Topic Selection and Submission 1 Caps Dr. Brian William Smith

Office Hours Today 10-2 Tomorrow 11-2 Friday 10-12

Learning Outcomes Covered Today Define an appropriate and current problem that is being actively discussed by real decision makers at a specific level of government.

SOCIAL PROBLEM VS. SOCIAL POLICY

Examples: Social Problem  Immigration  Failing Public Schools  National Debt  Global Warming Controversial Solution  Dream Act  Race to the Top  Fair Tax  Cap and Trade

A Good topic has a social problem, with a solution, and decision makers are actively trying to solve it

Topic Proposals Due in Class on 1/28/2013 Paper must be typed Be Ready to make some changes (for the better)

Do I have a good topic? 1.Clearly Identified Social Problem 2.Policy history on my topic 3.Legitimate Controversial Policy Solution 4.Pro and Con Sides

SUBMISSION 1

Submission One – 10% Paper One consists of 2 parts: 1.Research Proposal (worksheet) 2.Annotated Bibliography

Research Proposal Worksheet. Overview ONLY! Do not go into depth. Get the arguments right! In prose form, this becomes the introduction to Submission Two.

Sub 1: Annotated Bibliography Basically a feasibility study Requires 14 sources total, pro- and con- Books, scholarly articles, legitimate websites and government resources No “helper” sources (limited journalistic sources and magazines allowed, but NO Wikipedia, NO Taking Sides or Controversial Issues citations etc.) Include: MLA Works Cited plus “annotations” (comments on each source’s authority, and on how you will use each source) Due on February 13th

How Many Sources 14 Total – 7 for the Pro Side – 7 For the Con Side These should be solid/authoritative sources

Good vs. Bad Good – Scholarly journal articles – Government documents – Reputable newspapers – Webpages of influental groups Bad – Wikipedia – Private Individuals with webpages – Non-influential groups – Trade publications (People, Esquire)

Annotation involves 2 things Develop a standard MLA citation for each entry Summarizing each source – Why it is credible – How it will contribute to your project

Recap Submission One = Annotated Bibliography + Research Proposal (worksheet) Research Proposal is revised for the introduction to Submission Two and subsequent submissions. Save the information to put in your Research File

CAPSTONE VOCABULARY Talking the Talk, is just as important as walking the walk

TOPIC QUESTION The title of your project (and your papers) Concern about what should be done about a specific social problem (i.e., a normative question) Answers imply a policy, so be specific Lets use a hypothetical: Should the Federal Government approve the Keystone pipeline?

POSITION One specific answer to topic question Particular stance on topic – Yes, the federal government should approve the Keystone Pipeline – No, the federal government should not approve the Keystone Pipeline

SIDES Identify all who share a position using shortcuts (efficient) Tell readers – Opponents and Proponents – Side A and Side B – Pro Dream Act, and Anti Dream Act Avoid generalizations

STAKEHOLDERS “Who holds each position?” Important actors with a vested interest – Environmental Groups – Labor Unions – Oil Companies – Politicians

GENERAL STAKEHOLDERS (aggregate data) Broad types of people who have taken a specific position Qualify as precisely as possible (some, many, %’s) Not all of one type of people ever take one position (e.g. All Dems or Reps)

SPECIFIC STAKEHOLDERS (Individual Data) These are real actors “Leading the charge” for a given side Specific individuals or named groups – Mitt Romney, Former Presidential Candidate – Nancy Pelosi, Former Speaker of the House

ISSUES Broad concerns that the sides are arguing over No opinionated language Generally sides “share” issues Usually 4-5 issues per controversy

ARGUMENTS Gives the OPINION of the side (which includes all the parties to the controversy) about each specific issue Each side may have several arguments about each issue Each argument should relate back to the side’s position.

EVIDENCE What each side uses to SUPPORT its arguments Can include: – Statistical information – Case studies – Expert testimony

PLANS/ACTIONS “What are the sides doing to insure their position is the one in force?” Practical, concrete actions Examples: developing proposals lobbying working with electoral system at all levels using the media

EXAMPLES OF PLANS/ACTIONS Pro-Keystone: – working with lobbyists – electing sympathetic candidates – mobilizing supporters Anti-Keystone – conducting studies to delay – media campaigns – electing sympathetic candidates

VALUES Beliefs about what is good and desirable, or what is undesirable and to be avoided All parties on a side hold all values

REVIEW Topic question = the clearly stated controversy Positions = possible answers to the topic question Stakeholders = describes who takes each position – General = broad types of people – Specific = named groups or individuals who are leaders on each side

REVIEW, cont. Issues = Concerns that the sides are arguing over Arguments = opinions of each side related to each issue Evidence – what a side gives to support each argument

REVIEW, cont. Plans = Concrete actions taken to insure that the side’s position is the one in force Values = beliefs about what is right and wrong

REVIEW EXAMPLE Topic question: Should the Federal Government approve the Keystone pipeline? One position: No, the federal government should not approve the pipeline Side Nickname: opponents

REVIEW EXAMPLE, cont. General Stakeholders on opponents side: Environmental Groups, some Democrats; etc. Specific Stakeholders on opponents side: Sierra Club, President Obama

REVIEW EXAMPLE, cont. Opponents side’s plans: electing Democrats, delaying through studies. Opponents side’s underlying values: The environment, safety, reduced dependence on oil