. A second important 
 difference between qualitative and quantitative research is that the latter 
 does not generally allow for generalisation from a sample to a population. 
 Rather\, qualitative research generalises either by the generation of 
 theory or by the accumulation of cases.\n\nMethodology might be described 
 as the work that enables an argument to be made. The content of the 
 previous paragraph is essentially methodological. The observation relating 
 theory to qualitative research might be taken to entail that one can or 
 should avoid reading theoretical work in advance of one's study\, but this 
 would not be correct. Reading theoretical work and\, indeed\, research 
 generally contributes to what Barney Glaser (1978) refers to as one's 
 'theoretical sensitivity' and is indispensable for the researcher: one 
 would hardly be surprised to find that a sociologist\, a psychologist and a 
 historian would approach their research activities\, including the 
 generation of theoretical categories from data (or sources for the 
 historian) with different sensitivities to what that data or those sources 
 might tell them.\n\nThis seminar involves reflection on the analytic 
 distinctions between the theoretical\, the empirical and the methodological 
 in the context of participants’ own work and the research reported in the 
 set readings\, which is largely qualitative. It is unimportant what stage 
 of research you are at—previous participants have included students in 
 their first term and students close to completion others at just about 
 every point in-between and some have even attended the programme more than 
 once—but you must come prepared to talk about and discuss your interests 
 and to have some of your ideas opened up to critical scrutiny and to be 
 involved in the discussion and scrutinizing of the interests and ideas of 
 other participants.\n\nSuggested Reading\n\nChung\, S-y. (2011). ‘The 
 modality of the textual institutionalisation of literary studies: towards a 
 sociology.’ Sociological Research Online. 16/3/3. 1-14\n\nDouglas\, M. 
 (2002). Purity and Danger. London. Routledge.\n\nCollins\, H. & Pinch\, T. 
 (1998). The Golem: what you should know about Science. London. 
 CUP.\n\nDowling\, P. C. (2009). Sociology as method: Departures from the 
 forensics of culture\, text and knowledge. Rotterdam\, The Netherlands: 
 Sense Publishers.\n\nDowling\, P.C. (2013). 'Social activity method: a 
 fractal language for mathematics.' Mathematics Education Research Journal. 
 25: 317-340.\n\nDowling\, P.C. & Brown\, A.J. (2010). Doing 
 Research/Reading Research: Re- interrogating education. London. 
 Rutledge.\n\nGeertz\, C. (1989). Works and Lives: the anthropologist as 
 author. Cambridge. Polity.\n\nGeertz\, C. (2000 Edn (1977)). The 
 Interpretation of Cultures. New York. Basic Books. \n\nGlaser\, B. & 
 Strauss\, A. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for 
 qualitative research. New York. Aldine Publishing Company.\n\nWhiteman\, N. 
 (2012). Undoing Ethics: rethinking practice in online research. New York. 
 Springer.
ORGANIZER;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
CATEGORIES:
CONTACT;CN="Bob Grist":MAILTO:qtnvris@ucl.ac.uk
STATUS:CONFIRMED
UID:LibCal-4459553
URL:https://dscal.ioe.ac.uk/event/4459553
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:BUSY
BEGIN:VALARM
TRIGGER:-PT15M
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:Reminder
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT

END:VCALENDAR