Lesson Report:
Okay, here is the lesson report generated from the transcript:
**Lesson Report**
**Title: Final Paper Workshop: Applying IR Theories and Planning the Final Session**
**Synopsis:** This session served as the final content-focused class. The initial part involved discussing and deciding on the activity for the next (and final) class meeting. The majority of the session was dedicated to a workshop focused on the final paper, specifically guiding students to connect chosen International Relations (IR) theoretical concepts (like realism and constructivism) to specific historical events within their research topics, followed by student presentations explaining these connections.
**Attendance:**
* No students were explicitly mentioned as absent for the entire session.
* One student (Hamdam) joined the class late.
**Topics Covered:**
1. **Planning for the Final Class Session (Wednesday):**
* **Objective:** Decide the activity for the final class meeting.
* **Options Presented:**
* **Option 1: Final Review Workshop:** Continue workshopping final papers and reviewing concepts for the final.
* **Option 2: Debate:** Engage in a debate on topics related to US foreign policy.
* Potential Topic Example 1: The role and impact of the intelligence community (“the blob”) in US foreign policy – is its influence outsized/dangerous or expected?
* Potential Topic Example 2 (Recalled later): Debating motivations behind specific events, e.g., the Iraq War (Realist/oil motives vs. Democracy promotion motives). Instructor mentioned assigning sides randomly in the past.
* **Option 3: Movie:** Watch “Wag the Dog” (1997 suggested, originally stated 1993 or 1997).
* **Film Description:** A satirical film exploring the media’s influence on US foreign policy decision-making, illustrating the “tail wagging the dog” concept where media shapes presidential actions, rather than just reporting on them. Stars Dustin Hoffman and Robert De Niro.
* **Initial Discussion/Vote:** A brief show of hands indicated division (1 for review, 0 for debate, interest in the film but questions about its relevance). The decision was postponed.
* **Final Decision (End of Class):** After further discussion and a vote showing preference for review/workshopping, a compromise was reached: the final class will begin with workshopping the final papers, followed by the in-class debate.
2. **Final Paper Workshop: Connecting Theory, Concepts, and Events:**
* **Objective:** Guide students in applying specific IR theoretical concepts to historical events relevant to their final paper topics.
* **Reference Material:** Google Doc titled “not so good, colon” (shared previously).
* **Recap:** Students had previously identified relevant IR theories (e.g., Realism, Constructivism) and extracted core concepts (e.g., Balance of Power, Security Dilemma, Unilateralism).
* **Task Introduced (Building on previous work):** For each core concept identified, students were asked to:
* Identify at least one specific historical event from their research narrative.
* Explain in a few sentences *how* the chosen core concept can be used to explain the *why* or *how* of that specific event.
* **Instructor Example:**
* Trend: US Pivot to Asia
* Theory: Offensive Realism
* Concept: Balance of Power
* Event: Formation of SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty Organization)
* Explanation: The US formed SEATO to create a military framework balancing against rising Chinese power, perceived as a threat, demonstrating the balance of power concept in action.
* **Student Work Time:** Students worked individually on this task. (Hamdam joined during this time and was brought up to speed).
3. **Workshop Discussion & Feedback – Applying Concepts:**
* **Objective:** Students share their concept-event connections, and the instructor provides feedback to deepen analytical understanding.
* **Timur (Realism – Security Dilemma & Unilateralism):**
* *Concept 1:* Security Dilemma -> Event: Invasion of Afghanistan post-9/11.
* *Feedback:* Instructor challenged Timur to move beyond the obvious need to respond and explain *specifically* how the Security Dilemma concept (acting under uncertainty, potentially overreacting to mitigate risk) illuminates the *nature* of the US response.
* *Concept 2:* Unilateralism -> Event: Invasion of Iraq (acting despite lack of allied support).
* *Feedback:* Instructor pushed for a deeper definition of unilateralism (when/why states disregard norms/allies) and a clearer application to the US decision-making process regarding Iraq.
* **Jade (Realism – Balance of Power):**
* *Concept:* Balance of Power -> Events: Petrodollar system, Bretton Woods, US funding of Israel.
* *Feedback:* Instructor clarified Balance of Power (struggle to maximize power leading to a system structure, not necessarily equal power). Discussed applying it to *economic* power (US overcoming resistance to establish favorable systems like the Petrodollar). Suggested looking for scholars applying BoP economically and considering Bandwagoning theory as an alternative/complement.
* **Raphael (Constructivism):**
* *Concept 1:* Need for an Adversary -> Event: US framing of Iran.
* *Concept 2:* Subjective Interpretation of Threats -> Event: US framing of Iraq as an imminent threat.
* *Feedback:* Instructor affirmed constructivism’s strength in explaining actions potentially counter to material interests (like the Iraq War), highlighting the role of subjective interpretations and identity in shaping policy. Linked to Wendt’s “Anarchy is what states make of it.”
* **Hamdam (Realism – Power Projection):**
* *Concept 1:* Security/Survival -> Event: Post-9/11 context, Al-Qaeda threat.
* *Concept 2:* Power Projection -> Event: US drone strikes in Pakistan/Yemen (2004-2010).
* *Feedback:* Instructor began probing the definition of Power Projection (displaying military might abroad) and its application to the *how* and *why* of US drone policy, but was cut short by the transition to the next activity.
4. **Mini-Presentation Activity: Explaining Core Concepts:**
* **Objective:** Have students articulate their understanding of one core concept and its application more formally.
* **Task:** Prepare and deliver a 2-3 minute presentation covering:
1. The core concept’s name and meaning.
2. The originating scholar(s) and a key text (book/article).
3. A brief description of the related historical event.
4. A clear explanation of how the concept helps understand the event.
* **Instructor Example/Suggestion (for Jade):** Introduced Bandwagoning theory (why/how weaker states align with stronger ones) as potentially applicable to Saudi Arabia aligning economically with the US.
* **Student Presentations & Feedback:**
* *Timur (Unilateralism):* Presented definition (powerful state bypassing norms), linked to power levels, applied to US bypassing UN for Iraq War due to perceived national security needs/urgency. Feedback: Good start, encouraged using specific scholarly language in the final paper.
* *Raphael (Constructivism – Wendt’s “Anarchy is what states make of it”):* Explained concept (states interpret anarchy subjectively, defining allies/enemies). Applied to US constructing Iran/Iraq as enemies, justifying intervention. Feedback: Good application.
* *Jade (Bandwagoning):* Explained concept (states seek dominance, weaker ones align/rely on stronger ones). Applied to explain how the US established favorable economic systems with less resistance due to its power. Feedback: Affirmed the link between power dynamics and US leverage.
* *Hamdam:* Did not present due to time constraints.
**Actionable Items:**
* **Urgent (For Next Class – Wednesday):**
* **Debate Preparation:** Instructor needs to finalize the specific debate topics, structure, and potentially assign sides for the debate portion of the next class.
* **Student Follow-up:**
* **Hamdam:** Instructor should follow up with Hamdam, as she did not get to present her mini-presentation on Power Projection due to time running out. Ensure she understands the concept application task.
* **Minor/Informational:**
* **Film Information:** Confirm the release year of “Wag the Dog” (mentioned 1993 or 1997, confirmed later as 1997).
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK
No specific homework assignment was given during this lesson; the activities discussed, such as applying theoretical concepts to historical events and presenting on core concepts, were conducted as in-class workshop exercises, and the lesson concluded with planning the activities for the next class session.