際際滷

際際滷Share a Scribd company logo

Critical Thinking 際際滷s 2014 Olsen: Logic Argument NVIVO Qualitative Interpretation

Download as PPT, PDF
Wendy Olsen
Wendy Olsen

Critical Thinking 際際滷s 2014 Olsen: Logic Argument NVIVO Qualitative Interpretation This talk explains how Fisher described a complex, logical and well organised argument. I also set out ways that we can use interviews or other texts as the evidence part of such an argument. It discusses warranted (logical) arguments, competing arguments and parsing arguments. Examples are developed. There is a part-two with more examples in more detail.

1 of 22
Downloaded 12 times
4210011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Critical Thinking Using Qualitative Data and Software (Part One) By Wendy Olsen 2014 Methods@Manchester Workshop Aiming at PhD Students and Researchers Who Want to Disseminate Arguments
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 AIM 1) To introduce critical thinking to your academic writing. Class Exercise 1: We parse the arguments out (break them up into steps). AIM 2) Set up (hand) coding on a simple transcript. Simple NVIVO lecture. Class exercise 2: Look at the transcript that is sent as an email attachment. Code 1 page with retrieval codes. Then code with a second layer of analytical codes. AIM 3) NVIVO SKILLS IN WILLIAMSON ROOM 3.59 COMPUTER CLUSTER Powerpoint presentation on NVIVO methods. Practical Exercise 1: Code your project in NVIVO just 3 codes please. 2: view coding stripes. 3: Look at models and coding in three sample NVIVO projects. 4: add a model to your own project. Concluding Practical Activities: 5. Overall and document-wise word count 6. Demonstration of matrix query AIM 4) (rejoin in Williamson Room 2.05) Integrate our analysis of the sample transcript (or your own data sample, if you bring one) with what we learned about social-science argumentation.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Critical Thinking Parse the logic of a sample piece of writing. The steps should be related, and coherent. The conclusion should rest on the argument. Complex arguments use data as evidence. P= Premises C = Conclusions
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 4 An Argument Is an extended set of sentences about one thing. Has a coherent relationship among the sentences. Is coherent as a whole. Leads toward its own conclusion. I have stipulated this definition.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 5 Exercise 1. In Pairs: Share textual samples. Write down two codes which are theme names, so that the material in this sample could be RETRIEVED. Write down two codes which are analytical, ie. Perhaps they relate to theory, such as agency, neoliberal discourse, power, or other. The theme is going to develop into an argument. You are not merely descriptive in summarising your findings. Induction.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Conclusion of Exercise 1 Step 1 : simple, descriptive codes. Step 2 : analytical codes, axial codes. These invoke theory. Step 3 : develop an argument and test it out, work on it. Code more What are the peoples lay arguments? (See Sayer) What is your expert argument, over-arching? 6
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 7 Exercise 2. Please read Appendix 1 sample of writing. Work out the main lines of the argument. Work together. what are the premises, taken-for-granted assumptions? what is the assertion or theme of the short piece? what reasoning is used to link evidence to this theme? Write brief notes.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 8 Gist of the Argument (Schools Online Piece, Appendix 1) P1. Schools teach kids to develop arguments. P2. Teachers teach kids. P3. Teachers choose and use resources. P4. Arguments are of different quality levels. D: - no data given. E: evidence that one can gather tables and numbers about marriage is offered, but not linked into the argument well. R1: If data, then arguments are better. C1: If data, then teachers can teach better.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 9 Crucial Linking Reasoning: P5. Students choose data to use. Unestablished P6. Arguments are of higher quality level if they use data to support their inner claims. R2. Teachers teach kids to develop arguments better IFF they use data both to teach, and in the arguments. R3. Teachers who choose and use data resources of numeric and survey types online offer better data choices to students. R4: Because teachers and students can gather tables and numbers about marriage, students can link data well into their arguments. OR R5: IFF teachers and students can link data well into arguments, they can gather sensible tables and numbers about marriage. C1: If data, then teachers can teach better. (NOT ESTABLISHED) C2: IFF R5 then teachers with data can teach better than teachers who do not use data.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 10 Exercise 2, Summary Some premises were not well argued for. Some reasoning was missing from the argument. The original conclusion rested heavily on a belief in an unstated Premise.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 11 Lecture 1. (Morning) Better and worse ARGUMENTS. An argument is a theme, and it has to have a counter-theme (the antithesis). Good arguments might have: Better ethics than worse arguments, OR More consistent premises, OR Consideration of data that might falsify a claim, OR Coverage of things that are very well known to the writer. See Bowell and Kemp, Critical Thinking, London: Routledge, 3rd ed., 2010. pg 96.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 12 Parsing Arguments To parse means to break up into small chunks. TO PARSE . MEANS . TO BREAK . UP . INTO . SMALL . CHUNKS. Verb definition synonym-verb object Break up arguments into P, R, D, E, Cs Fisher, A. (1988). The Logic of Real Arguments. Cambridge, NY and Sydney, Cambridge Univ. Press.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 13 Warranted Arguments In a warranted argument, Conclusions are not just beliefs, Premises are consistent and coherent, Reasoning is sound, Verbs used are relevant and appropriate, Logic is used (various types), and The conclusion would be false if any of the Ps or Rs are false.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 14 Data in Warranted Arguments Premises Data which verifies findings . . . After the findings are rewritten back into the data sections! But you did not know in advance what you would find. Discoveries. Retroduction. Reasoning . . . Which uses data! Depends on it! Needs it! Develops / analyses it! Conclusion(s) (Danermark et al 2001) Beware of verificationism. Hence use hypotheses. Or use claims e.g. it is claimed that X Y
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 15 The Duhem-Quine Paradox Willard Van Orman Quine (June 25, 1908 December 25, 2000) Edgar Pierce Chair of Philosophy at Harvard, 195678 Two Dogmas of Empiricism (1951) Assume M1 M2 to test whether X causes Y. (M is a measurement method which has premises.) By assuming M1 and M2 you bias the case toward accepting that X causes something, and that Y is caused, and thus that X causes Y or something like that. This is verification.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 16 Smarts Paper Premise: gay couples who are doing civil registration agree upon what kind of ceremony and practices/roles they want. Premise: social traditions of weddings influence the way the UK gay people do civil registrations. (Also C1) D, Rs are about HOW they do it. (An even better argument would be about WHY they do it that way. See practices literature.) Conclusions: 4 types of gay marriage in UK. The description offered here assumes no tension. Anodyne.
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Planning our presentations for 3-4 pm SOME PAIRS OF STUDENTS CAN MAKE A SHORT PRESENTATION -- one slide with your research question. One slide with your Model or a code list. One slide with your argument 5 minutes in all. VOLUNTEERS: (Wendy) 17
Basic Functions of NVIVO for Qualitative Analysis By Wendy Olsen, University of Manchester Aiming at PhD Students and Researchers Who Want to Disseminate Arguments 09/06/2014 18
Where to find self-training elements Click the blue ? circle icon to get help. It wants to go onto internet to get help area. This has a SEARCH option. GLOSSARY is helpful too. TUTORIALS is a set of links to online video tutorials 09/06/2014 19
Lecture These are key readings for NVIVO users: Gibbs, G.R. (2008) Analysing Qualitative Data, London: Sage. Has chapters on all topics at a high level of abstraction, yet also covers details such as transcription and digitising the textual data. It involves CAQDAS and covers NVivo, MAXqda 2 and Atlas.ti 5.2. Lewins, A. and Silver, C. (2007) Using Software in Qualitative Research: A Step-by-Step Guide, London: Sage. Cover several programs including principally NVivo, MAXqda 2 and Atlas.ti 5.2. 09/06/2014 20
421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 21 Very Concise Sources: Cook, S. (1999). "Methodological aspects of the encompassing principle." Journal of Economic Methodology 6: 61-78. AND chapters 2-3 of: Sayer, A. (1992 (orig. 1984)). Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. London, Routledge. OR two chapters from Smith, M., ed. 1998, Social Science in Question.
4210011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Thank you. P.S. Something to read by Wendy Olsen on ethics . . . Olsen, Wendy, (2009) Moral Political Economy and Moral Reasoning About Rural India: Four Theoretical Schools Compared, Cambridge Journal of Economics, http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/33/5/875.pdf, 33:5, 875-902.

More Related Content

Critical Thinking 際際滷s 2014 Olsen: Logic Argument NVIVO Qualitative Interpretation

  • 1. 4210011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Critical Thinking Using Qualitative Data and Software (Part One) By Wendy Olsen 2014 Methods@Manchester Workshop Aiming at PhD Students and Researchers Who Want to Disseminate Arguments
  • 2. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 AIM 1) To introduce critical thinking to your academic writing. Class Exercise 1: We parse the arguments out (break them up into steps). AIM 2) Set up (hand) coding on a simple transcript. Simple NVIVO lecture. Class exercise 2: Look at the transcript that is sent as an email attachment. Code 1 page with retrieval codes. Then code with a second layer of analytical codes. AIM 3) NVIVO SKILLS IN WILLIAMSON ROOM 3.59 COMPUTER CLUSTER Powerpoint presentation on NVIVO methods. Practical Exercise 1: Code your project in NVIVO just 3 codes please. 2: view coding stripes. 3: Look at models and coding in three sample NVIVO projects. 4: add a model to your own project. Concluding Practical Activities: 5. Overall and document-wise word count 6. Demonstration of matrix query AIM 4) (rejoin in Williamson Room 2.05) Integrate our analysis of the sample transcript (or your own data sample, if you bring one) with what we learned about social-science argumentation.
  • 3. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Critical Thinking Parse the logic of a sample piece of writing. The steps should be related, and coherent. The conclusion should rest on the argument. Complex arguments use data as evidence. P= Premises C = Conclusions
  • 4. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 4 An Argument Is an extended set of sentences about one thing. Has a coherent relationship among the sentences. Is coherent as a whole. Leads toward its own conclusion. I have stipulated this definition.
  • 5. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 5 Exercise 1. In Pairs: Share textual samples. Write down two codes which are theme names, so that the material in this sample could be RETRIEVED. Write down two codes which are analytical, ie. Perhaps they relate to theory, such as agency, neoliberal discourse, power, or other. The theme is going to develop into an argument. You are not merely descriptive in summarising your findings. Induction.
  • 6. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Conclusion of Exercise 1 Step 1 : simple, descriptive codes. Step 2 : analytical codes, axial codes. These invoke theory. Step 3 : develop an argument and test it out, work on it. Code more What are the peoples lay arguments? (See Sayer) What is your expert argument, over-arching? 6
  • 7. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 7 Exercise 2. Please read Appendix 1 sample of writing. Work out the main lines of the argument. Work together. what are the premises, taken-for-granted assumptions? what is the assertion or theme of the short piece? what reasoning is used to link evidence to this theme? Write brief notes.
  • 8. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 8 Gist of the Argument (Schools Online Piece, Appendix 1) P1. Schools teach kids to develop arguments. P2. Teachers teach kids. P3. Teachers choose and use resources. P4. Arguments are of different quality levels. D: - no data given. E: evidence that one can gather tables and numbers about marriage is offered, but not linked into the argument well. R1: If data, then arguments are better. C1: If data, then teachers can teach better.
  • 9. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 9 Crucial Linking Reasoning: P5. Students choose data to use. Unestablished P6. Arguments are of higher quality level if they use data to support their inner claims. R2. Teachers teach kids to develop arguments better IFF they use data both to teach, and in the arguments. R3. Teachers who choose and use data resources of numeric and survey types online offer better data choices to students. R4: Because teachers and students can gather tables and numbers about marriage, students can link data well into their arguments. OR R5: IFF teachers and students can link data well into arguments, they can gather sensible tables and numbers about marriage. C1: If data, then teachers can teach better. (NOT ESTABLISHED) C2: IFF R5 then teachers with data can teach better than teachers who do not use data.
  • 10. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 10 Exercise 2, Summary Some premises were not well argued for. Some reasoning was missing from the argument. The original conclusion rested heavily on a belief in an unstated Premise.
  • 11. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 11 Lecture 1. (Morning) Better and worse ARGUMENTS. An argument is a theme, and it has to have a counter-theme (the antithesis). Good arguments might have: Better ethics than worse arguments, OR More consistent premises, OR Consideration of data that might falsify a claim, OR Coverage of things that are very well known to the writer. See Bowell and Kemp, Critical Thinking, London: Routledge, 3rd ed., 2010. pg 96.
  • 12. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 12 Parsing Arguments To parse means to break up into small chunks. TO PARSE . MEANS . TO BREAK . UP . INTO . SMALL . CHUNKS. Verb definition synonym-verb object Break up arguments into P, R, D, E, Cs Fisher, A. (1988). The Logic of Real Arguments. Cambridge, NY and Sydney, Cambridge Univ. Press.
  • 13. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 13 Warranted Arguments In a warranted argument, Conclusions are not just beliefs, Premises are consistent and coherent, Reasoning is sound, Verbs used are relevant and appropriate, Logic is used (various types), and The conclusion would be false if any of the Ps or Rs are false.
  • 14. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 14 Data in Warranted Arguments Premises Data which verifies findings . . . After the findings are rewritten back into the data sections! But you did not know in advance what you would find. Discoveries. Retroduction. Reasoning . . . Which uses data! Depends on it! Needs it! Develops / analyses it! Conclusion(s) (Danermark et al 2001) Beware of verificationism. Hence use hypotheses. Or use claims e.g. it is claimed that X Y
  • 15. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 15 The Duhem-Quine Paradox Willard Van Orman Quine (June 25, 1908 December 25, 2000) Edgar Pierce Chair of Philosophy at Harvard, 195678 Two Dogmas of Empiricism (1951) Assume M1 M2 to test whether X causes Y. (M is a measurement method which has premises.) By assuming M1 and M2 you bias the case toward accepting that X causes something, and that Y is caused, and thus that X causes Y or something like that. This is verification.
  • 16. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 16 Smarts Paper Premise: gay couples who are doing civil registration agree upon what kind of ceremony and practices/roles they want. Premise: social traditions of weddings influence the way the UK gay people do civil registrations. (Also C1) D, Rs are about HOW they do it. (An even better argument would be about WHY they do it that way. See practices literature.) Conclusions: 4 types of gay marriage in UK. The description offered here assumes no tension. Anodyne.
  • 17. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Planning our presentations for 3-4 pm SOME PAIRS OF STUDENTS CAN MAKE A SHORT PRESENTATION -- one slide with your research question. One slide with your Model or a code list. One slide with your argument 5 minutes in all. VOLUNTEERS: (Wendy) 17
  • 18. Basic Functions of NVIVO for Qualitative Analysis By Wendy Olsen, University of Manchester Aiming at PhD Students and Researchers Who Want to Disseminate Arguments 09/06/2014 18
  • 19. Where to find self-training elements Click the blue ? circle icon to get help. It wants to go onto internet to get help area. This has a SEARCH option. GLOSSARY is helpful too. TUTORIALS is a set of links to online video tutorials 09/06/2014 19
  • 20. Lecture These are key readings for NVIVO users: Gibbs, G.R. (2008) Analysing Qualitative Data, London: Sage. Has chapters on all topics at a high level of abstraction, yet also covers details such as transcription and digitising the textual data. It involves CAQDAS and covers NVivo, MAXqda 2 and Atlas.ti 5.2. Lewins, A. and Silver, C. (2007) Using Software in Qualitative Research: A Step-by-Step Guide, London: Sage. Cover several programs including principally NVivo, MAXqda 2 and Atlas.ti 5.2. 09/06/2014 20
  • 21. 421 0011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 21 Very Concise Sources: Cook, S. (1999). "Methodological aspects of the encompassing principle." Journal of Economic Methodology 6: 61-78. AND chapters 2-3 of: Sayer, A. (1992 (orig. 1984)). Method in Social Science: A Realist Approach. London, Routledge. OR two chapters from Smith, M., ed. 1998, Social Science in Question.
  • 22. 4210011 0010 1010 1101 0001 0100 1011 Thank you. P.S. Something to read by Wendy Olsen on ethics . . . Olsen, Wendy, (2009) Moral Political Economy and Moral Reasoning About Rural India: Four Theoretical Schools Compared, Cambridge Journal of Economics, http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/33/5/875.pdf, 33:5, 875-902.