JCU Logo
JOHN CABOT UNIVERSITY

COURSE CODE: "PL 223-1"
COURSE NAME: "Comparative Politics"
SEMESTER & YEAR: Spring 2015
SYLLABUS

INSTRUCTOR: Andrea Pirro
EMAIL: [email protected]
 HOURS: TTH 6:00 PM 7:15 PM
TOTAL NO. OF CONTACT HOURS: 45
CREDITS: 3
PREREQUISITES:
OFFICE HOURS:
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
As both a subject and a method of study, comparative politics examines the nature, development, structure and functioning of the political systems of a selection of countries with very different cultures, social and economic profiles, political histories and geographic characteristics. Through case studies, students will learn to use the comparativist’s methods to collect and organize the information and develop general explanations.
SUMMARY OF COURSE CONTENT:
​The first part of this course covers the different concepts and issues of comparative political analysis. The second part compares and contrasts different political institutions (e.g. parliaments), organisations (e.g. parties), and processes (e.g. elections). The third part moves beyond institutionalised politics and looks at political issues and challenges (e.g. social and political change, immigration and minority issues, protest) in a comparative perspective. The course covers different topics in contemporary politics, critically assessing their causes and mechanisms. Particular emphasis will be placed on governments, political organisations, elections and voters across Europe. The class format includes lectures, discussion, teamwork, student presentations, and audio-visual material.
LEARNING OUTCOMES:
Upon completion of this course, students should have learned to identify the defining characteristics of the political phenomena of specific countries; identify the dominant trends influencing and shaping the above characteristics, and assess evidence of convergence or divergence between them; develop analytical skills of comparison and contrast. Moreover, students should have developed their ability to gather, organise and deploy evidence from a variety of sources; exercise critical judgment; reflect on their own learning and make use of constructive feedback. Ultimately, students should have developed their ability to communicate effectively, both orally and in writing; use communication and information technology for the retrieval and presentation of information; work individually, demonstrating initiative, self-organisation and time management; collaborate with others to achieve common goals.
TEXTBOOK:
Book TitleAuthorPublisherISBN numberLibrary Call NumberCommentsFormatLocal BookstoreOnline Purchase
Comparative PoliticsCaramani, D.Oxford University Press, 20149780199665990 Abbrev. "CCP"   
Representative Government in Modern Europe. Institutions, Parties and GovernmentsGallagher, M., Laver, M. and Mair, P.McGraw-Hill, 20119780077129675 Abbrev. "GLM"   
REQUIRED RESERVED READING:
Book TitleAuthorPublisherISBN numberLibrary Call NumberComments
Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics: An IntroductionLandman, T.Routledge, 20080415412374 Abbrev. "LCP"
European PoliticsBale, T.Palgrave, 20099780230362932 Abbrev. "BEP"

RECOMMENDED RESERVED READING:
NONE
GRADING POLICY
-ASSESSMENT METHODS:
AssignmentGuidelinesWeight
Class participationRegular attendance; preparation and reflection on readings assigned; active, civilised, and well-informed participation in class activities. The use of laptops, tablets and telephones in class is not allowed. Use of electronic devices in class will result in deduction of 10% from your final grade.10%
Student presentationsStudents will give a short individual or team presentation on a specific topic related to the class programme. The presentation should be well organised and researched, concise (max. 15 mins), and include (when opportune) audio-visual or electronic material.10%
Mid-term examDemonstrating knowledge of theories and issues of comparative politics.30%
Final examDemonstrating knowledge of theories and issues of comparative politics.30%
Reading reflectionsThe student will be asked to demonstrate critical reading of academic course material.20%

-ASSESSMENT CRITERIA:
AWork of this quality directly addresses the question or problem raised and provides a coherent argument displaying an extensive knowledge of relevant information or content. This type of work demonstrates the ability to critically evaluate concepts and theory and has an element of novelty and originality. There is clear evidence of a significant amount of reading beyond that required for the cour
BThis is highly competent level of performance and directly addresses the question or problem raised. There is a demonstration of some ability to critically evaluate theory and concepts and relate them to practice. Discussions reflect the student’s own arguments and are not simply a repetition of standard lecture and reference material. The work does not suffer from any major errors or omissions and provides evidence of reading beyond the required assignments.
CThis is an acceptable level of performance and provides answers that are clear but limited, reflecting the information offered in the lectures and reference readings.
DThis level of performances demonstrates that the student lacks a coherent grasp of the material. Important information is omitted and irrelevant points included. In effect, the student has barely done enough to persuade the instructor that s/he should not fail.
FThis work fails to show any knowledge or understanding of the issues raised in the question. Most of the material in the answer is irrelevant.
-ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENTS:
​The class meets twice a week and attendance is mandatory. You can miss a maximum of six classes throughout the semester. If you miss more than six classes, you will fail the course! Showing up late two times will count as one absence. Attendance will be recorded at the beginning of each class.
ACADEMIC HONESTY
As stated in the university catalog, any student who commits an act of academic dishonesty will receive a failing grade on the work in which the dishonesty occurred. In addition, acts of academic dishonesty, irrespective of the weight of the assignment, may result in the student receiving a failing grade in the course. Instances of academic dishonesty will be reported to the Dean of Academic Affairs. A student who is reported twice for academic dishonesty is subject to summary dismissal from the University. In such a case, the Academic Council will then make a recommendation to the President, who will make the final decision.
STUDENTS WITH LEARNING OR OTHER DISABILITIES
John Cabot University does not discriminate on the basis of disability or handicap. Students with approved accommodations must inform their professors at the beginning of the term. Please see the website for the complete policy.
SCHEDULE

Week 1:                   Introduction to Comparative Politics

(20 January)

  • Landman, T. (2000) Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics. Routledge: London, pp. 3-20. [LCP, Chapter 1]

(22 January)

  • Caramani, D. (2014) ‘Introduction to Comparative Politics’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1-17. [CCP, Introduction]


Further Reading:

·      Sartori, G. (1991) ‘Comparing and Miscomparing’. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 3 (3): 243-257.


Week 2:                   Theories and Methods in Comparative Politics

(27 January)

  • Guy Peters, G. (2014) ‘Approaches in Comparative Politics’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 34-46. [CCP, Chapter 2]

(29 January)

  • Keman, H. (2014) ‘Comparative Research Methods’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 47-59. [CCP, Chapter 3]


Further Reading:

  • Von Beyme, K. (2014) ‘The Evolution of Comparative Politics’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 21-33. [CCP, Chapter 1]
  • Lijphart, A. (1971) ‘Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method’. American Political Science Review, 65 (3): 682-693.
  • Sartori, G. (1970) ‘Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics’. American Political Science Review, 64 (4): 1033-1053.
  • Collier, D., and J. Mahon (1993) ‘Conceptual “Stretching” Revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis’. American Political Science Review, 87 (4): 845-855.


Week 3:                   Regimes

(3 February)

  • Mair, P. (2014) ‘Democracies’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 79-95. [CCP, Chapter 5]

(5 February)

  • Brooker, P. (2014) ‘Authoritarian Regimes’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 96-109. [CCP, Chapter 6] (Group presentation)


Further Reading:

  • Dahl, R.A. (1971) Polyarchy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  • Linz, J.J. (1978) The Breakdown of Democratic Regimes: Crisis, Breakdown & Reequilibration. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins Press, pp. 14-86 (Chapters 2-4).
  • Poggi, G. (2014) ‘The Nation-State’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 63-78. [CCP, Chapter 4]
  • Anderson, B. (1991) Imagined Communities. Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.
  • Collier, D., and S. Levitsky (1997) ‘Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research’. World Politics, 49 (3): 430-451.
  • Lijphart, A. (1969) ‘Consociational Democracy’. World Politics, 21 (2): 207-225.
  • Pop-Eleches, G. (2007) ‘Historical Legacies and Post-Communist Regime Change’. Journal of Politics, 69 (4): 908-926.


Week 4:                   Institutions

(10 February)

  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 23-46. [GLM, Chapter 2]

(12 February)

  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 47-83. [GLM, Chapter 3]


Further Reading:

  • Kreppel, A. (2014) ‘Legislatures’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 113-130. [CCP, Chapter 7]
  • Blondel, J., et al. (1970) ‘Legislative Behaviour: Some Steps towards a Cross-National Measurement’. Government and Opposition, 5 (1): 67-85.
  • Leiston-Bandeira, C. (2009) ‘Dissent in a Party-Based Parliament: The Portuguese Case’. Party Politics, 15 (6): 695-713.


Week 5:                   Elections and Referendums

(17 February)

  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 366-411. [GLM, Chapter 11]

(19 February)

  • Reif, K., and H. Schmitt (1980) ‘Nine Second-Order National Elections: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of European Election Results’. European Journal of Political Research, 8 (1): 3-44. (Written reading reflection)


Further Reading:

  • Gallagher, M. (2014) ‘Elections and Referendums’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 166-188. [CCP, Chapter 10]
  • LeDuc, L., R. Niemi, and P. Norris (eds.) (2010) Comparing Democracies. Elections and Voting in the 21st Century. London: Sage.


Week 6:                   Cleavage Structures and Change

(24 February)

  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 278-298. [GLM, Chapter 9]

(26 February)

  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 298-325. [GLM, Chapter 9]


Further Reading:

  • Welzel, C., and R. Inglehart (2014) ‘Political Culture’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 284-301. [CCP, Chapter 17]
  • Lipset, S.M., and S. Rokkan (1990) ‘Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments’, in P. Mair (ed.) The West European Party System. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 91-138. [WEP, Chapter 9]
  • Inglehart, R. (1990) ‘The Nature of Value Change’, in P. Mair (ed.) The West European Party System. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 247-252. [WEP, Chapter 17]
  • Flanagan, S.C., and R.J. Dalton (1990) ‘Models of Change’, in P. Mair (ed.) The West European Party System. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 232-265. [WEP, Chapter 18]
  • Inglehart, R. (1990) ‘From Class-Based Politics to Value-Based Politics’, in P. Mair (ed.) The West European Party System. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 266-282. [WEP, Chapter 19]
  • Dalton, R.J. (2002) Citizen Politics. Sage: London. [DCP, Chapters 5-6]
  • Inglehart, R. (2008) ‘Changing Values among Western Publics, 1970-2006’. West European Politics, 31 (1-2): 130-146.
  • Pedersen, M.N. (1979) ‘The Dynamics of European Party Systems: Changing Patterns of Electoral Volatility’. European Journal of Political Research, 7 (1): 1-29.
  • Crouch C. (2008) ‘Change in European Societies since the 1970s’. West European Politics, 31 (1-2): 14-39.


Week 7:                   Review and Examination

(3 March)

Mid-Term Review

(5 March)

In-Class Examination


Week 8:                   Political Parties and the Media

(10 March)

  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 238-277. [GLM, Chapter 8]

(12 March)

  • Bale, T. (2009) European Politics. London: Palgrave. [BEP, Chapter 7]


Further Reading:

  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 326-365. [GLM, Chapter 7]
  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 326-365. [GLM, Chapter 10]
  • Katz, R.S. (2014) ‘Political Parties’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 199-215. [CCP, Chapter 12]
  • Caramani, D. (2014) ‘Party Systems’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 216-236. [CCP, Chapter 13]
  • Dalton, R.J. (2002) Citizen Politics. Sage: London. [DCP, Chapters 7-10]
  • Gunther, D., and L. Diamond (2003) ‘Species of Political Parties: A New Typology’. Party Politics, 9 (2): 167-199.
  • Mair, P., and C. Mudde (1998) ‘The Party Family and its Study’. Annual Review of Political Science, 1: 211-229.
  • Von Beyme, K. (1985) Political Parties in Western Democracies. Aldershot: Gower.
  • Ware, A. (1996) Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Katz, R., and P. Mair (1995) ‘Changing Models of Party Organization and Party Democracy: The Emergence of the Cartel Party’. Party Politics, 1 (1): 5-28.
  • Katz, R., and P. Mair (2009) ‘The Cartel Party Thesis: A Restatement’. Perspectives on Politics, 7 (7): 753-766.
  • Krowel, A. (2003) ‘Otto Kirchheimer and the Catch-All Party’. West European Politics, 26 (6): 23-40.
  • Kitschelt, H. (2000) ‘Citizens, Politicians and Party Cartellization: Political Representation and State Failure in Post-Industrial Democracies’. European Journal of Political Research, 37 (7): 149-179.
  • Strøm, K. (1990) ‘A Behavioral Theory of Competitive Political Parties’. American Journal of Political Science, 34 (4): 565-598.


Week 9:                   Central and East European Politics

(17 March)

  • Ramet, S.P. and F. Wagner (2010) ‘Post-Socialist Models of Rule in Central and Southeastern Europe’, in S.P. Ramet (ed.) Central and Southeast European Politics since 1989. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 9-36.

(19 March)

  • Hoare, M.A. (2010) ‘The War of Yugoslav Succession’, in S.P. Ramet (ed.) Central and Southeast European Politics since 1989. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 111-135.


Further Reading:

  • Tismaneanu, V. (1998) Fantasies of Salvation: Democracy, Nationalism, and Myth in Post- Communist Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Kitschelt, H., Z. Mansfeldova, R. Markowski, and G. Toka (1999) Post-Communist Party Systems: Competition, Representation, and Inter-Party Cooperation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Bugajski, J. (2002) Political Parties of Eastern Europe: A Guide to Politics in the Post-Communist Era. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
  • Rose, R., and N. Munro (2009) Parties and Elections in New European Democracies. Colchester: ECPR Press.
  • Kitschelt, H. (1992) ‘The Formation of Party Systems in East Central Europe’. Politics & Society, 20 (1): 7-50.
  • Bakke, E., and N. Sitter (2005) ‘Patterns of Stability: Party Competition and Strategy in Central Europe since 1989’. Party Politics, 11 (2): 243-263.
  • Enyedi, Z., and L. Linek (2008) ‘Searching for the Right Organization: Ideology and Party Structure in East-Central Europe’. Party Politics, 14 (4): 455-477.
  • Marks, G., L. Hooghe, M. Nelson, and E. Edwards (2006) ‘Party Competition and European Integration in the East and West: Different Structure, Same Causality’. Comparative Political Studies, 39(2): 155-175.
  • Pop-Eleches, G. (1998) ‘Separated at Birth or Separated by Birth? The Communist Successor Parties in Romania and Hungary’. East European Politics and Societies, 13 (1): 117-147.
  • Vachudova, M.A. (2008) ‘Tempered by the EU? Political Parties and Party Systems Before and After Accession’. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(6): 861-879.


Week 10:                 Special Topic #1 – Populism

(24 March)

  • Mudde, C. (2004) ‘The Populist Zeitgeist’. Government and Opposition, 39 (3): 541-563.

(26 March)

  • Mudde, C., and C. Rovira Kaltwasser (2013) ‘Exclusionary vs. Inclusionary Populism: Comparing Contemporary Europe and Latin America’. Government and Opposition, 48 (2): 147-174. (Written reading reflection: groups A and C / Presentation: group A)
  • Zaslove, A. (2008) ‘Here to Stay? Populism as a New Party Type’. European Review, 16 (3): 319-336. (Written reading reflection: groups B and D / Presentation: group B)


Further Reading:

  • Taggart, P. (2000) Populism. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  • Mudde, C., and C. Rovira Kaltwasser (eds.) (2012) Populism in Europe and the Americas: Threat or Corrective to Democracy?. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Van Kessel, S. (2014) ‘The Populist Cat-Dog: Applying the Concept of Populism to Contemporary European Party Systems’. Journal of Political Ideologies, 19 (1): 99-118.


Week 11:                 Special Topic #2 – Globalisation and Modernisation

(31 March)

  • Sørensen, G. (2014) ‘Globalization and the Nation-State’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 407-420. [CCP, Chapter 24]

(2 April)

  • Ignazi, P. (1992) ‘The Silent Counter-Revolution: Hypotheses on the Emergence of Extreme Right-Wing Parties in Europe’. European Journal of Political Research, 22 (1): 3-34. (Reading: groups B and C / Presentation: group C)
  • Minkenberg, M. (2000) ‘The Renewal of the Radical Right: Between Modernity and Anti-Modernity’. Government and Opposition, 35 (3): 170-188. (Reading: groups A and D / Presentation: group D)


Further Reading:

  • Kriesi, H., E. Grande, R. Lachat, M. Dolezal, S. Bornschier, and T. Frey (2006) ‘Globalization and the Transformation of the National Political Space’. European Journal of Political Research, 45 (6): 921-956.
  • Betz, H.G. (1993) ‘The New Politics of Resentment: Radical Right-Wing Populist Parties in Western Europe’. Comparative Politics, 25 (4): 413-427.


*** SPRING BREAK ***

Week 12:                 Special Topic #3 – The Politics of Immigration and Minorities

(14 April)

  • Bale, T. (2009) European Politics. London: Palgrave. [BEP, Chapter 10]

(16 April)

  • Bale, T. (2003) ‘Cinderella and Her Ugly Sisters: The Mainstream and Extreme Right in Europe’s Bipolarising Party Systems’. West European Politics, 26 (3): 67-90. (Written reading reflection: groups A and C / Presentation: group C)
  • Pirro, A.L.P. (2014) ‘Populist Radical Right Parties in Central and Eastern Europe: The Different Context and Issues of the Prophets of the Patria’. Government and Opposition, 49 (4): 599-628. (Written reading reflection: groups B and D / Presentation: group D)


Further Reading:

  • Fennema, M. (1997) ‘Some Conceptual Issues and Problems in the Comparison of Anti-Immigrant Parties in Western Europe’. Party Politics, 3 (4): 473-492.
  • Schain, M. (2006) ‘The Extreme-Right and Immigration Policymaking: Measuring Direct and Indirect Effects’. West European Politics, 29 (2): 270-289.
  • Bustikova, L. (2014) ‘Revenge of the Radical Right’. Comparative Political Studies, 47 (12): 1738-1765.
  • Mudde, C. (1999) ‘The Single-Issue Party Thesis: Extreme Right Parties and the Immigration Issue’. West European Politics, 22 (3): 182-197.
  • Mudde, C. (2005) ‘Racist Extremism in Central and Eastern Europe’. East European Politics and Societies, 19 (2): 161-184.
  • Williams, M.H. (2006) The Impact of Radical Right-Wing Parties in Western Democracies. New York: Palgrave.
  • Van Spanje, J. (2010) ‘Contagious Parties: Anti-Immigration Parties and Their Impact on Other Parties’ Immigration Stances in Contemporary Western Europe’. Party Politics, 16 (5): 563-586.


Week 13:                 Special Topic #4: The EU and Euroscepticism

(21 April)

  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 116-163. [GLM, Chapter 5]

(23 April)

  • Taggart, P. (1998) ‘A Touchstone of Dissent: Euroscepticism in Contemporary Western European Party Systems’. European Journal of Political Research, 33 (3): 363-388. (Reading: groups A and D / Presentation: group A)
  • Taggart, P., and A. Szczerbiak (2013) ‘Coming in from the Cold? Euroscepticism, Government Participation and Party Positions on Europe’. Journal of Common Market Studies, 51 (1): 17-37. (Reading: groups B and C / Presentation: group B)


Further Reading:

  • Hix, S. (2014) ‘The EU as a New Political System’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 387-406. [CCP, Chapter 23]
  • Marks, G., L. Hooghe, M. Nelson, and E. Edwards (2006) ‘Party Competition and European Integration in the East and West: Different Structure, Same Causality’. Comparative Political Studies, 39 (2): 155-175.
  • Kopecký, P., and C. Mudde (2002) ‘The Two Sides of Euroscepticism. Party Positions on European Integration in East Central Europe’.European Union Politics, 3 (3): 297-326.
  • Taggart, P., and A. Szczerbiak (2004) ‘Contemporary Euroscepticism in the Party Systems of the EU Candidate States of Central and Eastern Europe’. European Journal of Political Research, 43 (1): 1-27.


Week 14:                 Social Movements and Final Review

(28 April)

  • Kriesi, H. (2014) ‘Social Movements’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 267-283. [CCP, Chapter 16]

(30 April)

Module Review and Final Discussion


Further Reading:

  • Kitschelt, H., and P. Rehm (2014) ‘Political Participation’, in D. Caramani (ed.) Comparative Politics (Third Edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 302-317. [CCP, Chapter 18]
  • Gallagher, M., M. Laver, and P. Mair (2011) Representative Government in Modern Europe (Fifth Edition). London: McGraw-Hill, pp. 458-478. [GLM, Chapter 13]
  • Della Porta, D. (1995) Social Movements, Political Violence, and the State: A Comparative Analysis of Italy and Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Smith, G., and C. Wales (2000) ‘Citizens’ Juries and Deliberative Democracy’. Political Studies, 48 (1): 51-65.
  • Scarrow, S.E. (2001) ‘Direct Democracy and Institutional Change’. Comparative Political Studies, 34 (6): 651-665.
  • Hirsch-Hoefler, S., and C. Mudde (2014) ‘“Ecoterrorism”: Terrorist Threat or Political Ploy?’. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 37 (7): 586-603.


Week 15:                 Exam Week

(2-8 May)

Final Exam (Look for Announcements)