Sociology 204A                                                                                                    Draft date: 10/27/2025

“Capstone Research Seminar part 1”

Fall quarter, 2025

Class meets Mondays and Wednesdays
12:30-1:20 P
in Bldg 160, room 127

Professor Michael J. Rosenfeld
email:   mrosenfe@stanford.edu
Web:    https://web.stanford.edu/~mrosenfe

TA: Terresa Eun

Section Time: TBA

Course Description and Goals:

            This course focuses on the sociological research and writing process and fulfills the Writing-in-the-Major (WIM) requirement for sociology majors. Each student will choose a research topic, narrow it to a specific research question, review the existing literature related to their question, develop a research plan to answer their question, have a plan to gather data, start your IRB proposal if necessary, and start drafting the theory and background sections of your capstone paper. Final capstone papers are due in the quarter of your graduation.

            Winter quarter seminar Soc 204B and Spring quarter seminar Soc 204C are not required, but are strongly recommended as places where you will sharpen your capstone paper and get feedback from your peers and from the graduate TA.

            Throughout the quarter, each student will work with the instructor, an experienced TA, and the other students in the class to improve their own work—and to offer constructive criticism on one another’s work. Therefore, the course aims to enhance not only students’ research and writing skills but also their abilities to work collaboratively and to constructively critique the research and writing of others.

            We will be reading and critiquing a series of past students’ Sociology and Urban Studies BA honors theses and capstone papers. Every student will have to document that they have passed the online training for human subjects’ certification, even if your particular project may not involve human subjects. Being certified to work with human subjects is a foundational and necessary step for most kinds of social research, including work you might end up doing with Stanford professors or other scholars.

            Reading about research and talking about research methods will be part of this class but note: Because of time constraints and students’ diverse interests, this course will not cover in any depth many basic aspects of research, including sampling, survey design, coding of data, survey experiments, archival methods, ethnography, and the statistical analysis of data. In short, this is not a course on research methods! If you have not taken a course on research design and methods, you are strongly advised to enroll in Sociology 180A (Foundations of Social Research), or a comparable methods class that teaches how to use the particular research tools you intend to use. In Soc 204A you will receive an introduction to some of these research methods but you will have to sharpen your specific skillset elsewhere.

Course Goals and Learning Outcomes

The research and writing process is a core facet of scholarship in all disciplines, including sociology. The aim of this course is to guide you through the process of conceptualizing an original sociological research project and writing a research proposal that effectively communicates your ideas.

• You will demonstrate an understanding of how to pose and investigate sociological questions.
• You will evaluate sociological theory and constructively critique research within the discipline. In this class we are going to be evaluating and critiquing BA theses and capstone papers rather than professional journal articles because research published in the professional journals often reflects years of scholarship and expenditure resources way beyond what can be accomplished in a capstone project.
• We will also be doing constructive critique of each other’s work in this class. We are going to learn how to give advice and how to take advice and criticism constructively so that our own work is always getting better.
• Part of giving criticism and receiving criticism is the necessity to treat all your classmates and your TA and your instructor with respect. Disagreement is allowed but respect is fundamental.
• You will demonstrate an understanding of how to do a literature review, even though in Soc 204A you will probably only be scratching the surface of the literature that is relevant to your own project. You will have the opportunity to evaluate the degree to which our former BA theses have accomplished a convincing and coherent literature review.
• You will develop appropriate ways to test or investigate the sociological questions that you have.
• You will learn to clearly and persuasively communicate ideas in an academic writing style and this is a skill that you will be sharpening as long as you do research.
• You will consider the importance of ethics when undertaking sociological research, and you will take and pass Stanford’s online human subjects research certification course.
• During Soc 204A you will be prepared to submit your IRB human subjects protocol (if applicable to your research plan).
• During Soc 204A you will be prepared to submit a proposal for a small grant to VPUE (if applicable to your research plan).

Required Texts:

* Babbie, Earl R. The Practice of Social Research. 15^th edition. Cengage. ISBN-10 : 0357360761. $73 in e-textbook format, ISBN: 978-0357360767. We will be reading only some sections of this book, so it is OK to rely on the versions on reserve in the library, even if they have an earlier edition. If you can afford the book, I suggest that you buy it.

* Humphreys, Laud. 1976. The Tearoom Trade. Routledge, 2^nd Edition. ISBN-13: 978-0202302836. $53 new, but many used copies are available. This book is a classic example of the power of human subjects research and also the potential ethical quandaries of human subjects research.

* A variety of papers linked on the class Canvas site.

* A variety of former student BA theses and capstone papers linked on the class Canvas site.

Grade Breakdown:

Being IRB Certified to work with human subjects	10%
Regular class participation	20%
Presentation of your guide star BA thesis or capstone	10%
Your draft literature review	10%
Your research design and revision	20%
Your comments on another student’s draft proposal	10%
Your final proposal	20%
Total	100%

Mask Policy:

            I reserve the right to wear a mask.

The Honor Code

            It is expected that instructors and students will follow Stanford’s Honor Code in all matters relating to this course. You are encouraged to meet and exchange ideas with your classmates while studying and working on homework assignments, but you are individually responsible for your own work and for understanding the material. You are not permitted to copy or otherwise reference another student’s homework. If you have any questions regarding this policy, feel free to contact me. ChatGPT or other AI bots are not acceptable research tools unless you have explicit permission from the instructor to use them. Final capstone papers will be put through a variety of AI detectors.

Compromising your academic integrity may lead to serious consequences, including (but not limited to) one or more of the following: failing the assignment, failing the course, disciplinary probation, and suspension or dismissal from the university. An unsatisfactory capstone will prevent you from graduating.

            Students are responsible for understanding the University’s Honor Code policy and must make proper use of citations of sources for writing papers, creating, presenting, and performing their work, taking examinations, and doing research.

Academic Accommodation

Students who may need an academic accommodation based on the impact of a disability must initiate the request with the Office of Accessible Education (OAE). Professional staff will evaluate the request with required documentation, recommend reasonable accommodations, and prepare an Accommodation Letter for faculty dated in the current quarter in which the request is being made. Students should contact the OAE as soon as possible since timely notice is needed to coordinate accommodations. The OAE is located at 563 Salvatierra Walk (650-723-1066; http://oae.stanford.edu).

Class date	Assignment for that class	Other notes and assignments
Monday, September 22		Class introduction
Weds, Sept 24	Read BA theses Luke Babbitt and by Jackie Hwang	We will be talking about research techniques that BA honors projects have used, we will begin a discussion of research ethics
Mon, Sept 29	Come to class prepared to discuss your proposed research questions and research plan	Also: pick a guidestar BA thesis or Capstone paper that (hopefully) has something in common with your own research plans.
Weds, October 1	Read The Tearoom Trade, Introduction, Chapters 1, 2,5,6, and the Poscripts. Read all the parts of the multi-author postscript in the Tearoom Trade edited volume. Students will be assigned defend or explain different arguments from the postscript.	We will be discussing a famous research study, the Tearoom Trade, and the ethical issues arising from it. Submit proof that you have passed the IRB human subjects course by midnight on Oct 1, to Canvas https://researchcompliance.stanford.edu/panels/hs/for-researchers/training/citi
Mon, Oct 6	Upload your draft research design to Canvas, and come to class prepared to discuss it.
Weds, Oct 8	Read two BA theses for their literature reviews: Luke Babbit 2023, and Nic Fishman 2021
Mon, Oct 13	Students to submit to canvas a preliminary 3-5 page literature review, along with a 1 page literature review chart.	By October 13, submit your draft literature review to Canvas. We will be discussing your literature reviews in class.
Wes, Oct 15	Read Babbie: Ch 7 “The Logic of Sampling,” Read Jimenez and Orozco, “Constructing Better Interview Protocols”	A discussion of sampling, representativity, and convenience samples Also: a discussion of interviewing as a research method. Jiménez and Orozco: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11133-021-09483-2
Mon, Oct 20	Student presentations on their BA guide star papers, part I
Weds, Oct 22	Student presentations on their BA guide star papers, part II
Mon, Oct 27	Talk through questions and issues with your research plan
Weds, Oct 29	Read Babbie, Ch 8 “Experiments,” and Ch 9 “Survey Research”	A discussion of survey research and experimental research
Mon, Nov 3	TBD
Weds, Nov 5	Talk through questions and issues with your research plan
Mon, Nov 10	Submit draft of your full proposal to Canvas	Second full draft research proposal due to Canvas.
Weds, Nov 12	TBD
Mon, Nov 17	TBD
Weds, Nov 19	TBD
Week of Nov 24-28	Thanksgiving Break
Friday, Nov 28		Final full research proposal draft due
Mon, Dec 1		Student presentations of final proposals
Weds, Dec 3		Student presentations of final proposals

Sociology Writing Advice

Applicable to All Students

· Use parenthetical citations for in-text citations. - (Last name Year: pg#), and provide the full reference in a “References” or “Works Cited” section at the end of the paper. Citations and reference lists should either conform to ASA (American Sociological Association) style or use another style that has all the relevant information consistently listed.

o Footnotes are for ideas that don’t fit into the main body of the paper and should be used sparingly.

· If you refer to someone else’s idea, or say something contested or controversial, provide a citation and explain what you mean.

· The most important skill in writing is a willingness and eagerness to re-write. Willingness to re-write means having an openness to criticism, even criticism that might at first seem unfair. If someone else has not understood the meaning of your text, you need to consider that what you wrote may not have been clear enough or sharp enough. As you work in Soc 202A you will be re-writing your own work based on feedback you get from your peers, your TA, and your instructor. And after Soc 204A you will be refining and re-writing parts of your capstone paper draft. Then when you are writing your final capstone paper, you will be re-writing your original ideas to accommodate what you learned in your research, and what you have learned from additional literature review. The more you learn, the more feedback you get, the more you re-write, the better the final product will be.

· Often the key question that motivates your research will eventually be displaced by another question that will present itself as more interesting or more urgent when the data come in. You will in the future have to be open to new and better questions, and this is part of a willingness to re-write.

· Beware of (and avoid if possible) the passive voice.

o This is especially true in sociology because it is important to identify the actor.

o It is not usually wise to use “society” as an actor – be very precise with your argument.

· Make specific arguments

o Introductions with broad, unsubstantiated claims do not help your argument – get right to the point.

· Use concise, clear sentences. No flowery language necessary.

o Don’t use a fancy word when a simple one will convey the same meaning.

· Respect word/page limits.

o It is easier for most of you to write more than less

o This is a learned skill – you will get better at it over time.

Learning Outcomes Rubric
	Unacceptable	Marginal	Proficient	Exemplary
Learning Outcome #1 Demonstrate an understanding of how to pose and investigate sociological questions.	Does not develop a sociological research question or offer hypotheses. Proposes a research plan with fewer than two distinct methods, or does not propose methods that provide leverage on the research question given the project's constraints.	Develops sociological research questions and offers hypotheses that are connected to the question but not plausible given relevant research or theory. Research plan provides limited leverage on the research questions and some key limitations are not addressed.	Develops sociological research questions and offers plausible hypotheses. Research plan provides leverage on the research question but leaves some elements unaddressed. The plan is feasible given the project's constraints, and limitations are acknowledged.	Develops sociological research questions and offers sophisticated hypotheses. Research plan is tailored to the research question and both methods are feasible given the project's constraints. Addresses whether and how limitations could affect the results.
Learning Outcome #2 Evaluate theory and critique research within discipline.	Does not accurately summarize existing knowledge or use the literature to connect the research question to sociological theory. Does not define terms or concepts, lacks appropriate references, and does not identify the project's sociological contribution.	Does not provide appropriate context for question or relies on out-of-date or non- academic sources to connect the research question to theory. Key concepts lack clarity, key references are missing, and the sociological contribution is not clearly established.	Connects the research question to sociological theory using relevant literature, but some key perspectives are not addressed. Provides some appropriate references, and demonstrates the sociological contribution of the project, but some terms and concepts are not clearly defined.	Synthesizes relevant literature to present different perspectives and to connect the research question to sociological theory. Clearly defines key terms and concepts, provides references as appropriate, and identifies a gap in the literature that can be filled by the research.

Learning Outcomes Rubric
	Unacceptable	Marginal	Proficient	Exemplary
Learning Outcome #3 Develop an appropriate way to test or investigate sociological questions	Correct analytic tools are not proposed or are incorrectly applied.	Correct analytic tools are proposed but the link between data and broader questions is unclear or otherwise lacking.	Correct analytic tools are proposed and the link between data and broader questions are correctly stated. Some minor mistakes of logic may be made in proposed analysis.	Uses correct analytic tools, and proposes to analyze data in light of research question. Proposed data collection lends itself to evidence that supports conclusions but also weighs plausible alternative explanations.
Learning Outcome #4 Clearly and persuasively communicate ideas in an academic writing style.	Communication of ideas is muddled, lacking an identifiable argument. Final paper is not organized as an academic article, citation style is inconsistent, typographical and grammatical errors are found throughout.	Offers an identifiable argument but it is not logically or persuasively presented. Writing and verbal communication is awkward or sloppy at times. Final paper is organized in the style of an academic article but citation style is inconsistent.	Communicates ideas competently, offers a clear argument that may contain minor logical gaps, but is generally persuasive. Paper is organized in the style of an academic article, consistently uses a single citation style, and contains only a few minor copyediting errors.	Communicates ideas clearly both verbally and in writing, develops persuasive and logical arguments. Final paper is organized in the style of an academic article, consistently uses correct ASA citation style and was obviously proofread.

	Unacceptable	Marginal	Proficient	Exemplary
Learning Outcome #5 Understand the role of human subjects’ protection in social research. Apply for and obtain IRB approval prior to any research with human subjects involved in capstone or honors thesis projects.	If capstone or honors thesis research is undertaken where there are human subjects so that IRB approval was required and IRB approval was not obtained, this is unacceptable and may lead to a capstone paper being rejected and graduation being delayed or denied	The research either was exempt from human subjects review (because the research was archival or with secondary data) or had appropriate human subjects review and IRB approval, but the justifications of the process are only marginally adequate.	Either the research was exempt from human subjects review (because the research was archival or with secondary data) or the research had human subjects and IRB approval. The rationales for human-subject-related decisions are justified but the explanation of the process is not quite as clear as it could be.	Either the research was exempt from human subjects review (because the research was archival or with secondary data) or the research had human subjects and IRB approval. In either case, the process of IRB approval or exemption is clearly explained and justified.