Teacher(s)
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 : | |
| Social and political sciences are empirical sciences that require the researcher to use and master specific methodologies. Among these, field methods (or qualitative methods), which essentially include observations and interviews, are part of the comprehensive paradigm and require the researcher to get as close as possible to the "natural situations" (de Sardan, 2008: 41) experienced by the subjects of the investigation. The main objective of this course is to deepen the knowledge related to these two methods, a first overview of which has been given in previous courses (DMSS and Anthropology), and to ensure their appropriation through practical work that implements them. More specifically, at the end of the course, students will be able to: - identify the historical and epistemological contexts in which the methods taught were developed and which allow us to understand their meaning, rules, uses and conditions of validity ; - evaluate the scientific contributions and limitations of these methods (particularly in relation to other methods in the social and political sciences) - identify and define the technical operations that implement them; - understand the major ethical issues related to their use; - to apply them through practical work: from administration to analysis of collected data and writing up results. |
|
Content
Social and political sciences are empirical sciences that require the researcher to use and master specific methodologies. Among these, field methods (or qualitative methods), which essentially include observations and interviews, are part of the comprehensive paradigm and require the researcher to get as close as possible to the "natural situations" (de Sardan, 2008: 41) experienced by the subjects of the investigation. The main objective of this course is to deepen the knowledge related to these two methods, a first overview of which has been given in previous courses (DMSS and Anthropology), and to ensure their appropriation through practical work that implements them.
More specifically, at the end of the course, students will be able to:
- identify the historical and epistemological contexts in which the methods taught were developed and which allow us to understand their meaning, rules, uses and conditions of validity ;
- evaluate the scientific contributions and limitations of these methods (particularly in relation to other methods in the social and political sciences)
- identify and define the technical operations that implement them;
- understand the major ethical issues related to their use;
- to apply them through practical work: from administration to analysis of collected data and writing up results.
More specifically, at the end of the course, students will be able to:
- identify the historical and epistemological contexts in which the methods taught were developed and which allow us to understand their meaning, rules, uses and conditions of validity ;
- evaluate the scientific contributions and limitations of these methods (particularly in relation to other methods in the social and political sciences)
- identify and define the technical operations that implement them;
- understand the major ethical issues related to their use;
- to apply them through practical work: from administration to analysis of collected data and writing up results.
Teaching methods
The course consists of a lecture and a group work. This work is itself broken down into two exercises dealing with observation (exercise 1) and interviewing (exercise 2). Group work sessions accompanied by the professor and the assistant are organized to help the students in the realization of their work.
The lecture course favors as much as possible a dynamic and involving teaching. The oral presentations are based on emblematic research using the methods taught to bring inductively theoretical elements: those of W. Foote Whyte in the Italian ghetto of Boston, of R. Hoggart on the English working class world, of P. Bourdieu in La misère du monde or of D. Bizeul on the National Front circles; and on concrete experiences recounted in films or by researchers using these methods. The principle of the "flipped classroom" is also used in application sessions based on exercises prepared by the students beforehand.
A detailed lesson plan as well as the Powerpoint supports for the oral presentations are transmitted via Moodle at the latest the day before the class sessions. Students are expected to take careful notes to complete these.
The practical work aimed at testing the principles and techniques related to the methods taught during the lecture will be done in groups of 4 people. Based on an imposed theme, the students must carry out observation work (4 hours of observations with the help of an observation guide transmitted during the course, and their analysis) and interview work (2 interviews per person based on an interview guide elaborated in group, and their analysis). The practical work is accompanied by the teacher and the assistant.
The lecture course favors as much as possible a dynamic and involving teaching. The oral presentations are based on emblematic research using the methods taught to bring inductively theoretical elements: those of W. Foote Whyte in the Italian ghetto of Boston, of R. Hoggart on the English working class world, of P. Bourdieu in La misère du monde or of D. Bizeul on the National Front circles; and on concrete experiences recounted in films or by researchers using these methods. The principle of the "flipped classroom" is also used in application sessions based on exercises prepared by the students beforehand.
A detailed lesson plan as well as the Powerpoint supports for the oral presentations are transmitted via Moodle at the latest the day before the class sessions. Students are expected to take careful notes to complete these.
The practical work aimed at testing the principles and techniques related to the methods taught during the lecture will be done in groups of 4 people. Based on an imposed theme, the students must carry out observation work (4 hours of observations with the help of an observation guide transmitted during the course, and their analysis) and interview work (2 interviews per person based on an interview guide elaborated in group, and their analysis). The practical work is accompanied by the teacher and the assistant.
Evaluation methods
The EU will be assessed in two parts:
- by a group work (50% of the final grade) which aims at verifying the abilities to implement the competencies seen in the lecture course. The use of generative AI is tolerated for the formal correction of written reports (and not for the production of content) and must be clearly indicated. The mark will largely take into account its originality and personalised character.
- by an oral exam (50% of the final grade) which aims to verify the knowledge of the subject matter and the ability of the student to use his/her knowledge (for example through the identification of methodological or ethical issues in the description of a research protocol).
In case of failure in January: the part of the grade (exam or group work) that may have been passed (at least 10/20) is automatically kept for the second session. The failed part(s) of the grade (less than 10/20) must be retaken.
- by a group work (50% of the final grade) which aims at verifying the abilities to implement the competencies seen in the lecture course. The use of generative AI is tolerated for the formal correction of written reports (and not for the production of content) and must be clearly indicated. The mark will largely take into account its originality and personalised character.
- by an oral exam (50% of the final grade) which aims to verify the knowledge of the subject matter and the ability of the student to use his/her knowledge (for example through the identification of methodological or ethical issues in the description of a research protocol).
In case of failure in January: the part of the grade (exam or group work) that may have been passed (at least 10/20) is automatically kept for the second session. The failed part(s) of the grade (less than 10/20) must be retaken.
Other information
Face-to-face , first term, 30 hours of theory.
Bibliography
BARDIN L. (1991), L'analyse de contenu, Paris, PUF.
BEAUD S. WEBER F. (1998), Guide de l'enquête de terrain, Paris, La Découverte.
BECKER H. (2002), Les ficelles du métier, Paris, La Découverte.
BECKER H. (2016), La bonne focale. De l’utilité des cas particuliers en sciences sociales, Paris, La Découverte.
BERTEAUX D. (1997), Les récits de vie, Paris, Nathan – 128.
BIZEUL D. (2003), Avec ceux du FN : un sociologue au Front national, Paris, La Découverte.
BLANCHET A., GOTMAN A. (1992), L'enquête et ses méthodes : l'entretien, Paris, Nathan – 128.
Bourdieu p. (1993), « Comprendre », in P. Bourdieu, La Misère du monde, Paris, Seuil, pp. 903-939.
BURAWOY M. (2003), « L’étude de cas élargie. Une approche réflexive, historique et comparée de l’enquête de terrain », in CEFAÏ D., L’enquête de terrain, Paris, La Découverte, pp. 426-464.
CALLON M. (1999), « Ni intellectuel engagé, ni intellectuel dégagé : la double stratégie de l’attachement et du détachement », Sociologie du travail, 41, pp. 65-78.
CEFAÏ D. (2003), L’enquête de terrain, Paris, La Découverte.
DEMAZIERES D., DUBAR C. (1997), Analyser les entretiens biographiques, l'exemple des récits d'insertion, « Chapitre premier : Postures de recherche et statut de la parole des gens », Paris, Nathan.
FAVRET-SAADA J. (1997), Les Mots, la Mort, les Sorts, Paris, Gallimard.
FOOTE WHYTE W. (1996), Street corner society, Paris, La Découverte.
Goffman E. (1973), La mise en scène de la vie quotidienne, T.1. La présentation de soi, Paris, Les éditions de Minuit.
GENARD J.-L., ROCA i ESCODA M. (2019), Éthique de la recherche en sociologie, Bruxelles, De Boeck.
HOGGART R. (1970), La culture du pauvre, Paris, Les éditions de Minuit.
HUGHES E. (1996), Le regard sociologique, Paris, Éditions de l’École des Hautes Études en sciences sociales.
KAUFMAN J.C (1996), L'entretien compréhensif, Paris, Nathan – 128.
MALINOWSKI B. (1985), Journal d’un ethnographe, Paris, Seuil.
MILLER D. (2015), The Comfort of Things, Cambridge, Polity.
PAILLE P., MUCHIELI A. (2016), L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales, Paris, Armand Colin.
PETONNET C. (1982). « L’observation flottante. L’exemple d’un cimetière parisien » L’homme, 22, 4, p. 33-47.
RAMOS E. (2015), L’entretien compréhensif en sociologie. Usages, pratiques, analyses, Paris, Armand Colin.
SOULE B. (2007), « Observation participante ou participation observante ? Usages et justifications de la notion de participation observante en sciences sociales », Recherches Qualitatives, 27, pp.127-140.
STRAUSS A. et CORBIN J. (2004), Les fondements de la recherche qualitative. Techniques de développement de la théorie fondée, Fribourg, Academic Press.
BEAUD S. WEBER F. (1998), Guide de l'enquête de terrain, Paris, La Découverte.
BECKER H. (2002), Les ficelles du métier, Paris, La Découverte.
BECKER H. (2016), La bonne focale. De l’utilité des cas particuliers en sciences sociales, Paris, La Découverte.
BERTEAUX D. (1997), Les récits de vie, Paris, Nathan – 128.
BIZEUL D. (2003), Avec ceux du FN : un sociologue au Front national, Paris, La Découverte.
BLANCHET A., GOTMAN A. (1992), L'enquête et ses méthodes : l'entretien, Paris, Nathan – 128.
Bourdieu p. (1993), « Comprendre », in P. Bourdieu, La Misère du monde, Paris, Seuil, pp. 903-939.
BURAWOY M. (2003), « L’étude de cas élargie. Une approche réflexive, historique et comparée de l’enquête de terrain », in CEFAÏ D., L’enquête de terrain, Paris, La Découverte, pp. 426-464.
CALLON M. (1999), « Ni intellectuel engagé, ni intellectuel dégagé : la double stratégie de l’attachement et du détachement », Sociologie du travail, 41, pp. 65-78.
CEFAÏ D. (2003), L’enquête de terrain, Paris, La Découverte.
DEMAZIERES D., DUBAR C. (1997), Analyser les entretiens biographiques, l'exemple des récits d'insertion, « Chapitre premier : Postures de recherche et statut de la parole des gens », Paris, Nathan.
FAVRET-SAADA J. (1997), Les Mots, la Mort, les Sorts, Paris, Gallimard.
FOOTE WHYTE W. (1996), Street corner society, Paris, La Découverte.
Goffman E. (1973), La mise en scène de la vie quotidienne, T.1. La présentation de soi, Paris, Les éditions de Minuit.
GENARD J.-L., ROCA i ESCODA M. (2019), Éthique de la recherche en sociologie, Bruxelles, De Boeck.
HOGGART R. (1970), La culture du pauvre, Paris, Les éditions de Minuit.
HUGHES E. (1996), Le regard sociologique, Paris, Éditions de l’École des Hautes Études en sciences sociales.
KAUFMAN J.C (1996), L'entretien compréhensif, Paris, Nathan – 128.
MALINOWSKI B. (1985), Journal d’un ethnographe, Paris, Seuil.
MILLER D. (2015), The Comfort of Things, Cambridge, Polity.
PAILLE P., MUCHIELI A. (2016), L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales, Paris, Armand Colin.
PETONNET C. (1982). « L’observation flottante. L’exemple d’un cimetière parisien » L’homme, 22, 4, p. 33-47.
RAMOS E. (2015), L’entretien compréhensif en sociologie. Usages, pratiques, analyses, Paris, Armand Colin.
SOULE B. (2007), « Observation participante ou participation observante ? Usages et justifications de la notion de participation observante en sciences sociales », Recherches Qualitatives, 27, pp.127-140.
STRAUSS A. et CORBIN J. (2004), Les fondements de la recherche qualitative. Techniques de développement de la théorie fondée, Fribourg, Academic Press.
Faculty or entity
Programmes / formations proposant cette unité d'enseignement (UE)
Title of the programme
Sigle
Credits
Prerequisites
Learning outcomes
