POLS 5324 (The Executive)

POLS 5324 (The Executive)

Dr. Dometrius Office Phone: 742-3036

Office: Holden 13 Email:

Office Hours: 9:00-11:00 a.m. MW, Web Page: http://www.webpages.ttu.edu/ndometri

& by appointment or walk-in

COURSE PURPOSE

This course is on political executives -- those elected who also manage programs. The literature touching on this topic is enormous. It is touched upon as well in courses on voting behavior, interest groups, the legislature, comparative governments, bureaucratic politics, and more.

This course will focus primarily on the segment of that literature dealing with the American president, though some readings are included touching upon comparative executives such as governors or prime ministers. Even emphasizing the presidency the research issues and related literature are too vast for a single course. Recognizing that not everything can be included this syllabus focuses on the most contemporary issues and literature. Its purpose is to introduce students to this literature, to some important questions, to how scholars have addressed those questions, and to provide the substantive exposure necessary for students to conduct their own research in this area.

Expected Learning Outcomes:

1. Be able to professionally summarize the existing literature on questions dealing with executives.

Method of Assessment: Class participation and Literature reviews.

2. Be able to identify important theoretical and empirical issues in presidency research.

Method of Assessment: Class participation, Literature reviews, research project.

3. Conduct professional research on the executive.

Method of Assessment: Research project.

COURSE ACTIVITIES / EXPECTATIONS

Expectations

I expect Ph.D. students to behave as professional political scientists who are engaged in the acquisition and creation of social scientific knowledge. As a result, students are required to fully participate in a professional manner during class seminar discussions – i.e., fully read all of the assigned required readings for a given class before we meet, and to be able to competently discuss this material within a classroom setting. A seminar where students are not well prepared and willing to engage the material with one another is unacceptable graduate student behavior that will not be approved by the instructor.

Although the class seminar discussions are a collaborative enterprise, written assignments will be done independently by each student. Any part of a written assignment that is not your own work is forbidden.

Grades

Course grades will be based on 30% in-class participation, 30% literature reviews, and 40% a research project. Each is described more fully below.

In-class participation

This is a graduate seminar on the executive. This means a number of things. First the format is discussion, not lecture. Students must come to class having carefully read -- and carefully considered -- all of the required readings for the week. Second, the class emphasis is not a survey of findings, but identifying our current state of research and scholarly knowledge on the presidency as well as the researchable issues to be addressed. Students need to approach the readings as a scholar would. What is the research question / purpose? What is the theory / hypothesis being examined? How reliable is the evidence / research strategy presented by the author? What additional research would test or strengthen the argument? In sum, students are required to present thoughtful professional critiques of each meeting’s readings. On most class days students will be asked to present one or more of the assigned readings for that day.

Literature Reviews

At four times during the semester each student will turn in a review of the literature on a specific research theme on executives. By specific theme, I don’t mean something broad, such as “presidential campaigns” but rather a focused research tradition such as the role of priming in presidential campaigns.

The literature review should be similar to what you find in research articles. It should provide a history of the research tradition – what work first raised the question and what important later works have contributed information about the question. Identify the theoretical, data, statistical, or other contributions later works have made and the answers each provided.

Each literature review should be approximately 15 pages and cover 10-15 important works. These should be IMPORTANT works – those cited consistently by later scholars in the field, not just any 10-15 that you might find. Fewer than half of the important works covered should be required readings on this syllabus and, to the extent possible and consistent with the emphasis on important works, you should include items not mentioned in either the required or supplementary sections of this syllabus. At the end of the literature review, and NOT included in the page count, should be two bibliographies. One should include full citations for those covered in your review. The second should include any other works that may be relevant but not include in your literature review. Do not pad this second section. It should be a serious effort to identify important works you were not able to cover. It’s length will differ depending on the topic chosen, but most should be more than only 2-3 works but less than one page in length.

Topic Selection. Inform me of the topic for you literature review whenever you have selected one. Review the topics of both required and supplementary articles cited in this syllabus and review the abstracts of those of interest to you to identify topics for your literature reviews. Each topic you select should be drawn from a substantially different body of literature. That is you should not have two or more topics all dealing with presidential campaigning. Additionally no more than two students can select topics drawing from similar bodies of literature. Also, topics should be drawn from themes addressed throughout the course, not just themes addressed in the first few weeks of the course. Since the presidential literature is vast, themes in the literature not covered in this course are acceptable.

When finished, you literature review should be emailed to me. It will also eventually be emailed to all other students in the course. The literature reviews can serve as study resources when preparing for MA comprehensive or PhD qualifying exams.

Research Project

The culmination of the course will be a 20-30 page research paper. This will be a typical research paper entailing: identification of a research question of scholarly / theoretical (not applied) importance to our understanding of the executive; reviewing the existing literature and identifying the knowledge gaps your research should fill; stating hypotheses to be examined; describing why your data and methodological approach are appropriate to test the hypotheses, doing the research, and presenting and interpreting your results. These papers should be of sufficient professional quality as to comprise the basis of potential conference papers or publications

The topic of your research paper may, but does not have to, be same as the topic of one of your literature reviews. If so, only a focused and condensed version of the literature review paper should appear in your research paper. I do not want to spend the first 10 pages of your research paper merely rereading an earlier literature review.

Students will provide the instructor an approximately 3-page summary of their proposed research paper by the middle of the semester and be prepared to present their summary in class. No two students are to have the same research paper topic. The final paper is not just a research design. You are expected to actually conduct some of the research and analysis described in your paper. I do not expect your actual research and analysis to necessarily be completed by the end of the course but you should have done enough to demonstrate the viability and utility of the proposed research and draw some tentative conclusions. Students will present their completed research project to the class on the last class day. The final written version of the paper is to be submitted not later than noon on Saturday, May 2.

STUDENT NEEDS

Any student who, because of a disabling condition, may require some special arrangements in order to meet course requirements should contact the instructor as soon as possible to make necessary accommodations. Students should present appropriate verification from Disable Student Services, Dean of Students Office. No requirement exists that accommodations be made prior to completion of this approved University process.

Any student who may miss one or more days due to religious observances should inform the instructor at the beginning of the course and discuss with him any accommodations may be necessary.

MISCELLANEOUS

All written assignments should be submitted typed, using standard 1 inch margins, double-spacing, and a 12 point or smaller font.

All readings assigned for a class day are to be brought to class in printed form on that day. Bring the full version of assigned chapters or articles, not just your notes on those items.

Sorry, but computers are not allowed during class meetings.

REQUIRED TEXTS AND READINGS

Neustadt, Richard E. 1990. Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents: The Politics of Leadership from Roosevelt to Reagan. New York: The Free Press.

Barber, James David. 1992. Presidential Character: Predicting Performance In The White House (4th Edition). Prentice Hall. (A slightly revised version of this work was also printed by Longman in 2008).

Rockman, Bert A. and Richard Waterman (eds). 2008. Presidential Leadership, the Vortex of Power. Oxford University Press.

ARTICLES: The vast majority of required readings will consist of journal articles. Nearly all of them are available electronically from the TTU library via either JSTOR or one of their other electronic services. The only exception might be book chapters or articles published in 2008 or 2009. Any required items fitting into this latter category will be available on the instructor’s web site whose address is listed at the top of this syllabus. Please check the assigned readings early and let me know of any you cannot find.

JOURNAL ABBREVIATIONS:

APSR: American Political Science Review

AJPS: American Journal of Political Science

JOP: Journal of Politics

PRQ: Political Research Quarterly

NOTE ON READINGS:

The topical divisions in the schedule below are somewhat artificial as most readings touch on multiple topics. The items could readily be duplicated under multiple topics (and some may be).

Many of the readings are sequenced – a later article criticizing or expanding upon an earlier one. So it is always best to read the material in the order I have listed it.

COURSE SCHEDULE

Jan. 14 – Some Classics on the Presidency

Neustadt – read the prefaces (both) and chapters 1-5.

Barber, chapters 1-9.

King, Gary. 1993. “The Methodology of Presidential Research,” in George C. Edwards III, John H. Kessel, and Bert A Rockman (eds), Researching the Presidency. Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 387-414. A copy of this chapter will be available on the instructor’s web site.

Rockman and Waterman, chapters 11 & 12.

Supplements

The entire Edwards, Kessel, and Rockman book. If your primary field of study includes the presidency, this book should be included in your permanent library.

Shaw, Greg M., Robert Y Shapiro, Lawrence R. Jacobs. 1996. "Searching Presidential Documents On-line: Advantages and Limitations." PS September: 501-04.

Jan 21 – Presidential campaigning.

Krosnick, Jon A., and Donald R. Kinder. 1990. “Altering the Foundations of Support for the President through Priming.” APSR 84 (June): 497-512.

Druckman, James N, Lawrence R. Jacobs, and Eric Ostermeier. 2004. “Candidate Strategies to Prime Issues and Image.” JOP 66:4 (November): 1180-1202.

Petrocik, John R. 1996. “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study.” American Journal of Political Science, 40:3 825-50.

Noah Kaplan, David K. Park, Travis N. Ridout. 2006. “Dialogue in American Political Campaigns? An Examination of Issue Convergence in Candidate Television Advertising.” AJPS 50:3 (July): 724-736.

Wlezien, Christopher, and Robert S. Erikson. 2002. “The Timeline of Presidential Election Campaigns.” Journal of Politics 64:969-993.

Thomas M. Holbrook, Scott D. McClurg. 2005. “The Mobilization of Core Supporters: Campaigns, Turnout, and Electoral Composition in United States Presidential Elections.” AJPS 49:4 (October): 689-703.

Jonathan S. Krasno and Donald Green. 2008. “Do Televised Presidential Ads Increase Voter Turnout? Evidence from a Natural Experiment.” JOP 70:1 (January): 245-61. 2008

Michael M. Franz, Paul Freedman, Ken Goldstein and Travis N. Ridout. 2008. “Understanding the Effect of Political Advertising on Voter Turnout: A Response to Krasno and Green” JOP 70:1 (January): 262-68.

Jonathan S. Krasno and Donald Green . 2008. “Response to Franz, Freedman, Goldstein and Ridout” JOP 70:1 (January): 269-71.

Supplementary

Ferejohn, John and Randall Calvert. 1984. “Presidential Coattails in Historical Perspective.” American Journal of Political Science 28:127-146

Finkel, Steven E. 1993. “Re-examining the ‘Minimal Effects’ Model in Recent Presidential Campaigns.,” JOP 55:1 1-21.

David F. Damore. 2004. “The Dynamics of Issue Ownership in Presidential Campaigns.” Political Research Quarterly 57: 391-397.

D. Sunshine Hillygus. 2005. “Campaign Effects and the Dynamics of Turnout Intention in Election 2000.” JOP 67:1 (February): 50-68

Kim L. Fridkin, Patrick J. Kenney, Sarah Allen Gershon, Karen Shafer, and Gina Serignese Woodall. 2007. “Capturing the Power of a Campaign Event: The 2004 Presidential Debate in Tempe.” JOP 69:3 (August): 770-785

Lanoue, David J., and Peter R. Schrott. 1989. “The Effects of Primary Season Debates on Public Opinion.” Political Behavior 11:3 289-306.

Druckman, James N. 2003. “The Power of Television Images: The First Kennedy-Nixon Debate Revisited.” JOP 65:2 (May): 559-71.

Matthew A. Baum. 2005. “Talking the Vote: Why Presidential Candidates Hit the Talk Show Circuit.” AJPS 49:2 (April): 213-234.

Petrocik, John R., William L. Benoit, and Glenn J. Hansen. 2003. “Issue Ownership and Presidential Campaigning, 1952-2000.” PRQ 118:4 599-626.

Michael D. Martinez and Jeff Gill. 2005. "The Effects of Turnout on Partisan Outcomes in U.S. Presidential Elections 1960-2000". JOP 67:4 (November): 1248-74.

Matthew Hoddie and Stephen R. Routh. 2004. “Predicting the Presidential Presence: Explaining Presidential Midterm Elections Campaign Behavior.” Political Research Quarterly 57: 257-265.

Jennifer Wolak. 2006. “The Consequences of Presidential Battleground Strategies for Citizen Engagement.” Political Research Quarterly, 59: 353-361.

Haynes, Audrey, Julianne F. Flowers, Paul-Henri Gurian. 2002. “Getting the Message Out: Candidate Communication Strategy During the Invisible Primary.” PRQ 55:3 (September): 633-52.