Comprehensive Exam in Social Sciences - YBAJ008

• Anglický název: Comprehensive Exam in Social Sciences
• Zajišťuje: Program Liberal Arts and Humanities (24-SHVAJ)
• Fakulta: Fakulta humanitních studií
• Platnost: od 2023
• Semestr: oba
• E-Kredity: 10
• Rozsah, examinace: 0/2, Zk [HS]
• Rozsah za akademický rok: 13 [hodiny]
• Počet míst: zimní:neurčen / neurčen (neurčen); letní:neurčen / neurčen (neurčen)
• Minimální obsazenost: neomezen
• 4EU+: ne
• Virtuální mobilita / počet míst pro virtuální mobilitu: ne
• Stav předmětu: vyučován
• Jazyk výuky: angličtina
• Způsob výuky: prezenční
• Způsob výuky: prezenční
• Poznámka: předmět lze zapsat v ZS i LS
• Garant: Ludmila Maria Wladyniak, M.A., Ph.D.; David Verbuč, M.A., Ph.D.; Ing. Petr Špecián, Ph.D.
• Třída: Courses unavailable to incoming students
• Prerekvizity : YBAJ001

Anotace

čeština

Poslední úprava: David Verbuč, M.A., Ph.D. (22.11.2022)

Comprehensive Exam in Social Sciences (CESS) consists of three parts: Part 1: Basic Concepts in Social Sciences: Multiple-choice question test based on compulsory literature from three of the four disciplines – anthropology, economics, psychology, sociology. Students themselves choose three disciplines which they are supposed to register in advance. The subject of the test is the students' understanding of the compulsory social scientific literature. 35 % of the final grade. Part 2: Methodology of the Social Sciences: Multiple-choice question test from the methodology of social-science research based on the compulsory textbook reading (by Punch). The students have to demonstrate their understanding of the nature of empirical research in the social sciences, and the main methodological approaches in this regard. 25 % of the final grade. Part 3: Essay in one chosen discipline: Consists of a written assignment that will test the students’ ability to apply their knowledge and critical understanding to a particular problem within the selected scholarly discipline and convey them in an appropriate academic writing form, using the concepts and theories from the assigned literature. The students will be given a topic from one discipline of their choice (sociology, sociocultural anthropology, economics, or psychology), which they are supposed to register in advance. 40 % of the final grade. All the three parts of the exam have to be taken in one occasion (not in separate terms). The students have to achieve sufficient results in each and every part of the exam in order to successfully pass the full exam (and its parts). In case of failure in any of the 3 parts, the student will need to repeat the whole exam. All detailed information about the CESS exam, including updates, can be found here: https://dl1.cuni.cz/course/view.php?id=10868

Požadavky k zápisu

Poslední úprava: David Verbuč, M.A., Ph.D. (16.11.2023)

see here: https://dl1.cuni.cz/course/view.php?id=10868 

Sylabus

Poslední úprava: David Verbuč, M.A., Ph.D. (16.11.2023)

There is a list of all compulsory literature for CESS exam (for Parts 1 and 2). However, students choose only three disciplines out of four for Part 1 and only one discipline for Part 3 (list on Moodle). All literature is available in Moodle: https://dl1.cuni.cz/course/view.php?id=10868.

* 1. Mandatory literature (Part 1):

* 1.1. Sociocultural Anthropology (old version)

ERIKSEN, T. H.: A Brief History of Anthropology. In: Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction to Social and Cultural Anthropology. 2nd. ed. London: Pluto Press, 2001. pp 9-23.
RAPPORT, N. & OVERING, J.: Culture. In: Social and cultural anthropology: the key concepts. London: Routledge, 2002. pp 92-102.
MALINOWSKI, B.: Method and Scope of Anthropological Fieldwork. In: ROBBEN, A. C. G. M., & SLUKA, J. A. (Eds.): Ethnographic fieldwork: an anthropological reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub (Blackwell anthologies in social & cultural anthropology), 2007. pp 46-57.
HANNERZ, U.: Field Worries: Studying Down, Up, Sideways, Through, Backward, Forward, Early or Later Away and at Home. In Anthropology’s world: life in a twenty-first century. London a New York: Pluto Press a Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. pp 59-86.
TURNER, V. W.: Liminality and Communitas. In: The Ritual Process. Structure and Anti- Structure. New York: Cornell University Press, 2007. pp 94-130.
GEERTZ, C.: Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture. In: WELSCH, R. & ENDICOTT, K. (Eds.): Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Anthropology. Dubuque, Iowa: Dushkin/McGraw- Hill, 2003. pp 14-23.
SLOCUM, S.: Woman the Gatherer: Male Bias in Anthropology. In: ERIKSON, P. A., & LIAM D. M., (Eds.): Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory. 4th ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013.
SAID, E. W.: Knowing the Oriental. In: ERIKSON, P. A., & LIAM D. M. (Eds.): Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory. 4th ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013. pp 324-335.
CLIFFORD, J.: Introduction: Partial Truths. In: CLIFFORD, J. & MARCUS, G. E. (Eds.): Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, Berkley: University of California Press, 1986. pp 1-26.
WOLF, E. R: Introduction [Europe and the People Without History]. In: ERIKSON, P. A., & LIAM D. M.(Eds.): Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory. 4th ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013. pp 377-392. APPADURAI, A.: “Disjuncture and Difference.” In: ERIKSON, P. A., & LIAM D. M. (Eds.): Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory. 4th ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013. pp 511-518.

* 1.1. Sociocultural Anthropology (new version)

MALINOWSKI, B.: Method and Scope of Anthropological Fieldwork. In: ROBBEN, A. C. G. M., & SLUKA, J. A. (Eds.): Ethnographic fieldwork: an anthropological reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub (Blackwell anthologies in social & cultural anthropology), 2007. pp 46-57.
HANNERZ, U.: Field Worries: Studying Down, Up, Sideways, Through, Backward, Forward, Early or Later Away and at Home. In Anthropology’s world: life in a twenty-first century. London a New York: Pluto Press a Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. pp 59-86.
TURNER, V. W.: Liminality and Communitas. In: The Ritual Process. Structure and Anti- Structure. New York: Cornell University Press, 2007. pp 94-130.
GEERTZ, C.: Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture. In: WELSCH, R. & ENDICOTT, K. (Eds.): Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Anthropology. Dubuque, Iowa: Dushkin/McGraw- Hill, 2003. pp 14-23.
SLOCUM, S.: Woman the Gatherer: Male Bias in Anthropology. In: ERIKSON, P. A., & LIAM D. M., (Eds.): Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory. 4th ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013.
SAID, E. W.: Knowing the Oriental. In: ERIKSON, P. A., & LIAM D. M. (Eds.): Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory. 4th ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013. pp 324-335.

ORTIZ, Fernando. “On the Social Phenomenon of “Transculturation” and Its Importance in Cuba.” In: Anthropological Theory for the 21^st Century, edited by A. Lynn BOLLES, et al). [1940] 2022. pp. 94–96. 

APPADURAI, A.: “Disjuncture and Difference.” In: ERIKSON, P. A., & LIAM D. M. (Eds.): Readings for a History of Anthropological Theory. 4th ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2013. pp 511-518.

Margaret Mead’s Samoan adolescence study controversy:

HOLMES, Lowell D., and Ellen Rhoads Holmes. 1992. “Samoan Character and the Academic World” (from Samoan Village: Then and Now), 80–87.

FREEMAN, Derek. 1983. “Margaret Mead and Samoa.” (from Margaret Mead and Samoa: The Making and Unmaking of an Anthropological Myth), 70–79.

(both sources reprinted in/taken from Welsch, Robert, and Kirk Endicott, ed. 2003. Taking Sides: Clashing Views in Anthropology. Guilford: Dushkin/McGraw-Hill.)

Further (optional) reading: for further argumentation (especially regarding Freeman’s interviews with Fa’apua’a), see “The Trashing of Margaret Mead: How Derek Freeman Fooled us all on an Alleged Hoax,” excerpt from Paul Shankman’s book www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/current/readings/Shankman-Trashing%20of%20Margaret%20Mead.pdf

TSING, Anna. 2000. “The Global Situation.” Cultural Anthropology 15(3): 327–360.

* 1.2. Sociology

FULCHER, J. - SCOTT, J.: What is Sociology? In: Sociology. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University, 2011. pp 3-18. FULCHER, J. - SCOTT, J.: Theories and Theorizing. In: Sociology. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University, 2011. pp 20-68.
FULCHER, J. - SCOTT, J.: Socialization, Identity and Interaction. In: Sociology. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University, 2011. pp 111-148.
BAUMAN, Z. - MAY, T.: Decisions and Actions: Power, Choice and Moral Duty. In: Thinking Sociologically. 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 2001. pp 59-78.
BOTTERO, W.: Founding ideas. In Stratification: Social division and inequality. London: Routledge, 2005. pp 33-51.

* 1.3. Psychology

PENNINGTON, D. GILLEN, K., HILL, P.: Social Psychogy. Ch. Social Influence, London: Arnold, 1999. pp 244- 277.
PENNINGTON, D. GILLEN, K., HILL, P.: Social Psychogy. Ch. Pro-social and anti-social Behaviour, London: Arnold, 1999. pp 279-308.
WHITNEY, P.: Psychology of Language. Ch. The nature of Language. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1998. pp 2-31.
WHITNEY, P.: Psychology of Language. Ch. Language acquisition: Biological Foundations, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin, 1998. pp 302-333.
NUTTIN, J.: Motivation, Planning, and Actions. New Jersey: Leuven University Press. Ch. 5, 1984. pp 134-195.

* 1.4. Economics

DIXIT, A., and SKEATH, S.: Games of Strategy. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Ch. 1 & 2. 2004. pp 3-42. MANKIW, N. G.: Macroeconomics. 7th ed. Harvard University: Worth Publishers. Ch. 3 & 4. 2010. pp 45-115. VARIAN, H. R.: Intermediate Microeconomics. 8th ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Ch. 1, 2 & 3. 2010. pp 1-53.

* 2. Mandatory literature (Part 2):

PUNCH, K.: Introduction to social research: quantitative and qualitative approaches. 2nd or 3rd ed. London: SAGE. 2005.

* 3. Mandatory literature (Part 3): list of literature for Part 3 exam, separate for each discipline, together with all pdf readings, is posted on Moodle.