Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T02:35:59.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Planning for the Future: Methodology Training in Canadian Universities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2017

Michelle L. Dion  and
Laura B. Stephenson
Michelle L. Dion*
Affiliation:
McMaster University
Laura B. Stephenson*
Affiliation:
The University of Western Ontario
*
Department of Political Science, McMaster University, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4M4, email: dionm@mcmaster.ca
Department of Political Science, The University of Western Ontario, Room 4154, Social Science Centre, London, Ontario, N6A 5C2, email: laura.stephenson@uwo.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent changes in government policy making and the labour market have created new opportunities for political scientists, provided that we have the skills to respond to them. We argue that changes need to be made in the area of methodology training in order to capitalize on these opportunities. Canadian political scientists should ensure that all our students acquire basic quantitative competencies, in addition to research design and qualitative analysis training, and that those graduate students interested in more sophisticated quantitative methods have the opportunity to develop those skills. We explain how expanding and deepening training in quantitative methods is one strategy for ensuring a role for political science in evidence-based policy making, for expanding labour market options for students, and for keeping apace with disciplinary trends. We caution, however, that special care needs to be taken to ensure that all political scientists have equal opportunities to develop such skills.

Resume

Les changements récents survenus dans le processus de prise de décision du gouvernement et sur le marché du travail ont ouvert de nouvelles perspectives aux politologues, pourvu qu’ils aient les compétences pour y répondre. Pour tirer parti de ces ouvertures, nous soutenons que des changements s’imposent sur le plan de la formation dans le domaine de la méthodologie de la recherche. Les politologues canadiens doivent s’assurer que tous nos étudiants acquièrent les compétences quantitatives élémentaires, outre la formation en conception de la recherche et en analyse quantitative, et que les diplômés aux cycles supérieurs qui manifestent de l’intérêt pour des méthodes quantitatives plus complexes ont la possibilité de perfectionner ces compétences. Nous expliquons que l’élargissement de la formation aux méthodes quantitatives et son approfondissement est une des stratégies permettant à la science politique de jouer son rôle dans l’élaboration de politiques fondées sur des données probantes, de donner plus de choix aux étudiants sur le marché de travail et de progresser au rythme des tendances de la discipline. Nous tenons, toutefois, à faire remarques qu’une attention particulière doit être portée pour assurer que tous les politologues ont des chances égales de développer de telles compétences.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Political Science/Revue canadienne de science politique , Volume 50 , Issue 1 , March 2017 , pp. 281 - 294
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Political Science Association (l'Association canadienne de science politique) and/et la Société québécoise de science politique 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achen, Christopher. 2014. “Why Do We Need Diversity in the Political Methodology Society?” The Political Methodologist 21 (2): 25–28.Google Scholar
Aon Hewitt, . 2016. Developing Canada's Future Workforce: A Survey of Large Private-Sector Employers. Ottawa ON: Business Council of Canada. http://thebusinesscouncil.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Developing-Canadas-Workforce-March.pdf (September 26, 2016).Google Scholar
Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC). 2011. Trends in Higher Education: Volume 1—Enrolment. Ottawa, ON: The Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. http://www.cais.ca/uploaded/trends-2011-vol1-enrolment-e.pdf (August 1, 2016).Google Scholar
Bennet, Alex and Bennet, David. 2013. Knowledge Mobilization in the Social Sciences and Humanities: Moving from Research to Action. 2nd ed. Marlinton WV: MQI Press.Google Scholar
Birkett, Holly and Marsh, David. 2014. “What Is to Be Done? A Broad Church and the Impact of Political Science Research—A Response to Matthew Wood.” Politics 34 (3): 301–05.Google Scholar
Blais, André, Garand, James C., Giles, Michael and McLean, Iain. 2008. “The Methodological Divide in Political Science.” Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association. Vancouver BC.Google Scholar
Breuning, Marijke and Sanders, Kathryn. 2007. “Gender and Journal Authorship in Eight Prestigious Political Science Journals.” PS: Political Science & Politics 40 (2): 347–51.Google Scholar
Brooks, Stephen. 2007. “The Policy Analysis Profession in Canada.” In Policy Analysis in Canada: The State of the Art, ed. Dobuzinskis, Laurent, Howlett, Michael and Laycock, David. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Charbonneau, Leo. 2016. “Science Minister Kirsty Duncan Goes to Bat for Scientists.” University Affairs. http://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/science-minister-kirsty-duncan-goes-bat-scientists/ (August 1, 2016).Google Scholar
Chouinard, Jill Anne and Milley, Peter V.. 2015. “From New Public Management to New Political Governance: Implications for Evaluation.” Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 30 (1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Clark, Ian D., Trick, David and Van Loon, Richard. 2011. Academic Reform: Policy Options for Improving the Quality and Cost-Effectiveness of Undergraduate Education in Ontario. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Coates, Ken S. and Morrison, Bill. 2011. Campus Confidential: 100 Startling Things You Don't Know about Canadian Universities. Toronto: Lorimer.Google Scholar
Corley, Elizabeth A. and Sabharwal, Meghna. 2010. “Scholarly Collaboration and Productivity Patterns in Public Administration: Analysing Recent Trends.” Public Administration 88 (3): 627–48.Google Scholar
CPSA Diversity Task Force. 2012. Report and Analysis of the Canadian Political Science Association Member Survey.Google Scholar
Dion, Michelle. 2014. “An Effort to Increase Women's Participation: The Visions in Methodology Initiative.” The Political Methodologist 21 (2): 6–9.Google Scholar
Drummond, Don and Rosenbluth, Ellen Kachuck. 2015. Competencies Can Bridge the Interests of Business and Universities. Ottawa ON. Working paper. http://www.ruor.uottawa.ca/handle/10393/33200 (August 1, 2016).Google Scholar
Edge, Jessica and Munro, Daniel. 2015. Inside and Outside the Academy: Valuing and Preparing PhDs for Careers. Ottawa ON: The Conference Board of Canada.Google Scholar
Evans, Heather K. and Bucy, Erik P.. 2010. “The Representation of Women in Publication: An Analysis of Political Communication and the International Journal of Press/Politics.” PS: Political Science & Politics 43 (2): 295–301.Google Scholar
Evans, Heather K. and Moulder, A.. 2011. “Reflecting on a Decade of Women's Publications in Four Top Political Science Journals.” PS: Political Science & Politics 44 (4): 793–98.Google Scholar
Executive Office of the President. 2015. Social and Behavioral Sciences Team: Annual Report. Washington D.C.: National Science and Technology Council.Google Scholar
Harris, Kathleen. 2015. “Mandatory Long-Form Census to Be Reinstated by Liberals.” CBC. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-liberal-census-data-1.3305271 (January 27, 2016).Google Scholar
Hawkins, Richard, Langford, Cooper H. and Saunders, Chad. 2015. “Assessing the Practical Application of Social Knowledge: A Survey of Six Leading Canadian Universities.” Research Policy 44 (1): 83–95.Google Scholar
Howlett, Michael. 2009. “Policy Analytical Capacity and Evidence-Based Policy-Making: Lessons from Canada.” Canadian Public Administration 52 (2): 153–75.Google Scholar
Howlett, Michael and Lindquist, Evert. 2007. “Beyond Formal Policy Analysis: Governance Contex, Analytical Styles, and the Policy Analysis Movement in Canada.” In Policy Analysis in Canada: The State of the Art, ed. Dobuzinskis, Laurent, Howlett, Michael and Laycock, David. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Natalie M. 2016. “The Intersection of Political Science and Media: Research at a Faster Pace.” PS: Political Science & Politics 49 (3): 516–17.Google Scholar
Kadera, Kelly M. 2013. “The Social Underpinnings of Women's Worth in the Study of World Politics: Culture, Leader Emergence, and Coauthorship.” International Studies Perspectives 14 (4): 436–75.Google Scholar
King, Gary. 2011. “Ensuring the Data-Rich Future of the Social Sciences.” Science 331 (6018): 719–21.Google Scholar
Landry, Réjean, Amara, Nabil and Lamari, Moktar. 2001. “Utilization of Social Science Research Knowledge in Canada.” Research Policy 30 (2): 333–49.Google Scholar
Lau, Olivia, and Yohai, Ian. 2016. “Using Quantitative Methods in Industry.” PS: Political Science & Politics 49 (3): 524–26.Google Scholar
Liberal Party of Canada. n.d. “Science and Scientists.” Liberal Party. https://www.liberal.ca/realchange/science-and-scientists/ (July 27, 2016).Google Scholar
Lupia, Arthur. 2014. “What Is the Value of Social Science? Challenges for Researchers and Government Funders.” PS: Political Science & Politics 47 (1): 1–7.Google Scholar
Maliniak, Daniel, Oakes, Amy, Peterson, Susan and Tierney, Michael J.. 2008. “Women in International Relations.” Politics & Gender 4 (1): 122–44.Google Scholar
Margetts, Helen. 2015. “Maximizing the Relevance of Political Science for Public Policy in the Era of Big Data.” In The Relevance of Political Science, ed. Stoker, Gerry, Pierre, Jon and Peters, B. Guy. Basingstoke UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Marginson, Simon, Russell, Tytler, Freeman, Brigid and Roberts, Kelly. 2013. STEM Country Comparisons: International Comparisons of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Education. Melbourne: Australian Council of Learned Academies.Google Scholar
Mead, Lawrence M. 2010. “Scholasticism in Political Science.” Perspectives on Politics 8 (2): 453–64.Google Scholar
Mintrom, Michael. 2007. “The Policy Analysis Movement.” In Policy Analysis in Canada: The State of the Art, ed. Dobuzinskis, Laurent, Howlett, Michael and Laycock, David. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Montpetit, Éric, Blais, André and Foucault, Martial. 2008. “What Does It Take for a Canadian Political Scientist to Be Cited?” Social Science Quarterly 89 (3): 802–16.Google Scholar
Nuffield Foundation, Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC), and Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). 2014. Aims and Activities of the Q-Step Centres. London: Nuffield Foundation. http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/files/Aims%20and%20Activities%20of%20the%20Q-Step%20Centres(8).pdf (September 26, 2016).Google Scholar
Parker, Jonathan. 2010. “Undergraduate Research-Methods Training in Political Science: A Comparative Perspective.” PS: Political Science & Politics 43 (1): 121–25.Google Scholar
Peters, Guy, Pierre, Jon and Stoker, Gerry. 2010. “The Relevance of Political Science.” In Theory and Methods in Political Science (Political Analysis), ed. Marsh, David and Stoker, Gerry. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Raadschelders, Jos C.N. and Lee, Kwang-Hoon. 2011. “Trends in the Study of Public Administration: Empirical and Qualitative Observations from Public Administration Review, 2000–2009.” Public Administration Review 71 (1): 19–33.Google Scholar
Schedler, A. and Mudde, C.. 2010. “Data Usage in Quantitative Comparative Politics.” Political Research Quarterly 63 (2): 417–33.Google Scholar
Shapiro, Ian. 2007. The Flight from Reality in the Human Sciences. Princeton NJ: Princeton UP. http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8083.html (July 31, 2016).Google Scholar
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). 2013. Strenthening Canada's Cultures of Innovation. Ottawa, ON: SSHRC. Strategic Plan 2013–16. http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/about-au_sujet/publications/strategic_plan_2013-16-plan_strategique_2013-2016_e.pdf (July 27, 2016).Google Scholar
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). 2016. Advancing Knowledge for Canada's Future: Enabling Excellence, Building Partnerships, Connecting Research to Canadians. Ottawa, ON: SSHRC. Strategic Plan 2016-2010. http://www.sshrc-crsh.gc.ca/about-au_sujet/publications/strategic_plan_2013-16-plan_strategique_2013-2016_e.pdf (July 27, 2016.Google Scholar
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, and Canada Foundation for Innovation. 2013. Capitalizing on Big Data: Toward a Policy Framework for Advancing Digital Scholarship in Canada. Ottawa ON: The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). Consultation document.Google Scholar
Stoker, Gerry, Pierre, Jon and Peters, B. Guy, eds. 2015. The Relevance of Political Science. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Therriault, Andrew. 2016. “Finding a Place in Political Data Science.” PS: Political Science & Politics 49 (3): 531–34.Google Scholar
Trudeau, Justin. 2015. “Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Mandate Letter.” Prime Minister of Canada. http://pm.gc.ca/eng/minister-innovation-science-and-economic-development-mandate-letter (July 27, 2016).Google Scholar
Walter, Maggie and Andersen, Chris. 2013. Indigenous Statistics: A Quantitative Research Methodology. Walnut Creek CA : Left Coast Press.Google Scholar
Williams, Russell Alan. 2012. “Operationalizing ‘Policy Capacity’: A Case Study of Climate Change Adaptation in Canadian Finance Agencies.” Canadian Political Science Review 6 (1): 65–74.Google Scholar
Wood, Matthew. 2014. “Bridging the Relevance Gap in Political Science.” Politics 34 (3): 275–86.Google Scholar