For the final paper you may write on any topic you choose, subject to my approval. The paper must illustrate, test or extend one or more of the theories about candidates, parties, voters, elected officials, contributors, etc., considered in the course readings or lectures. Your paper should in some way feature your original analysis of some kind of data. This may be anything from a statistical analysis to an informal case study based on personal interviews or archival research. During the course we will encounter several different data sets I will encourage you to consider using for your paper (especially National Election Studies survey data; also possibly 2000 election ballots data), but those will be recommendations not requirements. I encourage you to talk to me or to Yuriko (the T.A.) either in person or via email to discuss ideas for the paper.
To get approval for a topic, you must submit a 2-3 page proposal for the paper. The proposal should summarize the argument you expect to make (e.g., what is the principal hypothesis), identify pertinent literature and list the data you think you will need to build evidence for your argument. The proposal should include references to at least four scholarly works (journal articles or books) that bear on your topic. The proposal is due in hard copy in class on Thursday, November 14 (I'll also accept it earlier).
Unless I have approved your proposal, I will not accept your paper. If the version of the proposal you initially submit is not acceptable, you may submit revised proposals until I do accept one. In any case, you must submit an initial proposal by November 14. The deadline for an acceptable revision is Tuesday, December 3. I hate to sound draconian, but because there has been some unfortunate confusion about this in previous years let me try to be completely clear about this: if I have not received your initial proposal by Nov. 14 and approved it, or received an acceptable revision by Dec. 3, I will not accept your paper.
The paper itself should run about 15 pages (double-spaced) and is due in hard copy at my office by 4:30pm Wednesday, December 11. Both the proposal and the paper should use normal scholarly apparatus for footnotes, citations, bibliography and any tables or figures.
In response to a recent (March 2002) resolution by the Faculty Senate, I'm obliged to remind you of the following university policy regarding academic integrity: ``Each student in this course is expected to abide by the Cornell University Code of Academic Integrity. Any work submitted by a student in this course for academic credit will be the student's own work.''
Walter Mebane