Degree | Type | Year | Semester |
---|---|---|---|
2504235 Science, Technology and Humanities | FB | 1 | 2 |
No previous requirements
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.
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
Theoretical sessions in large groups where the contents of the course are presented.
Classroom practice sessions where texts and films will be worked on.
Autonomous work: reading of proposed texts, study and preparation of group work.
Tutorials: supervision sessions.
Annotation: Within the schedule set by the centre or degree programme, 15 minutes of one class will be reserved for students to evaluate their lecturers and their courses or modules through questionnaires.
Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|
Type: Directed | |||
Practice classes | 16 | 0.64 | 1, 6, 2, 4, 5 |
Theory classes | 33 | 1.32 | 1, 2, 4, 5 |
Type: Supervised | |||
Tutorial | 4 | 0.16 | 1, 2, 4, 5 |
Type: Autonomous | |||
Information search | 10 | 0.4 | 6 |
Personal work | 55 | 2.2 | 1, 6, 2, 4, 5 |
Review | 10 | 0.4 | 1, 6, 5, 7 |
Teamwork | 15 | 0.6 | 8 |
EV1 Written exam on the first two blocks of the subject.
This evidence represents 40% of the total mark of the subject.
EV2 Review of a book to choose from a selection made by the lecturers. To be done individually.
This evidence represents 20% of the total mark of 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.
Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|
EV1 Written examination | 40% | 1 | 0.04 | 1, 4, 5 |
EV2 Book review | 20% | 1 | 0.04 | 1, 6, 5, 7 |
EV3a Elaboration of a group essay | 30% | 5 | 0.2 | 1, 3, 6, 2, 4, 8, 5, 7 |
EV3b Oral presentation of the collective essay | 10% | 0 | 0 | 1, 2, 8, 5 |
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.
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., & 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.