it isn’t actually a research paper. As a general
matter, research papers in political science involve analyzing data in order to test hypotheses about how
something works in an effort to determine whether our hypotheses are supported by the data. You are
not expected to do that here.
Instead, what you will actually do can be more correctly described as writing the literature
review of a research project. In other words, you will explore existing research in political science to
determine what political scientists have to say about how something (your chosen topic) works. Once
you have identified and read appropriate sources (typically political science journal articles), you will
digest and mold what you learn into a coherent narrative that explains our current understanding of the
topic. Your goal should be to produce a paper that someone with no prior knowledge of the topic can
read and come away feeling like they understand how it works.
Note – and this is a VERY important note: You will NOT simply string together a series of
summaries of the sources you find. While it will be very useful for you to prepare a summary of each
source for your own use, you will need to spend quite a bit of time thinking carefully about how your
sources fit – or don’t fit – together in order to compose your narrative. Perhaps political scientists
disagree even as to what the fundamental theoretical foundation is that best explains how your topic
works. If so, you will need to discuss the different perspectives, the pros and cons of each, and the
evidence that supports – or doesn’t support – them. Perhaps political scientists agree as to the basic
theoretical approach but disagree as to the applicability of that approach in specific contexts. If so, you
will need to discuss the contexts in which it works, those in which it doesn’t, and what we know about
why that is. Finally, and this is another very important point, you will very likely NOT be able to use all of
the first sources you find. As you read each source, you will need to keep asking yourself what it adds to
your understanding of the topic. In doing so you will need to consider carefully whether each source
actually addresses your chosen topic. For those that do not, you will need to move on from them and
find other sources. If you need help finding sources, librarians really are happy to help guide you!
So far this seems to be more about what NOT to do than what you should actually do. That’s
fair, so let me offer some pointers that will hopefully help get you headed in the right direction.
First, choose a topic that actually interests you. This is basic human nature, but you will find it
much easier to invest the time and effort needed if you are working on a topic that you find interesting.
Since you’re putting yourself through the experience of taking a course on the presidency, I presume
there are at least some things about the presidency that you find interesting. it isn’t actually a research paper. As a general
matter, research papers in political science involve analyzing data in order to test hypotheses about how
something works in an effort to determine whether our hypotheses are supported by the data. You are
not expected to do that here.
Instead, what you will actually do can be more correctly described as writing the literature
review of a research project. In other words, you will explore existing research in political science to
determine what political scientists have to say about how something (your chosen topic) works. Once
you have identified and read appropriate sources (typically political science journal articles), you will
digest and mold what you learn into a coherent narrative that explains our current understanding of the
topic. Your goal should be to produce a paper that someone with no prior knowledge of the topic can
read and come away feeling like they understand how it works.
Note – and this is a VERY important note: You will NOT simply string together a series of
summaries of the sources you find. While it will be very useful for you to prepare a summary of each
source for your own use, you will need to spend quite a bit of time thinking carefully about how your
sources fit – or don’t fit – together in order to compose your narrative. Perhaps political scientists
disagree even as to what the fundamental theoretical foundation is that best explains how your topic
works. If so, you will need to discuss the different perspectives, the pros and cons of each, and the
evidence that supports – or doesn’t support – them. Perhaps political scientists agree as to the basic
theoretical approach but disagree as to the applicability of that approach in specific contexts. If so, you
will need to discuss the contexts in which it works, those in which it doesn’t, and what we know about
why that is. Finally, and this is another very important point, you will very likely NOT be able to use all of
the first sources you find. As you read each source, you will need to keep asking yourself what it adds to
your understanding of the topic. In doing so you will need to consider carefully whether each source
actually addresses your chosen topic. For those that do not, you will need to move on from them and
find other sources. If you need help finding sources, librarians really are happy to help guide you!
So far this seems to be more about what NOT to do than what you should actually do. That’s
fair, so let me offer some pointers that will hopefully help get you headed in the right direction.
First, choose a topic that actually interests you. This is basic human nature, but you will find it
much easier to invest the time and effort needed if you are working on a topic that you find interesting.
Since you’re putting yourself through the experience of taking a course on the presidency, I presume
there are at least some things about the presidency that you find interesting. it isn’t actually a research paper. As a general
matter, research papers in political science involve analyzing data in order to test hypotheses about how
something works in an effort to determine whether our hypotheses are supported by the data. You are
not expected to do that here.
Instead, what you will actually do can be more correctly described as writing the literature
review of a research project. In other words, you will explore existing research in political science to
determine what political scientists have to say about how something (your chosen topic) works. Once
you have identified and read appropriate sources (typically political science journal articles), you will
digest and mold what you learn into a coherent narrative that explains our current understanding of the
topic. Your goal should be to produce a paper that someone with no prior knowledge of the topic can
read and come away feeling like they understand how it works.
Note – and this is a VERY important note: You will NOT simply string together a series of
summaries of the sources you find. While it will be very useful for you to prepare a summary of each
source for your own use, you will need to spend quite a bit of time thinking carefully about how your
sources fit – or don’t fit – together in order to compose your narrative. Perhaps political scientists
disagree even as to what the fundamental theoretical foundation is that best explains how your topic
works. If so, you will need to discuss the different perspectives, the pros and cons of each, and the
evidence that supports – or doesn’t support – them. Perhaps political scientists agree as to the basic
theoretical approach but disagree as to the applicability of that approach in specific contexts. If so, you
will need to discuss the contexts in which it works, those in which it doesn’t, and what we know about
why that is. Finally, and this is another very important point, you will very likely NOT be able to use all of
the first sources you find. As you read each source, you will need to keep asking yourself what it adds to
your understanding of the topic. In doing so you will need to consider carefully whether each source
actually addresses your chosen topic. For those that do not, you will need to move on from them and
find other sources. If you need help finding sources, librarians really are happy to help guide you!
So far this seems to be more about what NOT to do than what you should actually do. That’s
fair, so let me offer some pointers that will hopefully help get you headed in the right direction.
First, choose a topic that actually interests you. This is basic human nature, but you will find it
much easier to invest the time and effort needed if you are working on a topic that you find interesting.
Since you’re putting yourself through the experience of taking a course on the presidency, I presume
there are at least some things about the presidency that you find interesting. it isn’t actually a research paper. As a general
matter, research papers in political science involve analyzing data in order to test hypotheses about how
something works in an effort to determine whether our hypotheses are supported by the data. You are
not expected to do that here.
Instead, what you will actually do can be more correctly described as writing the literature
review of a research project. In other words, you will explore existing research in political science to
determine what political scientists have to say about how something (your chosen topic) works. Once
you have identified and read appropriate sources (typically political science journal articles), you will
digest and mold what you learn into a coherent narrative that explains our current understanding of the
topic. Your goal should be to produce a paper that someone with no prior knowledge of the topic can
read and come away feeling like they understand how it works.
Note – and this is a VERY important note: You will NOT simply string together a series of
summaries of the sources you find. While it will be very useful for you to prepare a summary of each
source for your own use, you will need to spend quite a bit of time thinking carefully about how your
sources fit – or don’t fit – together in order to compose your narrative. Perhaps political scientists
disagree even as to what the fundamental theoretical foundation is that best explains how your topic
works. If so, you will need to discuss the different perspectives, the pros and cons of each, and the
evidence that supports – or doesn’t support – them. Perhaps political scientists agree as to the basic
theoretical approach but disagree as to the applicability of that approach in specific contexts. If so, you
will need to discuss the contexts in which it works, those in which it doesn’t, and what we know about
why that is. Finally, and this is another very important point, you will very likely NOT be able to use all of
the first sources you find. As you read each source, you will need to keep asking yourself what it adds to
your understanding of the topic. In doing so you will need to consider carefully whether each source
actually addresses your chosen topic. For those that do not, you will need to move on from them and
find other sources. If you need help finding sources, librarians really are happy to help guide you!
So far this seems to be more about what NOT to do than what you should actually do. That’s
fair, so let me offer some pointers that will hopefully help get you headed in the right direction.
First, choose a topic that actually interests you. This is basic human nature, but you will find it
much easier to invest the time and effort needed if you are working on a topic that you find interesting.
Since you’re putting yourself through the experience of taking a course on the presidency, I presume
there are at least some things about the presidency that you find interesting.
