Replikation als Lehrinstrument in der sozialwissenschaftlichen Methodenlehre
Der Praxiskurs Datenanalyse und Replikation
Identifiers (Article)
Abstract
The data analysis and replication course presented here capitalizes on the gold standard of scientific research and offers a systematic approach integrating reproduction and replication projects into student methods training. Previous method trainings in political science hardly relies on the learning gain that replication projects offer as a research-based learning environment. However, this article argues that political science should introduce replication as part of method courses assignments or invest in stand-alone replication courses as student method trainings in order to establish a culture of replication and reproducibility. This article first discusses the differences between replication and reproducibility and then presents the added value of these projects for the learning process of students. The main part focusses on the learning product developed here and discusses the planning and implementation as well as the requirements for students and the learning objectives. In addition, all learning materials and the course structure developed here are licensed under the CC-BY-NC-SA open access license and can be accessed via GitHub. This data analysis and replication course can help students to develop a replication culture for their own research that meets the gold standard of reproducible research.
Statistics
References
ALVAREZ, R. M. & HEUBERGER, S. 2021. How (Not) to Reproduce: Practical Considerations to Improve Research Transparency in Political Science. PS: Political Science & Politics, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096521001062
ALVAREZ, R. M., KEY, E. M. & NÚÑEZ, L. 2018. Research Replication: Practical Considerations. PS: Political Science & Politics, 51(2), 422–426. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096517002566
BAKER, M. 2016. 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature, 533(7604), 452–454. https://doi.org/10.1038/533452a
BEHRENS, L. & ROHLFING, I. 2018. Not so different in present attitudes and behaviour, but expected future membership: A technical replication of a study of party youth in six European democracies. Research & Politics, 5(1), https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168018764876
BELL, M. S. & MILLER, N. L. 2015. Questioning the Effect of Nuclear Weapons on Conflict. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(1), 74–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002713499718
BIGGS, J., & TANG, C. 2011. Teaching for Quality Learning at University. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
CARSEY, T. M. 2014. Making DA-RT a Reality. PS: Political Science & Politics, 47(1), 72–77. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096513001753
DAFOE, A. 2014. Science Deserves Better: The Imperative to Share Complete Replication Files. PS: Political Science & Politics, 47(1), 60–66. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909651300173X
ENGZELL, P. & ROHRER, J. M. 2021. Improving Social Science: Lessons from the Open Science Movement. PS: Political Science & Politics, 54(2), 297–300. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520000967
EPPNER, S. & GANGHOF, S. 2015. Do (weak) upper houses matter for cabinet formation? A replication and correction. Research & Politics, 2(1), https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168015577969
FELTEN, P. 2013. Principles of Good Practice in SoTL. Teaching and Learning Inquiry: The ISSOTL Journal. 1(1): 121–125. https://doi:10.20343/teachlearninqu.1.1.121
FRANK, M. C. & SAXE, R. 2012. Teaching Replication. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 600–604. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612460686
FREESE, J. 2007. Replication Standards for Quantitative Social Science: Why Not Sociology? Sociological Methods & Research, 36(2), 153–172. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124107306659
HEALEY, M. & JENKINS, A. 2009. Developing undergraduate research and inquiry. Higher Education Academy York.
HERNDON, T., ASH, M. & POLLIN, R. 2014. Does high public debt consistently stifle economic growth? A critique of Reinhart and Rogoff. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 38(2), 257–279. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bet075
HUBER, L. 2009. Warum Forschendes Lernen nötig und möglich ist. Forschendes Lernen im Studium: aktuelle Konzepte und Erfahrungen, 10. https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2905776
HUBER, M. T. & HUTCHINGS, P. 2005. The Advancement of Learning: Building the Teaching Commons. Wiley.
ISHIYAMA, J. 2014. Replication, Research Transparency, and Journal Publications: Individualism, Community Models, and the Future of Replication Studies. PS: Political Science & Politics, 47(1), 78–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096513001765
JANZ, N. 2016. Bringing the Gold Standard into the Classroom: Replication in University Teaching. International Studies Perspectives, 17(4), 392–407. https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12104
JANZ, N. & FREESE, J. 2021. Replicate Others as You Would Like to Be Replicated Yourself. PS: Political Science & Politics, 54(2), 305–308. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520000943
KAUFMANN, D., & EGGENSPERGER, P. 2017. Gute Lehre in den Naturwissenschaften. Der Werkzeugkasten: Einfach. Schnell. Erfolgreich. Springer, Berlin.
KING, G. 1995. Replication, Replication. PS: Political Science and Politics, 28, 444–452.
KING, G. 2003. The Future of Replication. International Studies Perspectives, 4, 443–499.
KING, G. 2006. Publication, Publication. PS: Political Science and Politics, 39, 119–125.
KLÖBER, R. 2020. Charakteristika und Möglichkeiten forschenden Lehrens und Lernens: Scholarship of Teaching and Learning an der Universität Heidelberg. HINT. Heidelberg Inspirations for Innovative Teaching, 1(1), 11–26. https://doi.org/10.11588/hint.2020.1.77682
MARTEL GARCÍA, F. 2014. Democracy is good for the poor: A procedural replication of Ross (2006). Research & Politics, 1(3), https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168014559094
MEYER, C. 2021. Bringing the World to the Classroom: Teaching Statistics and Programming in a Project-Based Setting. PS: Political Science & Politics, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096521001104
OPEN SCIENCE COLLABORATION. 2015. Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
PENG, R. D. 2011. Reproducible Research in Computational Science. Science, 334(6060), 1226–1227. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1213847
RINKE, E. M. & WUTTKE, A. 2021. Open Minds, Open Methods: Transparency and Inclusion in Pursuit of Better Scholarship. PS: Political Science & Politics, 54(2), 281–284. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520001729
ROHLFING, I., KÖNIGSHOFEN, L., KRENZER, S., SCHWALBACH, J. & R, A. B. 2021. A Reproduction Analysis of 106 Articles Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis, 2016–2018. PS: Political Science & Politics, 54(2), 292–296. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096520001717
STOJMENOVSKA, D., BOL, T., & LEOPOLD, T. 2019. Teaching Replication to Graduate Students. Teaching Sociology, 47(4), 303–313. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X19867996
WEIDMANN, N. B. 2016. Replication: Why, Where, and How? A Synopsis. International Studies Perspectives, 17(4), 439–444. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekv002
WILLIAMS, R. 2021. Teaching Programming Skills in Methods Courses is an Opportunity, not a Burden. PS: Political Science & Politics, 55(1), 221–224. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096521001153
