STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory

reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

School of Arts and Humanities

POLS500
Research Methods in Social
Science
3 Credit Hours
Length of Course: 8 Weeks
Prerequisite(s): None

Course Description (Catalog)

This course in research methods prepares the student to understand materials and
issues associated with but not limited to the logic of the scientific method, research
design, and qualitative and statistical analysis of data. Students will be afforded the
opportunity to conduct research on a current issue as it relates to the US Congress.
The course is intended to provide a foundation from which the student may use the
knowledge and practices gained in this course throughout the rest of their graduate
program.

Course Scope
This course of study will take the student through the various steps of a traditional
research design. The student will select a specific and appropriate research topic on
the US Congress which will be approved by the instructor. With the approved topic,
the student will begin to acquire the basic information and tools in order to complete
a research proposal. By accomplishing exercises, the student will gather
information, assess materials, and analyze data. This will result in the submission of
a final research proposal.

Course Objectives

1. Demonstrate proficiency in the use of selected research methods and

tools.
2. Describe and examine the scientific method.
3. Differentiate between scholarly and non-scholarly articles.

1
STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

4. Develop research questions and/or hypotheses for a given topic.

5. Write a literature review for a given topic.
6. Anticipate ethical issues related to research.
7. Evaluate data associated with research findings.
8. Judge the usefulness of various research approaches: content analysis,
survey and field research, quantitative and qualitative analysis, and case
studies.

Course Delivery Method

This masters-level course will offer the student a highly interactive virtual classroom.
Each week’s lesson will have a course announcement, assigned readings, a
discussion board assignment based on either course readings or an internet-based
project, and lesson notes provided by the instructor. The course will provide the
student with the necessary knowledge of research methods and on-line research
tools to develop a hypothesis, collect data, and draw a conclusion that will advance
the students knowledge skills in the selected field of study. Since the student is
expected to fully participate in discussions, interact with the instructor and other
students, and complete the various steps of a research design, reading assignments
and assigned projects should be completed in a timely manner.

Course Materials

Required Readings:

Creswell, J.W., Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods

Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2014.

 Student Website available online at

http://www.sagepub.com/creswellrd4e/main.htm
 Creswell (Your textbook) Chapter Lesson Notes available in the eClassroom
under Lessons
 Weekly Lesson notes for each week are available in the eClassroom under
Lessons

Additional Readings:

Bird, S.J., “Research Ethics, Research Integrity and the Responsible Conduct of
Research.” Science and Engineering Ethics, 12, no. 3, (2006): 411-412.

Busch, C., De Maret, P.S., Flynn, T., Kellum, R., Le, S., Meyers, B., Saunders, M.,
White, R and Palmquist, M., “Writing Guide: Survey Research Writing@csu.”
Colorado State University Department of English. Internet. Available from
http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/survey, accessed 15 January 2012.

2
STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

Busch, C., De Maret, P.S., Flynn, T., Kellum, R., Le, S., Meyers, B., Saunders, M.,
White, R and Palmquist, M., “Content Analysis Writing@csu.” Colorado State
University Department of English. Internet. Available from
http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/content, accessed 1 January 2012.

Coppedge, M., “Theory Building and Hypothesis Testing: Large- vs. Small-N Research
on Democratization.” Internet. Available from
http://www.nd.edu/~mcoppedg/crd/mpsacopp02.pdf, accessed 12 January 2012.

Cornell. S., “It's Time for Gun Control Proponents to Reclaim the Constitutional High
Ground.” George Mason University’s History New Network. Internet. Available from
http://hnn.us/articles/24828.html, accessed 12 January 2012.

De Vaus, D. A. Research Design in Social Research. London: SAGE, 2001.

Fearon, J., “Counterfactuals and Hypothesis Testing in Political Science.” World

Politics 43, no. 2, (1991): 169-195.

Hamilton, L., “Noncompetitive Elections for Congress.” Center on Congress at

Indiana University. Internet. Available from
http://centeroncongress.org/noncompetitive-elections-congress, accessed 1 January
2012.

ICPSR, “Content Analysis: Guide to Social Science Data Preparation and Archiving.”
ICPSR. Internet. Available from
http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/files/ICPSR/access/dataprep.pdf, accessed 1 January
2012.

Jackson, G., Adrianna, K. Maria, K., de las Alas, N., “Preparing Scholarly Reviews of
the Literature: A Webtorial.” Graduate School of Education and Human Development
at the George Washington University. Internet Available from
http://www.gwu.edu/~litrev, accessed 8 January 2012.

Kwak, N. and Radler, B. “A Comparison Between Mail and Web Surveys.” Journal of
Official Statistics. Internet. Available from
http://www.barold.com/www/JOS%20article.pdf, accessed 1 January 2012.

Pole, K., “Mixed Method Designs: A Review of Strategies for Blending Quantitative
and Qualitative Methodologies.” Mid-Western Educational Researcher 20, no. 4,
(2007): 35-38.

Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., and Dillon, L., “Quality in Qualitative Evaluation: A
Framework for Assessing Research Evidence.” National Centre for Social Research.
Internet. Available from http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2011/09/a_quality_framework_tcm6-38740.pdf, accessed 10 January
2015.

3
STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

Evaluation Procedures
Grades for this course are based upon classroom participation and the following
grading instruments:

GRADE INSTRUMENTS: %

Assignments (5) 30%

Forums (8) 40%
Midterm Exam 15%
Final Research Proposal 15%

* Additional information on Forums

See Resource Section of the Sakai Classroom for specific

rubrics. Each Forum assignment requires that each student
provide at least two substantive replies to other student posts.
The criteria for substantiveness includes the following:

1. The reply is in a complete paragraph, and is at least 150

words in length.
2. The reply genuinely adds new information or fresh
insight.
3. It does not simply summarize what another student has
said. Example: “I really like your post, especially when
you said…”
4. The reply is supported by at least one source, similar to
the original Forum response.
Should a student fail to make at least two substantive replies,
the penalty is a 20% of the total score; 10% for each reply. As
well, if the reply is not substantive, then you may also be
docked up to 10%. On the other hand, if the reply is
exceptional, then an additional 10% may be added to your
overall score for that assignment.

* Additional information on the Final Research Proposal

In this course, you will be developing a formal research proposal on a

topic as it relates to the US Congress. A formal research proposal shall
be prepared in accordance with the standards of the academic

4
STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

discipline. The formal proposal must provide a clear and lucid

description of a question or problem and a proposed method of
answering the question or solving the problem. Proposal drafting is
considered a learning process and helps the students avoid oversights
and possible mistakes. The proposal should explain the question or
problem to be investigated and convince the research paper professor
and department that the question or problem merits investigation. It
should show that the student has read the relevant and recent
literature on the subject and it should contain a list of materials
consulted during the preliminary stages of research. In general, the
research proposal should include background information related to
the research topic, purpose of the research, and investigatory
procedures to be used. The formal proposal should not exceed ten
(10) pages (proposal title page not included) and is due at the end of
Week 8 of the course. There are many topics worth investigations such
as:

 individual members of Congress

 state delegations

 regional delegations

 Congressional members by party

 Congressional members by gender

 Congressional members by race/ ethnicity

 Congressional members by age

 Congressional members by income

 Congressional members by education

 Congressional members by religion

In addition, Congress is seemingly the most researchable branch of

government. There are floor votes. There are committee votes. There
are bill sponsorships, co-sponsorships, and amendments. There are
position statements, speeches, and media interviews. There are web
sites. There are Tweets, Blogs, and Facebook pages. There are
campaign contributions and expenditures.

5
 STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

Course Outline

WK Topic(s) Course Reading(s) Assignment(s)

Objective(s)

Demonstrate Required Reading: Week 1 Forum:

proficiency in Preface & Chapter 1, 2, 3 , 4 Creswell Virtual Intro. /
the use of Study Politics
selected Scientifically &
Additional Readings:
research Ethical Issues
Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., and Dillon, L.,
methods and
“Quality in Qualitative Evaluation: A Framework
tools.
for Assessing Research Evidence.” National Week 1
CO 2
Centre for Social Research. Internet. Available Assignment: Online
Describe and
examine the from http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/wp- Library Exercise
scientific content/uploads/2011/09/a_quality_framework
method. _tcm6-38740.pdf, accessed 10 January 2012.
Develop Pole, K., “Mixed Method Designs: A Review of
research Strategies for Blending Quantitative and
questions Qualitative Methodologies.” Mid-Western
and/or Educational Researcher 20, no. 4, (2007): 35-
hypotheses 38.
Basic for a given
1 Concepts of topic.
Research
 CO
6 Anticipate
ethical issues
related to
research.

the usefulness
of various
research
approaches:
content
analysis,
survey and
field research,
quantitative
and qualitative
analysis, and
case studies.

6
 STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

1 Required Reading: Week 2 Forum:

Demonstrate Chapters 5, 6, 7 Creswell Topic Selection &
proficiency in Refined Hypothesis
the use of Additional Readings:
selected Jackson, G., Adrianna, K. Maria, K., de las Alas,
research N., “Preparing Scholarly Reviews of the Week 2
methods and Literature: A Webtorial.” Graduate School of Assignment:
tools. Education and Human Development at the Hypothesis
George Washington University. Internet Exercise
Describe and Available from http://www.gwu.edu/~litrev,
examine the accessed 8 January 2012.
scientific
method. Bird, S.J., “Research Ethics, Research Integrity
and the Responsible Conduct of Research.”
Differentiate Science and Engineering Ethics, 12, no. 3,
between (2006): 411-412.
scholarly and
non-scholarly Coppedge, M., “Theory Building and Hypothesis
Hypothesis articles Testing: Large- vs. Small-N Research on
2 Developme Democratization.” Internet. Available from
nt Develop http://www.nd.edu/~mcoppedg/crd/mpsacopp0
research 2.pdf, accessed 12 January 2012.
questions
and/or
hypotheses for
a given topic.

the usefulness
of various
research
approaches:
content
analysis,
survey and
field research,
quantitative
and qualitative
analysis, and
case studies.
 CO Required Readings: There are no new readings Week 3 Forum:
1 Demonstrat this week. Review Chapters 1-7 Creswell Topic Selection &
e proficiency in Refined Hypothesis
the use of II
selected
research
methods and Week 3
Literature Assignment:
3 tools.
Review Literature Review
 CO
3 Differentiat
e between
scholarly and
non-scholarly
articles.
 CO 5 Write a

7
 STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

literature
review for a
given topic.
 CO
6 Anticipate
ethical issues
related to
research.
 CO 8 Judge
the usefulness
of various
research
approaches:
content
analysis,
survey and
field research,
quantitative
and qualitative
analysis, and
case studies.

CO Required Readings: There are no new readings Week 4 Forum:

1 Demonstra this week. Review Chapters 1-7 Creswell, Purpose Statement
te proficiency special emphasis on Chapter 6
in the use of
selected Week 4
research Additional Readings: none Assignment: None
methods and
tools. Mid-term
CO Examination
2 Describe
and examine
Purpose the scientific
4
Statement method.
CO
3 Differentiat
e between
scholarly and
non-scholarly
articles.
CO
4 Anticipate
ethical issues
related to
research.
CO Week 5 Forum:
3 Differentia Required Readings: Data Collection
te between Chapters 8- 10 Creswell
Data
5 scholarly and
Collection Week 5
non-scholarly Hamilton, L., “Noncompetitive Elections for
articles. Congress.” Center on Congress at Indiana Assignment: Data
CO University. Internet. Available from Collection Exercise

8
 STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

7 Evaluate http://centeroncongress.org/noncompetitive-
data elections-congress, accessed 1 January 2012.
associated
with research Busch, C., De Maret, P.S., Flynn, T., Kellum, R.,
findings. Le, S., Meyers, B., Saunders, M., White, R and
CO 8 Judge Palmquist, M., “Data Collection Writing@csu.”
the usefulness Colorado State University Department of
of various English. Internet. Available from
research http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/cas
approaches: estudy/pop3c.cfm, accessed 23 March 2012.
content
analysis,
survey and
field research,
quantitative
and
qualitative
analysis, and
case studies.
Required Reading: Week 6 Forum:
CO Review Chapters 8-10, Creswell Content Analysis
1 Demonstra
te proficiency Cornell. S., “It's Time for Gun Control
in the use of Proponents to Reclaim the Constitutional High
selected Ground.” George Mason University’s History
research New Network. Internet. Available from Week 6
methods and http://hnn.us/articles/24828.html, accessed 12 Assignment:
tools. January 2012. Content Analysis
CO 8 Judge Exercise
the usefulness Additional Readings:
of various Busch, C., De Maret, P.S., Flynn, T., Kellum, R.,
Content research
6 Le, S., Meyers, B., Saunders, M., White, R and
Analysis approaches: Palmquist, M., “Content Analysis Writing@csu.”
content Colorado State University Department of
analysis, English. Internet. Available from
survey and http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/co
field research, ntent, accessed 1 January 2012.
quantitative
and ICPSR, “Content Analysis: Guide to Social
qualitative Science Data Preparation and Archiving.” ICPSR.
analysis, and Internet. Available from
case studies. http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/files/ICPSR/access/
dataprep.pdf, accessed 1 January 2012.

CO 8 Judge Required Readings: Week 7 Forum:

the usefulness Review Chapters 8-10 Creswell Research Proposal
of various Evaluation
research Additional Readings:
Research
7 approaches: Busch, C., De Maret, P.S., Flynn, T., Kellum, R.,
Proposal Week 7
content Le, S., Meyers, B., Saunders, M., White, R and
analysis, Palmquist, M., “Writing Guide: Survey Research Assignment: None
survey and Writing@csu.” Colorado State University – work on final
field research, Department of English. Internet. Available from research proposal

9
 STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

quantitative http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/research/sur
and vey,
qualitative accessed 15 January 2012.
analysis, and
case studies.
Kwak, N. and Radler, B. “A Comparison Between
CO 9 Develop
Mail and Web Surveys.” Journal of Official
a proposal for
Statistics. Internet. Available from
a research
http://www.barold.com/www/JOS%20article.pdf
study.
, accessed 1 January 2012.

CO Week 8 Forum:
1 Demonstra Surveys
te proficiency Required Readings: Review all Creswell
in the use of
selected Additional Readings: None Week 8
research Assignment:
methods and Final Research
tools. Proposal
CO
6 Anticipate
ethical issues
related to
research.
CO 8 Judge
the usefulness
Surveys and
of various
8 Research
research
Proposal
approaches:
content
analysis,
survey and
field research,
quantitative
and
qualitative
analysis, and
case studies.
CO
9 Develop a
proposal for a
research
study.

Policies

Please see the Student Handbook to reference all University policies. Quick links to
frequently asked question about policies are listed below.

Drop/Withdrawal Policy
Plagiarism Policy
Extension Process and Policy

10
STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

Disability Accommodations

WRITING EXPECTATIONS
All written submissions should be submitted in a font and page set-up that is
readable and neat. It is recommended that students try to adhere to a consistent
format, which is described below.
 Typewritten in double-spaced format with a readable style and font and
submitted inside the electronic classroom (unless classroom access is not
possible and other arrangements have been approved by the professor).
 Arial 12-point font.
 Page margins Top, Bottom, Left Side and Right Side = 1 inch, with reasonable
accommodation being made for special situations and online submission
variances. Please do not right justify your margins!

CITATION AND REFERENCE STYLE

Assignments completed in a narrative essay or composition format must follow the
Turabian Style Manual. The following link may help:
http://www.newhaven.edu/library/Guides/StyleGuides/Turabian/
To access the manual using the APUS course site click on:
Online Library

/Turabian

LATE ASSIGNMENTS
Students are expected to submit classroom assignments by the posted due date and
to complete the course according to the published class schedule. As adults,
students, and working professionals, I understand you must manage competing
demands on your time. Should you need additional time to complete an assignment
please contact me before the due date so we can discuss the situation and determine
an acceptable resolution. For each day that the assignment is late, the assignment is
penalized 5% of the maximum grade.

TURNITIN.COM
Turnitin.com is a web-based plagiarism prevention application licensed for campus
use.

Turnitin.com analyzes electronic submissions of student writing, compares them to

the contents of a huge online database, and generates a customized Originality
Report. The database used to produce this analysis contains a massive collection of
documents available on the Internet from both free and commercial sources, as well
as the full texts of all other papers that have been previously submitted to
Turnitin.com.

The Similarity index is based on the amount of matching text to a submitted paper:

Blue = no matching text

Green = one word to 24% matching

11
STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

Yellow = 25 -49% matching text

Orange = 50-74% matching text
Red= 75-100% matching text

Your assignments will be automatically submitted to Turnitin through the assignment

submission tab. There is no need for you to do anything. However, if your similarity
index is above 25%, you should revise the submission and resubmit prior to the
deadline. If it is above this percentage, generally it signals that you have not used
enough of your own analysis or made an attempt to paraphrase the sources. You will
find the APUS library writing center website helpful when trying to understand how to
paraphrase from a source.

NETIQUETTE
Online universities promote the advance of knowledge through positive and
constructive debate--both inside and outside the classroom. Discussions on the
Internet, however, can occasionally degenerate into needless insults and “flaming.”
Such activity and the loss of good manners are not acceptable in a university setting-
-basic academic rules of good behavior and proper “Netiquette” must persist.
Remember that you are in a place for the fun and excitement of learning that does
not include descent to personal attacks, or student attempts to stifle the discussion
of others.
 Technology Limitations: While you should feel free to explore the full-range
of creative composition in your formal papers, keep e-mail layouts simple.
The Educator classroom may not fully support MIME or HTML encoded
messages, which means that bold face, italics, underlining, and a variety of
color-coding or other visual effects will not translate in your e-mail messages.
 Humor Note: Despite the best of intentions, jokes and--especially--satire can
easily get lost or taken seriously. If you feel the need for humor, you may
wish to add “emoticons” to help alert your readers: ;-), : ), 

AIR FORCE GRADE POLICY-Not Accepting Grade Changes

(Please read the Air Force memo below)

It is important to let Air Force students know to submit any grade appeals
or exception extension requests immediately upon the end of a course. If a
corrected grade is not submitted within the Air Force deadline, the Air Force
will force tuition reimbursement, even if a failing grade has now been
changed to a passing grade.

It is also important that any Air Force students who appeal and receive a
grade change from an F send a copy of their updated grade report
immediately to milta.reimb@us.af.mil or take a copy into their Education office
to request their grade be updated. Unfortunately the Air Force portal only
allows our office the ability to post missing grades or change Incomplete
grades in their online portal. We do not have access to change a grade in
the AI Portal once a final grade has been submitted.

DISCLAIMER STATEMENT
Course content may vary from the outline to meet the needs of this particular group.

12
STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

Academic Services

ONLINE LIBRARY RESEARCH CENTER & LEARNING RESOURCES

The Online Library Resource Center is available to enrolled students and faculty from
inside the electronic campus. This is your starting point for access to online books,
subscription periodicals, and Web resources that are designed to support your
classes and generally not available through search engines on the open Web. In
addition, the Center provides access to special learning resources, which the
University has contracted to assist with your studies. Questions can be directed to
orc@apus.edu.
 Charles Town Library and Inter Library Loan: The University maintains a
special library with a limited number of supporting volumes, collection of our
professors’ publication, and services to search and borrow research books and
articles from other libraries.
 Electronic Books: You can use the online library to uncover and download
over 50,000 titles, which have been scanned and made available in electronic
format.
 Electronic Journals: The University provides access to over 12,000 journals,
which are available in electronic form and only through subscription services.
 Turnitin.com: Turnitin.com is a tool to improve student research skills that
also detect plagiarism. Turnitin.com provides resources on developing topics
and assignments that encourage and guide students in producing papers that
are intellectually honest, original in thought, and clear in expression. This tool
helps ensure a culture of adherence to the University's standards for
intellectual honesty. Turnitin.com also reviews students' papers for matches
with Internet materials and with thousands of student papers in its database,
and returns an Originality Report to instructors and/or students.
 Tutor.com: Students have access to ten free hours of tutoring service per
year through Tutor.com. Tutoring is available in the following subjects: math
(basic math through advanced calculus), science (biology, chemistry, and
physics), accounting, statistics, economics, Spanish, writing, grammar, and
more. Additional information is located in the Online Library. From the Online
Library home page, click on either the “Writing Center” or “Tutoring Center.”
All login information is available.

 The AMU/APU Library Guides provide access to collections of trusted sites on

the Open Web and licensed resources on the Deep Web. The following are
specially tailored for academic research at APUS:
 Program Portals contain topical and methodological resources to help
launch general research in the degree program. To locate, search by
department name, or navigate by school.

 Course Lib-Guides narrow the focus to relevant resources for the

corresponding course. To locate, search by class code (e.g., SOCI111),
or class name.

13
STUDENT WARNING: This course syllabus is from a previous semester archive and serves only as a preparatory
reference. Please use this syllabus as a reference only until the professor opens the classroom and you have access
to the updated course syllabus. Please do NOT purchase any books or start any work based on this syllabus; this
syllabus may NOT be the one that your individual instructor uses for a course that has not yet started. If you need
to verify course textbooks, please refer to the online course description through your student portal. This syllabus
is proprietary material of APUS.

 POLS 500 Lib-Guide available online at

http://apus.campusguides.com/POLS500.

Selected Bibliography

Blalock, H. M. Conceptualization and Measurement in Social Sciences. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2002.
Cooper, H.M. Integrating Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1993.
Hoover, K. and Donovan, T. The Elements of Social Scientific Thinking. Washington,
DC: The Brookings Institution, 1993.
Jacoby, W.G. Statistical Graphics for Univariate and Bivariate Data. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, 1997.
Kinder, D.R. and Palfrey, T.R. Experimental Foundations of Political Science. Ann
Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press, 1993.
Schmidt, D.E. Expository Writing in Political Science. New York, NY: Harper Collins,
1993.
Shively, P.W. The Craft of Political Research, (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall, 1997.
Stinchcombe, A.L. Constructing Social Theories. Chicago, IL: Chicago University
Press, 1987.
Trochin, W.M. The Research Methods Knowledge Base. Cincinnati, OH: Atomic Dog
Publishing, 1999.
Verba, S. and Nie, N. Participation in America: Political Democracy and Social
Equality. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1987.

14