Thomas Fennewald: Difference between revisions
From Santa Fe Institute Events Wiki
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
Research: | Research: | ||
My research focuses on two areas. One is the development of economic, political, and environmental games as critical research methods that promote players to reflect on their decisions and the development of norms, institutions, and sustainability. Key aspects of | My research focuses on two areas. One is the development of economic, political, and environmental games as critical research methods that promote players to reflect on their decisions and the development of norms, institutions, and sustainability. Key aspects in the development of these games have included offering alternatives to standard game theorietic assumptions of player rationality and finding ways to balance player motivations in ways that are neither purely cooperative nor purely competitive, leaving players with situations that feel less contrived and more like real life than most games. These games are systemic in nature, and players' choices have consequential effects on the system. Please email me if you would like to see a 2 page paper on this research that includes data from simulations. | ||
My other strand of research applies philosophy in an analysis of research practice in the social sciences. Using Habermas' theory of knowledge to understanding validity, bias, and reliability in research practice, this work suggests alternatives to positivist and post-positivist conceptions are, when dealing with normative issues, both desirable and necessary. This builds on Habermas' assertion that inquiry into positivist assumptions is not possible in positivist research since positivist research avoids inquiry into the interest laden domains that motivate positivist scholars. I'll be happy to tell more to those interested! | My other strand of research applies philosophy in an analysis of research practice in the social sciences. Using Habermas' theory of knowledge to understanding validity, bias, and reliability in research practice, this work suggests alternatives to positivist and post-positivist conceptions are, when dealing with normative issues, both desirable and necessary. This builds on Habermas' assertion that inquiry into positivist assumptions is not possible in positivist research since positivist research avoids inquiry into the interest laden domains that motivate positivist scholars. I'll be happy to tell more to those interested! | ||
Latest revision as of 07:35, 5 June 2012
Contact Info:
tom.fennewald[at]gmail.com
314.623.9967
About:
I'm a doctoral candidate in the Inquiry Methodology program at Indiana University. Before venturing into education, learning science, and the philosophy of social science, I received a B.S. in Chemistry from Missouri Science and Technology and worked for the Dept. of Energy at the Hanford Site / Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and a variety of other laboratories. I currently work as methodology consultant and project evaluator at the Center for Urban and Multicultural Education at Indiana University where I am the lead evaluator of the NSF funded Graduate STEM Fellows in GK-12 Education program. My interests are wide and include languages, dinosaurs, swimming, and pop dance from many times and cultures, especially contemporary Bhangra.
Research:
My research focuses on two areas. One is the development of economic, political, and environmental games as critical research methods that promote players to reflect on their decisions and the development of norms, institutions, and sustainability. Key aspects in the development of these games have included offering alternatives to standard game theorietic assumptions of player rationality and finding ways to balance player motivations in ways that are neither purely cooperative nor purely competitive, leaving players with situations that feel less contrived and more like real life than most games. These games are systemic in nature, and players' choices have consequential effects on the system. Please email me if you would like to see a 2 page paper on this research that includes data from simulations.
My other strand of research applies philosophy in an analysis of research practice in the social sciences. Using Habermas' theory of knowledge to understanding validity, bias, and reliability in research practice, this work suggests alternatives to positivist and post-positivist conceptions are, when dealing with normative issues, both desirable and necessary. This builds on Habermas' assertion that inquiry into positivist assumptions is not possible in positivist research since positivist research avoids inquiry into the interest laden domains that motivate positivist scholars. I'll be happy to tell more to those interested!