Any Ph.D. knows that developing a basic statement of dissertation ideas rarely begins or ends with the formal proposal. In a sense dissertators never stop “proposing.” Throughout the process of data gathering and writing, they must make sense of new ideas and information, contend with theoretical and empirical dead ends, address the suggestions (or demands!) of advisors and committees. Nevertheless, the aspiring Ph.D. must start somewhere, and finding a starting point depends on one's own aptitudes and interests and the expectations of the scholars who will ultimately assess one's work. All of these may vary widely.

Failure to develop a dissertation topic and proposal is sometimes the downfall of graduate students. The course work may go well, exams may be passed with flying colors, and the students may even successfully write and present papers at conferences. The elusive dissertation topic, though, may continue to bring them misery. One problem is that students may wait too long to develop an idea; having no concept of what a dissertation should be and not knowing how to narrow their wide ranging interests into manageable projects, they flounder. They meet real trouble because they wait until they finish courses and exams before they even consider the topics on which to write their dissertations.

The irony was so striking that it could not be lost on anyone. Sitting before us was a soon-to-be-minted Ph.D. candidate whom we all liked tremendously, and who had an incredibly strong academic record, both in research and teaching. Yet, as our panel read his letter of application and CV, which were displayed on an overhead projector, and as we discussed them in progressively greater detail and honesty, we found several aspects of his materials off-putting. Why did he phrase something THIS way, another THAT way, we asked him? Sometimes his decisions were driven by a concern he need not have had; other times he was being advised by his graduate department. We ended by agreeing tat although he SHOULD have been given a job interview, our hypothetical search process might have passed him over for inclusion on our short list.

This is the thirtieth year that I have been monitoring participation by women at our annual meeting. These PS reports have documented the ascent of women in our profession. (At this year's meeting I reported to the Women's Caucus tracing participation by women in our programs since the 1970s.) While there are signs that women have continued to move ahead in their participation, the picture is mixed.

Activities

Chun-tu Hsueh, Huang Hsing Foundation, was elected a foreign member of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and honorary fellow of the Institute of East European, Russian and Central Asian Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.

George G. Bauroth

George G. Bauroth, who taught political science for three decades at St. Vincent College in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, died on June 24, 2000, from a stroke. Though death has taken him away, his influence over his family, friends, and students will be felt for many years.

Amid sunny skies and cool temperatures in San Francisco, 5,857 political scientists gathered for the ninety-seventh APSA Anuual Meeting held August 29 to September 2 at the Hilton San Francisco, Hotel Nikko and Renaissance Parc Fifty-Five hotels (and were lodged at eight additional hotels within walking distance). With members of the press, exhibitors and guests, the total attendance was 6,282, exceeding any previous West Coast meetings by more than 700 total attendees.

The purpose of this Section is to plan, develop, and implement professional activities for Association members with interests in federalism, intergovernmental relations and state and local government.

Western Political Science Association Presents Annual Awards

As part of it 2001 Annual Meeting in Las Vegas, the WPSA presented five awards to outstanding scholars and students.

Pi Sigma Alpha Award, for the best paper at the 2000 WPSA meeting, to Robert W. Mickey, doctoral candidate, Harvard University, for his paper “Ruling Parties in a Bind: The Transitions of South Carolina and Mississippi in Comparative Perspective.

Present:

Council: Richard Brody, Valerie Bunce, Randall Calvert, Ada Finifter, William Galston, Robert Holmes, Robert Jervis (president), Robert Kaufman, Edmond Keller, Gary King, Atul Kohli, Sandy Maisel, Edward Mansfield, Doris Marie Provine, Robert Putnam (president-elect), David Rayside, Catherine Rudder, Mark Schneider, Christine Sierra, Lee Sigelman, Kathryn Sikkink, Richard Sisson, Sven Steinmo, Judith Stiehm, Katherine Tate, Margaret Weir, Susan Welch