Course 2022-2023

Research Project : Policy-making in transforming societies [EPOLB221]

  • 10 credits
  • 75h+15h
  • 1st and 2nd quarter
Language of instruction: English

Learning outcomes

 

The project aims at providing students with the fundamental methodological, analytical, and theoretical tools to analyze decision and policy-making processes in modern societies. Public policies shape actors’ behavior through formal (and sometimes informal) means: they exhibit dynamism as well as stability, they distribute power and are inevitably contested. In short, public policies have a major impact on citizens and constitute constraints as well as opportunities for particular groups of citizens. As society becomes more complex and is confronted with political challenges (e.g. environmental sustainability, financial regulation, good governance), understanding the political, economic as well as social factors influencing (the formulation) of public policy is of major importance for any political analyst. In particular, the course focuses on policy areas which challenge societies, inducing deep transformations (e.g. energy, environment, migration, democratic innovations, international and European governance). This year, the students will focus on environmental and energy related issues taking place at local, regional, national and/or European levels.

The teaching method combines the added-value of lectures (introducing students to fundamental concepts and theories of policy-making) with empirical and theoretical analyses of real case-studies conducted by the students. Students apply concepts and theoretical models to an empirical analysis of a public policy of their choice (in coordination with the professor, teaching assistants, and professional experts). Regular meetings are organized with the professor and teaching assistants to receive comprehensive feedback throughout both semesters, before the final jury and the submission of their public policy analysis research paper.

Consequently, the organization of the course largely relies on students’ regular participation and commitment to field work (including the development of data collection tools, such as interviews, questionnaires or participatory observation with stakeholders and decision-makers). 

 

Objectives

The main objectives of the course are the following:

  1. Building a research design and a research strategy
  2. Using the interview method
  3. Developing a critical stance vis-à-vis the research method used
  4. Writing a public policy analysis research paper
  5. Writing an abstract in English
  6. Orally presenting your research findings in front of a jury
  7. Using collaborative working techniques



 

 

Content

The course takes place over the entire academic year and is divided into 4 complementary modules. Each module provides students with the specific knowledge and necessary skills for the final jury and the production of a research paper.

  • Module 1: Understanding epistemology and research methods
  • Module 2: Understanding public policy analysis
  • Module 3: Collecting and analyzing data
  • Module 4: Applying policy-making analysis

 


Teaching methods

Module 1 – Comprendre l’épistémologie et la démarche de recherche

Dans le module 1, les étudiants sont amenés à se familiariser avec les principes de base de la démarche scientifique à travers une réflexion épistémologique et méthodologique. Il s’agit de poser les jalons de ce qui fait science à travers les notions de théorie, de concept, de paradigme, de variables et d’indicateurs. Deux paradigmes seront mis en lumière : le paradigme explicatif et le paradigme compréhensif. Il s’agira d’en cerner les contours, les principes de base et les dispositifs méthodologiques sous-jacents. 

Module 2 - Policy-making analysis: theoretical and analytical framework

Module 2 introduces the main concepts and theories of policy-making analysis. Module 2 first aims at providing the students with a theoretical and analytical toolbox to understand what public policies are, how policy problems are identified and how policies are formulated, implemented and evaluated (i.e., sequential and cycle models; Problem emergence & Agenda setting; Policy programming & Decision; Policy implementation & Evaluation). Second, the students are introduced to key theories allowing to understand the factors explaining policy stability and change. In particular, the students will be introduced to (i) the ‘triangle of actors’ of a public policy, (ii) new institutionalism and the role of institutions and finally, (iii) Peter Hall’s concept of policy paradigm.

            The philosophy of the module rests on three pillars: (1) learning what public policy analysis is; (2) applying concepts and theories; (3) debating in English about energy and environmental challenges and learning vocabulary linked to public policy analysis. In practice, at the start of each session, the lecturer presents take-home messages summarizing the main concepts and findings of the session (about 60 minutes). The second part of the course is animated by the students themselves. For each session, a group of students is in charge of close-reading one article, applying its main concepts to (recent) political events (i.e., identifying a societal problem on the political agenda) and organizing interactions with the other students (i.e., wooclap questions, a short debate, an exercise…) (about 45 minutes).

In parallel with these sessions, English coaching sessions given by Christelle Hoorelbeke and Natassia Schutz will be organized to help students deal with research articles in English on public policy analysis. The students will take part in debates and discussions about energy and environmental policy issues as well as work on the necessary vocabulary and phrases to do so. In a similar vein, the students will have two collective sessions with Simon Lemaire to discuss their first ideas of topics and exploratory research questions as well as a reminder of how to conduct desk research and how to do a literature review (Political science coaching session). Attendance is compulsory for all English and political science coaching sessions.

Module 3 - Learning how to collect and analyze data

Dans le module 3, les outils techniques de collecte et d’analyse de données seront au centre du dispositif pédagogique. Plus spécifiquement, il s’agit de montrer quelles sont les techniques de récolte données ainsi que les principes d’échantillonnage en quantitatif et en qualitatif et d’introduire les étudiants à l’analyse thématique en sciences sociales. 

Module 4 - Policy-making analysis in practice

In this module, students apply concepts and theories of policy-making discussed during the first semester to real case-studies of public policies designed and implemented at local, regional, national or European levels. The students focus specifically on policy areas which challenge societies, inducing deep transformations and in particular this year, energy and environmental policies (e.g. nuclear energy in Belgium, solar energy, wind turbines…). A list of (potential) topics will be provided by the teaching team at the beginning of the academic year. At the end of the semester, students present a research paper focusing on one specific policy.

Overall, before the final jury, the semester is organized around 4 key deliverables: (1) Conducting desk research and a literature review; (2) defining the research objectives (e.g. research question, puzzle and identification of explanatory factors); (3) collecting and analyzing data and (4) presenting your preliminary findings. The objective of these deliverables is to help the students to conduct a study from A to Z. For each of the deliverables, students will receive regular feedback from the teaching assistant and the professors. Attendance is compulsory for all English and political science coaching sessions. In case you miss sessions without any valid reason, you will be summoned to the teachers’ office.

Finally, in parallel with these sessions, the students will receive the support of Christelle Hoorelbeke and Natassia Schutz (5 English coaching sessions) to learn how to write a (research) abstract. More specifically, you will analyze authentic examples, explore online writing-aid tools, and do exercises focusing on the typical grammar, phraseology and style of academic English. During the last class, you will also do reviewing activities aimed to (1) give you feedback on a very first draft of your abstract, and (2) help you understand the expectations of your final version and how you will be assessed in June.

 

Evaluations

Semester 1

Evaluation of module 1 - Epistémologie et méthodes de recherche

Prof. Burnay (10 points out of 20)

L’évaluation du module 1 consistera en un examen écrit de deux heures portant sur la matière vue au cours magistral durant le Q1 et permettant de s’assurer de la connaissance et de la compréhension de la matière.

 

Evaluation of module 2: understanding public policy analysis

Prof. Jacquet and Randour (10 points out of 20)

The evaluation of module 2 is organized in two steps.

     (1) 2 points are awarded for the preparation and animation of a discussion (about 45 minutes) on the readings (collective evaluation). The oral presentations should address the main concepts covered in the articles and apply them to the study of a recent case. To foster ‘controlled’ interactions between students and increase the participation rate, you are asked to prepare an online quiz using the Wooclap tool. In short, your mission is to explain the main concepts of the article; to prepare an online quiz for the other students and finally, to identify and apply the concepts to recent political events.

    (2) The other 8 points are awarded following an open-book (individual) oral exam composed of two questions. After a period of preparation, students will first answer a question on one of the articles from the compulsory reader (i.e., testing knowledge), followed by a second question focusing on the application of one of the theoretical frameworks seen in class to a current case (i.e., applying theories).

 

Evaluation of module 3-4: continuous evaluation  

Assistant (2 points out of 20)

The work of the students will be continuously evaluated during the semester, notably regarding (i) attendance; (ii) capacity to reach the deadlines for the deliverables; (iii) the quality of the deliverables (content); (iv) the peer-review (oral) discussion of the draft paper of another group of students.

 

Evaluation of modules 3-4: presenting your findings (final jury)

Prof. Burnay, Jacquet and Randour, C. Hoorelbeke, N. Schutz and the Assistant + 1 external guest (8 points out of 20)

 

At the end of the semester, the students present their research findings in front of a jury composed of the entire teaching team and of an external guest. The (group) oral presentation lasts 15 minutes(?) and consists of a presentation dealing with (i) the research question and puzzle of the research, (ii) the method and data used, (iii) the findings, (iv) a conclusion and discussion of the findings as well as of a critical appraisal of the method used. Following the oral presentation, the jury ask follow-up questions.

 

Semester 2

Evaluation of module 4: writing a public policy analysis research paper

Prof. Jacquet et Randour (10 points out of 20)

 

Each group of students prepares a public policy analysis research note applying one theoretical approach to a ‘real-case’ public policy related to energy and/or environmental issues. A list of topics will be provided by the teaching team at the beginning of the semester. More precisely, we expect a political science puzzle (i.e., why is your topic puzzling and why should we care about better understanding the phenomenon), a research question, the collection of original data (i.e., semi-structured interviews) and the conduction of serious desk research and to critically apply the theoretical approaches and concepts seen during the course to your policy. The assessment grid used to grade the paper will be available on the Webcampus page of the course.

 

Semester 2

Evaluation of module 4: abstract writing

Christelle Hoorelbeke and Natassia Schutz (Pass or fail)

 

The students will be assessed based on the final version of their abstract. For this task, the students will not get points per se. If the abstract meets the requirements, the group will get a ‘PASS’, which will validate their final grade. If not, the group will get a ‘FAIL’ and a symbolic 6/20 for their final grade.

During the coaching sessions, each group will get the opportunity to work together, in class, on a first version of their abstract, get peer-feedback and, before handing in a final version, some personal feedback from the teacher. The assessment grid used for this task will be available on WebCampus.

Retake session

  • The students who fail the evaluation of module 1 and/or module 2 (i.e., individual evaluations) must retake their exam during the June session. There is no retake exam for the group oral presentation of module 2.
  • The students who fail the final paper and/or the abstract writing must retake their evaluation during the August session. There are no retake exams for the final jury (modules 3-4) and for the continuous evaluation (module 4 – Simon Lemaire).   


tion methods (i.e., a traditional written exam, oral exam, oral group presentations, research paper, etc.). To pass the course, students must (1) pass all 4 modules (2) and get an average of 10/20 for the academic year.                                              

odule

Prof. in charge of the evaluation

Type of exam

Form of the exam

 

Module 1

Prof. Burnay

Examen individuel

Examen écrit à la fin du quadrimestre

/10

Module 2

Prof. Jacquet & Randour

Individual assessment

Oral exam (in French) at the end of the semester

/8

 

Module 2

Prof. Jacquet &. Randour

Collective assessment

Oral presentation (in English) during the course  

/2

 

 

 

 

/20

 

Module 4

 

Simon Lemaire

Collective assessment

Continuous evaluation (respect of deadlines, content and peer-review work)

/2

 

 

Module 3-4

 

 

Prof. Burnay

Prof. Jacquet &. Randour, Christelle Hoorelbeke and Natassia Schutz, Simon Lemaire

 

Collective assessment

 

Final jury - oral presentations and Q&A (in French)

 

 

/8

 

Module 4

Prof. Jacquet & Randour

 

Christelle Hoorelbeke and Natassia Schutz

 

Collective assessment

Research paper

 

Abstract writing

/10

 

Pass/

Fail

 

 

 

 

/20

           

 

Evaluation of the project in detail

 

Semester 1

Evaluation of module 1 - Epistémologie et méthodes de recherche

Prof. Burnay (10 points out of 20)

L’évaluation du module 1 consistera en un examen écrit de deux heures portant sur la matière vue au cours magistral durant le Q1 et permettant de s’assurer de la connaissance et de la compréhension de la matière.

 

Semester 1

Evaluation of module 2: understanding public policy analysis

Prof. Jacquet and Randour (10 points out of 20)

 

The evaluation of module 2 is organized in two steps.

     (1) 2 points are awarded for the preparation and animation of a discussion (about 45 minutes) on the readings (collective evaluation). The oral presentations should address the main concepts covered in the articles and apply them to the study of a recent case. To foster ‘controlled’ interactions between students and increase the participation rate, you are asked to prepare an online quiz using the Wooclap tool. In short, your mission is to explain the main concepts of the article; to prepare an online quiz for the other students and finally, to identify and apply the concepts to recent political events.

    (2) The other 8 points are awarded following an open-book (individual) oral exam composed of two questions. After a period of preparation, students will first answer a question on one of the articles from the compulsory reader (i.e., testing knowledge), followed by a second question focusing on the application of one of the theoretical frameworks seen in class to a current case (i.e., applying theories).

 

Semester 2

Evaluation of module 3-4: continuous evaluation  

Simon Lemaire (2 points out of 20)

The work of the students will be continuously evaluated during the semester, notably regarding (i) attendance; (ii) capacity to reach the deadlines for the deliverables; (iii) the quality of the deliverables (content); (iv) the peer-review (oral) discussion of the draft paper of another group of students.

 

Semester 2

Evaluation of modules 3-4: presenting your findings (final jury)

Prof. Burnay, Jacquet and Randour, C. Hoorelbeke, N. Schutz and S. Lemaire + 1 external guest (8 points out of 20)

 

At the end of the semester, the students present their research findings in front of a jury composed of the entire teaching team and of an external guest. The (group) oral presentation lasts 15 minutes(?) and consists of a presentation dealing with (i) the research question and puzzle of the research, (ii) the method and data used, (iii) the findings, (iv) a conclusion and discussion of the findings as well as of a critical appraisal of the method used. Following the oral presentation, the jury ask follow-up questions.

 

Semester 2

Evaluation of module 4: writing a public policy analysis research paper

Prof. Jacquet et Randour (10 points out of 20)

 

Each group of students prepares a public policy analysis research note applying one theoretical approach to a ‘real-case’ public policy related to energy and/or environmental issues. A list of topics will be provided by the teaching team at the beginning of the semester. More precisely, we expect a political science puzzle (i.e., why is your topic puzzling and why should we care about better understanding the phenomenon), a research question, the collection of original data (i.e., semi-structured interviews) and the conduction of serious desk research and to critically apply the theoretical approaches and concepts seen during the course to your policy. The assessment grid used to grade the paper will be available on the Webcampus page of the course.

 

Semester 2

Evaluation of module 4: abstract writing

Christelle Hoorelbeke and Natassia Schutz (Pass or fail)

 

The students will be assessed based on the final version of their abstract. For this task, the students will not get points per se. If the abstract meets the requirements, the group will get a ‘PASS’, which will validate their final grade. If not, the group will get a ‘FAIL’ and a symbolic 6/20 for their final grade.

During the coaching sessions, each group will get the opportunity to work together, in class, on a first version of their abstract, get peer-feedback and, before handing in a final version, some personal feedback from the teacher. The assessment grid used for this task will be available on WebCampus.

Retake session

  • The students who fail the evaluation of module 1 and/or module 2 (i.e., individual evaluations) must retake their exam during the June session. There is no retake exam for the group oral presentation of module 2.
  • The students who fail the final paper and/or the abstract writing must retake their evaluation during the August session. There are no retake exams for the final jury (modules 3-4) and for the continuous evaluation (module 4 – Simon Lemaire).   


 

 

Language of instruction

English

Location for course

NAMUR

Organizer

Faculté des sciences économiques, sociales et de gestion
Rue de Bruxelles, 61
5000 NAMUR

Degree of Reference

Undergraduate Degree