Option 1: A "traditional" research paper on a social issue currently relevant - this would incorporate the basic introduction, review, and conclusion sections, but also should include discussion of the implications of this issue for state or local functioning/policy. For instance, given what you have demonstrated about your particular topic through your literature review, how might this issue affect individual community members, groups, communities nationally and in Michigan, specifically? Is there evidence of such effects already (as evidenced by information from local/national media, research, etc.)?

The general outline of the paper should include a statement of the problem which the paper addresses including the various social, community, and individual effects of the problem (i.e., who is affected and how are they affected, why is it a problem, etc.). This should be followed by a discussion of the various possible causes of the problem focused not just on individual responsibility but also social and community responsibility. In other words, the discussion of potential causes should address the "ecology" of the problem, i.e., those individual, community and social factors which "drive" the problem and those which "inhibit" solutions. The last section of the paper should focus on innovative solutions to the problem which take into account the ecological nature of the problem, with an emphasis on prevention and empowerment oriented efforts. Sources for this section should come from a thorough review of the professional literature dealing with this social problem as well as knowledge gained from local/state/national media, community agencies and/or members working to address the problem. Your paper should end with suggestions for intervention and research that arise from your critical analysis of the current situation.

Examples of Sections in a Traditional Research paper:

1. Introduction of issue

This section should include information about

1. the importance of the topic,
2. main areas of thought surrounding the issue,
3. as well as the position that will be taken for the present discussion, or the "thesis" of your discussion (including a brief overview of how the paper goals will be accomplished)

- this section should describe what you plan to demonstrate in your discussion

1. Literature review

1. This section should outline "what we know" about the topic (incorporating relevant theoretical and empirical work).
2. This section should not be simply a summary of studies or theories. Instead the literature should be presented and discussed in the context of your paper goals. Information presented should be tied to a unifying theme, using summary, interpretative sentences, and transitions that help make your points.

1. Summary and Conclusions

1. This section should provide a summary of your paper points and the implications of what you have demonstrated.
2. Further, your interpretation of the research you reviewed for this paper should also result in you having an informed opinion of suggestions for future research and intervention.

Option 2: The "West Wing" assignment - you should take a particular policy relevant to some social issue, and based on your research, you should advise your candidate (at the state or national level) on what position to take and how to act on that particular issue. So, you should be prepared with the "pros" and "cons" of the particular position you choose and be prepared to defend your choice of how those "pros" outweigh the "cons." In other words, you should prepare your candidate to address both supporters of the position you choose as well as those who might oppose it.

There is more flexibility for the format of this paper. Since you will be advising a candidate, you could write in the form of a personal memo, using first person to address the candidate. This paper is similar to traditional formats in that you do have to identify the issue to be discussed, its relevance, and a brief background on the topic. Further you must make your candidate aware of different schools of thought or perspectives on the issue. You must clearly state the position that you are recommending. In doing so, you must provide information to support that position, as well as advising the candidate on how to address opposing/conflicting viewpoints. For instance, if you are advising your candidate to advocate for a specific policy regarding welfare reform, you must provide evidence that shows how the policy would be useful or has been useful and you should prepare you candidate to discuss why other policies have not been effective. (Think of a situation that could have occurred in the recent past: Think of yourself, for instance, as preparing Governor Bush to speak on a particular topic in terms of facts and research to support one position, while also preparing him to anticipate criticisms and a conflicting position from Vice-President Gore. In doing this, you might inform your candidate of the opposing position and why those opposers might feel the way they do, and possible ways to try to appeal to their interests).

Option 3: A policy-research comparison - you select a particular social issue that has specific policies associated with it and discuss the extent to which that policy is consistent or not consistent with "what we know" from social science research related to that topic. (It may be enlightening to some the extent to which legal/social policy and social science is informed or not informed by theory and/or research). For instance, the policy around teacher incentives, for example, could be related to research on motivation (e.g., extrinsic versus intrinsic motivation) and/or on research related to the impact of community/school level poverty/resources on student performance. Another example could be related to issues of welfare reform policy and how various developmental, social, and community factors may or may not be considered.

Example of format:

1. Introduction to issue/problem - statement of relevance and significance
2. Brief summary of types of policy or intervention programs that exist related to this issue
3. Statement of paper goal: What do you intend to demonstrate about the relationship between science and policy (e.g., existing programs do not incorporate social science knowledge about the topic; the characteristics of effective versus ineffective programs)
4. Literature review on topic ("what we know" about the social problem, target population, community, or other target of policy)
5. Evaluation/review of effectiveness of programs or effectiveness of policy

• To what extent do they incorporate social science?
• How does this relate to their effectiveness or ineffectiveness

1. Summary and Conclusions

Option 4: (with permission of instructor) - a fourth option would be to do a final paper based in part on projects such as honors theses. This could be approved only if the topic is appropriate and relevant to educational issues and the issue is discussed with other involved faculty (e.g., honors advisors). (This would have to be discussed with me beforehand, however).

The important thing to remember about any of the options is to keep your focus narrow, addressing only a few main topics of question. It is better to address one part or factor in a more thorough way than to have many questions and address them in a cursory way.

1. It lacks overall focus (poor thesis) and/or it lacks paragraph focus (poor topic sentences).
2. Ideas are in illogical order, overall or within sections
3. It has lots of generalizations (with not enough support) and/or lots of detail with no clear organizing principle
4. There are weak transitions from paragraph to paragraph, or from idea to idea within a paragraph
5. There are agency problems, too many impersonal and passive constructions, weak verbs
6. Too many expletives (it is, there are, it seems) at the start of sentences
7. There are changing syntactic patterns within a sentence: faulty parallel structure, incompatible subjects and verbs, pronouns with ambiguous antecedents
8. There are too many overly long sentences or run on sentences or sentence fragments
9. The text is overly repetitive or is too "wordy"
10. Quotations are overused or are used alone to convey ideas without interpretation
11. It has poor grammar and spelling

Strategy: Concentrate on the big issues first--focus and organization. Grading will primarily focus on how accurate, thorough, thoughtful, and creative the paper is. Although this is not the main focus of the paper, points will be deducted for more than minimal spelling and grammatical errors (including "typos"). There will be a 10% per business day deduction for late papers. Plagiarism (i.e., using another's words or ideas without citing them, or changing a few words in another's sentence and calling it your own), or any other form of cheating will result, at minimum, in a zero on the paper.

ORGANIZATION- The main idea is developed logically in coherent, unified paragraphs. The paper includes definitions of key words--definitions that are naturally integrated into the author's thesis. The transitions from paragraph to paragraph are effective, and there is an easy and natural movement from the general to the specific, both in ideas and in language. Generalizations are supported with extensive concrete detail.

STYLE- Related words and ideas are kept together, and all general and abstract terms are elaborated as soon as possible. There is some variety in the length and type of sentences employed by the writer, and the transitions (implicit or explicit) between sentences are smooth and effective. The writer succeeds in creating a voice that expresses his or her feelings or point of view. Vocabulary is interesting, varied, and effective. The writer is aware of the connotations of the words he or she uses and is imaginative, yet concise in the choice of language.

MECHANICS- the paper contains almost no misspellings and punctuation errors. It is generally free of mechanical errors and grammatical irregularities that would annoy distract, or mislead the reader.

1. Does the author have a main idea (or set of ideas), and does she/he stick to it?
2. Does the author make defensible assertions and supply adequate details to support these assertions?
3. Do the sentences and paragraphs flow smoothly one into the other?
4. Is the paper relatively free of grammatical errors, punctuation errors, and misspellings?