微信客服：xiaoxionga100
微信客服：ITCS521
POL3039-无代写
时间：2023-04-06
POL3039
POL3039 DISSERTATION MODULE OUTLINE 2022-2023
Level 3 Credit Value 40
Semester Taught One and Two Semester Examined One and Two
Module Leader Dr Natalie Langford Email natalie.langford@sheffield.ac.uk
Description:
This module involves supervised research on an agreed topic. The first part of this module will introduce
students to the research process, including research design, ethics and introductions to specific qualitative
approaches to research through a series of interactive workshops. The workshops will help students to
prepare and then submit a formally assessed 1000-word research proposal.
Upon submission of the assessed research proposal students will be assigned a dissertation supervisor.
The second part of the module will involve individual research which will be assessed on the basis of an
8000-word maximum dissertation. Students should note that as specified in the undergraduate
handbook word limits are absolute (there is no 10% leeway). Students will also be assisted and receive
feedback and direction in four individual formal supervision sessions with their dissertation supervisor at
which objectives will be specified, and general progress reviewed and discussed. Records will be kept of
these meetings.
Objectives:
This module aims to provide an opportunity for supervised research on an agreed topic in Politics and or
International Relations. In developing your dissertation students will be expected to design, organise, and
execute an assessed research proposal. This proposal will be formally submitted and assessed by your
designated supervisor.
Students will then be required to produce an 8000-word dissertation that;
1. Demonstrates significant knowledge of your chosen area of study;
2. Illustrates your ability to conduct independent research relevant on your chosen topic, by designing
a coherent research project in Politics and or International Relations, including formulating a
compelling research question, analyzing, and applying a significant body of knowledge/ literature
relating to your chosen area of study, selecting an appropriate approach and by utilising a broad
range of primary and secondary sources
3. Demonstrates critical transferable skills such as the ability to effectively deploy a considerable body
of research; assess the arguments of secondary source materials against relevant primary
sources; critically evaluate different interpretations within the Political Studies and International
Relations community; elucidate your conclusions in a clear, logically-structured, analytical and
independently-argued piece of work.
The module requires students to take a high degree of responsibility for managing their own learning
process, while taking appropriate supervisor guidance, reflecting critically on progress, and to seek and
use constructive supervisor feedback.
Assessment:
▪ 1000 word Dissertation Proposal = 15% due on the 3rd November 2022 by 12.00noon
▪ 8000 word Dissertation = 85% due on the 9th of May 2023 by 12.00 noon
Organisation:
5 x 2 hour workshops – which will take place during the first 5 weeks of semester one.
POL3039
2
After the third workshop students will submit a google form documenting their research interests, their
proposed research question, and key words by 16th October 2022 12 Noon. In the following week the
form will be used to allocate students to a supervisor. Students should note that some supervisors can be
oversubscribed. In some cases, it will not be possible to allocate students to the supervisor they would
most like, or have indicated a strong preference for on the form. The google form indicating your interests
and preferences is a source of information to guide and help us in making the allocation decisions,
enabling us to try to match you to a supervisor. If you don’t provide information on the google form,
we will effectively have to make the allocation blind and allocate you to a supervisor without any
information. A number of different considerations have to be balanced in making the supervisor
allocation, and after the allocation has taken place, it is largely impossible to make changes. After the
allocation has taken place, you will have around two weeks to informally discuss your 1000 word proposal
with your allocated supervisor and take advice, before it is submitted on 3rd November.
Students will submit a 1000-word proposal on 3rd November 2022 which will be assessed and count for
15% percentage of the final module grade. This should include a bibliography that will not be included in
the word count.
Students should participate in four formal supervision meetings – the exact suggested weeks are set out
elsewhere in this module guide. The meetings will be half an hour long, except for the final one, which can
be up to an hour to facilitate feedback on a submitted draft of the dissertation.
Timetable for Semester One:
Workshops will take place on Fridays 15.00-17.00 in Alfred Denny Building LTO1.
▪ 30th September 2022– Workshop One: Introduction – Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 7th October 2022– Workshop Two: Research Design – Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 14th October 2022 – Workshop Three: Crafting the Research Proposal – Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 16th October 2022 submit google form before 12 Noon, detailing research interests, key
words, working research question, and any staff you have spoken to.
▪ 21st October 2022– Workshop Four: Approaches to Research – Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 28th October 2022 – Workshop Five: Writing the Literature Review- Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 3rd November 2022 – Deadline for 1000-word proposal (submit before 12 Noon, via TurnItIn
Blackboard)– 15% of final grade
▪ 25th November 2022 – Feedback on proposal and marks will have been made available
w/c 27th November 2022 – First formal supervision meeting.
Aims of the workshops:
Workshops will be used to discuss the issues to consider in the process of planning, designing,
researching and writing a dissertation, as well as to introduce specific qualitative approaches to research
(including the department’s ethics approval process). The workshops will enable students to begin
planning their dissertation research from the beginning of semester one. This is a challenging piece of
work that demands considerable independent initiative from the beginning of the semester and then will
require a sustained effort throughout semester two. Students should not allow their taught modules to
crowd out work on the dissertation. It is crucially important to take charge of your dissertation
research taking the appropriate advice from supervisors and the module convenor along the way. Each
workshop will end with a Q & A session and sometimes tasks to perform, involving impromptu feedback
sessions, explaining the best courses of action and the difference between good and bad research
questions.
POL3039
3
Supervision:
Students will be allocated a supervisor following completion of the google form to be submitted 16th
October. We aim to have the full allocation done by 24th October. This will leave around two weeks for you
to liaise informally with your supervisor and take their advice before submitting the proposal on 3rd
November. The supervisor is the first point of contact for each student. Individual meetings will take place
between the supervisor and student according to the schedule detailed below. Supervisors can provide
guidance on topic selection, research questions and appropriate research and methodological strategies.
They can also advise on dissertation sources and structure. However, while the supervisor can guide and
advise, it is the responsibility of each student to choose your own dissertation topic, develop research
questions and find relevant source material. You should email your supervisor to set up the meetings
for the supervision schedule below.
Supervision Schedule:
Supervision Meeting 1: You will receive feedback on your research proposal and topic.
Advice for next steps will be given and an agenda set (Week
beginning 28/11/2022)
Supervision Meeting 2: This meeting will be a review of progress over the Christmas
vacation. Next steps will be set. (Week beginning 06/02/2023).
Some students and supervisors may wish to hold this meeting in the
second week of the semester, or before the semester starts if that
suits both parties. Note that February is usually a key time for making
progress on drafts of your dissertation, as there are usually few other
assignment deadlines at this time.
Supervision Meeting 3: This meeting will be a review of progress (week beginning
06/03/2023). Staff and students may wish to meet one week earlier
or later by mutual agreement. The final date to submit draft work is
the 31/03/2023. Supervisors will read up to one full draft of a
dissertation, but only one draft, and this is optional and to help
students. Supervisors will still be available to discuss your work with
you up to the submission date. Supervisors will plan a submission
schedule with students, including the submission of a draft that will
give supervisors time to read work before the final required
supervision meeting.
Supervision Meeting 4: This meeting in the first week after the Easter Vacation (Week
beginning 24/04/2023) will involve discussion of the draft of the
dissertation submitted prior to the Easter vacation, or part of a draft,
which the supervisor will have read. Some supervisors may take the
opportunity to arrange a meeting with you before this in the last week
of the Easter vacation. If you have not written a draft, this meeting
will be a discussion of the progress of the dissertation, identifying
problems, clarifying your argument and creating a plan of action for
submission of the final document on 10th May. Some written
feedback will be provided to students over the Easter vocation on
any draft material submitted. The submission of draft material is not
permitted after 31/03/23. Students do not have to submit a draft, but
are advised to take advantage of the opportunity for written and
verbal feedback if they can. Feedback will be provided during the
Easter vacation at some point, but students are encouraged to
continue reflecting on their written material during this period and
identify weaknesses and areas where further work might be
required, including asking for supervisor views and advice where
appropriate.
POL3039
4
▪ Please note that participation in these activities is a requirement (though the submission of a draft is
optional). The Department reserves the right to withhold marks for non-participation.
▪ The above schedule is the minimum supervision offered and required. Students may approach
supervisors/tutors at any time during their office hours if they wish to discuss their dissertation work or
otherwise by arrangement.
▪ For each meeting the tutor will keep an electronic record of supervision.
▪ The dissertation must be entirely the student’s own work. All text taken from other people’s work must
be quoted appropriately, and all sources must be acknowledged in the text or notes, and a full
bibliography provided. Plagiarism will be taken very seriously. Students should note the sections on
Assessment and on Plagiarism in the Department's Handbook. Students should avoid reproducing
large sections of work that they have produced in other assignments on other modules. Students can
use other assignments to inform their dissertation work, but should avoid reproducing large passages
of work, word for word from other assignments would effectively constitute self-plagiarism and
penalties will apply.
▪ All dissertations must be submitted electronically on Blackboard by 12.00noon on Monday 9th May
2023 using the submission template provided by the department.
▪ Extensions will be allowed on dissertations subject to the procedure set out in the Department’s
Handbook. The maximum extension is one week as dissertations must be in before the exam
period begins.
▪ Late submission of the dissertation will result in a penalty. Please refer to the Handbook for penalty
details and the details on word limits. There is no 10% leeway on word limits
▪ Students should note that usual three week feedback policy does apply to the final submission of the
dissertation. Because this is a double weighted final year module, the dissertation counts as a final
exam that needs to be confirmed by external examiners and the exam board, so marks and feedback
can only be released after the department’s final exam board has met and degree classifications have
been confirmed.
Departmental Policy on the reading of dissertation drafts: FEEDBACK that can be expected
The Department of Politics regards reading draft dissertation work as part of the supervision process.
Staff, however, cannot and will not act as editors. They will not give any indication of a mark or grade.
The purpose of reading draft work is to advise whether a student’s work is at the appropriate level and
conforms to the module’s aims and objectives, as well providing some general feedback and sense of
how the dissertation might be improved as part of a formative process.
We ask that you do not contact supervisors/administrators and ask for an extension in relation to
the submission of a draft. The draft deadline of 31th March 2023 is to be respected. It is not a formal
assessment deadline, but is there to provide help to students in a way that is as fair as possible for all. For
reasons of equality of treatment and fairness, staff are under instruction not to provide any feedback to
material submitted after 31st March. You submit the drafts by emailing them directly via an attached
document to your supervisor. We are keen to maintain a level playing field and ensure that every
student is treated in the same fashion. You of course have the option of submitting whatever draft material
you like, only part of a draft, or no material at all (though we advise against this). Obviously, the more
material you submit, the more comprehensive the feedback you receive will be. In exceptional
POL3039
5
circumstances of ill health, it may be possible to negotiate a minimal extension between student and
individual supervisor, but this should not be more than 3 or 4 days.
Supervisors will read up to one full draft of a dissertation. They will not re-read material previously
commented on, or read multiple drafts, or versions and are asked not to do this, so that all students get
roughly the same feedback and are treated equally and fairly.
Supervisors will provide feedback on the general orientation and trajectory of the dissertation, and identify
strengths, things that have been done well, as well as conspicuous weaknesses, or errors. The feedback
will be informative, but general in tone and provide an overview. You can expect one or two paragraphs.
Again to ensure equality of treatment staff are asked to not use the track change or comment function,
providing advice on specific detail, but instead to provide general written feedback (one or two
paragraphs).
Supervisors have been asked to address the following questions and feedback will address the issues
below. You should read these carefully and ask yourself if you your draft and ultimately the final version
of your dissertation fulfils these criteria. You could usefully use the list below as a checklist before
submitting the final version of your dissertation, as these questions also effectively double as the
assessment criteria.
i) Is the dissertation framed and introduced appropriately, with the context, significance and
justification for research questions clearly laid out?
ii) Does the dissertation follow a clear and logical structure, displaying the necessary methodological
awareness and explanation?
iii) Is there an appropriate balance between empirical material/ evidence/ reasoning and conceptual
and theoretical literatures?
iv) Does the dissertation display the necessary levels of understanding and insight into existing
literatures and findings and are these adequately explained?
v) Are there any gaps in the dissertation, in terms of important literatures that might usefully be
engaged with, empirical material that might be used or analysed, availed of, are there any conspicuous
errors, or misunderstandings present, and are there any other areas that need for further work?
vi) Does the dissertation have adequate and appropriate referencing?
vii) Does the dissertation have a clear, cogent thesis and argument that is made consistently and
robustly, while being supported by evidence and reason that also contributes to debates and literatures
in the relevant area?
viii) Is a plausible and full answer provided to the stated framing research question in the conclusion?
The individual supervision sessions provide opportunities for informal verbal feedback on the
development of the dissertation; students and supervisors will want to ensure they discuss both general
and substantive issues in sufficient depth in these one-to-one sessions. This formative feedback both
spoken, and written in response to drafts, will provide you with the opportunity to improve your work. This
will be accompanied by significant summative feedback in the grading of the dissertation, following
formal submission of the thesis. We ask supervisors to provide between a page and half a page of
summative feedback.
POL3039
6
Standards of Presentation
• Dissertations should be word-processed in Ariel font size 12 with a minimum of 1.5 pt line spacing.
• Submitted dissertations should include the essay submission template which must include the title,
word count, abstract (150 words maximum), registration number and name of dissertation
supervisor. These do not count towards the final word count. If necessary the abstract can be
included on a separate sheet with title, and again this will not be included in the word count for the
dissertation.
• Items on the submission template page (and any contents pages/bibliography/reference
footnotes/appendixes) are excluded from the word count, but substantive discursive footnotes
used to amplify or expand a point, will be included in the word count. Be aware that most word
processing packages count in-text (Harvard system) citations in the word count. The undergraduate
handbook gives details of referencing conventions. The word count basically starts at the first page of
substantive text (first page of introduction) to the last page of substantive text (final page of conclusion).
Bibliography and citation based footnotes are not included in the word count.
WORKSHOP ONE: Introduction
Aim: This 2-hour workshop will introduce students to the dissertation process and clarify what is expected
of students over the next two semesters. This session will focus on the importance of research design and
how to formulate a research question.
To help prepare for the workshop all students the following readings are recommended:
Colin Robson and Kieran McCartan (2015) Real World Research: 4th Edition (London: Wiley) Chapter 3
– Developing Your Ideas
Alan Bryman (2016) Social Research Methods: 5th Edition (Oxford: OUP) Chapter 4 – Planning a
Research Project and Formulating Research Questions
WORKSHOP TWO: Research Design
Aim: This workshop will focus on helping students to decide how you are going to answer your research
question. This session will look at how to select the appropriate theory/conceptual framework/approaches
to research and how to justify your research design. This workshop will also address issues of feasibility
and ethics.
To help prepare for the workshop all students should read the following:
Colin Robson and Kieran McCartan (2015) Real World Research: 4th Edition (London: Wiley) Chapter 4
– General Design Issues
Alan Bryman (2016) Social Research Methods: 5th Edition (Oxford: OUP) Chapter 3 – Research Designs
WORKSHOP THREE: Crafting the Research Proposal
Aims: This workshop will focus on what comprises a research proposal and the relationship between the
research proposal and the dissertation. This workshop will also address how to structure your dissertation
and clarify what students need to do for the first assignment (submission of 1000 word proposal).
POL3039
7
Tasks for students will be communicated on Blackboard for this workshop – you will be required to
complete independent tasks in preparation.
WORKSHOP FOUR: Approaches to Research
Aims: This workshop will focus on possible approaches to research design and how to approach
answering your research question. Different qualitative approaches to research design will be outlined and
the opportunities and challenges which arise with different approaches. We will discuss what is realistic
within the confines of the dissertation.
Tasks for students will be communicated on Blackboard for this workshop – you will be required to
complete independent tasks in preparation.
WORKSHOP FIVE: Writing the Literature Review
Aims: In this workshop students we will focus on how to write a literature review. This session will cover
the key aspects of writing a literature review and how to manage your time effectively when selecting the
literature to review.
To help prepare for the workshop all students should read the following:
Chris Hart (1998) Doing a Literature Review (London: SAGE)
https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/28728_LitReview___hart_chapter_1.pdf
HELPFUL GENERAL RESOURCES
Robson,R. and K. McCartan (2015) Real World Research: 4th Edition (London: Wiley)
Lamont, C. (2022) Research Methods in International Relations
Harrison, L (2001), Political research: an introduction (London: Routledge)
Murray R (2011), How to write a thesis (Buckingham: Open University Press)
Oliver P (2004), Writing your thesis (London: Sage)
Silbergh, D (2001), Doing Dissertations in Politics: a student guide (London: Routledge).
RESOURCES FOR SPECIFIC METHODS
Paul Avery and Michael Desch, “What do Policy Makers want from us? Results of a Survey of Current
and Former Senior National Security Decision Makers” International Studies Quarterly 58 (2), 2014.
Claudia Aradau and Jef Huysmans, ‘Critical Methods in International Relations: The Politics of
Techniques, Devices, and Acts’, European Journal of International Relations 20(3), 2014.
Andrew Bennett and Colin Elman, “Qualitative Research: New Developments in Case Study Methods”
Annual Review of Political Science 9(1), 2006, pp. 455-476.
Alan Buckingham and Peter Saunders, The Survey Methods Workbook (London: Wiley, 2004)
POL3039
8
James M. Curry, “In-Depth Qualitative Research and the Study of American Political Institutions” PS:
Political Science and Politics 50(1), 2017.
Kevin C. Dunn and Iver B. Neumann, Undertaking Discourse Analysis for Social Research (Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 2016)
Bent Flyvbjerg, ‘Five Misunderstandings about Case Study Research’ Qualitative Inquiry 12(2), 2006.
Barbara Geddes, “How the Cases You Chose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative
Politics” Political Analysis 2 (1990), pp. 131-150.
Andra Gillespie and Melissa R. Michelson, “Participant Observation and the Political Scientist:
Possibilities, Priorities, and Practicalities” PS: Political Science and Politics 44(2) (2011), pp. 261-265.
Lene Hansen, Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War (Abingdon and New
York: Routledge, 2006)
Rolf Johansson, Case Study Methodology; see http://www.psyking.net/htmlobj-
3839/case_study_methodology-_rolf_johansson_ver_2.pdf
Jonathan Joseph and John Michael Roberts, Realism, Discourse and Deconstruction (London:
Routledge, 2004)
Helen Kara, Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences (Bristol: Policy Press, 2015)
Joseph MacKay and Jamie Levin. “Hanging Out in International Politics: Two Kinds of Explanatory
Political Ethnography for IR” International Studies Review 17(2), 2015, pp. 163-188.
Peter Marsden and James Wright, Handbook of Survey Research: Second Edition (Bingley: Emerald
Press, 2010)
Jennifer Mason, ‘Facet Methodology: The Case for an Inventive Research Orientation’, Methodological
Innovations 6(3), 2011.
Christine Meyer, “A Case in Case Study Methodology” Field Methods 13(4), 2001, pp. 329-352.
Jennifer Milliken, ‘The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and
Methods’ European Journal of International Relations 5(2), 1999, pp. 225-254.
Layna Mosley (ed) Interview Research in Political Science (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013).
Jennie-Keith Ross and Marc Howard Ross, “Participant Observation in Political Research” Political
Methodology 1(1), 1974.
Sharon Rivera et al., “Interviewing Political Elites: Lessons from Russia” PS: Political Science and
Politics 35(4), 2002.
Herbert J. Rubin and Irene Rubin, Qualitative interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (California: SAGE,
1995)
Peregrine Schwartz-Shea and Samantha Majic, “Ethnography and Participant Observation: Political
Science Research in this ‘Late Methodological Moment’” PS: Political Science and Politics 50(1), 2017.
Laura Sjoberg and Caron E. Gentry, Mothers, Monsters, Whores: Women’s Violence in Global Politics
(London/New York: Zed Books, 2007).
Stephen Spencer, Visual Research Methods in the Social Sciences: Awakening Visions (London:
Routledge, 2011)
POL3039
9
Liam Stanley, ‘Using Focus Groups in Political Science and International Relations’ Politics 36(3), 2016,
pp. 236-249.
Wandra Vrasti, “The Strange Case of Ethnography and International Relations” Millennium 37(2), 2008.
Srdjan Vucetic, ‘Genealogy as a research tool in International Relations’ Review of International Studies
37(3), 2011, pp.1295-1312
Mike Wallace and Alison Wray, Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates; 3rd Edition, (London:
Sage, 2016)
Lisa Wedeen, “Reflections on Ethnographic Work in Political Science”, Annual Review of Political
Science 3(2010), pp. 255-272.
POL3039 DISSERTATION MODULE OUTLINE 2022-2023
Level 3 Credit Value 40
Semester Taught One and Two Semester Examined One and Two
Module Leader Dr Natalie Langford Email natalie.langford@sheffield.ac.uk
Description:
This module involves supervised research on an agreed topic. The first part of this module will introduce
students to the research process, including research design, ethics and introductions to specific qualitative
approaches to research through a series of interactive workshops. The workshops will help students to
prepare and then submit a formally assessed 1000-word research proposal.
Upon submission of the assessed research proposal students will be assigned a dissertation supervisor.
The second part of the module will involve individual research which will be assessed on the basis of an
8000-word maximum dissertation. Students should note that as specified in the undergraduate
handbook word limits are absolute (there is no 10% leeway). Students will also be assisted and receive
feedback and direction in four individual formal supervision sessions with their dissertation supervisor at
which objectives will be specified, and general progress reviewed and discussed. Records will be kept of
these meetings.
Objectives:
This module aims to provide an opportunity for supervised research on an agreed topic in Politics and or
International Relations. In developing your dissertation students will be expected to design, organise, and
execute an assessed research proposal. This proposal will be formally submitted and assessed by your
designated supervisor.
Students will then be required to produce an 8000-word dissertation that;
1. Demonstrates significant knowledge of your chosen area of study;
2. Illustrates your ability to conduct independent research relevant on your chosen topic, by designing
a coherent research project in Politics and or International Relations, including formulating a
compelling research question, analyzing, and applying a significant body of knowledge/ literature
relating to your chosen area of study, selecting an appropriate approach and by utilising a broad
range of primary and secondary sources
3. Demonstrates critical transferable skills such as the ability to effectively deploy a considerable body
of research; assess the arguments of secondary source materials against relevant primary
sources; critically evaluate different interpretations within the Political Studies and International
Relations community; elucidate your conclusions in a clear, logically-structured, analytical and
independently-argued piece of work.
The module requires students to take a high degree of responsibility for managing their own learning
process, while taking appropriate supervisor guidance, reflecting critically on progress, and to seek and
use constructive supervisor feedback.
Assessment:
▪ 1000 word Dissertation Proposal = 15% due on the 3rd November 2022 by 12.00noon
▪ 8000 word Dissertation = 85% due on the 9th of May 2023 by 12.00 noon
Organisation:
5 x 2 hour workshops – which will take place during the first 5 weeks of semester one.
POL3039
2
After the third workshop students will submit a google form documenting their research interests, their
proposed research question, and key words by 16th October 2022 12 Noon. In the following week the
form will be used to allocate students to a supervisor. Students should note that some supervisors can be
oversubscribed. In some cases, it will not be possible to allocate students to the supervisor they would
most like, or have indicated a strong preference for on the form. The google form indicating your interests
and preferences is a source of information to guide and help us in making the allocation decisions,
enabling us to try to match you to a supervisor. If you don’t provide information on the google form,
we will effectively have to make the allocation blind and allocate you to a supervisor without any
information. A number of different considerations have to be balanced in making the supervisor
allocation, and after the allocation has taken place, it is largely impossible to make changes. After the
allocation has taken place, you will have around two weeks to informally discuss your 1000 word proposal
with your allocated supervisor and take advice, before it is submitted on 3rd November.
Students will submit a 1000-word proposal on 3rd November 2022 which will be assessed and count for
15% percentage of the final module grade. This should include a bibliography that will not be included in
the word count.
Students should participate in four formal supervision meetings – the exact suggested weeks are set out
elsewhere in this module guide. The meetings will be half an hour long, except for the final one, which can
be up to an hour to facilitate feedback on a submitted draft of the dissertation.
Timetable for Semester One:
Workshops will take place on Fridays 15.00-17.00 in Alfred Denny Building LTO1.
▪ 30th September 2022– Workshop One: Introduction – Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 7th October 2022– Workshop Two: Research Design – Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 14th October 2022 – Workshop Three: Crafting the Research Proposal – Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 16th October 2022 submit google form before 12 Noon, detailing research interests, key
words, working research question, and any staff you have spoken to.
▪ 21st October 2022– Workshop Four: Approaches to Research – Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 28th October 2022 – Workshop Five: Writing the Literature Review- Dr Natalie Langford
▪ 3rd November 2022 – Deadline for 1000-word proposal (submit before 12 Noon, via TurnItIn
Blackboard)– 15% of final grade
▪ 25th November 2022 – Feedback on proposal and marks will have been made available
w/c 27th November 2022 – First formal supervision meeting.
Aims of the workshops:
Workshops will be used to discuss the issues to consider in the process of planning, designing,
researching and writing a dissertation, as well as to introduce specific qualitative approaches to research
(including the department’s ethics approval process). The workshops will enable students to begin
planning their dissertation research from the beginning of semester one. This is a challenging piece of
work that demands considerable independent initiative from the beginning of the semester and then will
require a sustained effort throughout semester two. Students should not allow their taught modules to
crowd out work on the dissertation. It is crucially important to take charge of your dissertation
research taking the appropriate advice from supervisors and the module convenor along the way. Each
workshop will end with a Q & A session and sometimes tasks to perform, involving impromptu feedback
sessions, explaining the best courses of action and the difference between good and bad research
questions.
POL3039
3
Supervision:
Students will be allocated a supervisor following completion of the google form to be submitted 16th
October. We aim to have the full allocation done by 24th October. This will leave around two weeks for you
to liaise informally with your supervisor and take their advice before submitting the proposal on 3rd
November. The supervisor is the first point of contact for each student. Individual meetings will take place
between the supervisor and student according to the schedule detailed below. Supervisors can provide
guidance on topic selection, research questions and appropriate research and methodological strategies.
They can also advise on dissertation sources and structure. However, while the supervisor can guide and
advise, it is the responsibility of each student to choose your own dissertation topic, develop research
questions and find relevant source material. You should email your supervisor to set up the meetings
for the supervision schedule below.
Supervision Schedule:
Supervision Meeting 1: You will receive feedback on your research proposal and topic.
Advice for next steps will be given and an agenda set (Week
beginning 28/11/2022)
Supervision Meeting 2: This meeting will be a review of progress over the Christmas
vacation. Next steps will be set. (Week beginning 06/02/2023).
Some students and supervisors may wish to hold this meeting in the
second week of the semester, or before the semester starts if that
suits both parties. Note that February is usually a key time for making
progress on drafts of your dissertation, as there are usually few other
assignment deadlines at this time.
Supervision Meeting 3: This meeting will be a review of progress (week beginning
06/03/2023). Staff and students may wish to meet one week earlier
or later by mutual agreement. The final date to submit draft work is
the 31/03/2023. Supervisors will read up to one full draft of a
dissertation, but only one draft, and this is optional and to help
students. Supervisors will still be available to discuss your work with
you up to the submission date. Supervisors will plan a submission
schedule with students, including the submission of a draft that will
give supervisors time to read work before the final required
supervision meeting.
Supervision Meeting 4: This meeting in the first week after the Easter Vacation (Week
beginning 24/04/2023) will involve discussion of the draft of the
dissertation submitted prior to the Easter vacation, or part of a draft,
which the supervisor will have read. Some supervisors may take the
opportunity to arrange a meeting with you before this in the last week
of the Easter vacation. If you have not written a draft, this meeting
will be a discussion of the progress of the dissertation, identifying
problems, clarifying your argument and creating a plan of action for
submission of the final document on 10th May. Some written
feedback will be provided to students over the Easter vocation on
any draft material submitted. The submission of draft material is not
permitted after 31/03/23. Students do not have to submit a draft, but
are advised to take advantage of the opportunity for written and
verbal feedback if they can. Feedback will be provided during the
Easter vacation at some point, but students are encouraged to
continue reflecting on their written material during this period and
identify weaknesses and areas where further work might be
required, including asking for supervisor views and advice where
appropriate.
POL3039
4
▪ Please note that participation in these activities is a requirement (though the submission of a draft is
optional). The Department reserves the right to withhold marks for non-participation.
▪ The above schedule is the minimum supervision offered and required. Students may approach
supervisors/tutors at any time during their office hours if they wish to discuss their dissertation work or
otherwise by arrangement.
▪ For each meeting the tutor will keep an electronic record of supervision.
▪ The dissertation must be entirely the student’s own work. All text taken from other people’s work must
be quoted appropriately, and all sources must be acknowledged in the text or notes, and a full
bibliography provided. Plagiarism will be taken very seriously. Students should note the sections on
Assessment and on Plagiarism in the Department's Handbook. Students should avoid reproducing
large sections of work that they have produced in other assignments on other modules. Students can
use other assignments to inform their dissertation work, but should avoid reproducing large passages
of work, word for word from other assignments would effectively constitute self-plagiarism and
penalties will apply.
▪ All dissertations must be submitted electronically on Blackboard by 12.00noon on Monday 9th May
2023 using the submission template provided by the department.
▪ Extensions will be allowed on dissertations subject to the procedure set out in the Department’s
Handbook. The maximum extension is one week as dissertations must be in before the exam
period begins.
▪ Late submission of the dissertation will result in a penalty. Please refer to the Handbook for penalty
details and the details on word limits. There is no 10% leeway on word limits
▪ Students should note that usual three week feedback policy does apply to the final submission of the
dissertation. Because this is a double weighted final year module, the dissertation counts as a final
exam that needs to be confirmed by external examiners and the exam board, so marks and feedback
can only be released after the department’s final exam board has met and degree classifications have
been confirmed.
Departmental Policy on the reading of dissertation drafts: FEEDBACK that can be expected
The Department of Politics regards reading draft dissertation work as part of the supervision process.
Staff, however, cannot and will not act as editors. They will not give any indication of a mark or grade.
The purpose of reading draft work is to advise whether a student’s work is at the appropriate level and
conforms to the module’s aims and objectives, as well providing some general feedback and sense of
how the dissertation might be improved as part of a formative process.
We ask that you do not contact supervisors/administrators and ask for an extension in relation to
the submission of a draft. The draft deadline of 31th March 2023 is to be respected. It is not a formal
assessment deadline, but is there to provide help to students in a way that is as fair as possible for all. For
reasons of equality of treatment and fairness, staff are under instruction not to provide any feedback to
material submitted after 31st March. You submit the drafts by emailing them directly via an attached
document to your supervisor. We are keen to maintain a level playing field and ensure that every
student is treated in the same fashion. You of course have the option of submitting whatever draft material
you like, only part of a draft, or no material at all (though we advise against this). Obviously, the more
material you submit, the more comprehensive the feedback you receive will be. In exceptional
POL3039
5
circumstances of ill health, it may be possible to negotiate a minimal extension between student and
individual supervisor, but this should not be more than 3 or 4 days.
Supervisors will read up to one full draft of a dissertation. They will not re-read material previously
commented on, or read multiple drafts, or versions and are asked not to do this, so that all students get
roughly the same feedback and are treated equally and fairly.
Supervisors will provide feedback on the general orientation and trajectory of the dissertation, and identify
strengths, things that have been done well, as well as conspicuous weaknesses, or errors. The feedback
will be informative, but general in tone and provide an overview. You can expect one or two paragraphs.
Again to ensure equality of treatment staff are asked to not use the track change or comment function,
providing advice on specific detail, but instead to provide general written feedback (one or two
paragraphs).
Supervisors have been asked to address the following questions and feedback will address the issues
below. You should read these carefully and ask yourself if you your draft and ultimately the final version
of your dissertation fulfils these criteria. You could usefully use the list below as a checklist before
submitting the final version of your dissertation, as these questions also effectively double as the
assessment criteria.
i) Is the dissertation framed and introduced appropriately, with the context, significance and
justification for research questions clearly laid out?
ii) Does the dissertation follow a clear and logical structure, displaying the necessary methodological
awareness and explanation?
iii) Is there an appropriate balance between empirical material/ evidence/ reasoning and conceptual
and theoretical literatures?
iv) Does the dissertation display the necessary levels of understanding and insight into existing
literatures and findings and are these adequately explained?
v) Are there any gaps in the dissertation, in terms of important literatures that might usefully be
engaged with, empirical material that might be used or analysed, availed of, are there any conspicuous
errors, or misunderstandings present, and are there any other areas that need for further work?
vi) Does the dissertation have adequate and appropriate referencing?
vii) Does the dissertation have a clear, cogent thesis and argument that is made consistently and
robustly, while being supported by evidence and reason that also contributes to debates and literatures
in the relevant area?
viii) Is a plausible and full answer provided to the stated framing research question in the conclusion?
The individual supervision sessions provide opportunities for informal verbal feedback on the
development of the dissertation; students and supervisors will want to ensure they discuss both general
and substantive issues in sufficient depth in these one-to-one sessions. This formative feedback both
spoken, and written in response to drafts, will provide you with the opportunity to improve your work. This
will be accompanied by significant summative feedback in the grading of the dissertation, following
formal submission of the thesis. We ask supervisors to provide between a page and half a page of
summative feedback.
POL3039
6
Standards of Presentation
• Dissertations should be word-processed in Ariel font size 12 with a minimum of 1.5 pt line spacing.
• Submitted dissertations should include the essay submission template which must include the title,
word count, abstract (150 words maximum), registration number and name of dissertation
supervisor. These do not count towards the final word count. If necessary the abstract can be
included on a separate sheet with title, and again this will not be included in the word count for the
dissertation.
• Items on the submission template page (and any contents pages/bibliography/reference
footnotes/appendixes) are excluded from the word count, but substantive discursive footnotes
used to amplify or expand a point, will be included in the word count. Be aware that most word
processing packages count in-text (Harvard system) citations in the word count. The undergraduate
handbook gives details of referencing conventions. The word count basically starts at the first page of
substantive text (first page of introduction) to the last page of substantive text (final page of conclusion).
Bibliography and citation based footnotes are not included in the word count.
WORKSHOP ONE: Introduction
Aim: This 2-hour workshop will introduce students to the dissertation process and clarify what is expected
of students over the next two semesters. This session will focus on the importance of research design and
how to formulate a research question.
To help prepare for the workshop all students the following readings are recommended:
Colin Robson and Kieran McCartan (2015) Real World Research: 4th Edition (London: Wiley) Chapter 3
– Developing Your Ideas
Alan Bryman (2016) Social Research Methods: 5th Edition (Oxford: OUP) Chapter 4 – Planning a
Research Project and Formulating Research Questions
WORKSHOP TWO: Research Design
Aim: This workshop will focus on helping students to decide how you are going to answer your research
question. This session will look at how to select the appropriate theory/conceptual framework/approaches
to research and how to justify your research design. This workshop will also address issues of feasibility
and ethics.
To help prepare for the workshop all students should read the following:
Colin Robson and Kieran McCartan (2015) Real World Research: 4th Edition (London: Wiley) Chapter 4
– General Design Issues
Alan Bryman (2016) Social Research Methods: 5th Edition (Oxford: OUP) Chapter 3 – Research Designs
WORKSHOP THREE: Crafting the Research Proposal
Aims: This workshop will focus on what comprises a research proposal and the relationship between the
research proposal and the dissertation. This workshop will also address how to structure your dissertation
and clarify what students need to do for the first assignment (submission of 1000 word proposal).
POL3039
7
Tasks for students will be communicated on Blackboard for this workshop – you will be required to
complete independent tasks in preparation.
WORKSHOP FOUR: Approaches to Research
Aims: This workshop will focus on possible approaches to research design and how to approach
answering your research question. Different qualitative approaches to research design will be outlined and
the opportunities and challenges which arise with different approaches. We will discuss what is realistic
within the confines of the dissertation.
Tasks for students will be communicated on Blackboard for this workshop – you will be required to
complete independent tasks in preparation.
WORKSHOP FIVE: Writing the Literature Review
Aims: In this workshop students we will focus on how to write a literature review. This session will cover
the key aspects of writing a literature review and how to manage your time effectively when selecting the
literature to review.
To help prepare for the workshop all students should read the following:
Chris Hart (1998) Doing a Literature Review (London: SAGE)
https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/28728_LitReview___hart_chapter_1.pdf
HELPFUL GENERAL RESOURCES
Robson,R. and K. McCartan (2015) Real World Research: 4th Edition (London: Wiley)
Lamont, C. (2022) Research Methods in International Relations
Harrison, L (2001), Political research: an introduction (London: Routledge)
Murray R (2011), How to write a thesis (Buckingham: Open University Press)
Oliver P (2004), Writing your thesis (London: Sage)
Silbergh, D (2001), Doing Dissertations in Politics: a student guide (London: Routledge).
RESOURCES FOR SPECIFIC METHODS
Paul Avery and Michael Desch, “What do Policy Makers want from us? Results of a Survey of Current
and Former Senior National Security Decision Makers” International Studies Quarterly 58 (2), 2014.
Claudia Aradau and Jef Huysmans, ‘Critical Methods in International Relations: The Politics of
Techniques, Devices, and Acts’, European Journal of International Relations 20(3), 2014.
Andrew Bennett and Colin Elman, “Qualitative Research: New Developments in Case Study Methods”
Annual Review of Political Science 9(1), 2006, pp. 455-476.
Alan Buckingham and Peter Saunders, The Survey Methods Workbook (London: Wiley, 2004)
POL3039
8
James M. Curry, “In-Depth Qualitative Research and the Study of American Political Institutions” PS:
Political Science and Politics 50(1), 2017.
Kevin C. Dunn and Iver B. Neumann, Undertaking Discourse Analysis for Social Research (Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press, 2016)
Bent Flyvbjerg, ‘Five Misunderstandings about Case Study Research’ Qualitative Inquiry 12(2), 2006.
Barbara Geddes, “How the Cases You Chose Affect the Answers You Get: Selection Bias in Comparative
Politics” Political Analysis 2 (1990), pp. 131-150.
Andra Gillespie and Melissa R. Michelson, “Participant Observation and the Political Scientist:
Possibilities, Priorities, and Practicalities” PS: Political Science and Politics 44(2) (2011), pp. 261-265.
Lene Hansen, Security as Practice: Discourse Analysis and the Bosnian War (Abingdon and New
York: Routledge, 2006)
Rolf Johansson, Case Study Methodology; see http://www.psyking.net/htmlobj-
3839/case_study_methodology-_rolf_johansson_ver_2.pdf
Jonathan Joseph and John Michael Roberts, Realism, Discourse and Deconstruction (London:
Routledge, 2004)
Helen Kara, Creative Research Methods in the Social Sciences (Bristol: Policy Press, 2015)
Joseph MacKay and Jamie Levin. “Hanging Out in International Politics: Two Kinds of Explanatory
Political Ethnography for IR” International Studies Review 17(2), 2015, pp. 163-188.
Peter Marsden and James Wright, Handbook of Survey Research: Second Edition (Bingley: Emerald
Press, 2010)
Jennifer Mason, ‘Facet Methodology: The Case for an Inventive Research Orientation’, Methodological
Innovations 6(3), 2011.
Christine Meyer, “A Case in Case Study Methodology” Field Methods 13(4), 2001, pp. 329-352.
Jennifer Milliken, ‘The Study of Discourse in International Relations: A Critique of Research and
Methods’ European Journal of International Relations 5(2), 1999, pp. 225-254.
Layna Mosley (ed) Interview Research in Political Science (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2013).
Jennie-Keith Ross and Marc Howard Ross, “Participant Observation in Political Research” Political
Methodology 1(1), 1974.
Sharon Rivera et al., “Interviewing Political Elites: Lessons from Russia” PS: Political Science and
Politics 35(4), 2002.
Herbert J. Rubin and Irene Rubin, Qualitative interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data (California: SAGE,
1995)
Peregrine Schwartz-Shea and Samantha Majic, “Ethnography and Participant Observation: Political
Science Research in this ‘Late Methodological Moment’” PS: Political Science and Politics 50(1), 2017.
Laura Sjoberg and Caron E. Gentry, Mothers, Monsters, Whores: Women’s Violence in Global Politics
(London/New York: Zed Books, 2007).
Stephen Spencer, Visual Research Methods in the Social Sciences: Awakening Visions (London:
Routledge, 2011)
POL3039
9
Liam Stanley, ‘Using Focus Groups in Political Science and International Relations’ Politics 36(3), 2016,
pp. 236-249.
Wandra Vrasti, “The Strange Case of Ethnography and International Relations” Millennium 37(2), 2008.
Srdjan Vucetic, ‘Genealogy as a research tool in International Relations’ Review of International Studies
37(3), 2011, pp.1295-1312
Mike Wallace and Alison Wray, Critical Reading and Writing for Postgraduates; 3rd Edition, (London:
Sage, 2016)
Lisa Wedeen, “Reflections on Ethnographic Work in Political Science”, Annual Review of Political
Science 3(2010), pp. 255-272.
