Despite great interest in the impact of undergraduate research on student developmen[.in the literature on higher education, [here has not been much work done on the relationship between participation in undergraduate research and the development ofpolitical science students. This paper assesses the relationship between student participation in collaborative research projects with f a c u l v and both student learningoperationalized in terms of scores on the Major Field Aptitude Test (MFAT) in political science, and the likelihood of entrance inro professional or graduate school. We find th& participation in collaborative research with faculty, in general, is associated with improved student learning in political science and a grealer likelihood [hat students will proceed on to graduate/ professional school.

How well are women authors represented in the most-recognized journals in political science? To what degree does the presence of women authors mirror women's presence in the discipline? Although a few studies have sought to provide data on the presence of women authors in political science journals (Young 1995; Kelly et al. 1994), more recent work on the visibility of women in the discipline has focused on gender and authorship of edited volumes (Mathews and Andersen 2001), on the participation of women in the APSA annual meetings (e.g., Gruberg 2006; 2004), and on the status of women in the discipline (Sarkees and McGlen 1992; 1999; Committee on the Status of Women in the Profession 2001). All are useful endeavors. This paper analyzes the presence of women authors in six volume years (1999–2004) of eight prestigious political science journals—American Political Science Review (APSR), American Journal of Political Science (AJPS), Journal of Politics (JOP), World Politics (WP), International Organization (IO), Comparative Politics (CP), Comparative Political Studies (CPS), and International Studies Quarterly (ISQ).

No abstract

Why are women still relatively scarce in the international studies profession? Although women have entered careers in international studies in increasing numbers, they represent increasingly smaller percentages as they move from PhD student to full professor. Our survey investigates why this is so, focusing on the assistant professor years, which are crucial to succeeding in the profession. We found that there are significant differences in publication rates, as well as differences in research focus (traditional subjects vs. newer subfields) and methodologies (quantitative vs. qualitative). Further, women and men have different perceptions of official and unwritten expectations for research, and policies regarding faculty with children may affect how successful women are in moving up the ladder. Taken together, these findings suggest reasons for the continued “leakiness” of the career pipeline for women and some potential solutions.

We argue that role theory offers the possibility of integrating Foreign Policy Analysis (FPA) and International Relations (IR) theory. While role theory was originally adapted for use by U.S.-based FPA scholars, it was later picked up by European scholars as well as the Constructivist IR community. The ISA Workshop that generated this special journal issue was designed to bring together scholars from these various research traditions to pursue integration and synthesis. The resulting papers contained in this issue have set the stage for a productive conversation that has continued well beyond the initial workshop. Role theory does appear to offer the possibility of integration and even synthesis across FPA and IR as demonstrated in the following papers. We believe that this special issue highlights numerous avenues to continue the fruitful development of this research program.Role theory has had an intermittent presence in the study of foreign policy analysis (FPA), though it is largely unfamiliar to scholars in international relations (IR). Yet, it is uniquely suited to integrating FPA and IR. Role theory is premised on explaining and understanding the interaction between agents and structure. This may sound familiar to constructivist IR scholars but as the papers in this special issue of Foreign Policy Analysis show, role theory tends to focus on the agent-structure debate from a slightly different, albeit complementary, vantage point.The papers in this issue were prepared for a workshop organized by Cameron Thies at the 2010 meeting of the International Studies Association (ISA) funded by ISA's Workshop Grants program. The workshop brought together an international group of scholars from disparate research traditions, most of whom had little or no prior connection with one another. The discussion that began with the workshop papers has continued to produce a fruitful dialogue. The papers in this issue are the result of that dialogue and several rounds of revisions, a process that would not have been possible without the opportunity provided by ISA.This special issue demonstrates the potential for role theory to weave tighter connections between disparate research traditions. Although role theory shares a natural affinity with (constructivist) IR theory, few scholars in this tradition have made explicit use of role theory's well-developed conceptual apparatus. Role