5.00 credits
30.0 h
Q1 and Q2
This learning unit is not open to incoming exchange students!
Teacher(s)
Denis Benjamin; Dufrasne Marie; Franssen Abraham; Jacquot Sophie; Lenel Emmanuelle; Maes Renaud (compensates Franssen Abraham);
Language
French
Prerequisites
The prerequisite(s) for this Teaching Unit (Unité d’enseignement – UE) for the programmes/courses that offer this Teaching Unit are specified at the end of this sheet.
Learning outcomes
At the end of this learning unit, the student is able to : | |
| The Workshops come at the end of the "methodological" sequence for students in block 3 POLS. The aim is therefore for students to build on their knowledge and skills acquired during the following courses: Introduction to academic work in social sciences, Approach and methods in social sciences, Field methods, MQ1, 2 and 3. The specificity of the Workshop lies in the fact that it combines the construction of a problematised object with its translation for the use of an actual or potential recipient. In other words, it is a question of carrying out research and investigation work that leads to a production intended, at least potentially, for actors outside the university (the idea of the "student in the city"). Each year, the work themes proposed by the holders are reviewed according to current events and research projects that are underway or to come within the research units most directly linked to the POLS programmes (CReSPo, CESIR, CASPER, ENGAGE). This production must therefore take into account the actors who constitute the field of study and its potential recipients. If necessary, it can be part of a privileged relationship with a "partner" (an association, a public authority, professionals in the field, a trade union, etc.). The aim is to consider the students' work as an autonomous production that can be a resource for the actors. The form that the final work will take (journalistic investigation, research report, round table, popularisation articles, strategic orientation note, etc.) is to be defined according to the chosen theme and the skills present in each group. Whatever form is chosen, the result of the work, the process that led to it and the critical retrospective look should be the subject of both a written production and a final oral presentation. |
|
Content
The specificity of the Workshop lies in the fact that it aims to combine the construction of a problematized object with its translation for use by an actual or potential recipient. In other words, it involves conducting research and investigation work that results in a production intended, at least potentially, for individuals or entities outside the university (the concept of "the student in the community").
This production must take into account the actors who make up the field of study and its potential recipients. If necessary, it can be part of a special relationship with a "partner" (an association, a public authority, professionals in the field, a union, etc.). The idea is to consider the students' work as an autonomous production that can be a resource for the actors involved.
The format (journalistic investigation, research report, roundtable discussion, popular science articles, etc.) that the final work will take depends on the chosen theme and the skills present in each group. Regardless of the chosen format, the outcome of the work, the process that led to it, and the critical retrospective perspective should be both a written production and a final oral presentation.
This production must take into account the actors who make up the field of study and its potential recipients. If necessary, it can be part of a special relationship with a "partner" (an association, a public authority, professionals in the field, a union, etc.). The idea is to consider the students' work as an autonomous production that can be a resource for the actors involved.
The format (journalistic investigation, research report, roundtable discussion, popular science articles, etc.) that the final work will take depends on the chosen theme and the skills present in each group. Regardless of the chosen format, the outcome of the work, the process that led to it, and the critical retrospective perspective should be both a written production and a final oral presentation.
- The recommended common structure for all Workshops is as follows: o 1 to 3 introductory sessions on the theme by the instructors and organization of work (identification of partners and potential recipients, steps to be taken, formation of subgroups, etc.); o Group work sessions and/or student subgroups meetings and regular meetings throughout the process between students (in the workshop or in subgroups) and the instructor(s) in charge, based on the required working documents; o Submission of intermediate work in December (approx. 30,000 characters including spaces per subgroup); the content of this work will be defined in each workshop but will be an important step in the final work; o Feedback from the relevant instructor(s) on the intermediate work in early February; o Continuation of work in the second semester focused on the "translation" to the actual or potential recipient; o Presentation of the final production to the workshop, after the spring break, in the presence of certain partners or recipients; the final result should be evaluated in terms of the adequacy between a scientifically constructed object and a potential recipient (client, partner, defined audience...); o Collective debriefing.
- This structure can be adapted based on the specificities of the themes and partners involved.
Teaching methods
The Workshops take place in person and run throughout the academic year (Q1 and Q2). The themes and modalities of the workshops offered by the various instructors will be presented during an information session at the beginning of the semester. Students must make their choice either in person or via the general Moodle for the Workshops on that day. Those absent from the presentation session can make their choice based on the presentation dossier, which is also available on the general Moodle for the Workshops.
Evaluation methods
The final assessment, out of 20 points, will cover :
on the work carried out during the year (continuous assessment). This evaluation of collective and individual work will be carried out by the workshop teachers. It may go as far as awarding a zero if these performances are absent or extremely reduced.
on the quality of the final work produced. Half of this mark may be awarded by the workshop members and the other half by a jury composed of workshop members and external persons connected with the field concerned by the work. The following evaluation criteria will be favoured
quality of the problematisation (clarity and precision in the use of the concepts used, overall coherence, etc.);
quality of the results obtained in relation to the objectives set and to the consideration of comments made by the holders throughout the process;
quality of the consideration given (both in form and in content) to the addressee of the research; potential usefulness of the concrete production for professionals or citizens concerned by the subject matter of the work;
quality of the final presentation (structuring of the presentation, communication with the audience, respect of timing...);
quality of the critical feedback by the students on the work carried out.
The Workshop is a mechanism that requires a significant and active commitment from each student. The active participation of each student is evaluated. Article 78 of the General Study and Examination Regulations applies to the Workshops, which means that there is no examination organised for the Workshops during the September session. However, special arrangements may be made for students who are absent for a long period of time for legitimate reasons (illness, etc.).
on the work carried out during the year (continuous assessment). This evaluation of collective and individual work will be carried out by the workshop teachers. It may go as far as awarding a zero if these performances are absent or extremely reduced.
on the quality of the final work produced. Half of this mark may be awarded by the workshop members and the other half by a jury composed of workshop members and external persons connected with the field concerned by the work. The following evaluation criteria will be favoured
quality of the problematisation (clarity and precision in the use of the concepts used, overall coherence, etc.);
quality of the results obtained in relation to the objectives set and to the consideration of comments made by the holders throughout the process;
quality of the consideration given (both in form and in content) to the addressee of the research; potential usefulness of the concrete production for professionals or citizens concerned by the subject matter of the work;
quality of the final presentation (structuring of the presentation, communication with the audience, respect of timing...);
quality of the critical feedback by the students on the work carried out.
The Workshop is a mechanism that requires a significant and active commitment from each student. The active participation of each student is evaluated. Article 78 of the General Study and Examination Regulations applies to the Workshops, which means that there is no examination organised for the Workshops during the September session. However, special arrangements may be made for students who are absent for a long period of time for legitimate reasons (illness, etc.).
Bibliography
Une bibliographie de référence pourra être indiquée par chaque titulaire.
Faculty or entity
ESPB
Programmes / formations proposant cette unité d'enseignement (UE)
Title of the programme
Sigle
Credits
Prerequisites
Learning outcomes
Bachelor in Information and Communication (French-English)
Bachelor in Information and Communication (French-Dutch-English)
Bachelor in Sociology and Anthropology (French-English)
Bachelor in Sociology and Anthropology (French-Dutch-English)
Bachelor in Political Sciences (French-Dutch-English)