Political Science » Graduate Program »

Prospectus Defense Guidelines

Dissertation prospectus defenses are governed by departmental guidelines, as summarized below; questions about these guidelines should be directed to the department's graduate advisor (currently Professor Forrest Maltzman ).

At the dissertation prospectus defense meeting, the student and the student's working committee (normally, the committee chair and two readers) come together to consider the importance of the proposed dissertation project and the appropriateness and feasibility of the research design. The defense meeting also provides an opportunity for the working committee and others in attendance to provide a broad range of constructive input at this critical early stage. Although the meeting is typically conducted more in the spirit of a working session than of an exam, it culminates in a formal recommendation by the working committee about whether the research should proceed.

The defense can be scheduled only after every member of the student's working committee informs the departmental graduate advisor that the prospectus is ready to be defended. As soon as the graduate advisor gives the student permission to proceed, the student should:

1. Consult with the members of the working committee to find a date and time for the defense. All committee members should be prepared to devote at least two hours to the defense.
2. Work with the department staff to find a suitable room for the defense. The room should be available for at least two hours (and preferably longer) and should be able to accommodate several guests.
3. Assuming that a suitable room is available at the designated time, check back with the graduate advisor to ensure that there are no scheduling conflicts, and, assuming that there are none, finalize the room arrangements.
4. Prepare a one-page announcement of the defense. This announcement should contain the following information:
   • Title
   • Candidate
   • Date
   • Time
   • Location
   • Committee
   • Abstract (one paragraph)
5. At least ten days before the prospectus defense, this announcement must be posted electronically to all Political Science faculty members and graduate students.
6. At least ten days before the prospectus defense, the student must also deposit a copy of the prospectus in the department office, so any interested faculty member or graduate student will have an opportunity to examine it.
7. The student should also obtain a "Dissertation Topic Approval Form" from the graduate advisor, and bring it to the defense to be signed in the event that the defense is successful.

The defense is open to all Political Science faculty and graduate students who wish to attend. The procedures to be followed in a particular defense should be agreed on by the working committee members in a brief pre-defense session, but several considerations should generally be applicable.

1. The committee chair should chair the defense, and should indicate at the outset the procedures that will be followed.
2. The committee chair should then ask the student to provide a very brief project overview. Because the committee members can safely be assumed to be familiar with the prospectus and because the defense is primarily (though not exclusively) a proceeding involving the student and the working committee, a lengthy recitation is not appropriate. Five minutes should normally be more than enough time for the student’s introductory remarks.
3. The committee chair should ensure that there is ample time for questions and comments by members of the committee, other faculty members in attendance and graduate students, in that order of priority. The committee should, if at all possible, encourage questions and comments from graduate students.
4. At an appropriate time, the committee chair should excuse the student and all guests from the room so the committee can formulate its recommendations. When this discussion is complete, the committee chair should call the student and guests back in, convey in short form the nature of the recommendations, and adjourn the meeting.
5. If the committee members determine that the student should, on the basis of the prospectus as defended, be given permission to proceed with the dissertation, they should sign the form that the student has brought to the defense. Also available to the committee are several alternatives to outright approval. These alternatives include the following:
   1. If committee members conclude that the prospectus needs fundamental revision, it will have to be defended again. (Because the committee members approved the original prospectus defense, this option should be exercised only if the actual defense turns up serious problems that were not evident earlier.)
   2. If the meeting has brought to the surface certain concerns that need to be taken into account in the prospectus but are relatively narrow, then the committee members may:
      1. Delay signing the approval form until the necessary changes have been made to the prospectus, but without requiring that a new defense be scheduled; or
      2. Agree that the readers will sign the form but the committee chair will not do so until the prospectus has been satisfactorily revised according to the committee's specifications.

After the prospectus has received committee approval, the student should establish a working relationship with the committee members. The nature of this relationship will vary from student to student and from committee to committee (and even within a committee, from member to member). Some committees or some members may expect to play a very active role in guiding the project as it develops. Others may prefer that the chair monitor the project closely, with the readers playing a lesser role. There is no single “best” way to proceed, but it is vital at the very least that the faculty members of the dissertation committee (a) be kept informed of the progress the student is making, (b) be consulted when unanticipated problems arise, and (c) review drafts of completed sections on an ongoing basis.

Sample Prospectus:

Logan Wright, "Ideas and Interests in Reforming China's Financial System"

Tonya Giannoni "State and Socioeconomic Actors in Argentina 1900-1943: A Changing Relationship?"

 

Revised 1/30/06.