The course aims to provide graduate students with advanced skills in political science methods so that they will be able to evaluate existing literature more critically. By underlining the variety of methodological alternatives, another purpose of the course is to enable students to make the appropriate methodological choice that best fits to their research interest.
We will start with (1) an overview of key issues in the philosophy of social science, we will then move onto issues of (2) formulating a research question, (3) conducting literature review, and (4) constructing a theoretical framework. Then we shall examine (5) different methods of data collection and analysis. Application of research techniques will establish particular focus of the course, which we will explore through the examination of actual research projects. Finally, the course will entail the students developing their own research proposals towards their dissertation in the doctoral program.
Vertical Tabs
Course Learning Outcomes
| Learning Outcomes | Program Learning Outcomes | Teaching Methods | Assessment Methods |
| On successful completion of this course, and having completed the required reading and activities, students should be able to: | |||
| Outline stages of the research process. | 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 | A, B, D |
| Formulate research questions including theoretical propositions or hypotheses. | 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 | A, B, D |
| Conduct an extensive literature review of the concepts and theories related to their research questions. | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 | A, B, D |
| Gather qualitative and quantitative data through ethnography and participant observation, interviewing and focus group, survey, and archival work. | 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 | A, B, D |
| Classify and present qualitative and quantitative data within the frames of experimental research, comparative research, textual analysis, and statistical analysis. | 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 | A, B, D |
| Interpret limits and implications of their research. | 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 | A, B, D |
| Prepare a well-framed research proposal. | 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 | A, B, D |
| Employ highest ethical standards throughout the research process. | 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 | 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 | A, B, D |
Course Flow
| COURSE CONTENT | ||
| Week | Topics | Study Materials |
| 1 | Introduction: Research Ethics | Malici and Smith (2013): 188-200. |
| 2 | Philosophy of Social and Political Sciences |
Halperin and Heath (2012): 25-100.
Fuller (2003): 18-42. Kuhn (1996): 10-51. Popper (2002): 3-27 and 57-74. |
| 3 | Foundations of Political Science Research |
Malici and Smith (2013): 1-12.
Erozan and Turan (2004): 359-63. Moses, et al. (2005): 55-68. Smith (1997): 253-87. Schwartz-Shea and Yanow (2002): 457-486. |
| 4 | Structuring of Inquiry in Political Science |
Malici and Smith (2013): 13-24.
Halperin and Heath (2012): 101-182. Gerring (1999): 357-399. Sartori (1970): 1033-1053. Collier and Levitsky (1997): 430-451. |
| 5 | Case Study and the Comparative Method |
Malici and Smith (2013): 25-40.
Halperin and Heath (2012): 202-229. Lijphart (1971): 682-93. Gerring (2004): 341-54. Hawkins (2009): 1040-67. |
| 6 | Field Research |
Malici and Smith (2013): 41-56.
Halperin and Heath (2012): 287-308. Tilley (2006) : 409-12. Weeden (2010): 255-272. Tuğal (2006): 245-273. |
| 7 | Interviewing and Focus Group |
Malici and Smith (2013): 57-75.
Halperin and Heath (2012): 253-286. Thalhammer (2001): 493-520. Multi-Author Symposium (2002): 663-694. |
| 8 | Statistical Research |
Malici and Smith (2013): 76-92.
Halperin and Heath (2012): 338-366. Pantoja and Gershon (2006): 1171-1187. King (1986): 666-87. |
| 9 | Survey Research |
Malici and Smith (2013): 93-110.
Halperin and Heath(2012): 230-252. Çarkoğlu and Toprak (2006). |
| 10 | Secondary Data Analysis |
Malici and Smith (2013): 111-132.
Halperin and Heath (2012): 366-418. Yeşilada and Noordijk (2010): 9-27. |
| 11 | Textual Analysis |
Malici and Smith (2013): 133-148.
Halperin and Heath (2012): 309-337. Multi-Author Symposium (2004): 15-38. Dinçşahin (2012): 618-640. |
| 12 | Political Historiography |
Carr (2001).
Lustick (1996): 605-18. Dinçşahin and Goodwin (2011): 843-862. |
| 13 | Experimental Research |
Malici and Smith (2013): 149-167.
Smith et al. (2005): 115-134. Ben-Nun Bloom and Arıkan (2012) |
| 14 | Formal Modeling |
Malici and Smith (2013): 168-187.
Walker and Schafer (2007): 747-776. Fiorina (1975): 133-159. Fiorina (1977): 601-675. |
| 15 | Review and Conclusions | |
Recommended Sources
| RECOMMENDED SOURCES | |
| Textbook |
Malici, Akan and Elizabeth S. Smith, (2013) Political Science Research in Practice, (New York: Routledge).
Halperin, Sandra and Oliver Heath (2012) Political Research: Methods and Practical Skills (Oxford University Press). |
|
Additional Resources
Additional Resources |
Fuller, Steve (2003) Kuhn vs. Popper: The Struggle for the Soul of Science (Cambridge: Icon Books), 18-42.
Kuhn, Thomas (1996) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press), 10-51. Popper, Karl (2002) The Logic of Scientific Discovery (New York: Routledge), 3-27 and 57-74. Erozan, Boğaç and İlter Turan (2004) “The Development of Political Science in Turkey,” Political Science and Politics, 37(2): 359-63. Moses, J., Rhioux, B. and B. Kittel (2005) “Mapping Political Methodology: Reflections on a European Perspective,” European Political Science, 4: 55-68. Smith, Rogers M. (1997) “Still Blowing in the Wind: The American Quest for a Democratic, Scientific Political Science,”Daedalus, 126 (1): 253-87. Schwartz-Shea and Yanow (2002) “Reading” “Methods” “Texts”: “How Research Methods Texts Construct Political Science,” Political Research Quarterly, 55: 457-486. Gerring, J. (1999) “What Makes a Concept Good? A Criterial Framework for Understanding Concept Formation in the Social Sciences,” Polity, 31 (3): 357-399. Sartori, G. (1970) “Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics,” American Political Science Review, 64: 1033-1053. Collier D. and S. Levitsky (1997) “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research,” World Politics, 49 (3): 430-451. Lijphart, A. (1971) “Comparative Politics and Comparative Method,” American Political Science Review, 65(3): 682-93. Gerring, J. (2004) “What is a Case Study and What is it Good For?” American Political Science Review, 98(2): 341-54. Hawkins, K. (2009) “Is Chavez a Populist? Measuring Populist Discourse in Comparative Perspective,” Comparative Political Studies, 42: 1040-67. Tilley, C. (2006) “Afterword: Political Ethnography as Art and Science,” Qualitative Sociology, 29 (2006), 409-12. Weeden, I. (2010) “Reflections on Ethnographic Work in Political Science,” Annual Review of Political Science, 13: 255-272. Tuğal, Cihan (2006) “The Appeal of Islamic Politics: Ritual and Dialogue in a Poor District of Turkey, Sociological Quarterly, 47 (2): 245-273. Thalhammer, Kristina (2001) “I’ll take the High Road: Pathways to Human Rights Activism in Authoritarian Argentina,” Political Psychology, 22 (3): 493-520. Multi-Author Symposium (2002), “Interview Methods in Political Science,” PS: Political Science and Politics, 35 (4 ): 663-694. Pantoja, Adrian D. and Sarah Allen Gershon (2006) “Political Orientations and Naturalization among Latino and Latina Immigrants,” Social Science Quarterly, 87 (5): 1171-1187. King, Gary (1986) “How Not to Lie with Statistics: Avoiding Common Mistakes in Quantitative Political Science,” American Journal of Political Science, 30 (3): 666-87. Çarkoğlu, Ali and Binnaz Toprak (2006) Türkiye’de Din, Toplum ve Siyaset [Religion, Society and Politics in Turkey], (İstanbul: TESEV). Yeşilada, Birol A. and Peter Noordijk (2010), “Changing Values in Turkey: Religiosity and Tolerance in Comparative Perspective,” Turkish Studies, 11 (1): 9-27. Multi-Author Symposium (2004), “Discourse and Content Analysis,” Qualitative Methods, (Spring), 15-38. Dinçşahin, Ş. (2012) “A Symptomatic Analysis of Justice and Development Party’s Populism in Turkey: 207-2010,” Government and Opposition, 47 (4): 618-640. Carr, E.H. (2001) What is History (New York: Palgrave). Lustick, Ian S. (1996) “History, Historiography and Political Science: Multiple Historical Records, and the Problem of Selection Bias,” American Political Science Review, 90 (3): 605-18. Dinçşahin, Şakir and Stephen Goodwin (2011) "Towards an Encompassing Perspective on Nationalism: The Case of Jews in Turkey during Second World War, 1939-45," Nations and Nationalism, 17 (4): 843-862. Smith, Elizabeth; Powers, Ashleigh Smith; and Gus Suarez (2005) “If Bill Clinton Were a Women: The Effectiveness of Male and Female Politicians’ Account Strategies Following Alleged Trangressions,” Political Psychology, 26(1): 115-134. Ben-Nun Bloom, Pazit and Gizem Arıkan (2012) “Priming Religious Belief and Religious Social Behavior Affects Support for Democracy,” International Journal of Public Opinion Research, Walker, S. and M. Schafer (2007) “Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson as Cultural Icons of US Foreign Policy,” Political Psychology, 28: 747-776. Fiorina, Morris P. (1975) “Formal Models in Political Science,” Midwest Journal of Political Science, 19: 133-159. Fiorina, Morris P. (1977) “An Outline for a Model of Party Choice,” American Journal of Political Science, 21: 601-675. |
Material Sharing
| MATERIAL SHARING | |
| Documents | Required readings and documents can be found both in the Reserve section of the library and in the bookstore. |
| Assignments | Handouts explaining the assignments will be given in class. |
| Exams | Exams will be given in class. |
Assessment
| ASSESSMENT | ||
| IN-TERM STUDIES | NUMBER | PERCENTAGE |
| Weekly response papers | 9 | .45 |
| Research Question Assignment | 1 | .10 |
| Literature Review Assignment | 1 | .15 |
| Data Collection Assignment | 1 | .15 |
| Data Analysis Assignment | 1 | .15 |
| Total | 100 | |
| CONTRIBUTION OF FINAL EXAMINATION TO OVERALL GRADE | 0 | |
| CONTRIBUTION OF IN-TERM STUDIES TO OVERALL GRADE | 100 | |
| Total | 100 | |
Course’s Contribution to Program
| COURSE'S CONTRIBUTION TO PROGRAM | |||||||
| No | Program Learning Outcomes | Contribution | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | |||
| 1 | The ability to analyze and critically evaluate basic research models, approaches and intellectual traditions in the field of political science, international relations, comparative politics, Turkish politics and foreign policy. To demonstrate the ability to create innovative and original contribution to the field by specializing and expanding on these models and approaches. | X | |||||
| 2 | To demonstrate the ability to make original contributions to the field with an interdisciplinary approach. | X | |||||
| 3 | A command of basic research models and approaches of political science and international relations discipline and the ability to apply them in academic research and project design. | X | |||||
| 4 | Having the ability to compare, contrast and analyze societal and political systems with an interdisciplinary approach. | X | |||||
| 5 | Having a command of qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods and abiding by the highest levels of academic and research ethics. | X | |||||
| 6 | The ability to contribute to the progress of the field of political science and international relations by conducting original and independent studies that produce original thought, methods, models, and applications to the field and/or utilize existing ideas, methods, models, and applications in another field of study. | X | |||||
| 7 | The ability to contribute to the progress of the field of political science and international relations by publishing at least one academic article at a refereed journal and/or by producing or interpreting an original contribution. | X | |||||
| 8 | To develop current and advanced level of data into original thought and research as a specialist. The ability to develop original ideas and methods in the field of political science and international relations. | X | |||||
| 9 | The ability to debate and make presentations within an intellectual framework, and the ability to express oneself in a professional and academic manner. The ability to apply academic writing and presentation methods to dissertations, articles, and project design. | X | |||||
| 10 | Having advanced reading, writing, comprehension and speaking skills in the English language. | X | |||||
| 11 | Having the ability to apply knowledge of political science and international relations discipline to information technologies and traditional tools so as to produce sound solutions to problems. | X | |||||
| 12 | Having the competency to work in the public sector, NGOs, research institutions and the academia. | X | |||||
| 13 | Having empathy towards diverse and differing communities, which will facilitate conducing teamwork at local as well as global platforms. | X | |||||
| 14 | Having competency of comprehending and interpreting local and global issues through information exchange with international academics and students. | X | |||||
ECTS
| ECTS ALLOCATED BASED ON STUDENT WORKLOAD BY THE COURSE DESCRIPTION | |||
| Activities | Quantity |
Duration (Hour) |
Total Workload (Hour) |
| Course Duration (Including the exam week: 16x Total course hours) | 16 | 3 | 48 |
| Hours for off-the-classroom study (Pre-study, practice) | 16 | 7,5 | 120 |
| Weekly Response Papers | 9 | 5 | 45 |
| Assignments | 4 | 15,5 | 62 |
| Total Work Load | 275 | ||
| Total Work Load / 25 (h) | 11 | ||
| ECTS Credit of the Course | 11 | ||