Teaching at Kalamazoo College

Teaching political science is inherently challenging, for the subject matter of “politics” is naturally polemical, producing a wide array of impassioned views. However, this also means that politics is exciting and enervating. Indeed, it was my fascination with politics as a college student that first led me to study political science. Thus, one of my primary goals in teaching is to convey some of the passion that I feel for the political world to my students. Nonetheless, I also want my students to come away from my class knowing that political science consists of more than engaging in well-informed political debates, however enjoyable these might be. I want students to learn that professional political scientists engage in two basic types of analysis -- empirical analysis, which seeks to provide convincing explanations of political phenomena, and normative analysis, which seeks to arrive at ethical judgements about political ideas, actions, and institutions.

Therefore, in each of my courses I expose students to different empirical explanations of political phenomena (e.g., war, revolution, democratization) and encourage them to think critically about these explanations. I also encourage students to engage in normative debates on political issues. I freely share my own normative opinions with them, although I try to do so in a way that does not preempt discussion. In broad terms, then, my twin goals for every course are to share with students my own passion for the material, and to teach students to think critically and systematically about politics, rather than simply to absorb factual information.

Courses taught at Kalamazoo College

1) POLS 107 - Introduction to International Politics

This is the most fundamental international relations course that I teach. The core issue that we tackle in the course is the question of international war and peace. During the course, we explore some key empirical and normative questions: What explains the outbreak of war? What explains a country’s response to war? Can war ever be justified? If so, under what conditions? I use this critically important issue as a means to introduce students to thinking theoretically about politics. For example, we examine “realist,” “liberal,” "radical," and "feminist" approaches to international relations, as well as different levels of analysis (system, state, and individual levels).

+ COURSE SYLLABUS
+ Projects Handout

2) POLS 215 - Politics in Developing Countries

This course provides a general overview of some of the issues faced by the vast majority of countries in Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and East and Southeast Asia. Many of the most pressing problems of the 21st century are to be found in these areas of the world (e.g., poverty, environmental degradation, ethnic conflict, repression of women). The course examines the impact of colonialism; the problems of economic development; the social context of politics (focusing on the role of women in developing countries, as well as on the issues of religion and ethnicity); and the political alternatives of revolutionary, authoritarian, or democratic regimes.

+ COURSE SYLLABUS

3) POLS 245 - Politics of Latin America

This course explores socioeconomic conditions in Latin America; the principal actors in the Latin American political arena (peasants, labor movements, women, indigenous groups, the Catholic Church, the military, guerrilla movements, and political parties); and the political structures that have characterized the region in the form of authoritarian, revolutionary, and democratic regimes. As in all of my courses, I focus on key empirical and normative questions (e.g., What explains successful revolution in Latin America? Is violent revolution a justifiable course of action in Latin America?).

+ COURSE SYLLABUS

4) POLS 285 - United States Foreign Policy

This course explores the contemporary history of U.S. foreign policy and to examine the nuts and bolts of foreign policy making. In the first half of the course, we examine key questions about the history of U.S. foreign policy in the second half of the 20th century (e.g., What explains the onset of the Cold War? Was U.S. intervention in Vietnam justified?). The second half of the course is more empirical in nature, seeking to explain why the United States acts as it does in foreign policy. Here we examine the role played by the President, Congress, the bureaucracy, interest groups, mass media, and public opinion.

+ COURSE SYLLABUS

5) POLS 375 - International Political Economy

This course examines some of the dilemmas that arise in an international system that is increasingly united by a global economy, but remains fragmented politically. The course is structured primarily around the fundamental issues of international trade and the international monetary system. We explore substantive topics such as NAFTA, GATT, the WTO, the 1980s debt crisis, and the 1990s East Asian financial crisis. However, I want students to go beyond “the facts” and to learn to think theoretically. Thus, we critically examine the empirical and normative claims advanced within the major paradigms of the field – economic liberalism, economic nationalism, and dependency theory.

+ COURSE SYLLABUS

6) POLS 380 - Contemporary U.S. Foreign Policy Challenges: Drugs, Democracy, and Human Rights

As its title suggests, the purpose of this course is to provide a more in-depth examination of some of the more contentious issues (outside of the security and economic realms) in contemporary U.S. foreign policy. I designed this course to be both empirical and normative in nature. That is, throughout the course we explore both what U.S. policy has been and is with regard to these issues, as well as what U.S. policy ought to be. The course is a seminar, with class time spent in the discussion of seminal readings and the questions that they raise. This is a course that forces students to re-think many of their normative positions regarding the proper role of U.S. foreign policy (e.g., What role should democracy assistance play in U.S. foreign policy? Or should it even play a role? Why or why not?). Although they may not change their point of view, students almost inevitably finish the course better able to articulate their position on U.S. foreign policy.

+ COURSE