4 thoughts to “Final Research Design Presentation”
Bobby, I thought that the methodological reflections and challenges moving forward that you included in your presentation were very thoughtful and comprehensive — one of the strong points of your project, which is good because these are very important points. I am interested to know how you chose to operationalize your dependent variable (success/failure) because I wonder to what degree Ukraine is actually better off. If you are using regime change as the measure, is this really a good benchmark for revolution success — and the success of US democracy promotion programs? I understand why you couldn’t discuss this in depth here (because of the time limit), but this might be something to reflect on in your FNP.
Bobby, I think your discussion of your methodology and case selection was very strong in this presentation. I came to many of the same conclusions you did regarding methodology and usually for similar reasons. For example, we are both hoping to focus on post-Communist states in Eastern Europe and want to achieve a generalizability to other post-Communist Eastern European states while still maintaining that level of specificity to that region. Hence, small-n analysis. One thing I would have liked to see more of in this presentation is discussion of how you are planning to operationalize your variables. You don’t seem to do much of that in this presentation and I am interested in learning how you would define a revolution’s success and efficacy of U.S. democratic aid.
Boby, you have a very interesting puzzle here and you draw and your draw a lot from the existing literature. You also provide a great deal of the history and background of color revolutions. I, like Jack, would also be interested in how you would operationalize your dependent variable. I think that the concerns you have with the way you might operationalize the U.S. democratic aid are real but perhaps triangulating your sources you might be able to use some of the findings you have found. Good job and good luck with your FNP
Bobby — you’ve done a good job laying out the logic of your case selection and case comparison, and you’ve also done a very good job connecting your proposed research to scholarship and theory. As your classmates noted in their comments, it would be good to hear a bit about how you propose to operationalize your variable (especially because a rich or deep operationalization of these complex ideas like “success” or “democracy promotion” will be critical for achieving valid and reliable results). It might also have been a good idea to include your causal model diagram here to show how the various variable fit together (or how you hypothesize their fit) since the timing or sequencing of these different factors in the different cases might well matter. Mill’s Methods is attentive to the presence/absence of certain factors, but it is not limited to thinking of things in those terms. Looking ahead to 306 you might also consider the role of leadership (leaders at the head of the revolution in each case) as well as the organization or strength of the social movements supporting revolution in each case. There are a whole range of factors that might be at play here, but you have a good start on a logic of comparison and analysis.
Bobby, I thought that the methodological reflections and challenges moving forward that you included in your presentation were very thoughtful and comprehensive — one of the strong points of your project, which is good because these are very important points. I am interested to know how you chose to operationalize your dependent variable (success/failure) because I wonder to what degree Ukraine is actually better off. If you are using regime change as the measure, is this really a good benchmark for revolution success — and the success of US democracy promotion programs? I understand why you couldn’t discuss this in depth here (because of the time limit), but this might be something to reflect on in your FNP.
Bobby, I think your discussion of your methodology and case selection was very strong in this presentation. I came to many of the same conclusions you did regarding methodology and usually for similar reasons. For example, we are both hoping to focus on post-Communist states in Eastern Europe and want to achieve a generalizability to other post-Communist Eastern European states while still maintaining that level of specificity to that region. Hence, small-n analysis. One thing I would have liked to see more of in this presentation is discussion of how you are planning to operationalize your variables. You don’t seem to do much of that in this presentation and I am interested in learning how you would define a revolution’s success and efficacy of U.S. democratic aid.
Boby, you have a very interesting puzzle here and you draw and your draw a lot from the existing literature. You also provide a great deal of the history and background of color revolutions. I, like Jack, would also be interested in how you would operationalize your dependent variable. I think that the concerns you have with the way you might operationalize the U.S. democratic aid are real but perhaps triangulating your sources you might be able to use some of the findings you have found. Good job and good luck with your FNP
Bobby — you’ve done a good job laying out the logic of your case selection and case comparison, and you’ve also done a very good job connecting your proposed research to scholarship and theory. As your classmates noted in their comments, it would be good to hear a bit about how you propose to operationalize your variable (especially because a rich or deep operationalization of these complex ideas like “success” or “democracy promotion” will be critical for achieving valid and reliable results). It might also have been a good idea to include your causal model diagram here to show how the various variable fit together (or how you hypothesize their fit) since the timing or sequencing of these different factors in the different cases might well matter. Mill’s Methods is attentive to the presence/absence of certain factors, but it is not limited to thinking of things in those terms. Looking ahead to 306 you might also consider the role of leadership (leaders at the head of the revolution in each case) as well as the organization or strength of the social movements supporting revolution in each case. There are a whole range of factors that might be at play here, but you have a good start on a logic of comparison and analysis.