Abstract of My PhD Application Dissertation Proposal

Conceptualized every time I commute between home and school, between the cities of Caloocan and Manila.

Today, I hereby lay copyright claim to the research and coining of "Displaced Settlers", dwellers who have no capacity to live a decent life in where they currently reside, because they do not have a real house but live in the streets or public areas. 

I also lay claim to the theorem premised that a single local government's action is not enough to help these people.  Founded on principles of my Masteral thesis "Federalism and its Potential Application to the Republic of the Philippines" (2011), I posit the alternative (the future Ronald's Law) that "the dynamics of local government networks is needed to solve the problem of displaced settlers".  This is done by giving them means to live a decent life in the scattered islands of the various regions of the Republic.  Instead of giving them fish in the metro, give them the capacity to fish or till the soil in the Philippines lush provinces.

University of Santo Tomas – Graduate School

New Student Research Proposal: Ph.D. (Political Science)

Ronald M. Castillo

Deep Currents and Displaced Settlers: Philippine Intergovernmental Policy Analysis

The Philippine Republic uses a unitary system of geographic allocation of power.  Being an archipelago, the country is composed of more than 7,000 islands, most of which are crisscrossed by mountains and dotted by forests, which pose strategic problems for national management of the country.  Yet, even with such political geographic hindrance, these islands are rich in natural resources, beautiful and are undiscovered havens for residence, commerce, and tourism. 

Currently, Metro Manila has a proliferation of street settlers.  This phenomenon is an endemic governance concern both in the national and local levels of the Philippine government.  This issue touches on areas of human life such as rights, crime increases, spread of diseases, and the swelling of the metropolis’ population. 

This dissertation proposes a two tiered approach in relation to the said situation.  First, it will analyze political institutions and political culture blockages to policy making and implementation using deep current set method as applied to a single country comparative study of the Philippines.  On the second stage, it will test bottom-up institutional dynamics theory as embedded in the writings of Robert J. Rotberg.  Through these, the dissertation aims to establish the grassroots level of local government as the true foundation of a stable unitary state.

Keywords:  unitary system, displaced settlers, deep current set, political institutions, local government 

Repeated Surveys

Check if your alumni has "repeated" in the list.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B6lf7h9Qw9ccYVZDX3J0TUhFV2M/view?usp=sharing

POL 201 PPTs

Powerpoints: guides for POL 201

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B30MHtoilXd4cnpvZ2QtMW9fbDA&usp=sharing

POL 201 - Narrative and Reflection Writing Reminder

Like all papers, your narrative must have an argument.  It doesnt for a narrative - what claim can you state about the alumni which can be supported by your data? Is he or she a success? a rolemodel?.

For the reflection papers, what did you learn about visiting the institution?  Then you will relate this learning to a current events issue.

ALWAYS WRITE IN 3RD PERSON.

Comparative Politics in Transition - Content Guidelines for Paper and Defense

Note that this is only a guideline.  Do not expect that quetions here will be the only questions.

It all boils down to proving that the method matches the hypothesis.  You can be done in many ways, but the standards are:

1. Does your hypothesis' core objective match the objective of the method you use?  (will you use regression in a correlative hypothesis?)
2. Does the data gathering procedure that you propose satisfy a) your hypothesis if the hypothesis is turned into a question (does authoritarianism lead to development?).  b).  Is the procedure (survey, interview) the one that is used in your method?
3. Do your proposed questions lead to the right answer (findings) that will prove your hypothesis?

The research that you did also proves to me how well you know the method.

In general:

1. What are the parameters of your variables?  Sample what are the parameters of political participation as a variable? Does it only include voting? how about rallying? How about membership in a party?  How about talking about issues?  If qualitative - how can these be described.  If quantitative - how can these be counted or measured?

If qualitative:

1. How many selections (people to interview)?
2. How is data analyzed (in a phenomenology, in a case study, in a narrative)?
3. What are the data gathering methods or procedures that you will use? (interview, focus group, etc.)
4. What are the available sources of data?

If quantitative:

1. How many respondents (people to survey)?
2. What scale (range of numbers for rating) did you use? 1-5? 1-3, 1-7?  What does the range describe (effective? corrupt)?
3. Are your variables nominal? Ordinal? Are there dummy variables?
4. Are there available sources of data.

POL 201 Tasks for Groups 3 - 6

For submission on Friday October 24, 2014.

Each group will hold a parliamentary session.
In each group, 1 member will function as chair, 1 as secretary, the rest as regular members.  Your group must accomplish specific parliamentary actions.
The session will be recorded as an mp4 video by the secretary.  A camera phone, tablet or better camera may be used.  The entire session should be 8-12 minutes.  Secretary will make a minutes of the meeting which will be uploaded.  The Video will be burned on a CD, with a cover or label:
Parliamentary Practice Simulation
Olympia or Argos or Corinth (number)
Members in alphabetical list, surnames 1st.


For Olympia, Argos, and Corinth 3: each of these groups will meet separately as a new political party in the Philippines with strong liberal-right (idealogy):

Your agenda is to discuss the question of: what platforms should your government offer the people for the next national elections?

Parliamentary actions:

1. Main motion must be debated on.
2. The body must vote to approve or dismiss the main motion.
3. Each member must discuss/debate at least once (2 minutes following standards).
4. There will be 2 Main motions.  The 1st must be objected to succesfully,
5. Main motion must be amended as necessary.
6. There must be a successful motion to limit debate.
7. 2nd motion must be successfully referred to committee.
8. The groups decision along with justifications must be in the form of a resolution.

For Olympia, Argos, and Corinth 4: each of these groups will meet separately as an NGO with authoritarian-left ideology:

Your agenda is to discuss the question of: what steps should be taken for the successful lobbying in support of a plastic bags regulation act?

Parliamentary actions:

1. Main motion must be debated on.
2. The body must vote to approve or dismiss motion that need such procedure.
3. Each member must discuss/debate at least once (2 minutes following standards).
4. The main motion must be objected to and replaced by a new motion.
5. There will be a motion that is already on the table that can address the question.
6. The motion on the table must be successfully taken from it.
7. There must be a motion for recess during which opposing members discuss plans with their allies.
8. The groups decision along with justifications must be in the form of a resolution.

For Olympia, Argos, and Corinth 5: each of these groups will meet separately as the United Nations Security Council:

Your agenda is to discuss the question of:  what actions can be done to stabilize secutirty around the West Philippine Sea / South China Sea?

Parliamentary actions:

1. Main motion must be debated on.
2. Each member must discuss/debate at least once (2 minutes following standards).
3. Main motion must be amended as necessary.
4. China will not object to deliberation but will participate in the debate.
5. There must be a failed motion to suppress debate.
6. An ally of China must successfully suppress the vote by a motion to postpone indefinitely.  
7. There must be a question of privilege.

For Olympia, Argos, and Corinth 6: each of these groups will meet separately as a war council composed of members with a majority of high tenderness political attitudes:

Your agenda is to discuss the question of: what conditions should the body demand of an allied state which calls us to help in a war?

Parliamentary actions:

1. Main motion must be debated on.
2. The body must vote to approve or dismiss motion that need such procedure.
3. Each member must discuss/debate at least once (2 minutes following standards).
4. Main motion must be amended as necessary.
5. There must be a successful motion for a division of the assembly.
6. There must be a motion for recess during which opposing members discuss plans with their allies.
7. The groups decision along with justifications must be in the form of a resolution.

Upholding Justice in the Race

Reposting that the SOMEONE may know:

It has come to my attention that alumni Ms. Clare Fevidal has already been registered here under comment:

Nuvi Dela CruzOctober 9, 2014 at 10:26 PM
DELA CRUZ, Nuvi Maecy H. (1POL2) - Ms. Clare Fevidal

Yet SOMEONE still interviewed her and took the opportunity from Nuvi Dela Cruz.

THAT "SOMEONE" IS HENCEFORTH FORBIDDEN TO SUBMIT MS. FEVIDAL'S INTERVIEW. TO SUBMIT AN INTERVIEW OF MS. FEVIDAL IF YOU ARE NOT NUVI DELACRUZ MERITS FAILED IN POL 201 SINCE YOU DID NOT FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS AND RESULTED TO CHEATING ANOTHER STUDENT.

AND ANYONE WHO SUBMITS AN INTERVIEW OF AN ALUMNI PREVIOUSLY REGISTERED BY ANOTHER STUDENT, THUS RESULTING TO STOLEN OPPORTUNITIES WILL MERIT THE SAME PUNISHMENT.

POL201: Instruments in Determining Political Behavior - Your Ideologic Leanings

Take the tests.  Print the results.  Bring to class.

Political Compass

http://politicalcompass.org/test


Moral Compass

http://www.pa.msu.edu/~aaronson/alitest/aintro.html


Political Values Test

http://slackhalla.org/~demise/test/socialattitude.php

Comparative Study: Current Events Reading

It's an audio file. Video and written transcript are also available.

Here's the link:

http://www.cfr.org/russian-federation/conversation-mikhail-khodorkovsky/p33568

Addendum to Survey (easier to fill up form) POL 201

Here's a fillable pdf form.  Easier to answer for your alumni.

Don't forget to fill in the filename before sending.

DOWNLOAD PDF FILLABLE FORM

Survey Questionnaire for POL 201

Here is the Survey Questionnaire for your Amazing Race.

For this task, you need two (2) alumni's.  The qualifications must be.  Graduated within 2009-2013.
EMPLOYED OR UNEMPLOYED.  If your interviewed alumni falls in the same time period, then you can survey the same alumni, then add a new one.  Alumni's for survey are to be listed here in the comments area.  Again, no repetition.

For this task, there's no need for a narrative report.  All you need is that your alumni is able to fill this up.  Hence there must be two survey sheets in the cd.

Edit the file name before sending to your respective alumni.

File is offered in both word and pdf for convenience.

Guides for alumni answering in soft copy:

Adobe reader XI has a "Fill and Sign feature" which will facilitate the checking boxes and input of text.

For those who will use word, you can just highlight and change the color of the boxes.  Then just type text as usual.

The form can also be printed, answered, then scanned for submission.


DOWNLOAD WORD FILE

DOWNLOAD PDF FILE

POL 201 - Tasks for Groups 1 and 2

Each group will hold a parliamentary session.
In each group, 1 member will function as chair, 1 as secretary, the rest as regular members.  Your group must accomplish specific parliamentary actions.
The session will be recorded as an mp4 video by the secretary.  A camera phone, tablet or better camera may be used.  The entire session should be 8-12 minutes.  Secretary will make a minutes of the meeting and upload the video in eleap.


For Olympia, Argos, and Corinth 1: each of these groups will meet separately as a constitutional committee:

Your agenda is to discuss the question of: what institutional or behavioral problem is the root cause of corruption?

Parliamentary actions:

1. Main motion must be debated on.
2. The body must vote to approve or dismiss the main motion.
3. Each member must discuss/debate at least once (2 minutes following standards).
4. Main motion must be amended as necessary.
5. There must be a point of order.
6. There must be a failed motion to lay on the table.
7. There must be a successful motion for recess during which members meet to ally for the vote..
8. There must be at least 2 points of inquiry.

For Olympia, Argos, and Corinth 2: each of these groups will meet separately as a constitutional committee:

Your agenda is to discuss the question of: should animal rights be considered in the making of human laws?

Parliamentary actions:

1. Main motion must be debated on.
2. The body must vote to approve or dismiss motion that need such procedure.
3. Each member must discuss/debate at least once (2 minutes following standards).
4. Main motion must be amended as necessary.
5. There must be a failed motion for the previous question.
6. There must be a successful motion to expunge or rescind.
7. There must be a successful motion for the previous question thus suppressing further discussion.
8. There must be a motion to adjourn.

POL 201 Update

1st years who need formal letters to their alumni's must write their letters following regular standards of formal letters, with a "noted by" (after the closing and your signature part) for me to sign.

Groupings (PGC and POL 201)

For PGC documentary groups, sign up sheets are already available in eleap (groups button).  Just have a member choose a vacant slot and input the members.

For POL 201 parliamentary practice simulation groups, you have already been randomly assigned by eleap.  Just check out your groupings.  Assigned tasks / topics will be announced in class.

POL 201 Amazing Race Interview Questions

Here are 8 interview questions.  You may rephrase, but you will not remove a question.  You may add questions and follow-up questions specially if such questions will better enrich the original set.

1. How would you describe academic life when you were taking the political science program at AB?
2. What do you do in your line of work / job / career?  How would you describe your current professional life as it contributes to you personally? Economically?
3. (Using ranges of tens of thousands 10,000-19,000; 20,000-29,000) What is your current range of salary?  How does it compare to your initial salary?
4. Did you work immediately after graduation?  How long before you started working?  Did you initially get your target career?  How can you describe the steps that you took in order to get where you are now?
5. What was the reason for your choosing your job or line of work?  What made you continue or change jobs (if there were career shifts)?
6. What is your source of job satisfaction?
7. What competencies gained in college were useful in your job or career?  How did such competencies help you?
8. What lessons gained from AB, Political Science endured after graduation?  How did such lessons impact on you and your professional life?

POL201's Amazing Race - Future in the Discipline

WARNING - ACTUAL START OF RACE (SPECIFICALLY THE POSTING OF NAMES) IS ON OCTOBER 7, 2014 8:00 A.M.  But you may speak with potential interviewees before such date.

We began with an introduction of your past, and your ideas of why you are here in the Political Science program.  Your final exam will include this very special activity.

A search and interview of UST-AB Political Science alumni now already in their professional practice.

By definition in this activity, professional practice means that the alumni is already in a as Goodin mentioned "a relatively high status of occupational trade."

The first task in the race is to search for leads.  Go and seek professors and your ate's and kuya's in TPSF for contacts.  This can be skipped if you already know someone.

Second, is to visit and make an appointment with the chosen alumni.  Also inform that you need a fully updated copy of his or her curriculum vitae.  You will also need to take a picture of the alumni.  Either take a picture or ask for one in his/her best.

Third, since this is a race, you will immediately reserve the alumni in this blog by posting in the following format:

YOUR SURNAME, First Name Middle Initial (SECTION) - Your Alumni's First Name Middle Initial Surname

 Example: CASTILLO, Ronald M. (1POL4) - Renato C. Corona.

The interview must be recorded preferably in an audio file [required file format is either mp3 (1st choice) or wmv (2nd choice)].  You can also have it recorded as video.  Skype is definitely acceptable.

The audio recording must begin with the student speaking the following syntax for file identification and authentication:

Future in the Discipline.  Prototype Tracer Study.  Mr. / Ms. / Mrs. Atty. (use appropriate title of the person) Name interviewed by Student Name of section.  Date and Time.

Example: Once you press the record button.  First say to the recorder: Future in the Discipline. Prototype Tracer Study. Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago interviewed by Ronald M. Castillo of  One Political Science Four.  October Fourteen, Twenty-fourteen, Ten-thirty a.m.

Interview guide will be distributed in class.

Once done.  You will use both interview data and curriculum vitae to make a single page (long bond paper) narrative description of the life, achievements, and profdessional practice of the alumni.

Format will be similar to the CV that you first made in class.  But the title, instead of Curriculum Vitae, will now be:

  

On (Deadline) October 27, 2014.  Students must submit in class:

The printed narrative will be collected by the class president following the same protocols as was done in the first class activity (compile it in a clearbook).

A CD containing:

1. Soft copy in PDF file format of the narrative.  Filename - "Interview Section (1POL1) Student Surname - Alumni Surname"
2. Soft copy of alumni's curriculum vitae.  Filename - "CV Section (1POL1) Student Surname - Alumni Surname"
3. Audio or Video file of interview.  Filename - "Interview Section (1POL1) Student Surname - Alumni Surname"

The Big No-no's in the Finals Paper

Committing the following will merit an automatic zero / 0 for the finals paper:

• Poor bibliographic list.
• Bloated bibliographic list.
• Missing in-text citations.
• More than one unnecessary direct quote.
• Uncreative title.
• Did not follow format.
• Plagiarized work.  - Unparaphrased but cited material is plagiarized.  And this time, no more second chances.  It's already the second chance (final paper).
• Work does not fit the required content (argumentative paper must be argumentative, not simply descriptive.).
• Grammatical and compositional errors that span across the entire paper.

Quantitative Analysis Method for Compa

Here is a link to a supplementary reading that can help in quantitative analysis.


https://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCQQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wider.unu.edu%2Faboutus%2Fpeople%2Fresident-researchers%2Fen_GB%2Fnino-zarazua-miguel%2F_files%2F88595805175415092%2Fdefault%2FNino-Zarazua-10-2012.pdf&ei=qwstVLGCGsrW8gXar4H4Dw&usg=AFQjCNEHB0bgJoK7dZuFiBa98UhZfp-jPA&bvm=bv.76477589,d.dGc

Comparative Paper II

Preliminary:  All those who gained 80 and above in the prelim paper must email a soft copy to:

ustrmc22@gmail.com 

For the 2nd comparative paper.  You're approach is either Hypothesis Testing or Prediction.

But you will do neither.  Rather, the paper will propose three things.

1. Propose a hypothesis for testing or a prediction on one state.  The other state will be used to support claims if needed.
2. Propose 1 qualitative method of testing the hypothesis or prediction.
3. Propose 1 quantitative method of testing the hypothesis or prediction.

Logistics:

• Submission; October 23, 2014
• Pages: 3-4 excepting reference list
• Due to a number of cheaters (plagiarists) in the prelim paper, a plagiarized work will definitely get the writers (both partners) a failed Comparative Politics in Transition Grade.
• Title page now follows the format in the syllabus since there's no more need of pictures.
• For the students names, just put in successive sequence alphabetically.  (i.e. Castillo, Ronald M. and Rodriguez, Ma. Zenia M.)

Content:

The Introduction is 1-2 paragraphs.  It must be where the authors propose their hypothesis or predictions along with the two methods. The hypothesis creates a relationship between two variables.  A prediction proposes the possibility of a political event to happen (you will have to agree on which state to focus on).  The proposed hypothesis or prediction must be accompanied with an explanation justifying a background on why such hypothesis or prediction was generated.  This background should be rationally based on current facts about that state. 

The Discussion will discuss how your claim can be supported by 1) qualitative analysis, and 2) quantitative analysis.  Hence, your sub-headings for the discussion will be on those two.

You will not actually do the analysis.  But rather you will prove that the analysis can support your hypothesis or prediction.

For example, I propose a hypothesis that "the reason for rebellion of Bangsamoro in the Philippines is the unitary system and cultural diversity".  I will give a short explanation why I suspected this cause (with citations).

To this, I will propose 1) phenomenology and 2) T-Test.

The discussion for phenomenology will be on how I will interview Islamics in Mindanao with regards to the issue.  There will be a short list of questions that satisfy the hypothesis or prediction.  I will include how analysis of the interview is done using phenomenology.  

For T-Test, I will measure the ratings of Mindanao citizens on variables such as a) how they feel cared for by the national government, b) how Philippine laws clash with their beliefs, and c) the degree of their feeling of difference with non-Mindanao citizens.

For other samples, check out Landman's Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics.  The samples that you surveyed before will be good guides.

Be sure to give lots of narrative examples of your proofs (i.e. how you propose to do the analysis).

For the Conclusion, in paragraph form, reiterate your proposals with a short version of your proofs.

Grading:

Grade Rubric:

Hypothesis or Prediction (4pts)

4 - justified with existing political science theory, principle or law.

3 - justified with explanations based existing situations.

2 - justified but with errors in reasoning.

1 - unproven claim

0 - no hypothesis 

Qualitative and Quantitative Method (4pts each)

4 - Clearly explained method.  And method matches the hypothesis or prediction.

3 - Method clearly explained but did not completely support the hypothesis or prediction.

2 - Method both unclear and did not completely match the hypothesis or prediction.

1 - Method both unclear and did not support the hypothesis or prediction.

0 - no method.

Format (3pts)

3 - Flawless format.

2 - Few (1-2) violations of format.

1 - Paper is riddled with format violations.

0 - Did not follow the format for the entire paper.

TOTAL of 15 pts.

Please posts your questions in the comments box.

Classifications of Governments: PGC Substitute Lecture for 1LIT2, 1CA2 and 1CA4

Governments can be classified in several ways.  De Leon provides 5 ways to classify, and the Philippine government, under the 1987 Constitution, can be described using the kinds of government under these classes.

The five classifications are: 

1. According to the number of rulers.
2. According to the extent of power exercised by the national / central government.
3. According to the relationship between the executive and legislative branches.
4. According to the nature and origin of power.
5. According to the identity or non-identity of the state and government with the people.

Each of the above classes has different kinds of of government under them.  Let us identify them.

According to the number of rulers.

Aristotle in ancient Greece classified governments based on the number of rulers.  He also made a distinction regarding the quality of rule (good/pure or corrupt/bad).

• Monarchy, from ancient Greek mono = one, and archos=ruler.  The government under one ruler as in the times of the Pharoah of Egypt, the Kings and Queens of France and England.
• Aristocracy, rule by the few.  Aristos=best, and kratos=power.  As proposed by Plato, Aristotle's senior, the rulership of the few which is composed of the best or most capable members of the community. 
• Oligarchy, rule by the rich.  From Greek Oligos=wealthy.  The corrupt version of Aristocracy. 
• Democracy, rule by the many.  Demos=the people.  The form of government wherein all members have the right to participate in governance whether by directly ruling or by voicing out their concerns.
• Tyranny is the corrupt verson of monarchy.  From Greek tyrannos=terrible) is the government under a single terrible/oppressive ruler.

According to the extent of power exercised by the national / central government.

This way of classification identifies delegation of powers by the constitution.  There are two ways.

• Unitary - when the constitution concentrates all powers to the national government (President, congress) or first delegates powers to the national and leaves some for the national to give to the local. The local governments (provinces, cities) are reliant to the central government.
• Federal - when the constitution distributes or delegates governmental powers between the national and the local.  E.g. In the United States.  The national, called 'federal government', has power over printing of currency, command over military, and handling foreign relations. While each local government ('states' - State of California, State of New York) has power to determine THEIR OWN taxes, marriage policy, etc.        

According to the relationship between the executive and legislative branches.

There are three general or basic powers to govern.  The power to make laws - legislative.  To administer that the laws are observed - executive.  And to interpret the law as it applies to the actions of people (if they violated or obeyed the law) - judicial.  All three powers held by one person or office  lead to abuses by rulers.  Charles de Secondat, the baron of Montesquieu, proposed that all 3 be separated and given to 3 separate branches or agencies.  Each co-equal to the other, no interference, and with checks to guard the abuses of the others.  These agencies were the Executive (Head of State/Government), Legislative (congress or parliament) and Judicial (courts) branches. 

The courts have the essence of always being neutral and by nature passive - it only acts on questions set before them.  No question, no answer.  But the other two are active, legislature makes laws to keep up with modernity, executive should never cease to implement the law. The relationship of these two branches determine whether a government is:

• Presidential - all three powers and branches are separate.  The President is both Head of State (symbol of the state/symbolic head) and Head of Government (actual person who leads the administration).
• Parliamentary - the two active branches (executive and legislature are fused as one.  Such as in Great Britain.  The legislative branch is called 'parliament', The people elect members of parliament called 'ministers'.  After they are elected, all ministers will then elect from among them a 'Prime Minister' who then becomes the head of government.  The head of state is the Monarch currently a Queen (Elizabeth I) who has little powers in government other than being recognized as symbol of the state.  

According to the nature and origin of power.

Power can have two ways to determine source:

• Elected - the power to rule comes from the people choosing who should rule them.
• Hereditary - the power to rule is passed from generation to generation in the blood line of a family.  There are two ways to determine hereditary passing of rule.  a. Primogeniture (heirs are from eldest child to youngest, then eldest next of kin).  and b. Ultimogeniture (youngest to eldest child, then next of kin).  Sometimes this is restricted by gender, e.g. only males, only females.  

According to the identity or non-identity of the state and government with the people.
There are two kinds of democracy.  This distinction differentiates the government's identity with the people.

• Primary - also called direct democracy.  In a small territory, direct democracy can be practiced with every quaslified citizen participating in the deliberations of government.  This was the original democracy as was done in Athens.  The people and government are one. 
• Republic - but its not easy to have direct governance by the people when the territory is large with also a large number of qualified participants.  To make this run smoothly, there is indirect democracy.  The people elect representatives to become members of government tu rule in their place.  Here the government is accountable to the people.

History of the Discipline from Ancient Greece to the Enlightenment - POL 201 Lecture

Political science disciplinary history identifies an open minded (eclectic view).  It uses the minimalist definition of science which reads:

"systematic enquiry, building toward an ever more highly-differentiated set of ordered propositions about the empirical world” (Goodin and Klingemann, 1996).

Our discipline makes propositions, scientific statements about the world – particularly the political world.  i.e. “Power tends to corrupt, but absolute power corrupts absolutely” (Online Library of Liberty, 2014). The quote originates from John Dalberg Acton.  Also known as Lord Acton, he described people who hold power in his statement.  Leading to a hypothesis that the more power a person holds, the greater the tendency that person has to become corrupt both as a person and in handling affairs of state.

The minimalist definition of science used here is in contrast to the maximalist perspective which qualifies the words “scientific enquiry”, seen above, as the use of only mathematical and experimental methods.  To use the minimalist view is a mature way of accepting the variety of systematically built ideas since the time of ancient Greece to the present.  The progress part of the perspective helps us identify where the improvements were.  So let us begin at the 1^st two points of the timeline.  I will not write the specifics that can simply be read from the book.  This lecture is about insights in understanding it.

• First a note on time:
• Greece – ancient time (start approx.. 400 - 001 B.C.)
• Rome – Early Middle Ages (Start of A.D. 001-499)
• Medieval – Middle Ages (approx. 500-1299)
• Renaissance – Late Middle Ages (1300-1599)
• Enlightenment – Early Modern (1600)
• Modern – 19^th Century (1800)

Greece and Rome and the Middle Ages

Plato and Aristotle did classify governments.  Here they tried to answer: What are the different forms of government, or by what form can we better govern man.  The timeline started with Plato who used metaphysics – Greek ta meta phisika “that which is beyond the physical”.  His process was by way of logical reasoning.  Using the essence of virtues as arguments.  This was somewhat improved by Aristotle who used empiricism by comparing actual constitutions as a process for analysis and answering the question mentioned earlier.  He also makes a somewhat scientific stance when he proposes polities as solutions to the problem of governance mimicking a doctor prescribing medicine (Almond, 1996).

But there was something missing, the several polis of the Hellenes (Greek nation) was a small world in the Aegean part of Europe.  These philosophers may have had the advantage of discourse, but they were big fish living in a small pond.  The rise of empire through Alexander solved this by expanding the known world across continents (Europe, Africa, Asia).  From this, the Stoics, a school of Philosophy began the ideas of 1) Universal Humanity and 2) Natural Law. 

The first allows us to assume that there is a common essence of what makes man, wherever man may be in the world.  The second is that we humans, by using our intellect and reason can deduce principles from nature. 

I.e. Aristotle proposed that “man is by nature political” (Online Library of Liberty, 2014) such statement is based on the essence of man as a social being who lives in the polis (city-state).  This is because man has a need to make himself better.  And in order to attain a better life, he needs other people, and must please other people who happen to have their own concerns.  Thus a political relationship exists among all humans.

Other such examples are – All men want to be treated justly.  Government requires legitimacy.

These two begins the 2 scientific questions which become the theme of almost every political idea.  1) What are the forms of polity? 2) What are the standards used to evaluate polity?  Answer: 1) Aristotle’s 6 real types (which will change as time progresses).  2) Principles of Universal Humanity and Natural Law (which will have new ideas in time).

Both Plato and Aristotle contributes to us the theory of mixed constitutions as the best polity.  This will carry to Rome during the time of Cicero (Rome) and St. Thomas Aquinas (Middle Ages), with Venice as the best proof of the theory in practice.

The Renaissance

The time when Europe is renewing the lost knowledge and art of the past, which was destroyed during the dark ages.  Machiavelli becomes the father of modern political science because of his value-free politics.  Before him, political philosophers (note that practitioners were not yet called scientists then) evaluate polity as pure (good) or corrupt (bad).  Machiavelli is a realist, it’s not about good or bad.  It’s all about what actually gets results.

He was followed by Bodin who in turn made the polemic (philosophical attack) on mixed constitutions by reasoning (with evidence) that such mixed polities were actually authoritarian.

The Enlightenment

The beginning of reason eclipsing metaphysics. The two fathers of opposing state of nature/social contract theories Hobbes and Locke provides the progress in our history through the strength of their logical rationalism.  Both have different opinions of humanity and the state of nature, and yet they were able to theorize the legitimate purpose of government.  Locke’s ideas would eventually become foundation of the U.S. and the 1987 Philippine Constitutions.

Locke, with Montesquieu (title of Charles de Secondat, Baron of Montesquieu), and Publius (pen name of the 3 Federalist writers James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, and John Jay) also added to disciplinary improvement through actual testing of the philosophies of the past in the foundation of new government – the United States. 

Locke’s was the social contract, and his version of the power of government.

Montesquieu formalized the separation of powers.

The Federalists explained the uses of a federal republic.

All three combined produced the polity of presidential and federal system of government.

The achievements of this time period also include the improvement of the science-like approach used by the philosophers.  There was the emphasis of balance in the separation of powers.  And the use of logical equation-like reasoning of x+y=z [separation of powers + checks and balance = liberty (Almond)].

Note: Pls. post questions of clarifications and inquiry on the comment box.

References:

Almond, G. (1996). Political Science: History of the Discipline. In R. Goodin, & H. Dieter-Klingemann, A New Handbook of Political Science (pp. 3-49). New York: Oxford University Press.

Goodin, R. & H. Dieter-Klingemann (1996). Political Science: The Discipline. In R. Goodin, & H. Dieter-Klingemann, A New Handbook of Political Science (pp. 3-49). New York: Oxford University Press.

Online Library of Liberty (2014, April 10). Acton-Creighton Correspondence (1887). Retrieved from Online Library of Liberty: http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/acton-creighton-correspondence-1887?q=power+corrupts#

--- (2014, April 10) Introduction to The Politics of Aristotle, trans. into English with introduction, marginal analysis, essays, notes and indices by B. Jowett. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1885. 2 vols. Vol. 1: http://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/aristotle-s-politics?q=aristotle#

The People - PGC Lecture

The Philippines based on the constitution is a Republic type of democracy.  Both the preamble and Article II attest to this.  Basically, it is a "rule by the people".  But what does to rule mean? And who are the people?  If we look it up, the first question can be answered technically through Article V, and the second can be answered through section IV.

Since the Philippines is a democracy, the people are called citizens.  If it was under a monarchy, they would be called subjects, since the people will then be subject to the rule of another.  There are four kinds of citizens differentiated on how they became Filipinos (Art. IV sec. 1).  For citizens by birth, the general rule applied is Jus sanguinis (the rule of blood relationship as opposed to rule of birthplace).

Citizenship can be aquired voluntarily and involuntarily.  But what is citizenship? It's a political concept.  By being a citizen, citizenship is a process whereby the state grants a person rights and privileges.  Since it's a grant. It can be lost involuntarily or renounced voluntarily (see De Leon). And lost citizenship can also be gained through the process of repatriation.  Naturalization though applies to a person who seeks citizenship from a state for the first time (he / she has not lost citizenship from that state).

Do citizens rule in Philippine democracy?

Such is a complex question.  Let's take a look at the difference between Article IV and V.  Citizens are have rights, privileges and duties, and are protected by the state.  The bill of rights (Article III) grants people the freedom of speech - particularly to voice out their ideas on how government should be.  Article II places supremacy of civilian authority over military authority.  These are manifestations of indirect rule.

Direct rule is exercised by "the people" when they use their right of suffrage.  The 3 powers of government are not usually wielded by the hands of the people.  It is in the hands of the administration.  But who put the administration in office?

The people in terms of suffrage and in terms of citizenship are different.  Article V states who have the right of suffrage, and Article IV tells us who are citizens (see De Leon).  All who can exercise suffrage must be citizens, but not all citizens can exercise suffrage (1st sentence of Art V, sec. 1).  It is a right and obligation given to those who fit the requirements.

Suffrage is voting (THERE IS NO WORD CALLED VOTATION!!!), and election is a a kind of suffrage.  There are four other kinds of the exercise of suffrage: Plebiscite, Referendum, Initiative and Recall.

Plebiscite, Referendum, and Initiative apply to law making.  Here the people participate and wield the power to make laws.  In Plebiscite and Referendum, the people gain the power to approve laws.  In Initiative, the people gain the power to directly propose laws.  Recall is the reverse of election, wherein the the people may directly remove by the proper procedure a public official before the end of his / her term.

So who are "the people"?  Ask, "based on what context?"

The technicalities of citizenship and suffrage can be supplemented through De Leon.

Please raise questions through the comment box.

Conflict Resolution: Approaches and Strategies Reading

Reading can be downloaded here:

http://webworld.unesco.org/water/wwap/pccp/cd/pdf/negotiation_mediation_facilitation/alternative_dispute_resolution_approaches.pdf

Prelims Coverage

Check out syllabus:

PGC:

• Units 1-4 (unit 4 is discussed online)
• Latin Maxims

POL 201:

• Unit 1-4
• Robert's Rules - Only the table of motions (precedence, interruption, votes, etc.)

POL 241:

• Units 1-2 and until part D of unit 3.
• Federalism
• Sunni Shia Divide

Prelim Martial Law Declaration

Prelims of classes under my instruction will be administered on September 9, 2014 and September 12, 2014.  Each section's schedule will be finalized on Monday and Tuesday (September 1 and 2, 2014).  Here are general policies for all classes concerned:

• Be on time.  Late students will be given 10 point deduction.
• Most of you by now have already taken a quiz under me.  You were told that there is suspension of due process for people attempting to cheat.  In two separate sections, there were students who still attempted to do such.  This means that during prelims, to violate the anti-cheating instructions will merit deductions if not outright failure for said exam.
• All concerns must be addressed to the professor.  These include questions of inquiry and technical concerns.  Logically, seatmates are not to be asked.  To ask seatmates for any reason constitutes cheating under Prelim Martial Law policy.
• All students of the section must already be in line by the e-leap room at the 2nd floor of St. Raymund building by the appointed time.  Students not in line by then are considered late.  Students not in proper place will receive the same penalty.
• Since the exam is an eleap exam, students will come in to the eleap room without causing unnecessary conversational noise. Every instance will merit the ENTIRE CLASS TO GET 2 PTS DEDUCTION for every instance of a need for reprimand.
• Upon entering the eleap room, open the computer and log-in to eleap.  Observe technical problems and wait to be entertained by the professor.
• As practiced during the quizzes, each row will be asked for technical problems before the exam commences.  Those with technical problems will be transferred to a different computer. 
• During the exam, students are to focus only on their exam as displayed on the monitor and not entertain the students in their immediate surroundings.  There are many ways to rest your eyes without having to look at your neighbors, such as closing your eyes or looking up (which actually relieves tension). Violation constitutes an attempt to cheat.

Tips and Clarifications: Writing in Political Science

1. All data/information/ideas that is not yours should be cited.
2. If a certain information is general knowledge, Google it first, using the exact wording, to find out the origin of that idea.  If you can't recall, ask around; if you still can't, then don't use it.  If you find it, cite it.  If there's no actual original source, then identify it in your writing as "commonly known" or any similar wording.
3. Information that you know from experience is different from data that you learned from someone (which is also an experience).  For example, you know that traffic is congested in Manila everytime you commute.  This is your own personal experience, which you can write without need for citation. But, as another example, the idea that there was a hostage situation at Manila Hotel because a friend mentioned it to you is not personal experience.  You need to search for it and cite the news that mentions it.
4. The paper or thesis is original because it is your own thought.  But it gets filled with citations because of the necessity for proof.  The tendency is a discussion that is made of paraphrase from various sources.  Such practice is wrong.  
5. A good paper must discuss your idea, and then you mention other sources to prove.  One example is: I'm writing on the negative effects of political raiment (power created through image).  I'll talk about how 1) either too much self-importance, and 2) too little use of use practical wisdom.  To prove my 1st claim, I'll cite explanations by UNESCO (2003) regarding mistakes made by diplomats and negotiators when they make decisions during negotiations based on how they will look to their constitutents instead of focusing on the goal.  Then I'll also cite facts from Inquirer (2014) and GMA news (2014) regarding fashion mistakes at the SONA to prove the 2nd claim.

• Sample for #3:   

     Political raiment is a tool, and like any other it can cause both positive and negative effects. And as a tool, it causes negative effects when mishandled.  There are two factors that cause the negative effects of political raiment: 1)  too much self-importance, and 2) too little use of use practical wisdom.

     Sometimes, one gets too focused on maintaining personal power that they fail in doing their job.  This extends to the attention one gives to his or her political image or stature.  UNESCO (2003) gives a practical explanation when they discussed how a negotiator can make a mistake during international negotiations when they get are emotionally baited by opposing negotiators.  When pride gets hit, people get emotional, they miss focusing on their goal (sample Spratly Islands settlement) and end up personally engaging in a verbal exchange of aggression with the other negotiator.

     

Sunni and Shia Divide - Comparative Politics in Transition

Council on Foreign Relations Interactive Infoguide

http://www.cfr.org/peace-conflict-and-human-rights/sunni-shia-divide/p33176#!/

Grading Categories for POL201 Paper - What Makes It Political?

Reminders:
You are to prove something in human life that is not usually political as political.  Samples are shoes, penguins, watching anime, planting trees.  If your topic is already obvious as political you have high risk of a failed paper.

Follow all previous lessons on paper writing.

Good luck.

Edit well.

GRADING:

Grade Categories:

Format - 5 (impeccable overall output - see FORMAT in syllabus rubric)

Bibliography and In-text Citations - 5 (see CITATION in syllabus rubric: plagiarized automatically fails)

Introduction - 5 (Creative and Attractive - see COMPOSITION in syllabus rubric)
Discussion - 15 (Argument, Explanations, Samples - see CONTENT in syllabus rubric)
Conclusion - 5 (Insightful)

TOTAL of 35 pts.

Academic papers - Writing in the Discipline

What are Academic Papers?

One of the skills that you as a Political Science graduate must master is writing academic papers. They are also known as term papers, think pieces, thought papers, or simply papers. Here in the undergrad, paper writing can serve as training for the defining output of a bachelor's degree - an undergraduate thesis. It also serves you whichever you  choose among the myriad of professions available to a thomasian AB (PS) degree holder.  In political science, it is one of the essential components that make the discipline a science.

Essentially, an academic paper is a written composition of your thoughts about a particular topic or in answer to a particular question. But it is not an essay that simply spans several pages. And it is not simply an opinion.  It must either be rich or rigorous, clearly narrates or discusses the ideas, organized and follows the standard format of the discipline, the institution, and the course professor.

The content of a paper has a particular thesis as its heart. Originating from Greek, the word thesis attempts to lay down or propose an idea that can be phrased as a single statement. This thesis must be supported by premises thereby completing a set argument. This argument when presented and subsequently passes scrutiny becomes either a theory (Kant's theory of perpetual peace), a law (Newton's laws of physics, Say's law of the market), or a policy (no plastic policy, RH law, anti-money laundering act).

Examples of theses.

• All governments need a military to function.
• Corruption in the Philippines hinders economic development.
• Political dynasties should be allowed because they establish an ordered  social hierarchy.

From these ideas, you can then write several paragraphs that support arguments about it.  Each of these paragraphs belong under sub-headings in the discussion or body of the paper (see Three main headings: Introduction, Discussion, Conclusion below).
.

E,g, for "All government need a military to function."

1. I'll discuss the purpose of a military and how it serves the purpose of the state.
2. I'll discuss stable states with strong militaries.
3. I'll discuss failed states with weak militaries.

Personally, I consider academic paper writing within the global political science community as a participating in a debate.  A thesis proposes.  Eventually another person might write a countervailing argument, which becomes the antithesis.  As scholars and scientists continue to do their research, a new thesis or antithesis can be found, or eventually a synthesis can be formed uniting the working components of a thesis and its' antithesis.

Here are important things to keep in mind in order to write a paper that's acceptable in the discipline.

• Follow the format.

Each discipline and each professor has a preferred style or form. When a professor gives you a format to follow, then by all means follow it. If there's no format, then follow the basic style.  Basic standards for format (particularly for me) are:

Font Style and Size - Times new Roman 12 / Calibri 11

Spacing - Double

Margins - 1" on all sides

Paper Size - Short Bond Paper

For courses that I handle, I require a different set of margins to compensate for my comments during checking. Please see the syllabus for my complete set of paper format requirements.

• Make sure you understand and answer the question or discuss the theme of the paper.

Many papers fail through this initial test.  Some students simply google everything that they can find in relation to the topic, and mash it in a rational order to produce a paper.  That automatically ends in a failed grade. Yes there can be a few grades for organizing it but the required item was not submitted.  It's similar to a math question where a students provide a very long and correct equation and yet at the end, the answer was incorrect.   

Remember your thesis, support it and explain it.  That is what is meant by "discuss".  If you're talking about examples, then describe them in detail.  If it's an event, narrate it in such a way that you weave an interesting factual story.  All through out, your paragraphs convey the answers to the question/s or theme/s set by the professor for you to write about.

Also remember, the answer must match the question.  If there are several questions, make sure you answer all in the entire discussion, in sequence and with "signposts".  Signposts are clues that lead the reader that this particular paragraph is about a particular topic.  This can be done by using sub-headings, or by expressing it through the paragraphs topic sentence.

• Be direct.

A thesis proposes an idea and it starts with a question. Thus the center of your world in writing a paper is that particular idea that answers that particular question. When your professor posts a question to be answered or discussed in your paper, answer it with reason and backed up with facts. The research for appropriate principles and facts gives your paper rigor. The capacity to reason out your idea in such a way that it enlightens the reader rather than make the person further scratch his or her gives your paper insight.

Yes, you did the research. Read so many books to the point of monopolizing the books at the Benavides library. Yes, your reason is flawless. But all this are for nothing if you can't communicate it well. The basic of successful communication is by being direct and simple. Keep your sentences simple.  Do not use compound complex sentences. Here's one test. If your sentence has more than one idea, then it's already complex. Thus, the rule of thumb is - one sentence = one idea.

The same holds true with your paragraphs.  One paragraph = one topic.  And one paragraph = one set of interconnected ideas.  The paragraph has a topic stick to it.  The moment you add a totally different topic, then that's time to add a separate paragraph.  For example, you are discussing problems in the 3 branches of the presidential system.  Each branch must have its own paragraph.

Never ever write a sentence or a paragraph that spans the entire page or pages of the paper. One that spans on page one, then puts the period at the last page.  I once encountered and failed a 3rd year student's paper who actually did the that.     

• Three main headings: Introduction, Discussion, Conclusion.

These 3 main headings are the basic headings.  If the paper is a map, headings are location markers.  It tells the reader what to expect from the succeeding paragraphs until the next heading is encountered.

The Introduction gives the reader the gist of what the paper is about. It tells the topic, and gives a backgrounder why such a topic has a paper being written about it. It raises issues for discussion.  And most importantly raises the question or declares the thesis of the paper. A standard Introduction should be 1-2 short paragraphs only.

The Discussion contains the bulk of the paper. It is actually divided into several subheadings. Each of which are followed by 1-2 substantial paragraphs that support the thesis at the heart of the paper. This is where the reasoning and the proofs based on factual sources will be placed.

The Conclusions synthesizes the elements of the premises leading towards affirmation of the thesis of the paper. It answers the question raised in the Introduction and attempts to recommend suggestions for for plan's of action or for future researches. A basic conclusion is only 1 paragraph.       

• Practice the right style of citation.

An academic paper is graded in terms of the student's insight, rigor and rhetoric. And rigor in research is not simply the copying of text and putting them together into a coherent sequence on your paper. The data that you read from books and other sources must be rephrased in the form of either a precis or a paraphrase. Once rephrased, the text must be appropriately cited using APA (American Psychological Association) style. Failure to do so can be considered as plagiarism.  Sometimes, you might need to directly quote the statement of a canonical writer.  Such direct quote must be limited to a sentence or at least no more than three lines of a paragraph.  Direct quotes must be in quotation marks, and again must be appropriately cited.

Also note that MS Word 2007 onward has a tool for creating parenthetical citations and biblographies. And that NOT ALL TYPES OF REFERENCES are can be inserted via the MS Word tool.  Sometimes, you will have to use the manual way of citing.  N.D. or "No Date" for web sources are not acceptable.

Always cite reported or secondary sourced quotes appropriately.  For example, a present day (let's say 2003) printing of English translations of Plato's Republic is not cited as (Plato, 2014).  Use the name of the translator, and mention Plato as part of the sentence/statement.

E.g. - In his Republic, Plato emphasizes the importance of ruling as a duty and not just a privilege to the point of pointing out the ultimate consequence of not accepting such duty - which is that someone inferior might end up taking the mantle of ruling (Lee trans., 2003)

• Cite everything.

In line with the plagiarism risk above. It is ALWAYS advised to cite everything that is not yours. Images from google, from Encarta. Maps, flags, pictures, diagrams.  And there's no such thing as common knowledge about a particular quote. A serious academic paper has a clean trail of sources of where a particular information or statement came from.

Please note that writing the name of a person after a quote is not proper. e.g "It is better to be feared than loved, if you cannot have both." - Niccolo Machivelli

The right way is to cite is by knowing where was it written that Machiavelli actually said that.  Hence, there must be a translator's or editor's surname in parenthesis followed by the book's (in this case "The Prince") year of publication.    

Thesis Advisee A.Y. 2014-2015

For expediency, even if appointment has not been signed, all of my thesis group advisees should  meet with me as one big group for general orientation, tomorrow after 3:00 p.m. but not later than 5:00 p.m. Talk about the time, inform me via text message.

Be sure you know the advising policies.

Search and join the FB group "Athenaeum" which is the FB group for my advisees.  It also contains tips, so you might as well browse all posts there.

Prof. Roces' Articles

After I sent the first email to invite prof. Roces for the seminar, she sent two digital copies of her published journal articles on the politics of dress.  It's for sharing to the class.  At that time, this was distributed to the class on Comparative Politics and Government in Asia and Africa.  Now I open access to these articles to all Political Science students interested in the topic.

Here's the link:

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B30MHtoilXd4WXkyVWN3cm9BVVE&usp=sharing

Comparative Politics Paper (Level 1)

As mentioned in Comparative Politics in Transition class, your paper for the prelims period will focus on the first two reasons why we compare.  This trains you with foundation skills in a developmental succession.  A good comparative politics paper is in depth and original work.  You will not be merely repeating what information is in textbooks but rather produce data using the comparative method.  In this case, you will be describing contextually and classifying (raw) data.

LOGISTICS:

Date of Submission:  August 26, 2014

Place: In Class

NO COVER PAGE 3-4 PAGES:

NEW FORMAT: upper part of page 1.

 NAME OF COUNTRY

Creative Title

A Single Country Comparative (Contextual Description / Classification) Study of (insert Political Object of Study in the Country)

Researcher: Name of Student (Surname, First name)

Professor: Ronald M. Castillo

1st Semester 2014-2015

Your paper's text beginning with the Introduction immediately follows.

Follow the capitalization, boldface, center.  Times New Roman size 12.  1.5 spacing.  1.5 right margin, .5 left margin 1.0 top and bottom margins.  Justified paragraphs.  Appropriate indention.  No extra spaces.

GRADING:

Metric: 

1-2 (1-3) submitted the wrong work

3-4 (4-6) substantial flaws (unproven claims, simply reported common knowledge that can be gained from general references)

5-6 (7-9) average work, several common errors, accomplished the task and nothing more.  No student insight. 

7-8 (10-12) very good work, very minimal (1-2) errors, there is insight in student's ideas.  

9-10 (13-15) Excellent (added something new to the study of comparative politics)

Grade Categories:

Format - 10 (creative impeccable overall output)

Bibliography - 10 (rich and well documented + note: plagiarized automatically fails)

Contextual Description - 15 [described in detail and orderly (high level of abstraction if not multiple instances of comparison) + citation)] OR Classification - 15 [typologized data into correct data containers (high level of abstraction if not multiple instances of comparison) + proof/samples)

TOTAL of 35 pts.

CONTENT WRITING GUIDE:

First what you definitely need:  Secondary (if not primary) literatures (sources) that provide details (not just general/overview) discussions on the topic.  Most common are news (print, audio, video), and documentaries.  There are also several country studies in book form at our library.  Again, prefer to use sources that are in depth.

Just like any paper, this must have the basic 3 main headings.  For this paper, it will be: Introduction, Discussion and Conclusion (you will have an analytic conclusion even if it's description or classification, see below).

So what are we writing?

There must be a research direction.  Yes, you already have a country.  But as defended in the cosplay, you must focus on one particular political phenomenon.  Take for example: the Republic of Nonamia, I'm writing about the struggle of LGBT interest groups.  Hence, what I'll be contextually describing is this struggle of the nonamians.  I'll answer the question of which institutions did the interest group lobby with?  How did they lobby?

The data will also have to reflect on the sources type.  An example is a political event, which must be sourced from the news, and other books with narratives.   A political system on the other hand will be sourced from the constitution (primary source).  Another source for a political system are country studies (secondary source).  Be mindful that if you use country studies, then pick the best (which must be info rich).  If the country profile is not info rich, you'll need other sources to depict the dynamics of that system (again sourced from the news or related data source).

If it’s too basic that anyone with an encyclopedia can answer it, then why write the paper?

For the Introduction, you are given only one - two paragraph/s to give a background. This should 1) make the reader want to read, 2) inform the reader about the basics of your country, and 3) let the reader know what to expect in the discussion (is it description or classification?  What means did you use do it?).

For the Discussion you may choose either to do a contextual description or classification.

Generally comparison finds out things that are “most similar” or “most different” between objects being studied.  Both can be used whether you are doing description or classification.  But the question is what object are you studying?  This helps determine whether you will use description or classification.  You also need to ask what particular characteristics are your objects of study similar or different?  Sometimes, you need to find something deeper than what is obvious, not just simply relying on the objects as being both elections or they are both leaders, or they differ in time or differ place (though location can be a factor/variable in some studies).        

A contextual description will be a detailed “narrative”.  It can be one or more of the following.  1) Tells a detailed story of a political event.  2) Explains the roles and powers a political actors and/or institutions.  3) Tells the dynamics between political actors and/or institutions. 4) Described in detail the behavior of a political actor, institution or group of people.  A paper that used contextual description must provide a paradigm or conceptual framework that illustrates what was described.  Your research must produce “concepts” or general ideas that surfaced as you have dug deep in order to describe the politics of your chosen country.

A paradigm is a diagrammatized idea.  Using symbols or drawings, you will make an abstract idea more concrete, or at least help create a picture in the mind of the reader.  Variables in your paper must appear in the diagram along with a way to show relationships or dynamics between the variables (see Figure 1).  The size of your paradigm, table or matric will range from 1/4 - 1/2 of a page.

A paper focusing on classification explains both 1) how and 2) why you placed a certain political phenomenon, behavior, actor, or institution under a certain category or “data container”.  If you chose to do classification, you must provide one data treatment tool that you used to classify.  The common way is by using a table or comparative matrix.  The table or matrix must contain highlights of indicators (qualities) or measures (quantities) that your variables exhibit showing an easier way of comparing or classifying (see table 1, table 6, and matrix 1).  Your research must produce either typologies or sub-typologies of political events, behaviors, actors, or institutions.

For your conclusion, you are to simply sum up your new concepts or new typologies while briefly explaining the scientific method that you used to accomplish such.  It tells the reader what you found out while doing your research and how you were able to find out such information.