Important: Read and Refer Often to the Information in This Syllabus!
Political Science 1203.20013: State and Local Government
University of Central Oklahoma: Syllabus for Fall 2006

ABOUT THE INSTRUCTOR:
Dr. Brett S. Sharp, Associate Professor, has considerable professional and administrative experience in both state and local government. He received his Ph.D. and Master of Public Administration from the University of Oklahoma and a Bachelor of Science in Political Science/Public Affairs with a minor in Religious Studies from Oklahoma State University. He is a past president of the Oklahoma Chapter of the American Society for Public Administration.
Contact Hours: Mon/Wed/Fri 9:30-10:00 AM and Wed 7:00-7:30 PM (and by appointment)
Office: Liberal Arts Bldg 102-J (in Political Science suite) Email: bsharp@ucok.edu
Telephone: (405) 974-5526 (with voice mail) Fax: (405) 974-3823
Web Site: http://www.libarts.ucok.edu/political/faculty/sharp Classroom: LAR 120
COURSE DESCRIPTION:
This course introduces the structure and process of state and local government in the United States with an emphasis on Oklahoma. The focus will be on current issues and emerging trends facing state and local governments and how they respond to various public policy challenges. The roles played by elected leaders, policy makers, administrators, interest groups, and citizens in the political process will also be explored. Through a series of real-life case studies, we will analyze how people actually operate within a political framework to impact public policy at the state and local levels.
TEACHING METHODS/LEARNING EXPERIENCES:
This course is designed for active student participation and includes several case studies, presentations of readings, videos, and other in-class simulations. Classroom questions and discussion are strongly encouraged. Students will attend lectures which will orient them to basic concepts and information concerning state and local government. Students are responsible, through self-study and reading assignments, for learning relevant concepts and practices of state and local government. Each student will also write and present an article review over state or local government issues. The student is responsible for retaining backup copies of all assignments until final grades are posted. Students should be aware that some flexibility is retained in the syllabus to accommodate invited speakers and other learning opportunities. Students should regularly check the professor’s web site for any class announcements.
TEXTS
Bowman, Ann O’M and Kearney, Richard C. (2005). State and Local Government (6th Ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. [Required]

Markwood, Christopher L. and Sharp, Brett S. (Eds.). (2005). Oklahoma Government & Politics: An Introduction (3nd Ed). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing. [Required]
Ehrenhalt, Alan. (Ed.). (2005). Governing: Issues and Applications from the Front Lines of Government. Washington, DC: CQ Press. [Required]
Scott, Gregory M. & Garrison, Stephen M. (2006). The Political Science Student Writer’s Manual (5th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. [Highly Recommended]

Course Schedule - Fall 2006
Week |
Monday |
Wednesday |
Friday |
Aug 21- Aug 25 |
Political Culture |
Intros/Syllabus & Course Overview Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 1 |
Video: The Oklahoma Video Schedule Case/Article Presentations |
Aug 28- Sep 1 |
Federalism & the States Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 2 Markwood & Sharp: Chap. 1 |
State Constitutions Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 3 Markwood & Sharp: Chap. 2 |
Case 27: Politics and Promises Case 29: Enemies of the State Case 32: HUD the Unlovable |
Sep 4- Sep 8 |
Labor Day |
Citizen Participation Bowman/Kearney: Chaps. 4 Markwood & Sharp: Chaps. 9 |
Case 30: Made in Sacramento Case 35: Addicted to Corruption Case 13: Dot-Bomb Silver Lining |
Sep 11- Sep 15 |
Political Parties Bowman/Kearney: Chaps. 5 Markwood & Sharp: Chaps. 10 |
Interest Groups |
Case 37: Sugar Daddy Government Case 36: The Soft-Money Crackdown Case 38: How to Repair City |
Sep 18- Sep 22 |
First Exam |
Test Results & Review Video: Political Science Careers |
E-Government Case 16: Honey, I Shrunk the Deficit |
Sep 25- Sep 29 |
Case 15: Dealing in Data Case 18: The E-mail Mess Case 28: Breaking and Entering |
Legislatures Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 6 Markwood & Sharp: Chap. 4 |
Case 1: City Councils a Relic of the Past? Case 3: In Search of the Ideal Legislature Case 14: Legislators Who Get IT |
Oct 2- Oct 6 |
Video: Phoenix—Urban Desert | Governors/Executives Public Administration Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 7-8 Markwood & Sharp: Chap. 5-6 |
Case 9: Worth the Money? Case 10: Going Outside Case 40: Huge Turnover in Hard Times |
Oct 9- Oct 13 |
Judiciary/Criminal Justice Policy Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 9 & 16 Markwood & Sharp: Chaps. 7-8 |
Guest Speaker Jeanette Nance, Agency Liaison & Public Policy Specialist Office of Governor Brad Henry |
Case 21: Murder Mystery Case 22: Revising Sentences Case 33: The Avengers General |
Oct 16- Oct 20 |
Sociology Survey Local Government Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 10-11 Markwood & Sharp: Chap. 12 |
Video: Capitol Dome Celebration |
Fall Break |
Oct 23- Oct 27 |
State & Local Finance Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 12-13 Markwood & Sharp: Chap. 11 |
Second Exam |
Case 2: Anatomy of a Merger Case 39: Capital Gains Case 31: Squeezing the Federal Turnip |
Oct 30- Nov 3 |
Economic Development Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 14 Markwood & Sharp: Chap. 3 |
Video: Mayor’s Magazine - MAPS |
Case 4: The Phantom of New York Case 5: The Great GASB Case 19: Who’s Afraid of the DMV? |
Nov 6- Nov 10 |
Transportation Policy Video: Stateline: Road Trip |
Video: Coming & Going—Road to the Future |
Case 7: The Well That Dried Up Case 8: Risky Ventures Case 20: Unscrambling the City |
Nov 13- Nov 17 |
Historic Preservation |
Education Policy Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 15 Markwood & Sharp: Chap. 13 |
Library
Research Day (OPSA Conference) |
Nov 20- Nov 24 |
Video: We Built This City-NY |
Thanksgiving Break |
|
Nov 27- Dec 1 |
Health Care Policy Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 17 |
Case 23: Deadly Strains Case 24: Maine’s Medical Gamble Case 11: Payout Planning |
Library Research Day |
Dec 4- Dec 8 |
Environmental Policy Bowman/Kearney: Chap. 18 |
Library Research Day |
Course Wrap-Up Research/Issue Paper Due |
Final Exam - Monday, December 11: 11:00 AM - 12:50 PM |
|||
EVALUATION METHODS AND GRADING
Instructor will determine course grades Grading components include:
using the following scale: Participation 5%
90 -100 = A Quizzes 5%
80 - 89 = B Case Study/Article Review 10%
70 - 79 = C First Mid-Term Exam 20%
60 - 69 = D Second Mid-Term Exam 20%
0 - 59 = F Research/Issue Paper* 20%
Final Exam20%
* You may elect not to turn in an issue paper, and if so, the average of your first two exams will substitute for this score. Alternatively, you may turn in an issue paper, and your lowest exam score will be dropped. The average of your highest exam score and your issue paper would then substitute for the lowest exam score.
CLASS ATTENDANCE & PARTICIPATION
Class attendance is an important part of succeeding in this class and is expected of all students. Class time provides an opportunity for you to ask questions, clarify issues, and deepen your understanding of the concepts covered in the text. If you are absent, you are responsible for getting any notes, assignments, and schedule changes made on that day. If you come in late, you are responsible for seeing that the attendance record is correct. Class attendance may affect marginal grades and will be considered when assigning participation points. Above and beyond the expected class attendance, students are required to complete the readings as assigned (see course schedule) prior to the beginning of the class period. Demonstrated mastery of the assigned readings through class discussion is necessary to earn full participation points.
QUIZZES AND READING ASSIGNMENTS
Readings as assigned on the course schedule must be completed before the date indicated. To encourage faithful and current reading of the text, quizzes may be occasionally administered during class time. In addition, you are responsible for reading all of the cases scheduled for class discussion prior to classtime even if you are not assigned to present a case that day. If more than one quiz is administered, your lowest quiz grade will be dropped and the others will be averaged together. If no quizzes are administered, the final exam will be worth 25%. No makeups on quizzes will be offered.
REQUIREMENTS FOR CASE STUDY/ARTICLE REVIEW
Each student will select an article from the supplementary textbook, Governing: Issues and Applications from the Front Lines of Government. The student will then prepare a 2-3 page analytical response to the contents. The student may (but is not required to) draw upon outside readings in preparing their analytical response. Each article review will be presented to the rest of the class according to the schedule as arranged with the instructor. Students should briefly summarize the facts, highlight the key issues, and present their analysis. The article review should also include 2-3 thought provoking questions to be posed to the rest of the class in order to stimulate class discussion. Students will be allowed up to fifteen minutes for their presentation and subsequent class discussion. This assignment will be graded on quality of presentation, summary of relevant points, analysis, questions, and resulting class discussion.
EXAMINATIONS
There will be three examinations during the semester. The first two exams will be comprised of multiple choice questions. The final exam will be comprehensive and may be comprised of essay, short answer, and/or multiple choice questions. Make up examinations will not be offered except for documented emergencies. Even then, an alternate form of the examination will likely be substituted. In case of school cancellation due to weather or other reasons during the scheduled time for the final exam, university policy will be followed in the assigning of grades, which in the past has included the professor’s best judgment to what the student has earned up until that point. Therefore, it is in your best interest not to depend upon the final exam to make up for previously poor grades. Also, see note on Research/Issue Paper option (above).
REQUIREMENTS FOR RESEARCH/ISSUE PAPER
Each student that elects this option will write an 8-10 page, double-spaced research paper for this course. You will choose as your topic some issue that directly relates to contemporary state and local government or politics. While you must cite sufficient references to make your paper convincing, this assignment requires a minimum of five (5) references from outside sources. Students should follow an accepted style convention such as outlined in the recommended textbook by Scott and Garrison, The Political Science Student Writers Manual or the American Psychological Association (APA). The research paper is due at the beginning of class, Friday, December 8. Papers will be graded on topic selection, format, grammar, writing style, citation convention, content delivery, analysis, and research quality. Please refer to the discussion of plagiarism in the Academic Integrity Statement attached to the syllabus as well as the Fall 2006 Student Information Sheet/Syllabus Attachment, and The Political Science Student Writer’s Manual.
ACADEMIC HONESTY
Cheating = Failure (please refer to both the attached Academic Integrity Statement and the Fall 2006 Student Information Sheet/Syllabus Attachment). Cheating is unacceptable conduct and will result in an automatic grade of “F” for the course, and be reported to Academic Affairs. Students are required to do all of the work for this class on their own. Copying answers to exercises or examinations from anyone constitutes cheating. Allowing another student to copy one’s answers will be treated as cheating. Consulting with the instructor about any assignment does not constitute cheating and is encouraged.
The Political Science Department of the University of Central Oklahoma is asking all students taking political science courses to read the following Academic Integrity Statement. Our purpose in doing so is to ensure that all our students are aware of what is improper academic behavior.
![]()
Academic Integrity Statement
As members of the academic community, students are expected to recognize and uphold standards of intellectual and academic integrity. The Political Science Department expects that its students will conduct themselves honestly. This means, above all, that students submit for credit work that is the product of their own efforts. Principles of academic integrity require that all dishonest work be rejected as a basis for academic credit, and that students refrain from any and all forms of dishonorable conduct in the course of their academic work.
The examples and definitions given below are intended to clarify the standards by which academic honesty and integrity is judged. The list is merely illustrative of some of the more common infractions. It is not intended to be exhaustive. Any question a student has about what constitutes inappropriate behavior should be directed towards their instructor. The rule of thumb to follow is: If in doubt, ASK!
Definitions and Examples
Plagiarism - Plagiarism is presenting another person’s work as one’s own. Plagiarism includes not only the exact use of another’s words, word for word, but also the paraphrasing or summarizing of the works of another person without acknowledgment, including the submitting of another student’s work as one’s own. The student is responsible for understanding the legitimate use of sources, the appropriate ways of acknowledging academic, scholarly, or creative indebtedness, and the consequences of violating this responsibility. In case of doubt, give a citation of the author you are using. Failure to indicate the extent and nature of one's reliance on other sources is plagiarism. A plagiarized paper will result in a failing grade on the work in question, and perhaps, for the entire course.
Cheating on Examinations - Cheating on examinations involves giving or receiving unauthorized help before, during, or after an examination. Examples of unauthorized help include the use of notes, texts, or “crib sheets” during an examination (unless receiving instructor approval), or sharing information with another student either during or after an examination.
Falsification - It is a violation of academic honesty to misrepresent material or to fabricate information in an academic exercise or assignment (e.g. false or misleading citation of sources; falsification of survey results, experiments, or computer data).
Multiple Submissions - It is a violation of academic honesty to submit substantial portions of the same work for credit more than once without the explicit consent of the instructor to whom the material is being submitted the second time.
Turnitin.com Plagiarism Syllabus Statement: UCO subscribes to the Turnitin.com plagiarism prevention service. Students agree that by taking this course, all required assignments may be subject to submission for textual similarity review to Turnitin.com for the detection of plagiarism. All submitted assignments will be included as source documents in the Turnitin.com restricted access reference database for the purpose of detecting plagiarism of such assignments.
Use of the Turnitin.com service is subject to the Terms and Conditions of Use posted on the Turnitin.com website. Turnitin.com is just one of various plagiarism prevention tools and methods which may be utilized by your faculty instructor during the terms of the semesters. In the UCO Student Handbook, there is a process for contesting any plagiarism allegations against you.
Article Review Schedule - Fall 2006
Day |
Case Studies |
Student Name |
Friday, Sep. 1 |
Case 27: Politics and Promises |
Aaron W. |
Case 29: Enemies of the State |
Steve R. | |
Case 32: HUD the Unlovable |
Rhett B. |
|
Friday, Sep. 8 |
Case 30: Made in Sacramento |
Link L. |
Case 35: Addicted to Corruption |
Danielle L. |
|
Case 13: Dot-Bomb Silver Lining |
|
|
Friday, Sep. 15 |
Case 36: The Soft Money Crackdown |
|
Case 37: Sugar Daddy Government |
Heather C. |
|
Case 38: How to Repair the City |
Matt S. |
|
Friday, Sep. 22 |
Case 16: Honey, I Shrunk the Deficit |
Cyndi M. |
Monday, Sep. 25 |
Case 15: Dealing in Data |
|
Case 18: The E-Mail Mess |
Scott A. |
|
Case 28: Breaking and Entering |
Megan F. |
|
Friday, Sep. 29 |
Case 1: Are City Councils a Relic of the Past? |
Kelby B. |
Case 3: In Search of the Ideal Legislature |
Blake G. |
|
Case 14: Legislators Who Get IT |
Teara F. |
|
Friday, Oct. 6 |
Case 9: Worth the Money? |
Brit M. |
Case 10: Going Outside |
Kylie S. |
|
Case 40: Huge Turnover in Hard Times |
Cristy S. |
|
Friday, Oct. 13 |
Case 21: Murder Mystery |
Jeff C. |
|
|
|
Case 33: The Avengers General |
Brittany L. |
|
Friday, Oct. 27 |
Case 2: Anatomy of a Merger |
Billey |
| Case 22: Revising Sentences | Ta-keia F. | |
| Case 5: The Great GASB | Nicole G. | |
Case 31: Squeezing the Federal Turnip |
Kevin B. |
|
Friday, Nov. 3 |
Case 4: The Phantom of New York |
Nicole L. |
| Case 25: The Left Behind Syndrome | Latoya H | |
| Case 26: Edge-ucation | Melinda H. | |
Friday, Nov. 10 |
Case 7: The Well That Dried Up |
Andrew R. |
Case 8: Risky Ventures |
Adam L. |
|
Case 20: Unscrambling the City |
Daniel D. | |
Wednesday, Nov. 29 |
Case 23: Deadly Strains |
Jaye F. |
| Case 11: Payout Planning | Jonathon E. | |
Case 24: Maine’s Medical Gamble |
Josh T. |