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.