{"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}
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.
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.