Short courses
Short courses will be held for researchers and students interested in developing empirical research related to the Administration of Justice. Short courses are focused on research methods and techniques, which aim to offer training opportunities to individuals interested in expanding knowledge about Justice Administration research, supported by data and evidence.
Certificates will be provided individually for each short course.
Short Courses already confirmed
Justice Administration Research Supported by Interviews and Document Analysis
Prof. Dr. Isabelle de Baptista
September 28, 9h - 1pm
Read moreMethodological strategies for qualitative research in access to Justice
Prof. Luciana Garcia e Prof. Olívia Pessoa
September 28, 1:20pm - 5:30pm
Read moreJurimetry, Quantitative Empirical Research in Administration of Justice
Prof. Dr.Luciana Yeung
September 28, 6pm - 10pm
Read moreJustice Administration Research Supported by Interviews and Document Analysis
Summary
- Introduction. Main research paradigms in human and applied social sciences: positivism and interpretativism; Main methods and techniques of qualitative research: case study, action research, Design Science, Grounded Theory, ethnography, phenomenology, etc.
- Main procedures and instruments for data collection: interview, focus group, direct observation, secondary documents, etc.
- Interviews and Document Analysis. Screenwriting techniques, research protocols and data analysis.
- Data collection and analysis of interviews; document collection and analysis.
- Data analysis procedures and softwares use in qualitative research Computer-Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software (CAQDAS):
- IRAMUTEQ (Interface de Rpour les Analyses Multidimensionnellesde Textes et de Questionnaires)
- Atlas.ti, version 7.5, developed by Scientific Software Development
Objectives:
- Provide students with critical understanding of the methods, procedures and instruments that support qualitative research in the area of Justice Administration.
- State and discuss about research based on interview and document analysis.
- Show and discuss functionalities of qualitative research auxiliary software.
References
Bardin, L. (2009). Análise de conteúdo. Lisboa: Edições, 70.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publ.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
da Silva, L. F., Russo, R. D. F. S. M., & de Oliveira, P. S. G. (2018). Quantitativa ou qualitativa? um alinhamento entre pesquisa, pesquisador e achados em pesquisas sociais. Revista Pretexto, 19(4), 30-45.
Dresch, A., Lacerda, D. P., & Júnior, J. A. V. A. (2015). Design science research: método de pesquisa para avanço da ciência e tecnologia. Bookman Editora.
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 532-550.
Flick, U. (2008). Introdução à pesquisa qualitativa-3. Artmed editora.
Godoi, C. K., Bandeira-de-Mello, R., & Silva, A. D. (2010). Pesquisa qualitativa em estudos organizacionais: paradigmas, estratégias e métodos. São Paulo: Saraiva.
Minayo, M. C. (2011). Pesquisa social: teoria, método e criatividade. Editora Vozes Limitada.
Östlund, U., Kidd, L., Wengström, Y., & Rowa-Dewar, N. (2011). Combining qualitative and quantitative research within mixed method research designs: a methodological review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 48(3), 369-383.
Prolo, I., Lima, M. C., & da Silva, L. F. (2018). Os Desafios na Adoção da Tradição Interpretativista nas Ciências Sociais. Diálogo, (39).
Sauerbronn, J. F. R., & Ayrosa, E. A. T. (2010). Concerning Convergence and the Methodological Practice of Interpretive Interactionism in Academic Marketing Research. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 14(5), 854.
Silverman, D. (2009). Interpretação de dados qualitativos: métodos para análise de entrevistas, textos e interações. Bookman.
Teixeira, J. C., Nascimento, M. C. R., & Carrieri, A. D. P. (2012). Triangulação entre métodos na administração: gerando conversações paradigmáticas ou meras validações “convergentes”. Revista de Administração Pública, 46(1), 191-220.
Thiollent, M. (2009). Pesquisa-ação nas organizações. Atlas.
Yin, R. K. (2015). Estudo de Caso: Planejamento e Métodos. Bookman editora.
Mini curriculum
Prof. Dr. Isabelle de Baptista
isabelledebaptista@hotmail.com
Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2640-6706
Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/8883994472519041
Doctor of Business Administration (2019). Master of Law (2010). Degree in Law (2005) and History (2001). Associate Teacher, Federal University of Mato Grosso, Araguaia Campus. Member of the Research Groups “Administration of Justice” (UNB) and “Innovation Strategy” (UNINOVE). Develops research focused on the theme of transparency and innovation in the justice system and the fight against corruption.
Jurimetry, Quantitative Empirical Research in Administration of Justice
Summary
Introduction:
a) Defining Quantitative Empirical Research.
b) Conducting Quantitative Empirical Research.
c) Objectives of Quantitative Empirical Research.
Part I: Quantitative Empirical Research Design.
Part II: Collecting and Encoding Quantitative Data.
Part III: Analyzing Quantitative Data.
- Summarizing Quantitative Data;
- Statistical Inference;
- Regression Analysis: The Basis;
- Multiple Regression and Related Methods.
Part IV: Communicating Quantitative Data and Results.
Objectives:
- Introduce to empirical research and jurimetry.
- Introduce ways to develop empirical research, from design (planning), data collection and coding, to full analysis and communication.
- Discuss the advantages of empirical research as a research methodology compared to other research methods in the field of law and the like (Political Science, Economics, Social Sciences, etc.).
References
EPSTEIN, Lee; MARTIN, Andrew D. An introduction to empirical legal research. Oxford University Press, 2014.c
YEUNG, Luciana. “Jurimetria”. In RIBEIRO, Marcia Carla Pereira; DOMINGUES, Victor Hugo; KLEIN, Vinicius (Coords). Análise econômica do Direito: justiça e desenvolvimento. Curitiba: CRV, 2016.
YEUNG, Luciana. “Jurimetria ou Análise Quantitativa de Decisões Judiciais”. In MACHADO, Maíra Rocha. Pesquisar empiricamente o direito. São Paulo: Rede de Estudos Empíricos em Direito, pp. 249-74, 2017.
Mini curriculum
Prof. Dr. Luciana Yeung
Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/3780628429728581
PhD in Economics from EESP-FGV, with Law School internship at the University of California, Berkeley; Master of Applied Economics and Industrial Relations from the University of Wisconsin – Madison; Bachelor of Economics from FEA-USP. Founding Member and Former President (2016) of the Brazilian Association of Law and Economics (ABDE). Member of the board of directors of the Latin American and Iberian Association of Law and Economics (ALACDE), since Jan.2020. She was a member of the Working Group established by the CNJ (National Council of Justice) to evaluate the draft law on legal costs and gratuity of justice. She was Coordinator of the Undergraduate Economics Course of Insper from 2011 to 2018. As a researcher, she is dedicated to the area of Economic Analysis of Law (or Law and Economics) and Empirical Studies in Law. She has articles and chapters in national and international publications, including: Journal of Institutional Economics, IMA Journal of Management Mathematics, Encyclopedia of Law and Economics (Ed. Springer), Applied Economics, Economic Analysis of Law Review, Journal of Institutional Studies, among others. several others.
She is an acting reviewer of the Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, European Journal of Law and Economics, Journal of Institutional Economics, Operations Research and Decisions, Economic Analysis of Law Review, RAUSP, GV Law Journal, Journal of Empirical Studies in Law, Applied Economics, among others.
Frequently interviewed and collaborated by private and public organizations with articles, lectures and technical studies on issues of judiciary, economics and politics. She participates in Masters and PhD in law in several institutions in the country. She is a frequent guest for lectures in Schools of Magistracy, State Attorney Schools, postgraduate courses in Law and Economics in different Brazilian locations. In 2018 and 2019, she was a guest speaker at Harvard Law School, the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) and the Brazilian Days of Procedural Law. She gave the Magna Class of the 1st class of the Specialization Course in Law and Economics of the State University of Campinas (Unicamp).
Read more: https://www.insper.edu.br/pesquisa-e-conhecimento/docentes-pesquisadores/luciana-yeung/
Methodological strategies for qualitative research in access to Justice
Prof. Luciana Garcia (IDP) e Prof. Olívia Pessoa (UniPositivo)
Summary
The short course aims to revisit some theoretical frameworks on access to Justice, relating them to the debate on the administration of Justice and the understanding of the provision of jurisdiction as a service or even a public policy (also called judicial policy). In the sequence, it will list the methodological strategies that can contribute to research on the perception of citizens, civil servants and members of the Justice system (both understood as members of the bureaucracy) on access to Justice and verify to what extent the performance “at the tip” may interfere with the application of the standard.
- Updating the debate on access to justice. Beyond the “three waves”;
- Current scenario of the Brazilian justice system regarding access to justice;
- Judicial administration and the impact on Access to Justice;
- Street-level bureaucracy and access to justice;
- Organizing research: the challenges of the field;
- Interview or observation (or both)? When is the analysis of the procedural records necessary?
- Analyzing qualitative data in research on access to justice.
References
CAPELLETTI, Mauro; GARTH Bryan. Acesso à Justiça. Porto Alegre: Sérgio Antonio Fabris editor, 1988. Disponível em: https://www.dropbox.com/s/9gyomtziqngnni1/Cappelletti%20e%20Garth%20Acesso%20a%20Jusit%C3%A7a.PDF?dl=0
FULLIN, Carmen. Acesso à Justiça: a construção de um problema em mutação. In. SILVA, Feljpe Gonçalves; RODRIGUEZ, José Rodrigo. Manual de Sociologia Jurídica. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2019, pp. 249-267. Disponível em: https://www.dropbox.com/s/y8lwmxbzbbnxgzg/FULLIN%20Acesso%20a%20Justi%C3%A7a.pdf?dl=0
GALANTER, Marc. Por que “quem tem” sai na frente: especulações sobre os limites da transformação no direito. São Paulo: FGV Direito SP, 2018. Disponível em: http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/10438/25816/Por%20que%20%27quem%20tem%27%20sai%20na%20frente.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
GUARIDO FILHO, E. R., Luz, B. B. C., Silveira, T. R. (2018, abril). Legitimidade organizacional no contexto de organizações da justiça. In Anais do Encontro de Administração da Justiça, Brasília, DF, Brasil.
LIPSKY, Michael. Burocracia de nível de rua: dilemas do indivíduo no serviço público. Brasília: Enap, 2019. Disponível em: https://repositorio.enap.gov.br/bitstream/1/4158/1/Burocracia%20de%20n%C3%ADvel%20de%20rua_Michael%20Lipsky.pdf
MACHADO, Maíra Rocha. "Pesquisar empiricamente o direito." São Paulo: Rede de Estudos Empíricos em Direito (2017). Disponível em: http://reedpesquisa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/MACHADO-Mai%CC%81ra-org.-Pesquisar-empiricamente-o-direito.pdf
PESSOA, Olívia. Interações no juizado especial: quem fala com quem? In: PIRES, Roberto Rocha C. (org.). Implementando desigualdades: reprodução de desigualdades na implementação de políticas públicas - Rio de Janeiro : Ipea, 2019. Disponível em: http://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/bitstream/11058/9323/1/Implementando%20desigualdades_reprodu%C3%A7%C3%A3o%20de%20desigualdades%20na%20implementa%C3%A7%C3%A3o%20de%20pol%C3%ADticas%20p%C3%BAblicas.pdf