Research and Writing Seminar Thursday, 15 00 – 16 4 0 , room C

1. Research and Writing SeminarThursday, 1500 – 1640, room C To find an up-to-date version of the schedule and to read the papers check the websitewww.wne.uw.edu.pl/seminar

2. Coordinators: - M.A. in Development Economics Dr. Joanna Tyrowicz - M.A. in European Banking and Finance Dr. Michał Hulej - M.A. in International Economics Dr. Grzegorz Kula

3. Objective of the course: The objective of the Research and Writing Seminar is to give the students the basis for their own research.

4. The goals for each student are following: • Gain exposure to state-of-the-art research in economics, • Become familiar with key analytical tools and modeling skills, • Develop basic academic writing skills, • Gain exposure to useful presentation techniques.

5. Students’ obligations In the winter semester: • Five critical reviews of the presented papers, • Reviews are purely descriptive, and not exceeding 10 pages, • Each review must be delivered two weeks after the seminar presentation.

6. Students’ obligations In the summer semester: • Four critical reviews, • Each review must include an analytical extension of the reviewed paper, • Reviews should not exceed 20 pages, • Each review must be delivered four weeks after the seminar presentation.

7. Students’ obligations In the summer semester: Each student has to write also her/his research proposal for the master dissertation. This research proposal is not graded, but you must hand it in by August 31st, 2008 in order to pass the seminar.

8. Process of writing reviews Each paper has to be developed following the four rounds process: 1. Read the paper and prepare your comments – in the week before the seminar. 2. Ask questions and present your comments – at the seminar. 3. Discuss the first draft – one week after the seminar. 4. Submit the final version – two/four weeks after the seminar.

9. Process of writing reviews 1.Read the paper and prepare your comments Once you have identified topics that are of interest to you, you should: • Read the paper which will be presented and think about it. • Make comments that include your reasons explaining why you like (or do not like) the paper, your suggestions and concerns. • Make a list of specific questions you would like to ask to the presenter at the seminar. • Think about possible extensions that could be made to the paper.

10. Process of writing reviews 2. Ask questions and present your comments • Ask the invited speaker the questions you have prepared while reading the paper and those you have after listening to the presentation. • Present your suggestions for extensions and discuss them with the presenter and other participants.

11. Process of writing reviews 3. Discussing the first draft • Discuss your ideas with your seminar coordinator. • Present your opinions, comments and suggested extensions. We will give you the feedback both on the substance and exposition. • If you want to get more detailed comments you can send us your draft by email. However, you need to do it few days in advance to give us time to read it.

12. Process of writing reviews 4. Submitting the final version • Incorporate results of our discussion in round 3 and write the final version of the paper. • Read it carefully before you hand it in and use the spellchecker if possible. • Please send the paper to us by email.

13. The final version of each paper should include: • A title page • An abstract • An introduction with motivation, intuition, goals and structure • A brief literature review • A critical analysis of the theoretical framework (if any) • A critical analysis of statistical methodology (if any) • A critical analysis of theoretical and empirical findings • In the winter semester: a list of possible future extensions • In the spring semester: extended theoretical model or new empirical results • A brief conclusion • Bibliography

14. In the introduction: • you should describe what the paper is about, maybe mention its main points, • explain, what is your motivation for reviewing this paper (saying ”it is interesting” is not enough), • state the goals you want to achieve in the review (”reviewing the paper and criticizing it” is too general for the goal of a review).

15. The literature review: • it is not an analysis of what literature is used in the paper and how it is presented, • it is a survey of the field in which you should show how the paper is related to other works on this subject, • you do not need to read everything nor summarize all the papers you have found, • the idea is to compare the problems, methods and results, and not to describe other papers in details.

16. In the critical analysis: • do not describe theory or methodology in detail, unless you have comments or opinions of your own, • if you have them, include in the paper sections on a critical analysis of the theoretical framework and/or a critical analysis of statistical methodology, • if you have nothing to say about them, drop these sections, but say a few words about theory and methodology in the introduction, • you have to include a critical analysis of theoretical and empirical findings, • you should present arguments supporting your opinions.

17. Extensions In the winter semester: • Possible future extensions = only suggestions. • You have to describe: - what the suggested extension is, - the intuition behind it, - what result you hope to obtain, - why it is significant, - its’ feasibility. You should think of at least three possible extensions.

18. Extensions In the summer semester: • Theoretical or econometric extensions of the reviewed papers: - a step further in the research described in the reviewed paper, - solutions of some special cases, - alternative methods of estimation, - tests which were not conducted in the original research, - etc.

19. Extensions In the summer semester: • You are to do only one extension per review. • You are definitely not asked to conduct a completely new research, although you can conduct one if you wish. Papers in the summer semester can be written in pairs

20. Remember: You are writing a critical review, not a summary! There is no need to rewrite the paper you are reviewing.

21. Papers evaluation and final grades Each paper is evaluated on the basis of: • Clarity of exposition – 20% • Academic writing quality – 30% • Substantive quality – 50% In the summer semester these three points will constitute 50% of the grade, while the extension will yield the remaining 50%.

22. Papers evaluation and final grades For each paper you can get maximum 10 points. You may get one additional point, if you ask sensible questions during the discussion after the presentation. If you are late, you will loose points: minus one point for the delay of one week. Therefore it is best if you deliver the reviews on time!

23. Papers evaluation and final grades The final grade in the semester is a weighted average of the points from the reviews. We expect you to learn and improve with each review, thus: • In the winter semester the weights are: 15%, 17.5%, 20%, 22.5%, 25%. • In the summer semester, with only four reviews, the weights are: 20%, 22.5%, 27.5%, 30%.

24. Research proposal: • Introduces and describes the subject, or at least the field you want to study in your master thesis. • Should not exceed 10 pages. • Describes the problem, explains why it is worth studying, says how you will conduct your research and what you plan to include into the thesis, etc. • Includes a short bibliography of basic literature. Basically, the research proposal is supposed to show that you are interested in the subject, you know the problem enough to start the research, and you are able to write the thesis.

25. Contact details Dr. Joanna Tyrowicz Room: 5 Office hours:Thursday, 14 00 - 1500 e-mail:jtyrowicz@wne.uw.edu.pl Dr. Michał Hulej Room: 409 Office hours: Tuesday, 1315 – 1415 e-mail: mhulej@wne.uw.edu.pl Dr. Grzegorz Kula Room: 106 Office hours: Thursday, 1330 - 1430 e-mail: gkula@wne.uw.edu.pl