Our Mission
Made an illusion products to public in rich condition system.
Our Story
LOVE YOUR DATA
MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
The formal requirements for your data handling practice varies a lot. Common to these requirements is that they are fact like statements that you must meet. Often you encounter these in wording like compliance, rules, instructions found in policies, legislation, contracts. The workshop looks into requirements like:• Data Management plans• Legislation e.g. the general data protection legislation• Contractual obligations from business partners• Funder and publisher requirements• Archival demands
ALIGN WITH THE EXPECTATIONS
The expectations for good data handling practice are often a bit more vague, and expressed in terms like ‘you should’, ‘we expect’ etc. They might look like requirements, but often have less constraints on how you actually meet them.During the workshop we look into expectations suchs as:• Data management planning• Published and open data• Reproducible research• Good practice in line with the FAIR principles
HARVEST THE POTENTIALS
A part of good data handling practice is to focus on maximizing the value of your research data.Both from a egocentric, institutional and community point of view the workshop will look into actualizing potentials like: • Optimizing performance on trivial data handling tasks• Exposing you and your research through the light of the FAIR principles• UN Sustainability Development Goals and data publishing• New data handling methods for possible new discoveries
Discourse Studies: Concepts, Approaches and Cross-fertilization
References:
Alvesson M., & Kärreman, D. (2000). Varieties of discourse: On the study of organziations through discourse analysis. Human Relations, 53, 1125-1149.
Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2011). Decolonializing discourse: Critical reflections on organizational discourse analysis. Human Relations, 64, 1121-1146.
Broadfoot, K., Deetz, S., & Anderson, D. (2004), Multi-levelled, multi-method approaches in organizational discourse. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick, & L. Putnam (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse (pp. 193-212). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.
Fairhurst, G. T. & Putnam, L. (2004). Organizations as discursive constructions. Communication Theory, 14, 5-26.
Flowerdew, J. & J. E. Richardson. (2017). The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies. London: Routledge.
Grant, D., Hardy, C., Oswick, C. & Putnam, L. (2004.) The Sage handbook of organizational discourse. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hart, C. & D. Kelsey. (2019). Discourses of disorder: Riots, strikes and protests in the media. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Jørgensen, M. W. & Phillips, L.. (1999). Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: Sage.
Khosravinik, M. (2017). Social media critical discourse studies (SM-CDS). In J. Flowerdew, & J. E. Richardson (eds) The Routledge handbook of critical discourse studies, 752-769. London/New York: Routledge.
Khosravinik, M. & J. Unger. (2016). Critical discourse studies and social media: Power, resistance and critique in changing media ecologies. In R. Wodak,& M. Meyer (eds) Methods of critical discourse studies, 3rd ed., 205-233. London: Sage.
Norris, S. (2019). Systematically working with multimodal data: Research methods in multimodal discourse analysis. Newark: John Wiley & Sons.
O’Halloran, K. (2004). Multimodal discourse analysis. London: Continuum.
Phillips, N. & Hardy, C. (2002). Discourse analysis: Investigating processes of social construction. London: Sage.
Scollon, R. & S. Scollon. (2004). Nexus analysis: Discourse and the emerging internet. London: Routledge.
Wodak, R. & Meyer, M. (2009). Methods of critical discourse analysis. London: Sage.
