The subject-specific qualification for doctoral candidates at the Integrative Graduate Center TechnoScienceStudies (IGC TSS) at the MCTS is based on event formats like the #mytopic.in.society doctoral colloquium and doctoral workshops.
#mytopic.in.society – Doctoral Colloquium at the MCTS
The “#mytopic.in.society” doctoral colloquium at the MCTS focuses on current research into the interactions between technology and society. The aim is to present and discuss individual projects in a way that addresses the MCTS guiding principles, “empirical – interdisciplinary – reflexive – dialogic”. The colloquium is held during the semester.
Foto: Uli Benz (TUM)
MCTS Doctoral Colloquium #mytopic.in.society
Summer Semester 2019
July 25 & 26, 2019
TUM EDU, Marsstraße 20-22 (1st floor)
Negotiating Spaces of Mobility – Rise and Contestation of the Uber Model in Mumbai
Toxic Entanglements. A Situated Analysis Epigenetic Knowledge Production in Environmental Toxicology
Understanding the dynamics of underdetermined change projects in organizations
Constitutive orders for analyzing scientific credibility struggles. A closer look into a misconduct investigation and its critics
Autonomous driving in the (policy) making – The examples of Munich and Stuttgart
Non-commercial sharing mobilities as potential site for everyday resistance
Multi-species socio-technical imaginaries in the Varroa-Crisis
Co-creating Publics: Living Labs and the Politics of Urban Experimentation
Sociality as Code. Inside AI and Social Robotics.
Gender and Entrepreneurship: The Case of Co-Living Spaces
Criticizing, negotiating, (de)stabilizing – On the complexity of data critiques and their not-so-obvious consequences
Creating Social Situations
Fixing Innovation with Society: Soft Constitutionalism in the New Global Governance of Innovation
Rule(s) if Recommendation. Algorithmic power as a mode of ordering.
Robots Wanted – Dead and/or Alive
Foto: Uli Benz (TUM)
MCTS Doctoral Colloquium #mytopic.in.society
Winter Semester 2018/19
February 21 & 22, 2019
TUM EDU, Marsstraße 20-22 (1st floor)
Understanding Regional Innovation Cultures
Engaging the Moral Economy of [Automated Prototypes] or How Emotions Drive Innovation
Technology Futures of Autonomous Driving
(Re-)connecting Spaces. A Material-Discursive Approach to Earthly Spaceflight
Robotics Innovation Cultures – Prototyping Practices of Co-Creation in Europe
Work in the Making? On the Role of Experimental Attempts to Reorganize Work
The Design of Fruit and Vegetables
Infrastructuring European Migration and Border Control in Greece
Industrial User Configurations: The Introduction of 3D-Printing to the Prosthetics Industry
July 12 & 13, 2018
TUM EDU, Marsstraße 20-22 (1st floor)
“Finally a project which goes according to plan – so far” – how organizations evaluate internal digitalization projects
Investigating the socio-technical transition towards autonomous driving within policy-making arenas. The examples of the metropolitan regions of Munich and Stuttgart
Sharing beyond capitalism? – An exploration into non-commercial mobility sharing Melina Antonakaki Experiments in Compliance and Complicity: unpacking the tensions of Reproducibility
Responsible Innovation in Transnational Governance Settings. The Construction of OECD Principles for Responsible Innovation in Neurotechnology
Hackathons, Creativity, my PhD and other messy things
“It’s about doing something” TechnoCitizenship – governing through the “design of publics”
“I have no idea what will come out”: on complexity, enactments, and unforeseeable potentialities in the planning of Munich’s roads.
Chiral Worlds – STS perspectives on the shifting field of chemistry.
Platform politics vs. Content. How we communicate science on YouTube.
Georgia Samaras The Molecularisation of Social Adversity. Enacting the Epigenetics of Mental Illness in a Psychiatric Research Laboratory
Ubiquitous datafication. Regimes of data processing and the struggle for critics.
Improvising a lighthouse – Economisation for collective concerns in an EU smart city project.
In the Democracy of Controlled Experiments: Exploring the Policy-Innovation-Design Nexus in ‚Policy Labs’.
Translational Medicine as an answer to an emergency ?!
Computing Structures. Socio-Epistemic Con-Figurations of Algorithmic Societies: Impressions from the Development of a Recommender System
February 9 & 10, 2018
TUM EDU, Marsstr. 20-22
Audit epistemologies. The entanglement of audit and reproducibility
TechnoFeminism in Speculative Spaces: Co-production of New Industrial & Gender Regimes
Reconfiguring Future Forms of Work
Virtual Reality in the Art World
Interfacing Robotics and Care. On Governmentality in TechnoSocieties
Urban Studies without the urban and without the city
The Politics and Language of Designing Sanitation Infrastructures
(Re-)Producing Bodies. The Reorganization of the Prosthetics Industry through 3D Printing
The making-of autonomous driving: The impact of expectation by heterogenous actors on the development of the sociotechnical innovation of autonomous driving
The Scientific ‘Contribution’: Operations of Conviction in Contexts of Entrepreneurial Change
TechnoNature: On Configurations of Nature and Technology in the Case of Food
“Now, with the tools available, anyone can change the world” An enquiry into the Maker Movement and its practices
July 27 & 28, 2017
TUM EDU, Marsstr. 20-22
Ubiquitous Datafication: Regimes of Data Processing and the Struggle for Privacy
Repair Revisited – Flash in the Pan or Issue at the Heart of TechnoSociety?
Responsible Innovation in Transnational Governance-Settings
Translational Psychiatry as a new strategy in biopolitics
In the Democracy of Controlled Experiments: Exploring the Policy-Innovation-Design Nexus in three ‚Policy Labs’
Improvising a lighthouse – Economisation for collective concerns in an EU smart city project
Robotics Innovation Cultures
How planners plan: linearity and partial connections in planning for cycling
Logistics of Migration. On the Role of (Digital) Infrastructures and Contemporary Border Regimes
“Digital Taylorism”: Working with Process Management Systems in Comparison to Management Practices in Taylor’s Scientific Management
Climate and ecological changes in urban landscapes
Molecularizing Trauma. The Multisitedness of Environmental Epigenetics in a Psychiatric Research Laboratory
Re- designing design: the role of universities, discourses and prototyping in the making of experimental design practices in the 21th century
February 13 and 14, 2017
TUM EDU, Marsstr. 20-22
|09:00||Welcome Prof. Dr. S. Maasen|
Ordered Masses – Crowdsourcing as a technology of government
Chirality between bench and bedside – A Sociological Appraoch to Knowledge Transfer Between Basic and Applied Sciences
Apparatuses of regulation. Self-organization and control in “Industrie 4.0”
Sites of Prediction: Algorithmic transformation of context specific date into functional konwledge in the example of prediction software
Test bed sites as innovation practice
How does Technology do itself? A strange (STS) Romance of Love, Fear, Trust, Hybridity, and (obviously) Technology
The Translation of Science on YouTube
Meaning and Materiality of Biofacts viewed from a designerly perspective
Arranging ‚good‘ food. On governmentality in TechnoNatures
|15:20||Break||14:30||Break out groups|
|15:45||Break out groups|
Workshops for Doctoral Candidates at the MCTS
In interdisciplinary workshops at the MCTS, doctoral candidates practice and develop important academic research and professionalization skills, examine issues regarding applied research and reflect on academic work with respect to political, economic and public media related aspects.
MCTS Concepts & Theories
When & Where: Several meetings throughout the semester
|Session 1||8 May 2019||10:30 am–1 pm||MCTS, 270|
|Session 2||29 May 2019||10:00 am–12:30 pm||MCTS, 270|
|Session 3||19 June 2019||2 pm–4:30 pm||MCTS, 253 or Arcisstr. 21, 1221|
|Session 4||2 July 2019||2 pm–5 pm||MCTS, 270|
Workload: 7,5 hrs per session
Working language: English
Procedures for doctoral candidates who want to attend the workshop:
- Decide in advance whether you want to attend 15 or 30 hrs (workload per semester). Participation in 2 or 3 sessions amounts to 15hrs, full participation amounts to 30hrs (per semester).
- Register until 23 April via email to Anna Kellerer (email@example.com), naming which sessions you will attend. Based on this information the lecturers are able to prepare the session according to the number of attendees. Administration will set up a moodle, where all lecturers provide their session’s readings for the participants.
- If there are short-time changes in a session (room, time), the lecturer will let you know in due time via email.
- During the session: In each session, the lecturer will circulate a signature list, which they return to administration – as a basis for workshop certificates. Administration will send you the certificate after the last session. The minimum hours to receive a certificate will be 15 hours/2 sessions.
If you are not able to attend:
- If you are unable to attend, inform the lecturer in due time, in advance, via email.
- If you cannot attend a requested session and you are aiming for a 15hrs certificate, choose another session as a substitute (within the semester).
- In exceptional cases and in prior consultation with the lecturer
- once only, participation via Skype/video conferencing might be possible (e.g. because a participant is not situated in Munich and unable to travel for a session)
- once only, a written essay or similar output might replace the personal attendance of a session (e.g.: if a participant falls sick)
The doctoral workshop is designed as a semester-long reading course and provides the opportunity to dig deeper into selected topics and ongoing debates in Science and Technology Studies. Therefore, each session focuses on current topics, theories and methods in various STS research areas, which will be studied and discussed along the pieces of reading mentioned below. The reading course will take place each year onwards, during the summer semester, supporting doctoral candidates in building up a wide base of STS literature.
Agenda and Readings
Session 1, 8 May 2019:
Laboratorization and experimentation beyond laboratory walls (Andrea Schikowitz)
In STS, the lab and the experiment in their various configurations have been studied as core elements of producing credible and authoritative scientific knowledge (Knorr Cetina 1999; Latour & Woolgar 1986; Rheinberger 2008, Shapin 1999). Translations and transitions between the lab (as controllable ‘placeless place’ where generalizable knowledge is produced) and the field (as essentially situated, authentic and ‘real’ place) have been identified as being essential for the construction of facts (Kohler 2002; Latour 1983, 1999). Recent diagnoses of and calls for ‘opening up the lab’ and real-world-experimentation in relation to so-called societal challenges indicate a re-ordering of boundaries and relations (Gross 2018; Gross & Krohn 2005; Karvonen & Van Heur 2014). In this session, we will read and discuss two texts that deal with process of laboratorisation and experimentation beyond laboratory walls and that reflect upon what this might mean for knowledge production and its credibility.
Obligatory readings: [i]
- Gieryn, T. F. (2006). City as Truth-Spot: Laboratories and Field-Sites in Urban Studies. Social Studies of Science, 36(1), 5-38.
- Gross, M. (2016). Give Me an Experiment and I Will Raise a Laboratory. Science, Technology & Human Values, 41(4), 613-634.
Session 2, 29 May 2019:
Analysing contemporary technopolitics through the lens of sociotechnical imaginaries (Alexander Wentland)
Over the past decade, the concept of “sociotechnical imaginaries” has emerged as one of the most prominent STS frameworks to understand how technoscience is coproduced with political institutions, cultural narratives, and regional boundaries. Unlike visions, hypes or fashions, imaginaries are collective, durable, material, and capable of being performed; yet they are also temporally situated and culturally particular. Imaginaries help us to engage with the ways in which hopes and desires for the future get bound up with the hard stuff of past achievements. In this reading session, we will discuss how imaginaries constitute a useful analytical resource for investigating the formative but often implicit collective understandings of science and technology that shape contemporary social life and social order.
- Jasanoff, Sheila. 2015. “Future Imperfect: Science, Technology, and the Imaginations of Modernity.” Pp. 1–33, in Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power, edited by S. Jasanoff and S.-H. Kim. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.
- Felt, Ulrike. 2015. “Keeping Technologies Out: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Formation of Austria’s Technopolitical Identity.” Pp. 103–25, in Dreamscapes of Modernity: Sociotechnical Imaginaries and the Fabrication of Power, edited by S. Jasanoff and S.-H. Kim. Chicago, London: The University of Chicago Press.
- Pfotenhauer, Sebastian, and Sheila Jasanoff. “Panacea or Diagnosis?: Imaginaries of Innovation and the ‘MIT Model’ in Three Political Cultures.” Social Studies of Science 306312717706110. doi:10.1177/0306312717706110.
Session 3, 19 June, 2019:
Boundary objects – or how alignment between heterogeneous actors in open and uncertain co-operations can occur (Katrin Hahn)
Co-construction, user involvement and open innovation are only a few but very different concepts which all emphasize the importance of various knowledge sources for successful innovation and technology development. In practice the combination of different knowledge sources and their development towards something new requires at least to some extent the co-operation between heterogeneous, e.g. interdisciplinary, actors.
In this reading group we want to discuss the questions what is heterogeneity about and how can different actors in uncertain and open ended processes of knowledge creation, such as innovation, be aligned? Star’s and Griesemer’s famous paper about “boundary objects” builds the basis for our discussion. You are very welcome to bring examples from your empirical research about heterogeneous co-operation and/or boundary objects.
Please read carefully and in-depth:
- Star, Susan Leigh, and James R. Griesemer. 1989. “Institutional Ecology, `Translations’ and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley’s Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39.” Social Studies of Science 19 (3):387-420. doi: 10.1177/030631289019003001.
Please focus on understanding her main points about defining boundary objects:
- Star, Susan Leigh. 2010. “This is Not a Boundary Object: Reflections on the Origin of a Concept.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 35 (5):601-617.
Session 4, 2 July 2019:
Engaging ‘Solidarity’: concepts from/in the field and beyond (Prof. Barbara Prainsack, invited lecturer of RIPE/Eng.Resp.)
How can one work with concepts not ‘freely’ chosen, but rather encountered as part of a project-related position, or at fieldwork/data collection? Notions like responsibility, integrity, autonomy, sustainability, intelligence, etc. too often pop up in a multitude of empirical enactments in relation to technoscientific matters or might even structure the empirical field to such an extent that it is impossible to not consider an examination. STS research and scholarship encourages and systematically cultivates sensibilities about bringing theory and empirical work together. Engaging a concept in a structured manner is thus key concern for students and scholars alike, and many proposals have been developed.
In this session we focus on the examination of solidarity, as outlined by Profs Prainsack and Buyx in their seminal book:
‘Solidarity in Biomedicine and Beyond’ (2017)
Participants have the opportunity to meet invited lecturer, Prof. Barbara Prainsack* and collectively discuss what her/their approach entails for the researcher/author, and how it may prove fruitful in engaging concepts beyond solidarity.
Note that Prof. Stephen Hilgartner and Prof. Ruth Müller have declared interest to attend the session as discussants
- Prainsack, B., & Buyx, A. (2017). Solidarity: A Brief History of A Concept and A Project. In Solidarity in Biomedicine and Beyond (Cambridge Bioethics and Law, pp. 1-16). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Doi:10.1017/9781139696593.002
- Prainsack, B., & Buyx, A. (2017). Theorising Solidarity. In Solidarity in Biomedicine and Beyond (Cambridge Bioethics and Law, pp. 17-18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
*Professor of Comparative Policy Analysis, at the Uni.Wien, and Director of the Centre for the Study of Contemporary Solidarity (CeSCoS).
[i] Session 1 Background readings:
Gross, M. (2018). Remaking Participatory Democracy through Experimental Design. Science, Technology & Human Values, 0(0), 0162243918799172.
Gross, M., & Krohn, W. (2005). Society as Experiment: Sociological Foundations for a Self-Experimental Society. History of the Human Sciences, 18(2), 63-86.
Karvonen, A., & Van Heur, B. (2014). Urban Laboratories: Experiments in Reworking Cities. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(2), 379-392.
Knorr Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic Cultures. How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, Massachusetts / London, England: Harvard University Press.
Kohler, R. E. (2002). Landscapes and Labscapes. Exploring the Lab-Field Border in Biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1983). Give me a Laboratory and I Will Raise the World. In K. Knorr-Cetina & M. Mulkay (Eds.), Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science (pp. 141-170). London/Beverly Hills: Sage.
Latour, B. (1999). Circulating Reference. Sampling the Soil in the Amazon Forest. In Pandora’s Hope. Essays on the Reality of Science Studies (pp. 24-79). Cambridge/London: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory Life. The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Rheinberger, H.-J. (2008). Experimental Systems: Historiality, Narration, and Deconstruction. Science in Context, 7(01), 65-81.
Shapin, S. (1999). The House of Experiment in Seventeenth-Century England. In M. Biagioli (Ed.), The Science Studies Reader (pp. 479-504). New York/London: Routledge.
How to apply successfully for Horizon2020-Calls
Philip Pfaller, Anna Abelmann
When & Where: October 10, 2018, 9 am−12 (optional: extended 1h-Q&A-session after 12), MCTS, Augustenstr. 46, seminar room 270
Workshop Language: English
Target group: Advanced doctoral candidates + senior researchers Participating doctoral candidates will receive a certificate for PhD qualification program at MCTS
“Horizon 2020 (H2020) is the largest ever European funding program for research and innovation (promoted by the Directorate General “Research and Innovation” of the European Commission) with a budget of 79 billion euros, running until 2020. Its aims are to ensure that Europe produces world-class science, to remove barriers to innovation and to make it easier for public and private sectors to innovate. H2020 has 3 areas of focus: Excellent science, industrial leadership and Societal challenges, which covers all stages of research and innovation – from concept to market.” Adapted from: www.gov.uk/guidance/horizon-2020-what-it-is-and-how-to-apply-for-funding
The workshop shall provide a detailed insight into the application process for Horizon 2020 proposals, including Marie Curie actions. The workshop is especially designed for advanced PhD students, Postdocs and senior researchers who consider or have already concrete plans to apply for EU-Calls during the upcoming years.
The workshop will address the coherence between a successful academic career and international research cooperation, analyses concrete examples for successful and unsuccessful proposals and discuss specific application projects of 3 workshop participants as case studies. To understand how to respond successfully to Horizon2020-Calls, it is important to know the intention behind supported research topics as well as how submitted proposals will be evaluated.
Furthermore, this advanced workshop will focus on the following vital questions:
- Behind the calls: How do European political developments influence the H2020-calls?
- How to build international research networks interested in H2020?
- What are synergies between the European Programmes and why is this interesting?
- Academic Career Roadmap: Combination of funding schemes to achieve your long term goals.
- How can you benefit from BayFOR’s scientific coordination offices?
The achieved knowledge will prove to be useful in order to elaborate or contribute to successful proposals.
How should we live in academia?
Dr. Sarah R Davies
When & Where:
- Munich Colloquium on Technology in Society by Dr. Sarah R Davies on “Making sense of mobility: Precarity and international mobility in the natural sciences”, Nov 20, 2018, 5 pm, Vorhoelzer Forum
- Workshop November 23, 2018, 4-7 pm, MCTS, Augustenstr. 46, seminar room 270
There is increasing public, policy and academic discussion of the nature and conditions of academia, from ‘quit lit’ (personal accounts of the decision to leave research) to policy concerns about a ‘post-doc problem’. While, within these discussions, there is widespread agreement that universities are changing, assessments of exactly how and why vary, with emphases on, variously, new public management, the integration of public and private sectors, ‘academic capitalism’, or neoliberalism. Key trends – impacting both research and teaching – are marketisation, individualisation, evaluation, precarity, and responsibilisation.
We will consider these developments by reading, discussing, and critiquing some key literature and concepts and through reflexive engagement concerning how these dynamics shape our own careers and experiences. In particular we will pay attention to the question of how one should live and work in the academy under its current conditions. What possibilities are there for intervention or resistance, and are these necessary? If the ideal academic is construed by research policy as entrepreneurial, independent, and mobile, can and should we find other ways of performing this figure?
Ball SJ (2012) Performativity, Commodification and Commitment: An I-Spy Guide to the Neoliberal University. British Journal of Educational Studies 60(1): 17–28.
Cannizzo F (2018) ‘You’ve got to love what you do’: Academic labour in a culture of authenticity. The Sociological Review 66(1): 91–106.
Kleinman DL and Vallas SP (2001) Science, capitalism, and the rise of the ‘knowledge worker’: The changing structure of knowledge production in the United States. Theory and Society 30(4): 451–492.
Shore C (2008) Audit culture and Illiberal governance: Universities and the politics of accountability. Anthropological Theory 8(3): 278–298.
Sparkes AC (2007) Embodiment, academics, and the audit culture: a story seeking consideration. Qualitative Research 7(4): 521–550.
Thornton M (2013) The Mirage of Merit. Australian Feminist Studies 28(76): 127–143.
Ylijoki O-H (2010) Future orientations in episodic labour: Short-term academics as a case in point. Time & Society 19(3): 365–386.
Participants: 12 (max.)
When & where: January 29th 201, Arcisst.21, Room 1221
Format: 1 day (10am – 5pm)
Facilitators: Mascha Gugganig (TU Munich), Rachel Douglas-Jones (ITU Copenhagen)
Words ≠ Images: The politics of how we represent and communicate moments from fieldwork is an evergreen challenge. In science & technology studies and the social sciences, priority is ordinarily given to words, with images playing a supporting role. This workshop explores the relationship between words and images in communicating research by using the image as a frame within which words are placed. The visual vignettes will be curated on a designated website to inspire further visual vignettes as a creative teaching tool, dissemination tool and/or as a form of visual ethnography.
What is a visual vignette? A visual vignette integrates text and image to create short, evocative descriptions of a particular phenomenon, conveyed quickly while also providing substantive content. Other than photo essays, this format challenges the order and ‘division of labour’ between words – often as descriptor – and images – as illustration.
- How can we reconfigure research that has already been conducted into a novel genre of research dissemination
- Can composing a visual vignette be part of doing research itself?
Workshop Preparation: You should prepare for the workshop by finding and bringing with you existing images and a short text about a topic that currently inspires you in your work. You will need to bring your own laptop, with Powerpoint installed.
- Bring a story from your fieldwork, written up text (c. 700 words)
- Bring a selection of images that belong with this story (up to 10)
Extended Doctoral Workshops
When? Nov. 10 2017, 1 pm – open end
Where? theater “Heppel & Ettlich”, Feilitzstr. 12, 80802 München
Who? MCTS doctoral candidates
We are happy to announce that visiting professor Stephen Hilgartner from Cornell University will interactively engage and stay with us for the workshop!
Stephen Hilgartner’s work comprises some of the most prominent concepts of science and technology studies: It reflects on the politics of emerging technologies, scientific knowledge practices, the role of vanguard visions for sociotechnical change, the measurement and models of risk in society, and, most recently, the governance and control of knowledge. His work offers multiple entries of analytical reflections for current doctoral research projects at MCTS.
The extended doctoral workshop consists of two parts:
A public keynote by Stephen Hilgartner on the 17th October 2017, 5 pm, at Vorhoelzer Fourm in Munich.
An interactive doctoral workshop with Stephen Hilgartner taking place on the 10th November 2017 at the theater “Heppel & Ettlich”.
When? Oct. 12.-13. 2016, 9 am – 5 pm
Where? Seidlvilla, Nikolaiplatz 1b, 80802 München
Who? MCTS doctoral candidates
This year’s Summer School is about ‘Experimenting with Hybridity’.
Hybridity has long been a mainstay of STS scholarship. Metaphors such as ‘cyborg’ and ‘techno-society’ coexist with analytical approaches such as assemblages and actor-networks. If we have learned anything from past STS research, it is that we are living in a hybrid world without clear distinctions between human, animal and machine, society and technology, science and non-science. Which new forms of order and organization, relationality and praxis can be understood in terms of the hybrid? ‘Experimenting with Hybridity’ means exploring meaningful dimensions of hybridity in today’s techno-society.
Many prominent images of hybridity like artificial intelligence, genetic modification or virtual reality share a distinct emphasis on the future. However, these imaginations of the future are not unitary, a future of hybrids, but are themselves hybrid, ranging from egalitarian utopias to post-human dystopies. How are our expectations, projections and simulations of these futures related to their emergence? ‘Experimenting with Hybridity’ means discovering the unfolding temporal dynamics of hybrid arrangements.
The thematic focus on hybridity and their continuous emergence will be supported by an experimental setting. Beyond classical forms of presentations and workshops, we invite contributions that themselves blur the boundaries between experts and lay people, presenters and audience, the ones researching and the ones being researched. ‘Experimenting with Hybridity’ means being entangled in its becoming.