“What’s Positive About Positive Rights?” Students’ Everyday Understandings and the Challenges of Teaching Political Science

Linguistic differences between well‐established and predatory journals: a keyword analysis of two journals in political science

“…As Examples 3–6 illustrate, words such as bias (in the plural form), ideal (co‐occurring with points ), dummy (often with variable ), and uncertainty (often with bounds or estimates ), which are devoid of their prototypical meanings, were often used to describe formal models or equations used in political science research. Such an observation is in line with Ekström and Lundholm's () main argument, namely that the everyday and academic understandings of a concept often differ in important ways in the political science discipline, and therefore, conceptual change is at the heart of political science education. The absence of such words on the PJPS list may be considered to suggest an insufficient use or understanding of certain disciplinary concepts, which in turn reflects the lack of knowledge of important research methods in the field.…”

“…However, as a growing body of research in academic writing and disciplinary literacy has recognized, the acquisition of disciplinary literacy (in terms of both reading and writing) requires the participants to suppress their distinctive social and cultural identities to foreground disciplinary ways of thinking (e.g. Ekström & Lundholm, ; Hyland, ). This applies to all novice members of the discourse community, regardless of their native tongue.…”