Guest  

 
Search: 
Search By: SubjectAbstractAuthorTitleFull-Text

 

Showing 1 through 5 of 7,310 records.
Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 1462 - Next  Jump:
2011 - National Women's Studies Association Words: 86 words || 
Info
1. Arora, Kulvinder. "What is “Comparative” about “Comparative Feminisms?" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Women's Studies Association, SHERATON HOTEL (DOWNTOWN) ATLANTA, Atlanta, GA, Nov 10, 2011 <Not Available>. 2019-11-14 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p513261_index.html>
Publication Type: Individual Paper
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The rationale for this paper is to help feminist scholars and teachers grapple with the difficulties of teaching global perspectives to American students. Transnational feminists have offered important insights on how to teach the perspectives of non-western women. My paper will include a literature review of feminist writing on the teaching of transnational feminism. Much of this scholarship, however, is concerned with positionality more than actual pedagogical methods. I argue that these valuable insights may be transformed into thinking specifically about pedagogical concerns and feminist methodology.

2005 - American Political Science Association Pages: 38 pages || Words: 11298 words || 
Info
2. Krook, Mona Lena. "Comparing Methods for Studying Women in Politics: Statistical, Case Study, and Qualitative-Comparative Techniques" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Marriott Wardman Park, Omni Shoreham, Washington Hilton, Washington, DC, Sep 01, 2005 <Not Available>. 2019-11-14 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p41948_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Research on women in politics, like most work in political science, gravitates towards large-n statistical analyses or small-n case studies. Employing these conventional techniques, it offers relatively consistent explanations for cross-national differences in the percentage of women elected to national parliaments. This apparent consensus, however, obscures important disagreements among scholars that -- combined with recent empirical developments -- cast doubt on the causal effect of central variables, most notably the role of the electoral system and women's social and economic status in facilitating or undermining women's access to political office. Exploring the possibilities of qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), this paper outlines the methodological trade-offs involved in analyzing common trends across many cases (the large-n solution), unique trajectories across a few cases (the small-n solution), and causal diversity across a middle range of cases (the medium-n solution).

2008 - American Sociological Association Annual Meeting Words: 3 words || 
Info
3. Evans, Peter. "Institutions, Power and Interests in Comparative Politics and Comparative Political Sociology" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Sheraton Boston and the Boston Marriott Copley Place, Boston, MA, <Not Available>. 2019-11-14 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p246010_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: No abstract available.

2014 - American Sociological Association Annual Meeting Pages: unavailable || Words: 14585 words || 
Info
4. Broadbent, Jeffrey., Swarnakar, Pradip., Jin, Jun. and Lahsen, Myanna. "Comparing Climate Change Discourse Coalitions: Brazil, China and India in Comparative Context" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Hilton San Francisco Union Square and Parc 55 Wyndham San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, Aug 15, 2014 Online <APPLICATION/PDF>. 2019-11-14 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p726768_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Despite international agreements to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, total emissions have climbed rapidly following the “worst case” trajectory. Actual national priorities have evolved in tension with the emerging global (UNFCCC) norms that urge strong national mitigation. This paper analyzes the different discourse coalitions in relevant national cases and Taiwan as drawn from actors and positions cited in their major newspapers. The data come from Compon-Comparing Climate Change Policy Networks-a comparative study of 17 societies. We use the method of Discourse Network Analysis to gather this data and analyze it using standard network analysis techniques. This paper focuses on the three major developing country emitters, Brazil, China and India, without the participation of which, global efforts at mitigation will fail. The paper contrasts their discourse coalitions and explains them within their national context.

2015 - 59th Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society Words: 764 words || 
Info
5. Portnoi, Laura. and Bagley, Sylvia. "Comparative qualitative policy document analysis: Analyzing and comparing across contexts" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the 59th Annual Conference of the Comparative and International Education Society, Washington Hilton Hotel, Washington D.C., Mar 08, 2015 <Not Available>. 2019-11-14 <http://citation.allacademic.com/meta/p975507_index.html>
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Objectives/Purposes

Comparative and international education (CIE) involves comparing policies and practices across various national contexts. Although scholars have studied educational policies in depth, publications tend to focus on research findings, resulting in a dearth of literature on methodological procedures for analyzing policies. While conducting a study of the discourse on global competition in educational policy documents from around the world, we recognized the need to establish and delineate a process for analyzing policies that could be replicated or adapted in future research. This paper focuses on our development of a systematic and rigorous process for analyzing and comparing policies, which we have coined Comparative Qualitative Policy Document Analysis (CQPDA).

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

The CQPDA process is grounded in the qualitative tradition, which involves identifying patterns in words and other symbols that lead to understanding phenomena in depth (Bogdan & Biklin, 2007). In contrast to quantitative content analysis methods, the CQPDA process is centered on an exploration of text within documents to better understand phenomena represented therein. Rather than starting from a fixed perspective or testing a theory, the purpose of using qualitative procedures for comparing policies is to build theory and understanding through inductive processes (Merriam, 2001) involving thematic comparison across cases. Our study of the discourse on global competition in educational policies led to developing CQPDA as a means to gain a systematic, comparative understanding of the topic. Our research design was emergent and fluid (Creswell, 2007), and we continually revised and refined the CQPDA process as the study unfolded.

Analytical Methods/Modes of Inquiry

The CQPDA method evolved through two data collection phases in the study. Phase I consisted of collecting and sorting relevant policy documents; each was coded by type (e.g., general education policy, poverty reduction strategy) to assess the scope of the overall sample. In Phase II, we analyzed a subset of policies, building upon Saldaña’s (2012) two-cycle coding process to design a method specific to comparative policy analysis. The first cycle comprised holistic coding of large chunks of text by assigning descriptive labels to provide a broad understanding of emphases highlighted in the policies and provisional coding through a “start list” of codes based on a literature review. The second cycle involved pattern coding to move “up” from codes or categories to themes based on holistic and provisional coding. The third cycle, unique to CQPDA, was comparison across policy documents.

Data Sources/Evidence

The data sources collected in Phase I included over 300 educational policy documents from more than 100 countries, obtained online from the United Nations, the World Bank, search engine queries, and education ministry websites. For Phase II we sought to compare “varieties of apples” through purposive homogenous sampling (Patton, 2002) and limited the sample to polices that met the following four criteria: 1) available via the Internet, 2) available in English, 3) full-length governmental policy documents, and 4) focused on strategic priorities. Countries using English in governmental business and countries in Europe and North America were overrepresented in the initial sample; we thus selected policies from representative countries from each region for the final analysis (totaling 15 policies/countries).

Results/Conclusions

In this paper we report on results and conclusions related to the evolution of the CQPDA process. While conducting our study, we first sought existing strategies for analyzing policy documents by consulting an array of disciplines and considering policy, content, and discourse analyses as possible methods. We also reviewed articles and dissertations focused on investigations of policy. None of these resources yielded a clear and detailed strategy for comparatively analyzing educational policy documents. In the absence of an a priori method, we began to develop CQPDA to allow for a qualitative, inductive process that evolved through the study. For example, our provisional coding list was continually modified as we collaboratively added new codes and deleted or renamed others. Through using an iterative process for all components of the study, we established the parameters and systematic steps of CQPDA, which are outlined in detail in the paper.

Significance to CIE

CIE scholars and researchers regularly become involved in comparing policy documents across international contexts. Yet CIE researchers have not delineated a comprehensive, step-by-step procedure for analyzing policy documents that might be utilized directly or adapted to researchers’ specific needs in other studies. CQPDA provides a systematic and rigorous procedure for conducting comparative analyses of policy documents to better understand phenomena via inductive processes. As an established protocol for conducting comparative policy analyses, CQPDA provides an invaluable methodological resource for both senior and emerging scholars in the field.

Pages: Previous - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 1462 - Next  Jump:

©2019 All Academic, Inc.   |   All Academic Privacy Policy