Advertisement

The Importance of Teaching Quality of Life Theory and Methodology in Social Sciences Programs

  • Graciela H. TononEmail author
Chapter
  • 187 Downloads
Part of the Social Indicators Research Series book series (SINS, volume 79)

Abstract

We define quality of life as a multi-dimensional concept which involves a number of domains which people experience in diverse forms according to the importance attributed to them in their lives, considering their expectations, their values, and their experiences. Teaching theory, methodology and practice in quality of life implies the possibility of integrating the objective and subjective dimensions, considering that subjectivity is constructed on the basis of the daily interaction of the persons as well as their interaction with their environment. In this respect, the act of teaching is also a political act, which leads us to consider that the role of politics should not only be restricted to the solution of material problems, but also to develop an awareness of people’s life daily experiences. In the Social Sciences’ field it is vital to study how to think and integrate knowledge and imagine new forms of analysis, to excel the traditional paradigm based in memorize information and concepts hence the proposal of quality of life shows us the way towards integration. The objectives of this chapter are to present the proposition of quality of life (theoretical/methodological) as a possibility to construct a new outlook on the social field studies and to present a course that includes the vision of quality of life in a Master Program in Social Science.

Keywords

Quality of life Social sciences To teach Innovation Higher education 

References

  1. Cilleruelo, E. (2007). Compendio de definiciones del concepto «innovación» realizadas por autores relevantes: diseño híbrido actualizado del concepto. Revista Dirección y Organización, 34, 91–98. Recuperado de http://www.revistadyo.org/index.php/dyo/article/view/20/20. 21 de septiembre 2018.
  2. Cipriani, R. (2013). Sociología cualitativa. Las historias de vida como metodología científica. Buenos Aires: Editorial Biblos.Google Scholar
  3. Dasgupta, P., & Weale, M. (1992). On measuring quality of life. World Development, 20(1), 119–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Diaz Gomez, A. (2006). En Sotolongo Codina, P. y Delgado Diaz, C. La revolución contemporánea del saber y la complejidad social (pp. 223–232). Buenos Aires: CLACSO Libros.Google Scholar
  5. Diener, E. (2006). Guidelines for national indicators of subjective well-being and ill-being. ARQOL, 1(2), 151–157.Google Scholar
  6. Dogan, M., & Pahre, R. (1993). Las nuevas Ciencias Sociales, La marginalidad creadora. México: Grijalbo.Google Scholar
  7. Duderstadt, J. (1994). The University of the 21st century. Conferencia en The Meeting of the American Society for Information Science. Portland, Oregon, May 23.Google Scholar
  8. Duderstadt, J. (2010). Una universidad para el Siglo XXI. Buenos Aires: Universidad de Palermo.Google Scholar
  9. Estes, R., & Sirgy, M. J. (2018). Advances in well-being. Towards a better world. London: Rowman & Littlefeld International.Google Scholar
  10. Feinstein, A. (1987). Clinimetric perspectives. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 40, 635–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferris, A. (2006). A theory of social structure and the quality of life. ARQOL, 1(1), 117–123.Google Scholar
  12. Freire, P. (1973). Pedagogía del oprimido (10ª ed.). Buenos Aires: Ed. Siglo XXI.Google Scholar
  13. Gimenez, G. (2003). El debate sobre la prospectiva de las Ciencias Sociales en los umbrales del nuevo milenio. Revista Mexicana de Sociología, año 65, número 2, Abril-Junio. México, DF, pp. 363–400.Google Scholar
  14. Gimenez, G. (2004). Pluralidad y unidad de las Ciencias Sociales. En Estudios sociológicos, Vol. XXII, núm. 2, mayo-agosto, pp. 267–282. El Colegio de México, A.C. Distrito Federal, México. Retrieved from http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/598/59806501.pdf. November 1, 2018.
  15. Lechner, N. (2015). Norbert Lechner Obras IV. Polìtica y subjetividad. Mèxico: FLACSO Mèxico-Fondo de Cultura Econòmica.Google Scholar
  16. Martinelli, A. (2010). Social science in the public space (UNESCO, World Social Science Report, pp. 287–289). Washington, DC: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001883/188333e.pdf. November 1, 2018.
  17. Nowotny, H. (2010). Out of science-out of sync (UNESCO, World Social Science Report, pp. 319–322). Washington, DC: UNESCO. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001883/188333e.pdf. November 1, 2018.
  18. Nussbaum, M. (2012). Crear capacidades. Propuestas para el desarrollo humano. Barcelona: Paidós.Google Scholar
  19. Ortiz, R. (2004). Taquigrafiando lo social. Buenos Aires: Siglo XXI Editores Argentina.Google Scholar
  20. Portela Guarin, H., & Murcia Peña, N. (2006). Repensar el currículo: una perspectiva de deconstrucción mediada por los mundos simbólicos y sus imaginarios. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos (Colombia), vol. 2, núm. 2, julio-diciembre. pp. 83–102 Universidad de Caldas Manizales, Colombia, recuperado de http://www.redalyc.org/html/1341/134116843005/. October 5, 2018.
  21. Rodriguez Herrera, A., & Alvarado Ugarte, H. (2008). Claves de la innovación social en América Latina y el Caribe. Santiago de Chile: CEPAL.Google Scholar
  22. Sotolongo Codina, P., & Delgado Diaz, C. (2006). La revolución contemporánea del saber y la complejidad social. Buenos Aires: CLACSO Libros.Google Scholar
  23. Tonon, G. (Ed.). (2015). Qualitative studies in quality of life methodology and practice (Social indicators research series, Vol. 55). Heilderberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. Torres Carrillo, A. (2008). Investigar en los márgenes de las Ciencias Sociales (Folios N° 27, pp. 51–62). Colombia: Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.Google Scholar
  25. Wallerstein, I. (1995). Abrir las Ciencias Sociales. Informe de la Comisión Gulbenkian para la reestructuración de las ciencias sociales.Google Scholar
  26. Weber, L. & Duderstadt, J. (Eds.) (2012). Global sustainability and the responsibilities of universities. Glion Colloquium Series N° 7. London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Master Program in Social Sciences and the Social Sciences Research Centre (CICS-UP) of the School of Social SciencesUniversidad de PalermoBuenos AiresArgentina

Personalised recommendations