• Question: What explains China’s cooperation and noncooperation within international regimes when dealing with environmental issues?
• Answer: Realism, Neoliberalism, Cognitivism each explains parts of China’s behavior.
• Analysis Part 1: Realism explains this aspect of China’s behavior…..
• Analysis Part 2: Neoliberalism explains this aspect of China’s behavior…..
• Analysis Part 3 if relevant: Cognitivism explains this aspect of China’s behavior….
• Conclusion: Say something about, for example, future changes or policy challenges in the realist or neoliberal or cognitive part of your topic .
Guidelines for Senior Capstone Paper
A senior capstone paper is 2,800 words +/- 10% (these word-counts exclude footnotes).
Organize your paper as per the GRADING CHECKLIST on the next page; use subheadings to separate the main sections, and have relevant paragraphs within each section
Cite at least 4 scholarly sources, and optionally some other sources, on the main topic of your paper (this is in addition to any scholarly sources on the theoretical framework). Scholarly sources are books, typically from a university press or other major press, as well as scholarly journal articles (a journal article is typically 10-20 pages with citations and footnotes). The other sources can be less-scholarly, such as newspapers, Time, Newsweek, the internet etc.
The Submission Timeline is as follows:
First Submission: Nov 24, by 9 am in the morning.
Introduction (about 400 words); then sketch out your main analytical sections, writing about 6-8 sentences for each analytical section (about 400 words for all the relevant analytical sections). Use subheadings to separate each section and use paragraphs to separate each point within the section.
Come to class this day for further instructor feedback on your paper.
Final Submission: Dec 8 evening (this is the final-exam time for this class; there is no final exam and this is the time for the final submission of your paper). Submit the full paper on blackboard.
• When you submit the completed project, provide copies of your 4 scholarly sources (i.e if you refer to pages from a book, please scan the book cover page; if using a journal article, please scan the title page).
• At the end of the paper, write the word count.
• Use Single Space and 12 point font.
• Please do not write your name on the assignment, write only your university ID M-NUMBER.
• Cite all sources in Footnotes
FOOTNOTE and CITATION FORMATS
Cite your sources in Footnotes.
Mention the full form the first time you cite an author, and only the abbreviated form the second time you cite. The Full form is author name, title of work, (for a book) place of publication, year, and page reference; (for an article) journal title, issue number, date/year, and page reference.
Books:
Jimmy Burns, The land that lost its heroes: the Falklands, the war, and Alfonsin (London: Bloomsbury, 1987), p. 131.
Subsequent mentions: Burns, The land that lost its hereos, p.478.

GRADING CHECKLIST –
1. Introduction (300-500 words): [Grade: Poor — Okay/Adequate — Thorough / Good]
• What is the question you are exploring?
• What is the Analytical Framework or Theoretical Framework to answer the question
The Analytical Framework or Theoretical Framework is, in its most basic form, as follows:
X1, X2, X3….. explain Y.
When X1 is present/high/etc and/or X2 is present/high/etc, then Y is present/high/etc
When X1 is absent/low and/or X2 is absent/low, then Y is absent/low
Other Forms are
X1 explains one aspect of Y; X2 explains another aspect of Y; etc etc.
Y involves X1a, X1b, X1x; and X2a, X2b, X2c
• What is your short answer to the question
• Mention the Organization of the paper,—i.e. the first section will deal with …, the second section will deal with …, the third with…..
2. Historical or Basic Background (300-500 words; a simple historical and technical description of the issue)
[Poor — Okay/Adequate — Thorough / Good]
3. Analysis Part 1
[Poor — Okay/Adequate — Thorough / Good]
DISCUSS THE CASE IN SOME TIME-PERIOD (OR SOME ASPECT OF THE CASE), BY DISCUSSING X1, X2,…Y AS RELEVANT.
4. Analysis Part 2
[Poor — Okay/Adequate — Thorough / Good]
DISCUS THE CASE IN A SECOND TIME-PERIOD (OR SOME OTHER ASPECT OF THE CASE, OR SOME OTHER CASE IF YOUR PAPER IS COMPARING TWO CASES) BY DISCUSSING X1, X2,…Y AS RELEVANT.
5 if relevant. Analysis Part 3-4-5
[Poor — Okay/Adequate — Thorough / Good]
If Relevant REPEAT THE ANALYSIS FOR OTHER TIME-PERIODS OR OTHER CASES AS RELEVANT.
6. Conclusion (about 300words)– (this should summarize the main point/analysis and logically extend it to provide some broader inference/conclusion).
[Poor — Okay/Adequate — Thorough / Good]
7. Quality of writing
[Poor — Okay/Adequate — Thorough / Good]
8. Adequacy of Analysis/Theoretical Framework
[Poor — Okay/Adequate — Thorough / Good]
Does the paper have a real analytical/theoretical framework, or is it just describing the issue without a framework
Overall: Poor (1 pt) — Okay/Adequate (2pts) — Thorough / Good (3 pts) x …
A paper that simply ‘describes’ an issue gets a maximum grade of ‘B’; the analysis adds to this up to grades of B+, A-, or A.