PSIR 605 | Course Introduction and Application Information

Course Name
Comparative Politics
Code
Semester
Theory
(hour/week)
Application/Lab
(hour/week)
Local Credits
ECTS
PSIR 605
Fall
3
0
3
7.5

Prerequisites
None
Course Language
English
Course Type
Required
Course Level
Third Cycle
Course Coordinator -
Course Lecturer(s)
Assistant(s) -
Course Objectives By the end of this course, students are expected to be able to identify, analyze and critically evaluate different forms of states, state institutions, political regimes, political parties, electoral systems and mass behavior.
Course Description The students who succeeded in this course;
  • Students will be able to discuss institutional, cultural and rational approaches in comparative politics.
  • Students will be able to discuss main features of democratic and no-democratic systems.
  • Students will be able to distinguish between different methods used in comparative politics.
  • Students will be able discuss how public opinion affects governmental policies.
  • Students will be able to explain variations in political culture, behavior and political institutions across countries and time.
  • Students will be able to discuss the relationship between politics and economics.
Course Content The course introduces students to the study of political institutions, political culture, political behavior and political processes from a comparative perspective. Students will become familiar with the main theories, methods and terms used in comparative politics.

 



Course Category

Core Courses
Major Area Courses
X
Supportive Courses
Media and Management Skills Courses
Transferable Skill Courses

 

WEEKLY SUBJECTS AND RELATED PREPARATION STUDIES

Week Subjects Related Preparation
1 Introduction – syllabus presentation and explanation. Syllabus and documents containing rules for the undertaking and evaluation of students’ individual analytical work
2 Comparative politics and theory Todd Landman, Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics. Routledge. Chapter 1. Lijphart, Arend. "Comparative politics and the comparative method." American political science review 65, no. 03 (1971): 682-693. Kohli, Atul, Peter Evans, Peter J. Katzenstein, Adam Przeworski, Susanne Hoeber Rudolph, James C. Scott, and Theda Skocpol. "The role of theory in comparative politics: A symposium." World Politics 48, no. 01 (1995): 1-49.
3 Comparative method Landman, Chapters 2 and 3.
4 State Skocpol, Theda. 1985, “Bringing the State Back in: Strategies of Analysis in Current Research,” in Peter Evans, et al, Bringing the State Back In. 

 Evans, Peter. "The eclipse of the state? Reflections on stateness in an era of globalization." World politics 50, no. 01 (1997): 62-87. Migdal, Joel S. State in society: Studying how states and societies transform and constitute one another. Cambridge University Press, 2004. Chapters 1-3.
5 Democracy and Democratization Seymour M. Lipset. 1959. “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy,” American Political Science Review 53: 69 105. Samuel P. Huntington, “Will More Countries Become Democratic?” Political Science Quarterly, 99 (Summer 1984): 193-218. Geddes, Barbara. 1999. ‘What Do We Know About Democratization After Twenty Years?’ Annual Review of Political Science, 2:115‐44. Munck, Geraldo L., and Jay Verkuilen. 2002. ‘Conceptualizing and Measuring Democracy: Evaluating Alternative Indices.’ Comparative Political Studies 35: 5‐34. Horowitz, Donald, “Democracy in Divided Societies”, Journal of Democracy, vol.4, no.4, (Oct 1993), p.18-38
6 Legislatures Lijphart, Arend. 2012. Patterns of Democracy. Reynolds, Andrew. 1999. ‘Women in the Legislatures and Executives of the World: Knocking at the Highest Glass Ceiling.’ World Politics 51(4): 547‐572. Tsebelis, George. "Decision making in political systems: Veto players in presidentialism, parliamentarism, multicameralism and multipartyism." British journal of political science 25, no. 03 (1995): 289-325.
7 Executives Linz, Juan. 1990. ‘The Perils of Presidentialism.’ Journal of Democracy 1(1): 51‐69. Landman, Chap. 8 
 Riggs, Fred W. 1997. ‘Presidentialism versus parliamentarism: Implications for representativeness and legitimacy.’ International Political Science Review, 18 (3): 253‐278. Stepan, Alfred and Cindy Skach. 1993. ‘Constitutional frameworks and democratic consolidation: Parliamentarism and presidentialism.’ World Politics 46 (1): 1‐ 22.
8 Midterm Exam
9 Elections Lichbach and Zuckerman, Chap. 5 
 Landman, Chap. 8 
 David Farrell, 1997. Comparing Electoral Systems.
10 Voting Behaviour Powell, G. Bingham and Guy D. Whitten (1993). “A Cross-National Analysis of Economic Voting: Taking Account of the Political Context.” American Journal of Political Science 37(2): 391-414. Çarkoğlu, Ali. 2012. Economic evaluations vs. ideology: Diagnosing the sources of electoral change in Turkey, 2002–2011. Electoral Studies 31, no. 3: 513–21. Kalaycıoğlu, Ersin. 1994. Elections and party preferences in Turkey changes and continuities in the 1990s. Comparative Political Studies 27, no. 3: 402–24.
 Jackman, Robert W. and Ross A. Miller. 1995. ‘Voter Turnout in the Industrial Democracies during the 1980s.’ Comparative Political Studies, 27: 467‐92.
11 Political Movements Kentmen-Çin, Çiğdem. 2015. Participation in social protests: comparing Turkey with EU patterns. Kalaycıoğlu, Ersin. 2007. Religiosity and protest behaviour: The case of Turkey in comparative perspective. Journal of Southern Europe and the Balkans 9, no. 3: 275–91. Norris, Pippa, Stefaan, Walgrave, and Peter Van Aelst. 2005. Who demonstrates? Antistate rebels, conventional participants, or everyone? Comparative Politics 37, no. 2: 189–205. Minkoff, Debra C. 1997. Producing social capital: National social movements and civil society. American Behavioral Scientist 40 (5): 606–19.
12 Political Attitudes Kentmen-Çin, Çiğdem. 2008. Determinants of Support for EU Membership in Turkey Islamic Attachments, Utilitarian Considerations and National Identity. Hooghe, Liesbet and Gary Marks. 2004. “Does Identity or Economic Rationality Drive Public Opinion on European Integration? PS: Political Science & Politics 37, 3: 415-420. Hobolt, Sara B. 2012. “Citizen Satisfaction with Democracy in the European Union.” Journal of Common Market Studies 50, 1: 88-105. Karp Jeffrey A., S. A. Banducci, Shaun. Bowler. 2003. “To Know It is to Love it? Satisfaction with Democracy in the European Union.” Comparative Political Studies 36, 3: 271-292.
13 Political Conflict Landman, Chap. 5. 
 Lichbach, Mark I. “An Evaluation of "Does Economic Inequality Breed Political Conflict?" Studies.” World Politics Vol. 41, No. 4 (Jul., 1989), pp. 431-470. Eastery, William. Can Institutions Resolve Ethnic Conflict? Economic Development and Cultural Change. Vol. 49, No. 4 (July 2001) (pp. 687-706)
14 Review
15 Review
16 Final Exam

 

Course Notes/Textbooks Books (see above), power point presentations
Suggested Readings/Materials ACADEMIC HONESTY: Honesty and trust are the most fundamental pillars of learning and are necessary foundation for success and academic freedom in a university. Hence, any behavior that jeopardizes the learning environment by violating the rules of academic honesty will not be tolerated or condoned: Violations of academic honesty include but are not limited to: Cheating or facilitating cheating • looking or attempting to look at another student's answers or allowing others to copy one's answers, • copying other student’s in-class or take-home exam answers or letting others use take-home exam answers, • using "cheat sheet," pre-programmed calculator if not allowed by the instructor, • having someone else prepare the term project or homework or letting others use one’s homework/term project/paper, • Assistance of another person in preparation of a tem paper/homework/project if not allowed by the instructor, • Taking an exam for another student, • Purchasing term projects or homework or other assignments, • Signing in place of another student using their name/signature/student id number, Plagiarism • showing the work of another as one's own, • Not properly citing an earlier own work, • Submitting the same homework/paper/term project in one more one course if not allowed by the instructor, • Inaccurately or inadequately citing sources including those from the Internet, Violations of academic honesty can result in disciplinary action, as stated in the "Student Disciplinary Rules and Regulation" of the University. http://www.ieu.edu.tr/en/bylaws/type/read/id/13 and http://kariyer.ieu.edu.tr/en/bylaws/type/read/id/81 By enrolling in the University, each student is assumed to have read the rules and regulations regarding academic dishonesty, and lack of knowledge of this policy is not an acceptable defense.

 

EVALUATION SYSTEM

Semester Activities Number Weigthing
Participation
1
20
Laboratory / Application
Field Work
Quizzes / Studio Critiques
Homework / Assignments
1
20
Presentation / Jury
Project
1
30
Seminar / Workshop
Oral Exams
Midterm
1
30
Final Exam
Total

Weighting of Semester Activities on the Final Grade
4
100
Weighting of End-of-Semester Activities on the Final Grade
Total

ECTS / WORKLOAD TABLE

Semester Activities Number Duration (Hours) Workload
Theoretical Course Hours
(Including exam week: 16 x total hours)
16
3
48
Laboratory / Application Hours
(Including exam week: 16 x total hours)
16
Study Hours Out of Class
14
5
Field Work
Quizzes / Studio Critiques
Homework / Assignments
1
35
Presentation / Jury
Project
1
37
Seminar / Workshop
Oral Exam
Midterms
1
35
Final Exam
    Total
225

 

COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES AND PROGRAM QUALIFICATIONS RELATIONSHIP

#
Program Competencies/Outcomes
* Contribution Level
1
2
3
4
5
1

To be able to improve and deepen the theoretical and conceptual proficiencies on Political Science and International Relations.

X
2

To be able to evaluate critically and analytically the relationships between various factors in the discipline of Political Science and International Relations such as structures, actors, institutions and culture at an advanced level.

X
3

To be able to determine the theoretical and empirical gaps in Political Science and International Relations literature and gain the ability of questioning at an advanced level.

X
4

To be able to gain the ability to develop innovative, leading and original arguments in order to fill the gaps in Political Science and International Relations literature.

X
5

To be able to gather, analyze, and interpret the data by using advanced qualitative or quantitative research methods in Political Science and International Relations.

X
6

To be able to develop original academic works and publish scientific articles in refereed national or international indexed journals in the field of Political Science and International Relations.

X
7

To be able to describe individual research and contemporary developments in Political Science and International Relations in written, oral, and visual forms.

X
8

To be able to take responsibility in an individual capacity and/or as part of a team in generating innovative and analytical solutions to the problems that arise in relation to the politics in daily life.

X
9

To be able to develop projects in determining the institutional and political instruments for conflict resolution in national and international politics.

X
10

To be able to prepare an original thesis in Political Science and International Relations based on scientific criteria.

X
11

To be able to follow new research and developments, publish scientific articles and participate the debates in academic meetings in Political Science and International Relations through a foreign language.

X
12

To be able to have ethical, social and scientific values in the stages throughout the processes of gathering, interpreting, disseminating and implementing data relevant to Political Science and International Relations. 

X

*1 Lowest, 2 Low, 3 Average, 4 High, 5 Highest