Designing
Social Inquiry POLITICAL SCIENCE 2028
University of
Colorado-Boulder
Professor Vanessa
Baird
Office Ketchum 131D;
Email Vanessa.Baird@colorado.edu
http://socsci.colorado.edu/~bairdv/
Office Hours:
Tues-Thurs 3:30-5
(also by appointment)
The purpose of this course is to
introduce you to the systematic study of political science. We will study how
political scientists explain the attitudes and behaviors of human beings and
how those attitudes and behaviors interact with their political institutions to
achieve various outcomes. This course is
designed to survey the wide range of research designs and methods employed in
political science research, including normative analysis, interpretive analysis
and causal analysis. It will provide an introduction to students planning to
write honors theses and will be useful for any student planning to do research
in political science as part of a senior seminar or capstone course. In this course, students will have
·
improved
their critical thinking skills.
·
engaged
in a critical analysis of important theoretical assumptions, claims, and
arguments in a particular aspect of the existing theoretical literature on a
topic in political science.
·
developed
an appreciation for the various methods that political scientists use to
explain their world.
The
lectures will provide the necessary background information necessary to
complement your reading. The lectures
will not reproduce the reading. You will
be required to pick a topic from the variety of aspects of political science
scholarship, evaluate that scholarship and develop your own research design
that would add to the current body of knowledge regarding your topic, given
your evaluation of that literature. (The
description of this assignment follows the Course Outline). This approach allows for the achievement of
the goals for this course, which are as follows: 1) to obtain a good understanding of the how
to design inquiry in political science; 2) to obtain familiarity with current
research in an area in political science; and 3) to strengthen critical writing
skills, which means an ability to make non-obvious arguments and to anticipate
and reconcile all possible weaknesses of that argument.
We will be having some of the
class lectures in the data lab in Ketchum, particularly from mid-February
through March. You should be able
to use any of the ITS labs on campus in the same way, logging with their
IdentiKey Login and Password.
The list of the
labs with the numbers of computers, etc. is at http://webdata.colorado.edu/labs/map/, the more
general information on labs is at http://www.colorado.edu/ITS/MSG/itslabs.html
You are required to come to every class day, prepared by the reading for discussion. There is a final exam worth 10% of your final
grade. There will be assignments due throughout the semester; together, they
will be worth 40% of your grade (you will be able to drop two assignments). There will be quizzes throughout the
semester, worth 20% of your grade. And
there will be one 12-15 page research paper (25%). 5% of your final grade will
be based on a three minute oral presentation of your final research paper. These papers, assignments and quizzes and
their respective topics will be discussed during the course of the
semester.
There are many resources
on the website (http://sobek.colorado.edu/~bairdv/) that can be used in preparing
exams and the final paper.
You are expected to keep a copy of your work in case
something is lost. Incompletes are
strongly discouraged by the College and are only given for non-academic
reasons.
Please
email me or come by my office at any time to discuss issues with the
class. I am usually there and I usually
answer emails from students within minutes of receiving them. I genuinely look forward to discussing issues
in the class with students. I encourage
you to use email or office visits for any issues related to the class. On the other hand, I do not check voice
mail.
In this class, we will be dealing
with a great number of sensitive issues.
I encourage feedback on my teaching style and the materials, both anonymously
by email and otherwise, for any reason at any time, as long as it is
respectful. Along those same lines, I
always encourage students to disagree with anything I say at any time, again,
as long as it is respectful. I expect
all students to treat each other with respect as well. If I feel that you have treated me or any
other student with disrespect, I will ask you to meet me in my office. If you continue at any other time to treat me
or other students with disrespect, I will ask you to leave the classroom. Potentially, this kind of behavior could
result in being dropped from the class.
If you have any questions about my policies, or the University’s policy
regarding classroom behavior, do not hesitate to bring it up in class or talk
to me about it in my office. The
University’s general Code of Conduct can be found at the following website: http://www.colorado.edu/studentaffairs/judicialaffairs/code.html
and its code of conduct guidelines for the classroom can be found at the
following website: http://www.colorado.edu/policies/classbehavior.html
Campus policy regarding religious observances requires
that faculty make every effort to reasonably and fairly deal with all students
who, because of religious obligations, have conflicts with scheduled exams,
assignments or required attendance. See full details at http://www.colorado.edu/policies/fac_relig.html
I am
required by law to report to university officials any sexual harassment that I
observe or that is reported to me. The
university’s sexual harassment policy can be found at the following
website. http://www.cusys.edu/~policies/Personnel/sexharass.html
All the
work you do in this course is expected to be your own. Absolutely no cheating
or plagiarism (using someone else’s words or ideas without proper citation)
will be tolerated. Any time that you
consult outside sources, you MUST cite those sources. If your consult outside sources without
citation, even if you are not citing the sources directly, this constitutes
cheating. Failure to put quotation marks
around direct quotations constitutes plagiarism and will always result in an F
for the class. Misattribution of sources
(citing certain quotations or ideas as coming from a source other than the one
that they come from) will result in a lower grade. Any cases of cheating or plagiarism will be
reported to the Office of the Dean of Students.
If you cheat, you will fail the course. Please review the University’s policy
regarding academic integrity: http://www.colorado.edu/policies/acadinteg.html
The Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 (
The
purpose of the first part of this class is to differentiate the various kinds
of arguments that political scientists make.
First, there is the issue of fact and summarizing. There are also normative arguments that
communicate what the speaker’s view of what the world “ought” to be. There are also interpretive arguments, as for
example an argument about what the Supreme Court means when it says that speech
that presents a “clear and present danger” is not protected speech. There are also causal arguments, such as
“alienation from the government causes people to participate in politics.” In the beginning of the class, we will talk
about the various different kinds of arguments and there will be a quiz in
which you will be required to differentiate among the various kinds of
arguments. Bring Kellstedt and Whitten
for the quiz – it is open book!
|
Date |
Topic |
Assignment Due |
||
|
Tuesday |
January 13 |
Introduction to Political Science and Political Philosophy |
|
|
|
Thursday |
January 15 |
Introduction to Political Theory |
Kellstedt and Whitten, Chapter 1, Almond and Genco, Clouds and Clocks |
|
|
Tuesday |
January 20 |
Evaluating causal arguments |
Kellstedt and Whitten, Chapter 2 |
|
|
Thursday |
January 22 |
Quiz in class: bring your book |
|
|
|
Tuesday |
January 27 |
Various research designs |
Kellstedt and Whitten, Chapter 3 |
|
This portion of the class has to do with interpretation and normative political theory. One way of engaging in political science is to do careful textual analysis of ancient and contemporary texts. These texts could be works of political philosophy or historical archives or legal documents. The meaning of the text is interesting because it could give us insights into human nature or how political institutions affect human behavior. We will be investigating how to engage in textual analysis with an in class assignment and an out of class assignment in interpreting Rousseau’s view of human nature. The question in these assignments is: what does Rousseau mean when he says what he says. We will then engage in contemporary normative analysis in which we will read a contemporary political scientist, Tom Regan, and his ethics about human and animal life. Having discussed this example of contemporary normative analysis, students will come up with their own example of a normative research idea.
|
Date |
Topic |
Assignment Due |
|
||
|
Thursday |
January 29 |
Interpretation: in class assignment: Rousseau’s First Discourse |
Rousseau, Second Discourse (on website; print and bring to class) |
||
|
Tuesday |
February 03 |
Discussion of interpretation assignment |
Due: one page interpretation of Rousseau’s Second Discourse |
||
|
Thursday |
February 05 |
Normative analysis: Regan, Matters of Life and Death |
|||
|
Tuesday |
February 10 |
Normative analysis: Research design ideas |
Due: normative research idea |
||
The next portion of the class deals with causal theory. The most important yet most difficult job of a social scientist is to explain why things happen. What causes war? What causes people to participate in politics? What causes democratic stability? One way to answer such questions is to identify variation in war, participation and democratic stability and then look for attributes that go along with these political phenomena. Causal theories ought to be as exhaustive as possible; however, your model of the world must not (and actually should not) match the world precisely. Thus, we develop a model of the work with the simultaneous goal of keeping the explanations as simple as possible while being as accurate as possible. This section will deal with how to think about variation and variables, how to find evidence for co-variation and how to measure variables. We will also engage in questions of how to “control” for other variables in your model of political phenomena. You will be spending more time in the “data lab” in this portion of the class than in the others. You will learn rudimentary quantitative analysis.
|
Date |
Topic |
Assignment Due |
||
|
Thursday |
February 12 |
Types of variables |
|
|
|
Tuesday |
February 17 |
Variation, Units of Analysis |
Due: Invent a concept and then create a variable that would measure that concept |
|
|
Thursday |
February 19 |
Crosstabs and correlations I |
Due: open a data set using SPSS, conduct frequency and central tendency analysis |
|
|
Tuesday |
February 24 |
Spurious correlation: the logic of controlling |
|
|
|
Thursday |
February 26 |
Quiz on variables, units of analysis and
crosstabs Crosstabs and correlations II |
Due: Invent an example of a spurious relationship |
|
|
Tuesday |
March 03 |
Covariance and correlations |
Due: crosstab analysis |
|
|
Thursday |
March 05 |
Bivariate regression |
Due: crosstab analysis, controlling for a third variable |
|
|
Tuesday |
March 10 |
Hypothesis testing and causal inference |
Kellstedt and Whitten, Chapter 8 |
|
|
Thursday |
March 12 |
Discussion of final paper: Moscow Theater example |
Kellstedt and Whitten, Chapter 9 |
|
|
Tuesday |
March 17 |
Quiz over crosstabs, correlations and bivariate regression |
Due: paper topic and bibliography for literature review |
|
|
Thursday |
March 19 |
Measurement theory |
Kellstedt and Whitten, Chapter 5 |
|
|
Tuesday |
March 31 |
Multivariate Analysis |
Kellstedt and Whitten, Chapter 10 |
|
|
Thursday |
April 02 |
Interpreting Multivariate Analysis |
|
|
The next section of the course will deal with a variety of kinds of research designs, with a particular focus on situations in which the data are “messy” or when you have to collect your own data. We will think carefully about the rules of inference that are applied for the various kinds of designs. We will be focusing on qualitative analysis, such as case study analysis, with a particular emphasis on selecting those cases. You will be aware of how selection bias could affect your inferences. We will also look at how to collect your own data, using surveys or experiments. You will be expected to criticize various research designs in the literature as well as to design some of your own research ideas. By the end of the semester, you will be presenting your final paper as well as your research design in a short (three minute) oral presentation to the class.
|
Date |
Topic |
Assignment Due |
||
|
Tuesday |
April 07 |
Case study analysis |
Due: Critique of multivariate analysis |
|
|
Thursday |
April 09 |
Selection bias |
|
|
|
Tuesday |
April 14 |
Experimental designs |
Due: One section of the literature review for final paper |
|
|
Thursday |
April 16 |
Survey research |
Due: Experimental design idea |
|
|
Tuesday |
April 21 |
Interpretive rational choice analysis |
||
|
Thursday |
April 23 |
|
||
|
Tuesday |
April 28 |
Incorporating theoretical normative implications |
|
|
|
Thursday |
April 30 |
Oral presentations on final paper |
|
|
You should find a research topic dealing with political
science. Everyone’s research question is
the same: What causes ______ to vary/change (across people, geographic units,
time)? You should review the academic
literature associated with previously found explanation for what makes your
____ vary/change (across people, geographic units, time)? From that literature, you should deduce your
own theory from an idea that comes from a lacuna (something missing) in that
literature. You should develop a
research design that would answer the question and explain how you intend to go
about doing this research and the implications of the findings that you expect.
I.
Research Question – First Sentence or Two. What causes ______?
II.
Why the Question is Important – 2 pages.
III.
Literature Review – 6-8 pages. This is the bulk of the paper. The outline of this section is a list of
causes of the political phenomenon you are interested in. You should highlight and resolve to the best
of your ability any contradictions to the literature. Think of this part of the paper that is
making the argument that YOUR study needs to be done. Each section will be an argument about the
manner and extent to which that particular concept causes your political
phenomenon of interest. Be sure to
consider both sides of the argument. You
will need to deal with all relevant counterarguments.
Here is an example of an outline of the literature
review:
What causes the tendency to litigate to vary across
people?
A.
Political
disadvantage
B.
Perception
that courts are fair
C.
Social
networks
D.
Anger
E.
Self
esteem
F.
Severity
of the grievance
G.
Attribution
of blame of government
H.
Resources
(income, wealth, information, education)
For each bullet point, you will mention what the
literature has to say about whether this concept causes a tendency to litigate.
You will discuss many different scholars and their findings in terms of how
they relate to your conclusions about the manner and extent to which each
concept is a cause of your political phenomenon of interest.
IV.
Summary of Literature Review: Implications for your Research.
One or two paragraphs. The summary of
the literature review should introduce your research design. How are you going to contribute to what we
already know?
V.
Research Design. 2-3 pages.
VI.
Discussion of the Implications of
Expected Findings:
You should answer the question: What difference does it make for our
understanding of politics, perhaps in terms of how minorities can be better
protected, better representation, better economic growth, or other things that
we care about … that we now know what we are able to conclude from your
research? 2 pages.
You will be graded on the rigor of your discussion of the
literature and on the internal consistency of your arguments. I will pay close attention to whether you
have considered all potential counterarguments or inconsistencies presented by
the literature in your discussion. You
will also be graded on the creativity of the research design as well as your
ability to answer the question: what difference does this research make in its
contribution to previous literature? The
answer to this question enables you to connect the first parts of the paper
with the last.