POLS 878 Conducting and Analyzing Fieldwork

in Developing Countries, Spring 2009

Instructor: John Kennedy Classroom: Blake 212 Time: 5:00-7:50 Mondays Course Number: 83977

Office: 312 Blake Office Tel: 864-9030 Office Hours: WF 3-5 pm E-mail: kennedy1@ku.edu

Course Description:

This course is designed to teach graduate students (you) how to conduct fieldwork in developing countries and evaluate the results of other scholars who collected data in non-traditional settings. In this class, we will cover practical topics such as a research design, applying for funding and how to establish collaborative relationships with local researchers. In addition, we will examine the conceptual as well as concrete problems associated with data collection and analysis (quantitative and qualitative) in developing countries. This course will be useful to students at any stage of their research. You will not only learn how to conduct fieldwork, but you will also learn how to better evaluate the research findings of other scholars and published works.

This course will cover five general areas of fieldwork and analysis. One is writing a clear research design that can be realistically carried out in the field. This includes a testable theory, clear research question (that can be answered) and identifying the measures and the type of data needed to answer the question. Only after we have a clear question, can you address the appropriate method (quantitative or qualitative or both). The main point is that we let the research question guide the method. Second is applying for funding. You will learn how to use your research design for grant writing. The key is to convince granting institutions that your research is important and the fieldwork can be completed within the allotted time. Third is demonstrating how to establish initial contacts and developing long-term collaborative relationships. It is important to identify people from your host country who are interested in the same field of study or topic whether they are in universities, non-government organizations or government offices. Fourth is collecting data in the field. There are a number of elephant traps and pitfalls when conducting fieldwork in developing countries and especially in new or non-democracies. American textbooks provide examples of applying data collection techniques, such as surveys, in the most conducive and cooperative settings such as North America or Western Europe. However, unique problems arise when applying these methods in developing countries. The fifth part will evaluate the research findings of other scholars and published works. Given the problems associated with training local researchers, data collection and the translation issues in cross-national surveys, how do we evaluate the data results from other studies (beyond the statistical significance of their variables)?

Course Work: You will write two papers and complete several smaller written exercises. One paper is a complete research design. The other paper will be a grant proposal that will include an in-class presentation. The smaller written exercises are based on simple analysis of published research in your respective fields.

Course Requirements:

Grading:

Participation: 15%

Research Design: 25%

Analysis of Published Research Presentation: 20%

Grant Proposal: 25%

Proposal Presentation: 15%

Participation (15%) and Published Research Presentation (20%):

In this seminar, all students will be expected to participate in weekly discussions. In the first few weeks of the course we will focus on fieldwork issues and research design. After the first week, we will assign specific readings (weeks) for student presentations. Depending on the size of the class, each of you will provide at least two summary presentations this semester. In the presentations, students will provide a brief summary of the selected readings and address the strengths and weaknesses of the work, AND how the method or material relates to your own research/proposed fieldwork. Each presenter will write a one-page summary/analysis, and in the conclusion of the one page summary/analysis, the presenter must provide three questions regarding the readings. The presenter must send an e-mail copy (or attachment) of the analysis and the three questions to the whole class the Sunday before the seminar meets.

Research Design (25%)

You will be required to write a 10-15 page research design on any topic related to your current or future research. This is a narrow and focused paper. The design must have a clear research question and you need to demonstrate how you plan to answer it. I will provide an outline for the research design. Make an appointment with me before 3/1.

Grant Proposal (25%) and Presentation (15%)

The grant proposal is filling out an actual application, such as Fulbright, National Science Foundation (NSF), National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) or Social Science Research Council (SSRC), including a full budget and justification for the project. The grant proposals are due on the last day of class May 8^th. One of the requirements for the grant proposal is that you make an appointment to see me and discuss the funding organization you have an interest in applying, your topic and research question (i.e. turning your research design into a professional proposal). On April 28^th (and possibly May 5^th), each student will make a professional 10 minute presentation of their proposals to the class.

Required Texts:

Robert Emerson, Contemporary Field Research: Perspectives and Formulas, (Long

Grove, IL.: Waveland Press, 2001)

Janet Harkness, Fons Van De Vijver and Peter Mohler, Cross-Cultural Survey Methods

(Hoboken, NJ.: John Wiley & Sons, 2003)

Stephen Devereux and John Hoddinott, Fieldwork in Developing Countries (New York, NY.: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992)

A course-packet is available at the Department of Political Science (Room 504).

Suggested Text:

Regina Scheyvens and Donovan Storey, Development Fieldwork: a Practical Guide

(Sage Publications, 2003)

Wayne Fife, Doing Fieldwork: Ethnographic Methods for Research in Developing

Countries and Beyond, (Palgrave Macmillan, 2005)

Martin Bulmer and Donald P. Warwick, Social Research in Developing Countries:

Surveys and Censuses in the Third World (John Wiley & Sons Limited, 1983)

Week 1 (January 26^th): Introduction

We will discuss the course objectives and an overview of the readings and assignments. We will also discuss each of your research interests and reasons for taking the course.

What are your general research goals for your MA or PhD? What are your career goals after the graduate degree? What to you hope to gain from this course?

Week 2 (February 2^nd): The Limitations of Social Science Research in General

Required Reading:

Martin Shipman, “Introduction”, “Chapter 1: Social Research”, “Chapter 2: Scientistic social research” and “Chapter 3: Interpretive social Research” in The Limitations of Social Research (New York, NY.: Longman, 1997), pp. 1-45.

Sandra Harding, “New Feminist Approaches to Social Science Methodologies: An Introduction,” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, vol. 30, no. 4 (2005) pp. 1-7

Harkness et. al. “Chapter 1: Comparative Research” in Cross-Cultural Survey Methods, pp. 3-16.

Kenneth Shepsle and Mark Boncheck, “Introduction” in Analyzing Politics: Rationality, Behavior and Institutions, pp. 5-14

Daniel Little, “Introduction” in Varieties of Social Explanation: An introduction to the Philosophy of Social Science, pp. 1-9

W. Phillips Shively, “Chapter 1: Doing Research” in The Craft of Political Research, pp.1-11

Questions for the Readings (to be discussed in class):

(1a) What is social science? (1b) Given the readings and your own experience, is there a universal social science or can it be country/cultural/gender specific?

(2a) How do the three “short introductions” compare to each other and the Shipman chapters and Harding? (hint: assumptions about human behavior, complexity of society, scientific vs. interpretive and objectivity)

(3a) Can social theories (developed in North America and Western Europe) explain ALL human behavior? (3b) What are the consequences for social science research for a “yes” or “no” answer?

Suggested Readings:

John Law, After Method: Mess in Social Science Research, (Routledge, 2004)

Andrew Sayer, Method in Social Science: a Realist Approach (Routledge, 2002)

“Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminism-epistemology/

Diane Wolf (ed.), Feminist Dilemmas in Fieldwork (Westview Press, 1996)

Week 3 (February 9^th): From the Textbook to the Field: Applied Theories and Approaches to Fieldwork in Developing Countries

Required Reading:

Gary King et al., “The Science in Social Science” in Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research, (Princeton University Press, 1994), pp. 1-33

Alan Bryman, “The Research Question in Social Research: What is its Role?” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 10, No. 1, (February, 2007), pp. 5-20

Emerson, “Introduction” and Chapter 1 “The Face of Contemporary Ethnography” in Robert Emerson, Contemporary Field Research, pp. 1-53

Stephen Devereux and John Hoddinott, “Part 1 Overview: Fieldwork from Start to Finish” in Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 1-40

Gokah, “The Naive Researcher: Doing Social Research in Africa”, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 9, No. 1, (February, 2006), pp. 61-73

Questions for the Readings (to be discussed in class):

(1) How do the different (inductive vs. deductive) approaches vary for fieldwork? Do you agree that inductive is more qualitative and deductive is more quantitative (i.e Emerson and Geertz)? (1a) Can and should all “scientific” research (qualitative and quantitative) be deductive (i.e. King et al.)?

(2) How do the assumptions of deductive qualitative (as well as quantitative) fit with issues and problems that researchers face in the field especially in developing countries? (hint: comparing King et al. with Devereux and Hoddinott)—Also is there a clear definition of developing country?

(3) What approach best fits with your research?

(4) What is the theory you plan to discover or test?

Suggested Readings:

Clifford Geertz, “Thick Description Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture” in Robert Emerson, Contemporary Field Research, pp. 55-75

Ian Dey, Grounding Grounded Theory: Guidelines for Qualitative Inquiry (Academic Press, 1999)

Gary King, Robert Keohane and Sidney Verba, Designing Social Inquiry: Scientific Inference in Qualitative Research, (Princeton University Press, 1994)

Week 4 (February 16^th): Primary Qualitative Methods: Interviews, Participant Observer and Action Research

Required Reading:

Kondo, “How the Problem of ‘Crafting Selves’ Emerged”, in Robert Emerson, Contemporary Field Research, (Chapter 8), pp. 188-202

Warren, “Gender and Fieldwork”, in Robert Emerson, Contemporary Field Research, (Chapter 9), pp. 203-223

Emerson and Pollner, “Constructing Participant/Observer Relations”, in Robert Emerson, Contemporary Field Research, (Chapter 11), pp. 239-259

Elizabeth Francis, “Qualitative Research: Collecting Life Histories” (Chapter 6) in Devereux and Hoddinott, Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 86-101

Karen Ross, “Political Elites and the Pragmatic Paradigm” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 4, No. 2, (2001), pp. 155-166

William F. Whyte, “Advancing Scientific Knowledge Through Participatory Action Research” Sociological Forum, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Sep., 1989), pp. 367-385

Questions for the Readings (to be discussed in class):

(1) What are the advantages and disadvantages of an “outsider” observations and interviews?

(2) What are the advantages and disadvantages of participant observer?

(3) When is participatory action research (PAR) appropriate? (3a) When is it inappropriate? (3b) That is, what kind of problems can arise with PAR in countries with authoritarian or semi-authoritarian regimes?

(4) Which one of these methods is best for your research? How would you apply the methods suggested in your research?

Suggested Readings:

Robert M. Emerson, Rachel l. Fretz and Linda L. Shaw, Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes

(The University of Chicago Press, 1995)

Steinar Kvale, Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, (Sage Publishing, 2008: second edition)

Robin McTaggart, Participatory action research: international contexts and consequences (State University of New York Press, 1997)

Coralie McCormack, “Storying stories: a narrative approach to in-depth interview conversations” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 7, No. 3, July 2004, pp. 219 - 236 (15 pages).

Judith Lapadat, “Problematizing Transcription: Purpose, Paradigm and Quality” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 3, No. 3, (2000), pp. 203-219

William F. Whyte, Learning From the Field: A Guide from Experience (Sage Publication, 1984)

Week 5 (February 23^rd): Case Studies and Secondary Qualitative Methods; History, Documents and Archives

Required Reading:

Mabry, “Case Study in Social Research” Chapter 13 in Alasuutari, Bickamn and Brannen ed., Social Research Methods (Sage Publications, 2008), pp. 214-227

Brent Flyvbjerg, “Five Misunderstandings about Case Study Research” Qualitative Inquiry, Vol. 12, No. 2 (15 pages)

Bornat, “Biographical Methods” Chapter 20 in Alasuutari, Bickamn and Brannen ed., Social Research Methods (Sage Publications, 2008), pp. 344-356

Prior, “Documents and Action” Chapter 28 in Alasuutari, Bickamn and Brannen ed., Social Research Methods (Sage Publications, 2008), pp. 479-492

Heaton, “Secondary Analysis in Qualitative Data” Chapter 30 in Alasuutari, Bickamn and Brannen ed., Social Research Methods (Sage Publications, 2008), pp. 506-519

White and Marsh, “Content Analysis: A Flexible Methodology,” Library Trends 55.1 (2006) 22-45

Stanley Krippner and Jan Weinhold, “Gender Differences in the Content Analysis of 240 Dream Reports from Brazilian Participants in Dream,” Dreaming, Vol. 11, No. 1 ( March, 2001), pp. 35-42

Questions for the Readings (to be discussed in class):

(1) Why are there some many “misconceptions” about case study research?

(2) When is the case study approach appropriate? How would you choose a case for your research?

(3) When would you choose to use the biographical method? Would this fit in your research? If so how?

(4) What are the general challenges in collecting and analyzing secondary qualitative data? Are there a different set of challenges for this research method in developing countries? How do you plan to use secondary data in your research?

(5) How do specific national, cultural and linguistic differences influence the collection and interpretation of secondary data? (i.e. content analysis of news media, documents and formal interviews in the host county’s native language)

(6) How does gender influence the collection and interpretation of secondary data?

Suggested Readings:

Charles Ragin and Howard Becker, What is a Case Study? Exploring the Foundations of Social Inquiry, (Cambridge University Press, 1992)

Philipp Mayring, “Qualitative Content Analysis” Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol 1, No 2 (2000), pp. 1-9

Klaus Krippendorff, Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology (2nd edition) (Sage Publications, 2004)

Week 6 (March 2^nd): Quantitative Methods and Surveys in Developing Countries: Questionnaire Design, Translation and Sampling in the Field

Required Reading:

Anthony Heath, Stephen Fisher, and Shawna Smith, “The Globalization of Public Opinion Research” Annual Review of Political Science Vol. 8 (2005), pp. 297-333

Harkness et. al. Chapters 2-8 in Cross-Cultural Survey Methods, pp. 19-134 (questionnaire design, translation and sampling).

Wendy Olsen, “Random Sampling and Repeat Surveys in South India” (Chapter 4) in Devereux and Hoddinott, Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 57-72

Questions for the Readings (to be discussed in class):

(1) Do Chapters 2-8 in Harkness et. al. fully address problems associated with attitudinal (public opinion) surveys that Heath et al. raised?

(2) What are the issues associated with questionnaire translations? How can they be resolved? Are the problems related to questionnaire design and translation country specific, or are the general problems the same across most countries and cultures?

(3) What are the potential problems with political and social concepts, such as ‘democracy’, ‘representation’ and ‘satisfaction’, in surveys conducted in non-western countries? For example, is the definition of Human Rights universally accepted by leaders and citizens around the globe? If it is universally accepted, then translation of the UN Declaration of HR is a matter of linguistics. However, if it county or culturally specific, then how can we identify the “correct” translation/definition?

(4) What are the potential problems with sampling in developing countries? Can these problems vary by regime type (authoritarian or semi-authoritarian)?

Suggested Readings:

William Foddy, Constructing Questions for Interviews and Questionnaires: Theory and Practice in Social Research (Cambridge University Press, 1993)

Martin Bulmer and Donald Warwick (ed.), Social Research in Developing Countries: Surveys and Censuses in the Third World, (John Wiley & Sons Limited, 1983)

Week 7 (March 9^th): Quantitative Methods and Surveys in Developing Countries: Data Collection and Data Analysis

The reading and discussion for this section are meant for using and evaluating cross-national surveys or surveys conducted by someone else in your specific country. This is helpful for the literature review as well as your analysis.

Required Reading:

Harkness et. al. Chapters 9-13 in Cross-Cultural Survey Methods, pp. 137-204 (Bias and Equivalence, non-response and data collection).

Li, Chung-Yi, “Assessment of non-response bias in a survey of residential magnetic field exposure in Taiwan” Bioelectromagnetics, vol. 28, no. 5 (2007), pp. 340-348

James Lepkowski “Non-observation error in household surveys in developing countries”, Household Sample Surveys in Developing and Transition Countries (2005)

Lockwood, “Facts or Fictions? Fieldwork Relationships and the Nature of Data Collection” (Chapter 11) in Devereux and Hoddinott, Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 164-178

Stephen Devereux, “Observers are Worried: Learning the Language and Counting the People in Northeast Ghana” (Chapter 3) in Devereux and Hoddinott, Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 43-56

Questions for the Readings (to be discussed in class):

(1) How does interviewer training (or lack of training) influence the quality of the survey data? What kind of questions do we need to ask (as consumers of the secondary survey data) to determine the interviewer quality?

(2) Does interviewer training vary across countries and cultures? If so how?

(3) What are the reasons for non-response rates? Can these reasons vary across countries, and cultures? What about with a single country across class, regional and ethnic division? How can we deal with non-response rates in the analysis?

(4) How well does the use of secondary survey data (national or cross national) fit with your research? Do you plan to use or compare your results with a published survey?

Suggested Readings:

Moll, Terence (1992), “Mickey Mouse numbers and inequality research in developing countries”, Journal of Development Studies, Volume 28, Issue 4 (July), pages 689 – 704

Groves et al. Survey Non-Response (John Wiely, 2002)

Lesser, et al. Non-Sampling Error in Surveys (John Wiley, 1992)

Week 8 (March 16^th): Spring Break

No Class

Week 9 (March 23^rd): Access to the Field, Research Designs and Mixed Methods

In the research design, we need to think about the choice of theory, approach and appropriate methods. In addition, it is important to consider how you plan to get access to the field. This includes making personal and institutional ties before you leave for the field. Access to the field is directly related to the feasibility of your research.

Required Reading:

Review/Reread: Devereux and Hoddinott, “Part 1 Overview: Fieldwork from Start to Finish” in Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 1-40

Julia Brannen, “Mixing Methods: The Entry of Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches into the Research Process,” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 8, No. 3, (July 2005), pp. 173-184

Jennifer Mason, “Mixing methods in a qualitatively driven way” Qualitative Research, Vol. 6, No. 1, 9-25 (2006)

Alan Bryman, “Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done?” Qualitative Research, Vol. 6, No. 1, 97-113 (2006)

Harriss, “Talking to Traders about Trade” (Chapter 9) in Devereux and Hoddinott, Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 138-151 (*pay close attention to the letters of introduction in the appendix)

Hoddinott, “Fieldwork Under Time Constraints” (Chapter 5) in Devereux and Hoddinott, Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 73-85

Questions for the Readings (to be discussed in class):

(1) What are the theory, research question and method for your research?

(2) What is the literature on the subject? Here you need to have a clear idea about the “state of the field” in your specific area of study. Has your chosen theory already been tested or developed? Has others conducted the same fieldwork? If so, how does your study differ or expand previous studies? That is, what is the gap (or extension) in the literature you are attempting to fill?

(3) Can your research question be feasibly answered? How do you know when you have answered the question?

(4) How can you get access to the field? What are the possible challenges you might face and how do you plan to overcome these challenges?

(5) What are “mixed methods”? Why and how would you apply this combination?

Suggested Readings:

John Creswell, Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, (Sage Publications, 2003)

Vicki Plano Clark and John Creswell (ed.), The Mixed Methods Reader (Sage Publications, 2007)

Abbas Tashakkori and Charles Teddlie, Foundations of Mixed Methods Research Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Techniques in the Social and Behavioral Sciences (Sage Publications, 2008)

Week 10 (March 30^th): Ethical and Political Issues in the Host Country

We will also discuss the grant applications you need for the next class.

Professor will provide a handout with a list of possible foundations.

Guest speaker from KUCR (Human Subjects Report)

Required Reading:

Ken Wilson, “Thinking about the ethics of fieldwork” in Stephen Devereux and John Hoddinott, Fieldwork in Developing Countries, pp. 179-199 (19 pages)

Birgit Jentsch, “Making Southern realities count: research agendas and design in North-South collaborations” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 7, No. 3, July 2004 , pp. 259-269 (11 pages)

Dale Whittington, “Ethical Issues with Contingent Valuation Surveys in Developing Countries: A Note on Informed Consent and other Concerns.” Environmental and Resources Economics (2004), Vol. 28, No. 4. pp. 507-515 (10 pages)  

Questions for the Readings (to be discussed in class):

(1) What are some of the general ethical issues that all field researcher encounter including work in the United States?

(2) What are the ethical issues that researchers face in developing countries?

(3) How can you identify socially or politically sensitive issues in the field?

(4) What are the potential ethical issues for your own fieldwork? How do you plan to deal with these potential problems?

Suggested Readings:

Graham Crow, Rose Wiles, Sue Heath, Vikki Charles, “Research Ethics and Data Quality: The Implications of Informed Consent” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 9, No. 2. (April 2006), pp. 83-95.

Suruchi Thapar-Bjrkert and Marsha Henry, “Reassessing the research relationship: location, position and power in fieldwork accounts” International Journal of Social Research Methodology, Vol. 7, No. 5 (2004), pp. 363-381

Chapter 8, “Ethical Issues” in Regina Scheyvens and Donovan Storey, Development Fieldwork: a Practical Guide, p. 139

Chapter 24, “The Politics and Ethics of Field Research” in Martin Bulmer and Donald P. Warwick, Social Research in Developing Countries, p. 315

Week 11 (April 6^th): Research Funding and Writing Applications

Everyone will need to bring an actual application to fund your future research such as a Fulbright, Fulbright-Hays or Social Science Research Council. Also think about institutional affiliations for your research and application.

Guest Speaker: Nancy Myers, professional grant writer

Nancy and I will provide a handout with key points for successful grant writing.

Required Reading:

Porter, Robert “Why Academics Have a Hard Time Writing Good Grant Proposals,”

The Journal of Research Administration, Vol. 38, No. 2, (2007), pp.

Maria Carlson “Submitting A Grant Proposal: Risks, Benefits, and How to Succeed”

http://www.hallcenter.ku.edu/grants/development/pdf/SubmittingGrantProposal.shtml

Week 12 (April 13^th): Secondary Data and Cross Cultural Surveys: Latin America, Russia, EU and Eastern Europe Cases

Published Research Presentation: Each graduate student will select one of the readings below (week 12 or 13) and provide a brief summary that addresses the strengths and weaknesses of the work. Given what we have learned, what kind of questions do you have about the survey? Can we use some of the qualitative methods to evaluate the quantitative data?

Required Reading:

Harkness et. al. Chapters 19 in Cross-Cultural Survey Methods, pp. 291-310

Russell Dalton, “Popular Conceptions of the Meaning of Democracy: Democratic Understanding in Unlikely Places” Center for the Study of Democracy, 2007

Adam Luedtke, “European Integration, Public Opinion and Immigration Policy: Testing the Impact of National Identity,” European Union Politics, vol. 6, no. 1, (2005), pp. 83-112

Carol Graham and Sandip Sukhtankar, “Does Economic Crisis Reduce Support for Markets and Democracy in Latin America? Some Evidence from Surveys of Public Opinion and Well Being,” Journal of Latin American Studies, vol. 36, no. 2, (2004), pp.349-377

Mitchell Seligson, “The Rise of Populism and the Left in Latin America,” Journal of Democracy, Volume 18, No. 3 (July, 2007), pp. 81-95

Adam J. Berinsky and Joshua A. Tucker “‘Don’t knows’ and public opinion towards economic reform: Evidence from Russia,” Communist and Post-Communist Studies, vol. 39, No. 1, (March 2006), pp. 73-99

Suggested Readings:

The Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) http://sitemason.vanderbilt.edu/lapop/HOME

The Afrobarometer

http://www.afrobarometer.org/

Week 13 (April 20^th): Secondary Data and Cross Cultural Surveys: Asia, Middle East, Africa and Central Asia Cases

Required Reading:

Yu-tzung Chang, “The Uneven Growth of Democratic Legitimacy in East Asia,” International Journal of Public Opinion Research, vol. 18, no. 2, (2006), pp. 246-255

Eric C. Chang and Yun-han Chu Corruption and Trust: Exceptionalism in Asian Democracies?” Journal of Politics, vol 68, no. 2, (April 2006), pp. 259 – 271

Michael Bratton and Robert Mattes, “Support for Democracy in Africa: Intrinsic or Instrumental?” British Journal of Political Science, Vol. 31, No. 3 (Jul., 2001), pp. 447-474

Michael Bratton, “Briefing: Islam, Democracy and Democracy in Africa,” African Affairs, vol. 102, (2002), pp. 493-501

Mark Tessler and Elanor Gao, “Gauging Arab Support for Democracy,” Journal of Democracy, vol. 16, no. 3, (2005), pp. 83-97

Peter Furia and Russell Lucas, “Arab Muslim Attitudes Toward the West: Cultural, Social, and Political Explanations,” International Interactions, vol. 34, no. 2, (April 2008), pp. 186-207

Suggested Readings:

Zayani, Mohamed, “Courting and containing the Arab street: Arab public opinion, the Middle East and U.S. public diplomacy,” Arab Studies Quarterly, vol. 30, no. 2, (2008), pp. 45-64

James J Zogby, What Arabs Think: Values, Beliefs and Concerns (Utica, NY.: Zogby International, 2002)

Week 14 (April 27^th): Students Final Presentation (Funding Proposal)

Week 15 (May 4^th): Finish Final Presentations: Final Discussion

Final Proposals are due Friday, May 8^th.

Reference Guide for Paper Assignment

Reference: Single-Author Book

Alverez, A. (1970). The savage god: A study of suicide. New York:

Random House.

Reference: Book with More than One Author

Natarajan, R., & Chaturvedi, R. (1983). Geology of the Indian Ocean.

Hartford, CT: University of Hartford Press.

Reference: An Edited Volume

If you are referring to an article or signed chapter in an edited volume, your reference would look like this:

Pepin, R. E. (1998). “Uses of time in the political novels of Joseph Conrad.”

In C. W. Darling, Jr., J. Shields, & V. B. Villa (Eds.), Chronological looping

in political novels (pp. 99-135). Hartford: Capital Press.

Reference: Newspaper Articles

If the article is "signed" (that is, you know the author's name), begin with that author's name. (Notice the discontinuous pages.)

Poirot, C. (1998, March 17). “HIV prevention pill goes beyond 'morning after'.” The

Hartford Courant, pp. F1, F6.

If the author's name is not available, begin the reference with the headline or title in the author position.

“New exam for doctor of future.” (1989, March 15). The New York Times, B-10.

Parenthetical Citation

The APA system of citing sources indicates the author's last name and the date, in parentheses, within the text of your paper.

A). A typical citation of an entire work consists of the author's name and the year of publication.

Example: Charlotte and Emily Bronte were polar opposites, not only in their personalities but in their sources of inspiration for writing (Taylor, 1990).

Use the last name only in both first and subsequent citations, except when there is more than one author with the same last name. In that case, use the last name and the first initial.

B. If the author is named in the text, only the year is cited.

Example: According to Irene Taylor (1990), the personalities of Charlotte. . .

C. If both the name of the author and the date are used in the text, parenthetical reference is not necessary.

Example: In a 1989 article, Gould explains Darwin's most successful. . .

D. When the reference is to a work by two authors, cite both names each time the reference appears.

Example: Sexual-selection theory often has been used to explore patters of various insect mating (Alcock & Thornhill, 1983) . . . Alcock and Thornhill (1983) also demonstrate. . .

World Wide Wed citations:

Only professional web sites will be accepted such as major magazines (Time, Economist, Newsweek) or newspapers (New York Times, LA Times, Washington Post).

To cite files available on the WWW, give the author's name, last name first (if known); the full title of the work, in quotation marks; the title of the complete work (if applicable), in italics; any version or file numbers; and the date of the document or last revision (if available). Next, list the protocol (e.g., "http") and the full URL, followed by the date of access in parentheses.

Burka, Lauren P. "A Hypertext History
    of Multi-User Dimensions." MUD History.
1993. http://www.utopia.com/talent/
lpb/muddex/essay (2 Aug. 1996).

In Text cite the author and the first word of the title:

As Burka states, “Some students frequently have a difficult time citing web sites.” (Burka, “Hypertext”).