Identifying a Generational Zeitgeist?

Sometimes you discover something completely unexpected about how people perceive the world.

Back in February, students in my globalization course read the items below and wrote a response to “Is global trade a zero sum game — a process that causes some people to get poorer while others get richer? Why?”

  • Daron Acemoglu, “Economic Inequality and Globalization,” Brown Journal of World Affairs 13, 1 (Fall/Winter 2006).
  • Joseph Stiglitz, “The Globalization of Our Discontent,” Project Syndicate, 5 December 2017.
  • Branko Milanovic, “Why the Global 1% and the Asian Middle Class Have Gained the Most from Globalization,” Harvard Business Review Digital Articles, 13 May 2016.

Nearly the entire class wrote that global trade is a zero sum game. In class, students advocated for trade barriers.

Continue reading

Pre-Post Post-Its 3: Rubrics or Goobrics?

This post was inspired by an accidental encounter with an assignment rubric created by someone, or a committee, at my university. I do not know if the rubric is being used. I hope not, because it has 5 rows X 5 columns that contain a total of 860 remarkably ambiguous words, followed by a 362 word explanation — nearly four pages of information. No student is going to wade through such complex and lengthy verbiage for guidance on their work.

In contrast, I use a 3 X 4 rubric with 112 words. Much easier for students to decipher, but just as pointless if students don’t read it given that it is attached to about two dozen course assignments. So I decided to find out whether students do read it, with a third Post-It note survey, comprised of these items:

  • How do I feel right now?
  • I have read the rubric: a) before starting assignments, b) after receiving a grade for an assignment, c) both a and b, or d) I have never looked at the rubric.
  • For your answer to the previous question, why?

Similar to the previous Post-It note surveys, sixteen out of the twenty-one students present, or nearly 80 percent, stated that they felt badly in the one-word check-in. Twelve of these students wrote that they were tired. Three had neutral responses, and only two reported positive feelings. I’ll write more about this recurring problem in a future post.

For the second question, only two students commented that they had never read the rubric, but one of them wrote that they had already taken one of my courses and were familiar with it — so in effect 95 percent of the students who were in the classroom that day had used the rubric at some point. Nine students wrote that they read the rubric before starting to write, while ten students said that they had read the rubric both before and after completing an assignment.

Students’ answers to the last question included statements such as:

  • “So I know what to expect when my work is graded.”
  • “Wanted to know before [starting the assignment] how to do it, and after to see if I did anything wrong.”
  • “To make sure I can get the full amount of points.”
  • “That’s what you’re supposed to do.”

This is all good — the rubric seems to be serving its intended purpose and is not wasted effort or based on an incorrect assumption on my part.

Simulating the International Politics of Gender

Today we have a guest post from Susan Allen, associate professor of political science at the University of Mississippi. She can be contacted at shallen [at] olemiss [dot] edu.

This semester I am teaching a course on gender and international politics for the first time. The first half of the course examines gender and representation, while the second half explores gender in international politics. I aimed to bridge these two sections with a simulation that I created on child marriage—something currently on the agenda of the Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights and a likely topic at the Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) this summer.

Students have been working in groups by regions of the world to expand their knowledge base beyond their own experiences. For the simulation, they became spokespersons for their designated regions. As additional preparation, students read about CEDAW and an excerpt from Women, Politics, and Power by Paxton and Hughes. I did not inform them beforehand of the particular issue that would be discussed as part of the simulation, other than to say that the activity would resemble a communication from CEDAW.

During the simulation’s first class session, students met in their regional groups to research child marriage, making use of GirlsNotBrides.org. Each group formulated a regional proposal for what it would like the full class to discuss in the next two sessions. During these classes, a graduate student and I questioned students about their proposals to ensure they remained faithful to their roles. The ultimate objective was to collectively produce a single proposal to be presented at the upcoming CEDAW.

Based on post-simulation debriefing papers, students had mixed feelings about how little official private information was they received prior to negotiations and how much they had to rely on their own research to formulate a regional proposal. Perhaps as a result, discussion on the first day was a little slow to develop and their proposals were not as well fleshed out as I expected. On the second day, the majority of the students participated enthusiastically (and perhaps chaotically).

One of the most interesting things about this experience for the students was that they failed to come to an agreement in the time allotted. Many of them were concerned that they had “failed” the activity. When we debriefed the following week in class after they had written their papers, many of the students offered interesting insights about the difficulty of creating a proposal on something that they as American college students thought was an “easy” issue. The experience highlighted some of the practical challenges of creating laws that codify gender equality.

Next time, I might provide students with slightly more structured guidelines, but I don’t think I’ll do anything to make it easier for the students to create a unified proposal. I think the challenge and failure were essential parts of the value of the activity.

A Tale of Two Conferences

With apologies to Charles Dickens.

I recently presented at nearly back-to-back conferences that were not, strictly speaking, devoted to my areas of expertise. While I think it’s always good to go beyond one’s comfort zone, the experience again illustrated a principle upon which Simon and I have occasionally commented: academic conferences often don’t reflect workplace realities. To wit:

The first conference, of the Northeast Modern Language Association (NeMLA), was held in Washington, DC. Until you found out it wasn’t. I had immediately noticed from the call for proposals, unlike my wife/colleague, that the conference site was actually a 30-minute drive south, in Maryland. Public transit, including from the airport, took 90 minutes. While the hotel itself was gorgeous, its location represented additional expense and inconvenience for attendees, especially for those with limited or no financial support from their home institutions.

But the greater problem, in my opinion: it was the usual routine of presenting obscure research, completely unrelated to teaching, to mostly empty rooms. Hardly anyone who attended the conference has or will have a career that is entirely research-focused. In other words, the conference was organized to serve an audience that doesn’t exist.

The second conference, Eastern Regional Campus Compact, was a bit better in this regard, as one might expect from an organization whose mission is community engagement. But it still demonstrated the disconnect between conference format and audience. My contribution was an interactive workshop on teaching techniques, which drew a crowd of about fifty people, with some spilling out into the corridor — a clear sign of interest. The other sessions I attended, organized as traditional panels, attracted a half dozen or fewer people.

As I mention in the post at the link shown above, the economics of these kinds of conferences are backwards and not sustainable.

Call for Book Chapter Proposals: Teaching Political Methodology

Today we have a call for proposals from Jeffrey Bernstein at Eastern Michigan University.

I am working with Edward Elgar Publishing to produce an edited volume, tentatively entitled “Teaching Political Methodology,” that will focus on teaching this subject at the undergraduate level. Such a collection, I believe, will fill a hole in the literature.  Most of our departments offer such a class; however, it usually proves to be a hard course to teach. I’m excited about the possibility of a book that articulates rationales for what this course should look like, and for how it can be done well.

The publishers are looking for fairly thin (200-250 page) book, most likely with around twelve contributors.  The volume will likely consist of two parts.  Section One will focus more on the larger, theoretical questions involved in teaching research methods to political science undergraduates.  Why do we see this as an important topic for students to learn?  Do we want to approach the course as teaching mostly research design, statistical analysis, or programming and using Big Data? How much should we focus on qualitative versus quantitative tools?  While quantitative methods have traditionally dominated, scholars have noted the limitations and biases in both the questions asked and the tools used to answer these questions.  To what extent should our courses reflect this? 

Section Two will focus less on the theoretical and more on the applied.  Once we have determined the sort of methods course we want to teach, how do we do it effectively?  What are the best means to get across the central lessons from methods classes?  What does it look like when students achieve our learning goals?  Papers for this section should move beyond assertions of what we should be doing, or what we believe will work, and present evidence of student learning drawn from their work.  They should include things such as sample assignments to help other instructors build on successful approaches to the subject.

If you are interested in contributing to this collection, please email me as soon as possible at jbernstei@emich.edu with a summary of the idea you are proposing, as well as a CV.  The proposal deadline is May 1. Completed chapters will be due to me by May 31, 2020; this extended time frame will allow people to develop ideas for teaching these classes and test these approaches against data during the 2019-2020 academic year.

Perpetual Anarchy: A Game of War and Peace

Today we have a guest post by Matteo Perlini. He can be contacted at
matteoperlini [at] gmail [dot] com.

In a post from August of last year, Nathan Alexander Sears wrote about a simple game he designed that teaches students about IR theory. Based on Sears’s idea, I created “Perpetual Anarchy,” a two-player game where the goal is to maximize the wealth of one’s state. Unlike Sears’s game, mine does not eliminate players or involve diplomacy.

 “Perpetual Anarchy” requires a standard deck of playing cards and paper to record points scored and technological advances. The complete rules of “Perpetual Anarchy” are at https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/273757/perpetual-anarchy.

First Strategic Level

Each state must choose an action every turn: defense, attack or production. The choice of attack starts a war with the other state. Defense allows a player to better resist an attack by the opposing player. Production is an entirely peaceful action that helps increase wealth. The game has weak intransitive preference orderings: it is usually preferred (but not always!) to play defense against attack, attack against production, production against defense.

Defense vs. attack: as in the real world, defending is easier than attacking, so the defender has a bonus in the war (higher probability to win the war), but attacker must pay reputation costs for her belligerence.

Attack vs. production: attacker has a bonus in the war (higher probability to win the war) but she must pay reputation costs for her belligerence. By contrast, if the producer wins, she earns points without reputation costs.

Production vs. defense: both states score, but only the defending state has reputation costs, so the producer generally scores more.

The game is not strictly intransitive because the final outcome depends also on the second strategic level.

Second Strategic Level

States must choose how to allocate their budget across two dimensions: war/peace and long-term/short-term. A player must decide whether to give more prominence to one of the following strategies:

Short-term war: armament allocation helps the player win an urgent war, but the player will not use this allocation in the future.

Short-term peace: wealth allocation helps a player score points during peace.

Long-term war: military technology allocation does not increase the likelihood of winning an actual war, but increases marginally the player’s military efficacy forever.

Long-term peace: civilian technology allocation does not increase the actual points scored by a player, but increases marginally the player’s production efficacy forever.

As an example, a player who chooses a short-term war strategy will be more likely to win if a war occurs and will also prevent the opponent from capitalizing on long-term strategies, because the opponent loses any technology allocations in that turn.

Scholarly Literature As a Conversation

Below is an example of a recent in-class exercise that I used in my comparative politics course, created in collaboration with our crack staff of librarians. The exercise is designed to teach students that the scholarly journal articles they are reading represent an ongoing conversation between experts. I have included the information students were supposed to locate in italics. Feel free to modify the activity to meet your own needs.

Warm Up

Which former president of the American Political Science Association was one of Dr. Raymond’s professors? (Lucian Pye) First person to submit the correct answer before time expires earns 10 points toward their final course grade.

Backtracking

Locate this article: Larry Diamond, “Why Are There No Arab Democracies?” Journal of Democracy 21, 1 (January 2010): 93-112.

In this article, find citations for academic journal articles about democracy in the Arab world. Locate these articles. Write their citations:

  • Alfred Stepan and Graeme B. Robertson, “An ‘Arab’ More Than a ‘Muslim’ Democracy Gap,” Journal of Democracy 14 (July 2003): 30–44.
  • Mark Tessler and Eleanor Gao, “Gauging Arab Support for Democracy,” Journal of Democracy 16 (July 2005): 82–97.
  • Amaney Jamal and Mark Tessler, “The Democracy Barometers: Attitudes in the Arab World,” Journal of Democracy 19 (January 2008): 97–110.

One of the above articles (Jamal and Tessler) contains a citation for an academic journal article written by another former president of the American Political Science Association. Locate this article. Write the citation:

  • Samuel Huntington, “Will More Countries Become Democratic?” Political Science Quarterly 99, 2 (Summer 1984): 193-218

In the above article, find citations for these two works: the original version of an academic journal article that you have read for this course, and a book that you have read about for this course. What are the citations for the two works?

  • Seymour Martin Lipset, “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy,” American Political Science Review 53 (1959): 75.
  • Barrington Moore, Jr., Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy (Boston: Beacon Press, 1966), 418.

Synthesis

How do the ideas contained in the scholarly works listed above relate to the ideas presented by Diamond in the initial article?

Your Own Research

Choose a research topic of interest (does not have to be related to this course). On the back of this paper, track citations of academic journal articles about the topic through time. What do the authors of these articles say about the topic? How do their ideas correspond or differ?

Ducky!

ALPS has been awarded a Ducky for best group blog from the International Studies Association’s Online Media Caucus. This is our first officially-bestowed honor, and we greatly appreciate the recognition.

The Ducky inspired me to take stock of the work we’ve done here. ALPS content first appeared way back in February 2011 with a post replete with now-dead UW-Madison links (check out the phrase in the URL) — a sign that we have enjoyed greater longevity than much of what has been put on the internet. Since then, we’ve published more than 1,200 posts, mostly on teaching, with many written by contributors from different parts of the world. Our readership continues to expand; last September we exceeded 10,000 page views for the month.

I’m very happy with what this project has achieved.

Information Literacy as Research Methods IV


R M Media Ltd, CC BY-SA license

As I mentioned in my first post in this series, my interdisciplinary methods course includes a research proposal assignment consisting of:

  • An introduction containing a research question, hypothesis, rationale, and context.
  • A one-paragraph abstract.
  • Two-page discussion of the design of the proposed research project, the types of data that will be collected, how the data will be analyzed, and how this process will test the hypothesis and provide an answer to the research question.
  • A bibliography of references.

The proposal is intended to prepare students for an actual research project that they will design, conduct, and report on before graduating. I’ve created three smaller practice assignments that scaffold different aspects of the final proposal. The first uses research on Bolivia; here are the instructions:

  1. Read the rubric.
  2. Read either a chapter from Jim Schultz and Melissa Crane Draper, eds, Dignity and Defiance: Stories from Bolivia’s Challenge to Globalization, UC Press, 2008, or Isabel M. Scarborough, “Two Generations of Bolivian Female Vendors,” Ethnology 49, 2 (Spring 2010): 87-104.
  3. Read:
    Writing a Good Research Question
    What Makes a Good Research Question
    Constructing Hypotheses in Quantitative Research
    Forming a Good Hypothesis for Scientific Research
    Annotated Bibliography Guidelines

Write and submit the following as a single document:

  • A research question about the local effect of globalization in Bolivia.
  • A hypothesis derived from your research question.
  • A one-paragraph annotated bibliography entry for the item you read about Bolivia. Include the source’s complete bibliographic information.
Continue reading

More Pre-Post Post-its

A follow-up about asking students why they do what they do . . . For the second stage of this data-gathering exercise, I had students use Post-its to anonymously answer three questions at the beginning of class:

  • How are you feeling right now? (the one-word check-in)
  • Why are you feeling what you’re feeling?
  • Why did you come to class today?

Nineteen out of twenty-three students, or more than eighty percent, reported feeling badly — the same proportion as last time. Of the nineteen, ten referenced being tired while four wrote “stressed.” Only one wrote “hungry.” The overwhelming majority of people in this group attributed their feelings to too little sleep and too much work.

The other four students felt “happy,” “good,” “relaxed,” and “chill.” Three of these students attributed their feelings to having had time to eat, buy coffee, or otherwise get ready before class. One of them mentioned sleeping comfortably, while another wrote “not super-stressed . . . trying to stay calm for the day ahead.”

I sorted answers to the third question into a few different categories, which are shown below, along with their frequencies. A few students’ comments fell into more than one category.

  • I had to; attendance is mandatory: 7
  • Get a good grade: 5
  • I am paying for the course: 3
  • Learn something: 3
  • Participate in discussion: 1
  • Collaborate with teammates on an upcoming assignment: 3
  • Miscellaneous reasons — “My roommate told me I couldn’t skip,” “I was awake so I figured why not,” “Because I didn’t go to the last one,” “I try to go to all of my classes,” “Didn’t want to miss anything,” “To avoid falling behind”: 6

In sum, only seven students, or thirty percent, indicated that they had been intrinsically motivated to attend class that day; i.e., they came to learn or participate in a learning-oriented activity. More than half of the students indicated that they were extrinsically motivated by the fear that their grades would be harmed if they did not attend. What I think is interesting here: I do not penalize students for being absent from class — I regard them as legal adults, free to suffer the natural consequences of their actions. I do not grade on attendance or class participation. Only students’ written work, submitted before class, gets assessed.

More thoughts on this subject in a future post . . .