Despite the widespread use of paired comparisons, we lack clear guidance about how to use this research strategy in practice, particularly in case selection. The literature tends to assume that cases are systematically selected from a known population, a major assumption for many topics of interest to political scientists. This article speaks to this gap. It describes three distinct logics of paired comparison relevant to theory development, presents a simple way of considering and comparing them, and explores how this approach can inform more intentional research design, with particular attention to low information settings where substantial research is needed to ascertain the values of independent or dependent variables. The discussion underscores inter alia the need to be aware and explicit about the implications of case selection for the ability to test and build theory, and the need to reconsider the well-cited “rule” of not selecting on the dependent variable.

This article highlights the contribution of randomized, quantitative sampling techniques to answering qualitative questions posed by the study. In short it asks: what qualitative insights do we derive from quantitative sampling processes? Rather than simply being a means to an end, I argue the sampling process itself generated data. More specifically, seeking out more than 220 geographically dispersed individuals, selected though a randomized cluster sample, resulted in the identification of relationship patterns, highlighted extant resistance-era hierarchies and patronage networks, as well as necessitated deeper, critical engagement with the sampling framework. While this discussion is focused on the study of former resistance members in Timor-Leste, these methodological insights are broadly relevant to researchers using mixed methods to study former combatants or other networked social movements.

We describe a hands-on teaching module on the redistricting process for use in undergraduate classes. Students engage in the process of strategically drawing district lines, which allows them to inductively understand gerrymandering and its consequences. The module also encourages students to consider the many factors that complicate efforts to identify a “fair” approach to redistricting, focusing on communities of interest. We also discuss a number of extensions to the activity and provide examples of controversial districts that may be used to illustrate various redistricting concepts.

Political science departments often require a senior-capstone course as part of the major. The Wahlke Report (1991) recommended including such a course more than 20 years ago, and the Association of American Colleges and Universities considers it a high-impact practice. Colleges and universities are also advocating broad efforts of civic engagement—an approach to academic work for which political science majors are uniquely qualified. This article describes the successes and failures of partnering a senior-capstone course with seven public agencies in a small city. By developing a multistage process for interacting with agencies, city officials, and the public, this “State of the Community” project provides students with a real-world opportunity to serve as political consultants. By emphasizing the importance of timeliness, teamwork, presentation skills, and professionalism, this project can be a turning point for political science students who must soon transition from students in the undergraduate world to citizens in the community.

During the six weeks before the 2012 elections, we conducted a contest for the 54 students enrolled in an upper-division political science course on campaigns and elections. We modified and improved on a similar contest conducted by the first-named author (Abramson 2010) during the 2008 election campaign. Using contract prices posted by Intrade.com, an electronic gaming market in Dublin, we asked students to choose among 10 political outcomes. The contest was designed to help students learn about campaign strategies, understand how electoral rules affect political outcomes, and encourage them to talk about the campaign. We discuss ways we improved on Abramson’s 2008 contest and show that student participation increased substantially.

This article reflects on two specific sets of questions—both of which were prominent in conversations regarding the future of teaching in higher education—that emerged as we developed a pedagogy designed to advance the primary substantive goals of environmental justice. The first set of questions asks how to enhance interdisciplinary thinking and communication in a single course; the second asks how best to teach critical thinking online. We identify key challenges in both areas in a discussion of our experience in teaching two contemporaneous venues—one on-campus and one online—of an environmental justice course grounded in the subfield of political theory.

In an effort to teach strategic thinking, the Center for International Security Studies at Princeton University designed an adaptable model for crisis simulation that could be used in a variety of institutional contexts and with diverse content matter. Moreover, the simulation helped students to develop an understanding of several other important abstract concepts in political science: notably, information uncertainty, friction or “the fog of war,” and bureaucratic stove piping. This article describes the design, content, and implementation of our original simulation. It is based on a “loose-nukes” scenario resulting from the hypothetical collapse of the Pakistani state. We conclude by evaluating the benefits and limitations of the simulation and by suggesting ways in which it could be implemented in other institutional contexts.

Taking students to a prison for a field trip creates an opportunity to engage students on issues central to democratic citizenship including democracy, power, and punishment. Although some students opt out of the prison visit, a field trip to a prison creates a vibrant learning environment where students can share their experience with other classmates as well as reflect on their experiences with authority figures. It also disrupts power relationships between students and instructors because all prison field trip participants are virtual inmates for a day.