Description

The complex challenges of digitalisation often demand the professional use of both qualitative methods and data-exploration to diagnose issues and to act upon them.

In Navigating Complexity, students will be introduced to a range of conceptual and technical tools for generating and visualizing data and analysing complexity. Throughout the course students will experiment with different techniques for generating data and visualising complexity. Based on case work, students will be learn to reflect on how visualisations work as simplifications and can inform decision-making.

Students will learn a variety of qualitative approaches to quantitative data, focusing on inductive, exploratory inquiry. After the course, students will be capable of dealing with, communicating, and acting constructively in situations faced by complex challenges without straightforward solutions. The course will cover topics such as complexity thinking, storytelling with data, data and digital methods, situational analysis, problematisation, data politics and technical tools for data visualisation and exploration.

Intended learning outcomes

After the course, the student should be able to:

  • Develop research questions that allow for exploratory and inductive inquiry into an empirical case through an iterative process of data collection, analysis, and storytelling.
  • Apply selected methods and conceptual tools to analyze complexity in an empirical case.
  • Interpret the data and the visualizations generated using the technical and conceptual tools provided in the course.
  • Reflect upon the decisions made in the research process relating the data and the visualizations to the development of the research question or focus.
  • Discuss the relationship between chosen methods, theories, data, and their implications for the findings in a concise manner.

Learning activities

14 weeks of teaching consisting of lectures, exercises and supervision. Each week students have 4 hours of lecture and 4 hours of exercises. During exercises students will be divided into groups of approximately 40 working with TAs to practically engage with the exercises and topics of the week.

Mandatory activities

There are 10 mandatory activities in the course (nine written and one oral). These must be completed before participation in the final group report submission and oral exam. The written activities are the submission of individual weekly reflections on the course literature (one per week for a total of nine out of eleven). These reflections allow the students to familiarise themselves with the course curriculum and prepare them for the oral exam. The oral mandatory activity is a presentation of group work that takes place toward the end of the semester, but before exam submission.

Literature

Ang, I. ‘Navigating Complexity: From Cultural Critique to Cultural Intelligence’. Continuum 25, no. 6 (1 December 2011): 779–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2011.617873.

Bacchi, C. ‘Why Study Problematizations? Making Politics Visible’. Open Journal of Political Science 2, no. 1 (26 April 2012): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojps.2012.21001.

Cakici, B., & Ruppert, E. (2020a). Methods as forces of subjectivation: Experiments in the remaking of official statistics. Journal of Cultural Economy, 13(2), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350.2019.1684340

D’Ignazio, C., & Klein, L. F. (2020). Data Feminism. MIT Press.

Douglas-Jones, R., Burnett, J.M., Cohn, M., Gad, C., Hockenhull, Jørgensen, B., Maguire, J., Ojala, M., & Winthereik, B.R. (2018) ‘A Bestiary of Digital Monsters’. In Living with Monsters? Social Implications of Algorithmic Phenomena, Hybrid Agency, and the Performativity of Technology, edited by Ulrike Schultze, Margunn Aanestad, Magnus Mähring, Carsten Østerlund, and Kai Riemer, 177–90. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology. Springer International Publishing

Dumit, J. (2014). Writing the Implosion: Teaching the World One Thing at a Time. Cultural Anthropology, 29(2), 344–362. https://doi.org/10.14506/ca29.2.09

Gray, M. L., & Suri, S. (2019). Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Haraway, D.J. ‘Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium’. In Modest_Witness@Second_Millennium.FemaleMan_Meets_OncoMouse, 1 edition., 378. New York: Routledge, 1997.

Kanarinka. (2015, December 1). What would feminist data visualization look like? https://civic.mit.edu/feminist-data-visualization.html

Kjær, K. M., Ojala, M., & Henriksen, L. Absent Data: Hauntological Engagements with Twitter Collections. (Under Review)

Krygier, J., & Wood, D. ‘This Is Not the World (Ce n’est Pas Le Monde)’. In Rethinking Maps: New Frontiers in Cartographic Theory, edited by Martin Dodge, Rob Kitchin, and Chris Perkins, 978-0-415-46152–58. London ; New York: Routledge, 2009.

Law, J., Ruppert, E., Savage, M. (2011). The Double Social Life of Methods. CRESC Working Paper Series

Marres, N. ‘Are We Researching Society or Technology?’ In Digital Sociology: The Reinvention of Social Research, 1 edition. Malden, MA: Polity, 2017.

Marres, N. ‘Do we need new methods?’ In Digital Sociology: The Reinvention of Social Research, 1 edition. Malden, MA: Polity, 2017.

Mohamed, S., Png, M.-T., & Isaac, W. (2020). Decolonial AI: Decolonial Theory as Sociotechnical Foresight in Artificial Intelligence. Philosophy & Technology, 33(4), 659–684. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00405-8

Payne,. A., & Lewis., Mark. The Ghost Dance: An Interview with Jacques Derrida

Perriam, J., Birkbak, A., & Freeman, A. (2020). Digital methods in a post-API environment. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(3), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1682840

Rosenberg, D., & Williams, T. D. (2013). Raw Data Is an Oxymoron. MIT Press.

Rosling, H., Rosling, O., & Rönnlund, A. R. (2018b). Factfulness: Ten reasons we’re wrong about the world and why things are better than you think. Sceptre.

Turnbull, D. ‘3 Tricksters and Cartographers: Maps, Science and the State in the Making of a Modern Scientific Knowledge Space.’ In Masons, Tricksters and Cartographers, 277. Psychology Press, 2000.

Venturini, T., Bounegru, L., Gray, J., & Rogers, R. (n.d.). A reality check(list) for digital methods. New Media, 23.

Zimmer, M. (2018). Addressing Conceptual Gaps in Big Data Research Ethics: An Application of Contextual Integrity. Social Media + Society, 4(2), 205630511876830. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118768300

Woolgar, S., & Neyland, D. (2013). ‘7 Spaces of Governance.’ In Mundane Governance: Ontology and Accountability. OUP Oxford.