Banerjee - IR720 International Relations Theory and Critical Literature

Syllabus for Guidance - IR720 International Relations Theory and Critical Literature (Fall 2012)

Professor Sanjoy Banerjee

NOTA BENE! SYLLABUS IS FOR GUIDANCE ONLY! THE INSTRUCTOR WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE MOST RECENT SYLLABUS ON COURSE START DATE!

Purpose of IR 720:

This is the first course in the department's graduate curriculum. It has both an introductory and gatekeeping function. Students receiving less than a B grade will be referred to the Graduate Committee.

Assigned articles are most easily accessed through Google Scholar on the SFSU library web site. It is also the most useful search program for researching scholarly articles. Journals can be found through the Electronic Journals List:

 

You will need a library pin number to access these sites from off-campus.

J. Paul Leonard Library

Some readings will be sent out through e-mail. E-mail me immediately if you have trouble getting an assigned reading.

Grading:

Assignment 1: 33%; Assignment 2: 33%; Midterm exam: 33%

Attendance is required. Habitual failure to attend may lead to a drop from the class or to a grading penalty. Please get a sfsu.edu e-mail address, and use it to submit papers and communicate with me. The IR Department may use submitted papers to assess its teaching.

Functioning of the class:

The tasks of this class will consist largely of reading, writing, presenting, and commenting knowledgeably. All presentations should be supported by slides created with presentation software. Each student will be assigned to do one presentation in the class. Some will present in the Assignment 1 segment and the rest in the Assignment 2 segment. Please do not read out the slides or use any notes other than the slides. Students should familiarize themselves with presentation software such as Power Point. Please e-mail me your presentation file in advance in PC-readable format. For your assigned presentations, please make an effort to bring a laptop. If you bring a Mac, please try to bring the attachment that plugs into a projector.

Each student will write two papers in the class, for Assignments 1 and 2. Papers should have good prose style. Citations and bibliographies are required. The assignment grade will not be reduced due to rewriting. Please submit all written work as e-mail attachments. Please write your name and IR 720 in the subject area of the e-mail. All quotations must be in quotation marks and clearly cited. Quotations may consist of no more than 20% of words in the paper, excluding the bibliography.

The discipline of IR is more a many-sided debate than a body of relatively consensual and consistent knowledge like the natural sciences. Students are required to develop their own positions in this debate and to be able to explain why their positions are superior to the others.

Incompletes are not permitted without documented medical reasons.

Plagiarism will result in failure in the assignment and referral to the IR Department Graduate Committee as well as the SFSU Judicial Officer. A definition of plagiarism from the University of North Carolina valid for this class is available at:

Plagiarism - The Writing Center

Advice:

Form study groups. That greatly enhances your learning experience. Study alone also. You have the right to take classes with available space on SFSU fees at UC Berkeley, and at any UC or CSU. Our students have done well in UC Berkeley classes. Take advantage of the opportunity.

Assignment 1:

Students will be assigned responsibilities at the start for sections of the assigned texts. The student will be expected to present to the class a discussion of the reading meeting the following criteria:

  1. Summarize the reading. Select a focus author from readings. Clarify focus author's reasoning and main conclusions. This summary should focus on the questions below.
  2. Present one theory and one body of evidence, from separate sources, neither from assigned readings, that support the focus author's reasoning and main conclusions. The supporting theory should not have any authors in common with the focus theory. Identify questions that the focus theory answers yes and the supporting theory and data also answer yes. These questions should be somewhat general, and not about concrete facts. For the focus and supporting theory, give the quotes that answer your questions. Please give the quotes in the tables. Your prose should interpret and analyze the quotes. The data should be from cited sources, not encyclopedias, and there should be multiple cases or detailed treatment of a single case. For the focus and supporting theory, give the quotes that answer your questions. Elaborate upon the answers. Summarize in tables:
Table Summary of Readings (1)
  Focus theory Supporting theory
Q1 Yes. Quote. Yes. Quote.
Q2 Yes. Quote. Yes. Quote.
Q3 Yes. Quote. Yes. Quote.
Table Summary of Readings (2)
  Focus theory Supporting data
Q4 Yes. Quote. Yes. Cite sources.
Q5 Yes. Quote. Yes. Cite sources.
Q6 Yes. Quote. Yes. Cite sources.
  1. Present another unassigned theory and separately sourced body of evidence that contradict the focus author's reasoning and main conclusions. Identify questions that the focus theory answers yes and the opposing theory and data answer no. For the focus and opposing theory, give the quotes that answer your questions. The data should be from cited sources and there should be multiple cases or detailed treatment of a single case. Elaborate upon the answers. Summarize in tables:
Table Summary of Readings (3)
  Focus theory Opposing theory
Q7 Yes. Quote. No. Quote.
Q8 Yes. Quote. No. Quote.
Q9 Yes. Quote. No. Quote.
Table Summary of Readings (4)
  Focus theory Opposing data
Q10 Yes. Quote. No. Cite sources.
Q11 Yes. Quote. No. Cite sources.
Q12 Yes. Quote. No. Cite sources.

Write a paper with 3750 words (excluding tables and citations) following the guidelines above, including the tables for the twelve questions, giving equal space to the 3 points above. Paper is due on 24 October 2012 regardless of the date of your presentation.

Assignment 2:

Look through the last ten years of the journals from which readings are assigned World Politics, International Security, Millennium, European Journal of International Relations, Review of International Studies, International Feminist Journal of Politics, or other IR-related journals. Also, look at scholarly books published within the last decade and conference papers at isanet.org and pro.apsanet.org. Find two works that draw contradictory theoretical conclusions. In the literature review of one article, others may be criticized. This is a good way to find contradictory pairs. Present data supporting one and opposing the other. The data should not be taken from the two theoretical works. Give a presentation supported by graphics in class following these guidelines. Write a paper with 3750 words (excluding tables and citations) following these guidelines. The presentation and paper should include and support the following table:

Table Summary of Readings (5)
  Supported theory Opposed theory Data
Question1 Yes No Yes
Question2 Yes No Yes
Question3 Yes No Yes

The paper is due on xxxx, regardless of the date of presentation.

Midterm exam:

There will be a midterm exam on xxxx on the assigned readings. Please bring two blue books.

Weekly Schedule:

Week 1. Introduction.

Week 2. Liberalism: J. Oneal “Causes of peace” International studies quarterly 47, 3; M. Finnemore and K. Sikkink, “International norm dynamics …” International organization 52, 4; G. J. Ikenberry, “Institutions, strategic restraint, …” International security 23, 3 (Jstor)

Week 3. Liberalism: A. Moravcsik “Taking preferences seriously” International organization 51, 4 (Jstor); Q. Snyder “Integrating rising powers” Review of international studies First View articles; R. McKewon “Norm regress,” International relations 23, 1; R. Keohane “Democracy-enhancing multilateralism” International Organization 63, 1

Week 4. International political sociology: C. Chase-Dunn “Interstate system and capitalist world-economy” International studies quarterly 25, 1 (Jstor); J. Donnelly “The differentiation of international societies” European journal of international relations 18, 1; D. Nexon and T. Wright “What’s at stake in the American empire debate” American political science review 101, 2

Week 5. International political sociology: M. Sheikh “How does religion matter?” Review of international studies 38, 2; E. Moe “Mancur Olson and structural economic change” Review of international political economy 16, 2; J. Green “Uneven and combined development and the Anglo-German prelude to WWI” European journal of international relations 18, 2

Week 6. Realism: J. Grieco, “Anarchy and the limits of cooperation,” International organization 42, 3; D. Fiammenghi “The security curve and the structure of international politics” International security 35, 4; K. Scheve and D. Stasavage “The conscription of wealth” International Organization 64, 4

Week 7. Realism: R. Schweller and X. Pu “After unipolarity” International security 36, 1; M. Beckley, “China’s century?: Why America’s edge will endure” International security 36, 3; P MacDonald and J. Parent “Graceful decline?” International security 35, 4

Week 8. Feminism: S. Zwingel “How do norms travel?” International Studies Quarterly 56, 1; J. Vickers, “Bringing nations in” International feminist journal of politics 8, 1; S. Benhabib “Claiming rights across borders” American political science review 103, 4

Week 9. Constructivism: A. Wendt “Anarchy is what states make of it,” International organization 46, 2 (Jstor); E. Adler, “The spread of security communities,” European journal of international relations 14, 2; K. Fierke “The dialogues of maneuver and entanglement” Millennium 28, 1

Week 10. Constructivism: S. Banerjee, “The international structuration of national identities, 1989-2002” Manuscript 2010 (e-mail); G. Duffy and B. Frederking “Changing the rules” International studies quarterly 53, 2; T. Balzacq “The three faces of securitization” European journal of international relations 11, 2.

Week 11. Mid-term exam

Week 12. Presentations of Assignment 2

Week 13. Presentations of Assignment 2

Week 14. Presentations of Assignment 2

Week 15. Presentations of Assignment 2

Exam session, Presentations of Assignment 2

NOTA BENE! SYLLABUS IS FOR GUIDANCE ONLY! THE INSTRUCTOR WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH THE MOST RECENT SYLLABUS ON COURSE START DATE!