Foundations of Sociology
Code: 106218Credits: 6
| Degree programme | Type | Course |
|---|---|---|
| Science, Technology and Humanities | FB | 1 |
Contact lecturer
- Name :
- Nuria Valles Peris
- Email :
- nuria.valles@uab.cat
Teaching staff
- Nuria Valles Peris
Group languages
You can consult this information at the end of the document.
Prerequisites
No previous requirements
Objectives
1. To understand the influence of science and technology on the evolution of Western societies, as well as the historical and social conditioning factors in scientific and technological creation.
2. To explain the functioning of scientific research. To show the social and cultural factors that have to do with the production of knowledge and technologies. To analyze science as a social institution.
3. To critically evaluate the potential capacity and limitations of science and technology as well as their effects on social life. To critically analyze the correspondence between social needs and scientific and technical development, valuing citizen information and participation as a way to exercise democratic control over it.
4. To reflect in a complex and global way on techno-scientific topics of rigorous actuality and social incidence.
Learning outcomes
- Search for and select information sources, assess their importance, and use them in interpreting topics and issues of social interest.
- Work collaboratively and efficiently in teams.
- Identify the principal explanatory models of sociology.
- Make critical, reflective use of the notions intrinsic to sociological thought.
- Distinguish between good and bad practice in relation to the management of sex-/gender-based inequalities.
- Apply the values of non-sexist knowledge reflectively, creatively and from a critical standpoint.
- Use information searching techniques to produce different types of scientific reports or monographs.
- Evaluate the contribution of sociology to the study of science and technology.
Contents
Block 1. Classical sociological thought
1. Introduction to sociological thought
2. Basic concepts and main debates in Sociology
Block 2. Sociology of knowledge and sociology of science
3. Introduction to the sociology of knowledge
4. Science as an institution and the sociology of error
Block 3. Science and Technology Studies
5. From the sociology of science to the sociology of scientific knowledge
6. Current perspectives on Science and Technology Studies
Learning activities and methodology
| Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Theory classes | 33 | 1.32 | |
| Practice classes | 16 | 0.64 | |
| Teamwork | 15 | 0.6 | |
| Tutorial | 4 | 0.16 | |
| Review | 10 | 0.4 | |
| Information search | 10 | 0.4 | |
| Personal work | 55 | 2.2 |
Theoretical sessions in large groups where the contents of the subject are presented in a lecture format
Sessions of inverted classes where some theoretical content is explored in depth
Classroom practice sessions where the analysis of a controversy will be worked on.
Autonomous work: reading of proposed texts, study and preparation of group work.
Tutorials: supervision sessions.
Assessment
Continuous assessment activities
| Title | Weight | Hours | ECTS | Learning outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EV1 Written examination | 40% | 1 | 0.04 | 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 |
| EV3b Oral presentation of the collective essay | 10% | 0 | 0 | 2, 5 |
| EV2 Test about a book reading | 20% | 1 | 0.04 | 4, 8 |
| EV3a Elaboration of a group essay | 30% | 5 | 0.2 | 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7 |
Continuous evaluation
EV1 Written exam on the first two blocks of the subject.
This evidence represents 40% of the total mark of the subject.
EV2a Test on the reading of a book to be chosen from a selection made by the teaching staff of the subject. It will be done individually.
This evidence represents 20% of the total mark for the subject.
EV3a Elaboration of a group essay on a topic to choose from a selection made by the lecturers.
This evidence represents 30% of the total mark of the subject.
EV3b Oral presentation of the group work.
This evidence represents 10% of the total mark of the subject.
Students will obtain a “Not assessed/Not submitted” course grade unless they have submitted more than 30% of the assessment items
On carrying out each evaluation activity, lecturers will inform students (on Moodle) of the procedures to be followed for reviewing all grades awarded, and the date on which such a review will take place
In the event that tests or exams cannot be taken onsite, they will be adapted to an online format made available through the UAB’s virtual tools (original weighting will be maintained). Homework, activities and class participation will be carried out through forums, wikis and/or discussion on Teams, etc.Lecturers will ensure that students are able to access these virtual tools, or will offer them feasible alternatives
Definition of subject passed: to have obtained a total of at least 5 points in the continuous evaluation.
Resit: students who, during the continuous evaluation, have made evidences with a weight equal to or greater than 2/3 of the total grade and have obtained a final grade lower than 5 points and higher or equal to 3.5 points, may opt for the resit process.
Group work and oral presentation are excluded from the resit process.
In the event of a student committing any irregularity that may lead to a significant variation in the grade awarded to an assessment activity, the student will be given a zero for this activity, regardless of any disciplinary process that may take place. In the event of several irregularities in assessment activities of the same subject, the student will be given a zero as the final grade for this subject.
One-time evaluation
This subject does not admit one-time evaluation.
This subject allows the use of AI technologies as an integral part of the submitted work, provided that the final result reflects a significant contribution from the student in terms of analysis and personal reflection.
The student must clearly (i) identify which parts have been generated using AI technology; (ii) specify the tools used; and (iii) include a critical reflection on how these have influenced the process and final outcome of the activity.
Lack of transparency regarding the use of AI in the assessed activity will be considered academic dishonesty; the corresponding grade may be lowered, or the work may even be awarded a zero. In cases of greater infringement, more serious action may be taken.
Bibliography
Aibar, E. (2023) El culto a la innovación. Barcelona: NED.
Alexander, J. C. (1990). Las teorías sociológicas desde la segunda guerra mundial. Gedisa.
Barnes, B. (1995). Sobre ciencia. Biblioteca de Divulagación Científica.
Berger, P. L. (2016). Invitació a la sociologia. Herder
Berger, P. L. y Luckmann, T. (1988). La construcció social de la realitat. Herder.
Bijker, W. E., Bal, R., & Hendriks, R. (2009). The Paradox of Scientific Authority: The Role of Scientific Advice in Democracies. MIT Press.
Bloor, D. (1976). Conocimiento e imaginario social. Barcelona: Gedisa, 1998.
Butler, J. (2001). El género en disputa: el feminismo y la subversión de la identidad. Paidós.
Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2017). Why Democracies Need Science. Polity.
Collins, H., & Pinch, T. (1993). El gólem. Lo que todos deberíamos saber acerca de la ciencia. Crítica, 1996.
Collins, H., & Pinch, T. (1998). The Golem at Large. What You Should know about Technology. Cambridge University.
Crawford, K. (2021) Atlas de AI. Barcelona: NED, 2023
Domènech, M., y Tirado, F. J. (1998). Sociología simétrica. Ensayos sobre ciencia, tecnología y sociedad. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Feyerabend, P. (1981). La ciencia en una sociedad libre. Siglo XXI editores.
Foucault, M. (1993). Microfísica del poder. Ediciones la Piqueta.
Garfinkel, H. (2006). Estudios en Etnometodología. Anthropos.
Giddens, A. (1992). El capitalismo y la moderna teoría social. Editorial Labor
Gilbert, N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora’s Box. A sociological analysis of scientists’ discourse. Cambridge University.
Harding, S. (1993). Ciencia y feminismo (Vol. 1996). Morata.
Jasanoff, S. (2012). Science and Public Reason. Routledge.
Joas, H. y Knobl, W. (2016). Teoría social. 20 lecciones introductorias. Akal.
Kuhn, T. S. (2008). L'estructura de les revolucions científiques. Obrador Edèndum.
Kuhn, T. S. (2013). La estructura de las revoluciones científicas. FCE.
Lamo de Espinosa, E., González García, J. M. Torresaberol, C. (1994). La sociología del conocimiento y de la ciencia. Alianza Universidad Textos.
Latour, B. (1999). La esperanza de Pandora. Ensayos sobre la realidad de los estudios de la ciencia. Gedisa, 2001.
Latour, B. (2005). Reensamblar lo Social. Una introducción a la teoría del actor-red. Manantial, 2008.
Latour, B. (2017) Dónde aterrizar. Cómo orientarse en política. 2019th edn. Barcelona: Taurus.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). La vida en el laboratorio. La construcción de los hechos científicos. Alianza, 1995.
Mackenzie, D., & Wajcman, J. (1985). The Social Shaping of Technology. Open University, 1999.
Mannheim, K. (1993). Ideología y utopía. FCE
Merton, R. K. (1985). Sociología de la ciencia. Alianza.
Potter, J. (1996). La representación de la realidad. Discurso, retórica y construcción social. Paidós, 1998.
Price, D. J. S. (1973). Hacia una ciencia de la ciencia. Ariel
Vinck, D. (2007). Ciencias y sociedad. Sociología del trabajo científico. Barcelona: Gedisa, 2017.
Wajcman, J. (2004). El tecnofeminismo. Cátedra,2006.
Woolgar, S. (1988). Ciencia: abriendo la caja negra. Barcelona: Anthropos, 1991.
Software
No specific software is required.
Course groups and languages
The information provided is provisional until November 30. After this date, you will be able to consult the language of each group through this link. To access the information, you will need to enter the course CODE
| Type of teaching | Group | Language | Semester | Shift |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (TE) Theory | 1 | Spanish | second semester | morning-mixed |
| (PAUL) Classroom practices | 1 | Spanish | second semester | morning-mixed |