***Neu***
Alle Informationen unter www.unifr.ch/ecopol erhältlich.
PhD Course
Scientific Arguing
and Conference Presentation
October, 13-14
Rem tene, verba sequentur (Master the subject, and the words will follow!) by Cato maior
Downloads:
Newer Researchers Conference - Programme
Dear all,
I have the pleasure to invite you to a Ph.D. Course on "Scientific Arguing and Conference Presentation" in October 2008. The focus will be on presenting and discussing research in a conference-style environment.
The course will provide an opportunity to present and discuss your work, even if it is in an early stage. Advanced papers are very welcome. Invited guests of honor are senior researchers with relevant experience of the academic market and therefore competent to bring this point of view into the discussion. In addition, it features a presentation by a leading external researcher on the topic of "scientific arguing and conference presentation".
There are three types of papers which can be presented. Please let me know under which category you like to present:
1. Research proposal (very early stage- research idea and strategy) --> write a proposal
2. Paper with primary results (early stage)--> write extended abstract (2-3 pages) or paper
3. Paper ready for conference (nearly finished or completed)--> write a paper
The deadline for registration is *September 19* and for the submission of "papers" no later than *October 6*. Individual paper assignments for presentations and discussions will be sent out by *September 26* and *October 6* respectively. The course takes place from *October 13 to October 14*. You can find more detailed information in the attached file. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any further questions about the course.
Looking forward to seeing you!
Manuela
Courseware:
Discussing and refereeing a paper by Manuela La Fauci
What first year PhD candidates should be aware of: PhD Comics
Further tips:
Referee Report:
(see also list of literature I sent you)
See chapter 3 of "Guide for the Young Economist" (Writing and Speaking Effectively about Economics)See also: Being a Good Referee
For the PhD course: Max. 2 pages of the Referee report. You can include all mayor and minor points that will come up during the discussion. Add your own ideas and critics. Best is if you can add a suggestion how to improve the major problem areas.
Mind map:
You can use a nice software called compendium:
http://compendium.open.ac.uk/institute//download/download.htm
http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/course/view.php?name=KM
More infos:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind-map
http://www.wikimindmap.org/viewmap.php?wiki=en.wikipedia.org&topic=
Narrative Table of Contents:
It's like a table of content with short and focused information about what you treat in the specific chapters and/or what kind of results or conclusions you get. Of course, you can only write as much as you advanced in your work. If you are in the beginning (i.e. developing an idea) make sure that you are as precise as possible in what you want to analyse and which methode you think you're going to apply and what you expect to find out. (selling the idea!)
Further informations:
Previous Ph.D. Course in February 25-26, 2008 on:
Scientific Writing and Scholarly Publication
David Romer's Rules
for Making It Through Graduate School and Finishing Your Dissertation
"Out in Five"
* Don't clutter up your life with other activities; just write.
* Don't carry out a thorough and comprehensive search of the literature; just write.
* Don't attempt to make sure that every page you write shows the full extent of your professional skills; just write.
* Don't write a well-organized, well-integrated, unified dissertation; just write.
* Don't think profound thoughts that shake the intellectual foundations of the discipline; just write.
* If you don't have a paper started by the spring of your third year, be alarmed.
* If you don't have a paper largely drafted by the fall of your fourth year, panic.
* Have three new ideas a week while you are getting started.
* Don't try to game the profession, work on what interests you.
* Good papers in economics have three characteristics:
o A viewpoint.
o A lever.
o A result.
Some nice links:
Hamermesh: Advice for Economists
Mankiw (blog): Advice for grad-students (See also: Advice for Students. On the left)
Further information on how to present and publish a paper:
Rafael's presentation on "Scholarly Publication" (update!)
Manuela's presentation on "Summery of the Monday Session" (update!)
Literature (download): Content of the literature (short discriptions):
1. Learn from the Big Shots: How to Find a Topic
2. Style Guide for Economists
3. Which Journal?
Journal Rankings
Barrett/Olia/Von Bailey (2000)
Review Statistics and Processes, Editor‘s Reports
Mission Statements
4. Refereeing and How to Deal With Referee Reports
Chilton, S. (1999)
Hamermesh. D.S. (1992)
5. The Reviewing Process: Empirical Facts and the Personal View
Van Dalen, H.P., and A. Klamer (2005)
Gans, J.S., and G.B. Shepherd (1994)
6. Wissenschaftliches Arbeiten (WISU- Kompact)
Abgrenzung, Gegenstand und Qualitätskriterien wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten
