国际关系(IR)教学法、对话与多样性:认真对待国际关系课程大纲

IF 0.7 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
N. Andrews
{"title":"国际关系(IR)教学法、对话与多样性:认真对待国际关系课程大纲","authors":"N. Andrews","doi":"10.20991/allazimuth.716687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The field of International Relations (IR) has experienced different waves of ‘great debates’ that have often maintained certain theoretical and methodological frameworks and perspectives as core to the field whereas others are seen as peripheral and merely a critique of the former. As a result of this segregation of knowledge, IR has not become as open to dialogue and diversity as we are made to believe. To be sure, aspects of the extant literature speak of IR as being ‘not so international’, a ‘hegemonic discipline’, a ‘colonial household’, and an ‘American social science’, among other derogatory names. Informed by such characterizations that depict a field of study that is not sufficiently diverse, the paper investigates the relationship between pedagogical factors and dialogue in IR. In doing so, it provides preliminary results from a pilot study in February-April 2019 that sought to examine different graduate-level IR syllabi from leading universities in the global North and South (Africa in particular). In particular, the objective was to decipher as what extent course design including required readings and other pedagogical activities in the classroom tells us about dialogue and the sort of diversity needed to push IR beyond its conventional canons.","PeriodicalId":51976,"journal":{"name":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"International Relations (IR) Pedagogy, Dialogue and Diversity: Taking the IR Course Syllabus Seriously\",\"authors\":\"N. Andrews\",\"doi\":\"10.20991/allazimuth.716687\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The field of International Relations (IR) has experienced different waves of ‘great debates’ that have often maintained certain theoretical and methodological frameworks and perspectives as core to the field whereas others are seen as peripheral and merely a critique of the former. As a result of this segregation of knowledge, IR has not become as open to dialogue and diversity as we are made to believe. To be sure, aspects of the extant literature speak of IR as being ‘not so international’, a ‘hegemonic discipline’, a ‘colonial household’, and an ‘American social science’, among other derogatory names. Informed by such characterizations that depict a field of study that is not sufficiently diverse, the paper investigates the relationship between pedagogical factors and dialogue in IR. In doing so, it provides preliminary results from a pilot study in February-April 2019 that sought to examine different graduate-level IR syllabi from leading universities in the global North and South (Africa in particular). In particular, the objective was to decipher as what extent course design including required readings and other pedagogical activities in the classroom tells us about dialogue and the sort of diversity needed to push IR beyond its conventional canons.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.716687\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"All Azimuth-A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20991/allazimuth.716687","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

国际关系(IR)领域经历了不同的“大辩论”浪潮,这些辩论通常将某些理论和方法框架和观点视为该领域的核心,而其他理论和方法框架和观点则被视为边缘,仅仅是对前者的批评。由于这种知识隔离,国际关系并没有像我们所相信的那样对对话和多样性持开放态度。可以肯定的是,在现有文献中,国际关系被描述为“不那么国际化”、“霸权学科”、“殖民家庭”和“美国社会科学”,以及其他贬义词。鉴于这种描述研究领域不够多样化的特征,本文调查了IR中教学因素与对话之间的关系。在此过程中,它提供了2019年2月至4月进行的一项试点研究的初步结果,该研究旨在检查全球北部和南部(特别是非洲)一流大学的不同研究生水平的国际关系教学大纲。特别是,我们的目标是解读课程设计,包括课堂上的必读材料和其他教学活动,在多大程度上告诉我们对话和推动国际关系超越传统规范所需的多样性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
International Relations (IR) Pedagogy, Dialogue and Diversity: Taking the IR Course Syllabus Seriously
The field of International Relations (IR) has experienced different waves of ‘great debates’ that have often maintained certain theoretical and methodological frameworks and perspectives as core to the field whereas others are seen as peripheral and merely a critique of the former. As a result of this segregation of knowledge, IR has not become as open to dialogue and diversity as we are made to believe. To be sure, aspects of the extant literature speak of IR as being ‘not so international’, a ‘hegemonic discipline’, a ‘colonial household’, and an ‘American social science’, among other derogatory names. Informed by such characterizations that depict a field of study that is not sufficiently diverse, the paper investigates the relationship between pedagogical factors and dialogue in IR. In doing so, it provides preliminary results from a pilot study in February-April 2019 that sought to examine different graduate-level IR syllabi from leading universities in the global North and South (Africa in particular). In particular, the objective was to decipher as what extent course design including required readings and other pedagogical activities in the classroom tells us about dialogue and the sort of diversity needed to push IR beyond its conventional canons.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
30.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: All Azimuth is a bi-annual journal that provides a forum for academic studies on foreign policy analysis and peace research as well as theoretically-oriented policy pieces on international issues. We particularly welcome research on the nexus of peace, security, and development. We aim to publish pieces bridging the theory-practice gap; dealing with under-represented conceptual approaches in the field; and engaging in scholarly dialogue between the “center” and the “periphery”. We strongly encourage, therefore, publications with homegrown theoretical and philosophical approaches. In this sense, All Azimuth aims to transcend conventional theoretical, methodological, geographical, academic and cultural boundaries. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial evaluation by the Editor. If found suitable for further consideration, manuscripts will be assessed through double-blind peer-review by independent, anonymous experts. All Azimuth is published by the Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research, a non-profit and nonpartisan organization dedicated to helping develop agendas and promote policies that contribute to the peaceful resolution of international and inter-communal conflicts taking place particularly in the regions surrounding Turkey.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信