Here's our policy on getting a minor in research methods in the PhD program:
Students in any major area may choose Research Methods and Statistics as a minor area if they complete 3 Methods/Statistics courses beyond the standard requirements and receive permission from the Graduate Director.
And what are these required courses, you ask? Good question. For incoming students, they are:
SYA5345 (Research Methods), SYA5455 (Social Statistics and Data Analysis), SYA5406 (Multivariate Analysis), SYA 5407 (Advanced Quantitative Methods), and "a qualitative methods course offered in the sociology department, such as SYA5313 (Qualitative Research in Sociology), or SYA5355 (Comparative Historical Methods), or other qualitative offering in the department" (2006 Grad Studies Guide, p. 6).
So, what can a sociology graduate student take to get a methods minor? Generally, they will need to take BOTH qualitative research and comparative historical, meeting the qualitative degree requirement and giving them one of the three additional methods courses they need. Another methods course that will be offered soon is qualitative analysis (on the books for Fall 2007, from what I hear). That leaves one more, which could be epidemiologic methods or techniques of population analysis.
What about courses outside the department? In the past, they've only been permitted in exceptional situations. E.g., David Russell took a ISS survey research course w/ Mary Stutzman last summer to complete his methods minor. Rarely would we let a course count outside the department. The reason this is discouraged is that it is unwise to let students use College of Social Science waivers to take courses in other colleges. You can imagine the dean saying, "Me no likey." And our department lets students apply only two outside-the-dept courses toward their PhD course requirements.
So the question is this: Have we set up a methods minor that is destined to function poorly? How could we fix it or improve it? How can we expand the number of methods offerings in our department? Should we? How could a beefed up one-year master's program in Applied Social Research help out in this regard? Are students really getting a benefit out of the methods minor?
Please post your comments so we can get a decent discussion going on the methods minor!
Better than a dog biscuit!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
In general, it would be good for students to have many methods courses to choose from, but I am not sure if we have enough faculty members to offer more courses than we do now. In addition to the courses John mentioned, does advanced research seminar (?) count? (Sorry I forgot the exact title, but what John did a couple of years ago focusing on educational attainment. I am not sure if anyone is offering one soon.)
I can see how we will encounter administrative problems by letting students count courses from other departments. So my recommendation is to keep the current policy. But we can still tell students that they should take outside methods courses if they think those courses will contribute to their training.
koji
It does seem the minor can only be successful if there are enough courses offered in the department for students to take. I'd love to teach a graduate-level interviewing course and could do it starting next spring (2008). I think it makes a lot of sense to offer specific fieldwork seminars (interviewing and ethnography) along with the qualitative analysis course Doug has been teaching. It would be best if they were offered in opposite semesters, so students could take a fieldwork then analysis course while working on a particular project that they could turn into a published paper.
One thing I'm unclear about is how does the new qualitative methods requirement fit in? Is that the course that Pat teaches? I couldn't find any info about the qualitative methods requirement on the dept website. Related to this, I was wondering how much overlap might students be having in their coursework - particularly from a general research methods course to qualitative methods to more specific qual fieldwork & analysis courses? While some overlap seems necessary, those of us who teach courses in this area may want to talk about this.
I agree with Doug that it is a little misleading to identify oneself as having a "Research Methods and Statistics Minor" if you took 3 extra methods courses and 0 extra stats courses. I don't know what can be done about it officially, but we could encourage students who we know are taking the sequence to list it in their c.v. on a way that reflects their coursework (e.g., Statistics and research methods minor; Research methods minor).
Janice
Greetings! Sorry to join late -- I've been away at a conference.
We could develop a course in data management, analysis, and presentation. This is less statistical in focus, but could get people up and running with secondary analysis on public-domain datasets. People could also learn to input, manage, and clean quantitative data (perhaps field notes and qualitative materials as well). I would also include a section on the graphical presentation of data, and modeling and interpretation of conditional relationships.
I would be interested in teaching such a course after 2007.
Whaddyall think? --Don.
What is the value of a minor specialty area (other than the substantive knowlede acquired by taking these specific courses)? I have heard that some departments specifically do not recognize minors in stats/methods because they believe that earning a PhD in their program implies expertise in these areas of study.
John T
Good points everyone. So far we've raised the following issues:
-Is there any inherent value of methods minor?
-Is there value in a methods minor the way things stand in terms of our course offerings and college/dept restrictions on taking outside courses?
-Do we really offer a Methods and Statistics minor?
-What additional courses could and should we offer?
From a students' perspective, I guess one benefit of a methods minor is that they have another avenue to fulfill the PhD requirements.
Two 1st-year students have asked me about doing the methods minor, so some minimal demand is there. They are both loaded up on methods right now -- in Marc's comparative hist. and all the required courses, and they plan to take both qualitative in the spring and Doug's qual. analysis in the fall. Both students seem genuinely interested in methods and not just the quickest way across the finish line.
Still, this isn't working the way the minor was supposed to work. I think the original vision was that they methods minor would be much more ecumenical -- that students would get the best training at the university for the kinds of methods that are key in their area. This is a great philosophy and one that works at other places (esp. private universities), but it's hard to say it is a "real" minor here if the reality is that students scrape together whatever is offered.
In terms of new courses to offer, let's pursue those for sure. Many of these would be GREAT for the one-year master's program we are trying to resurrect from the ashes (our one 1-yr master's student just dropped out). George is working hard coming up with curricular ideas that are linked to specific TLH employers, and courses on data management, presentations, focus groups, interviewing, etc. would be a GREAT addition.
Sorry to be weighing in so late...
John's right. Our methods minor is not working the way the GPC/DPC intended. We simply don't have the faculty to offer the specialized stats and methods courses that larger departments can and although some of the needed courses are offered in other colleges, structural constraints mean that we can't encourage students to take courses outside of COSS.
I can give a little insight into the applied program and the likelihood that it will supply the kinds of courses we could "use" for the methods minor. Currently, George Luke is envisioning a two-track applied program that would allow students to specialize in either qualitative or quantitative analysis. Although some of these courses may be appropriate for Ph.D. students minoring in methods (e.g., managing large data sets), some of them won't(e.g., his spring course on reporting results to non-tech audiences). Until the applied program is up and running, I don't think that we can rely on it to offer sufficient additional courses to satisfy the minor.
Even though we may have the "demand" (and I do think that a "minor" in methods looks good on a CV), I don't think we have the "supply" to justify retaining the minor. Can we temporarily retire it and then reinstitute it down the road, when we have the courses to support it?
Can we temporarily retire it and then reinstitute it down the road, when we have the courses to support it?
I'll definitely add that to the list of possible fixes. Another option is to let it limp along but add greater clarity to what it is (and what it is not) when students ask or in the Guide to the Graduate Program.
Yeah, that's it, pass the buck! :-)
Post a Comment