san francisco state university · san francisco state university academic program review self-study...

of 70

San Francisco State University ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW SELF-STUDY

Department of International Relations PROGRAMS: M.A. in International Relations

Spring 2008

The enclosed self-study report has been reviewed by the faculty in the instructional unit and is now submitted for external review. ____________________________________________ ________________________ Department/Program Head Date Drafts have been read and deemed ready for external review by: ____________________________________________ ________________________ Joel Kassiola, Ph.D., Dean, Date College of Behavioral and Social Sciences ____________________________________________ ________________________ Linda Buckley, Ph.D., Associate Vice President, Date Academic Planning and Educational Effectiveness ____________________________________________ ________________________ Ann Hallum, Ph.D., Dean of Graduate Studies Date

of 70

Table of Contents

Section Page Number

General Introduction to the Program 1.0 Executive Summary 5 1.1 Brief history of the program 5 1.2 Brief synopsis of program review recommendations for the graduate program 6 1.3 Summary of how program meets the standards 10 1.4 Summary of present program review recommendations 11 2.0 Profile of the Program 14 2.1 Overview of the Program 14 2.2 The Program in the Context of the Academic Unit 19

How the Program Meets University Wide Indicators and Standards 3.0 Admission Requirements 26 3.1 Evidence of Prior Academic Success 26 3.2 Evidence of Competent Writing 27 3.3 English Preparation of non-Native Speakers 28 3.4 Overview of Program Admissions Policy 28 4.0 Program Requirements 30 4.1 Number of Course Offerings 30 4.2 Frequency of Course Offerings 31 4.3 Path to Graduation 32 4.4 Class Distribution on GAP 32 4.5 Class Size 33 4.6 Number of Graduates 34 4.7 Overview of Program Quality and Sustainability Factors 35 5.0 Faculty Requirement 37 5.1 Number of Faculty in Graduate Program 37

of 70

How Program Meets Program-Specific Standards

Section Page Number 6.0 Program Planning and Quality Improvement Process 39 7.0 The Student Experience 40 7.1 Assessment of Student Learning 42 7.2 Advising 47 7.3 Writing Proficiency 48 7.4 The Culminating Experience 49 7.5 Overview of Student Quality Indicators 51 8.0 The Program and the Community 53 8.1 Professional Engagement of Students and Alumni 53 8.2 Civic Engagement 55 8.3 Equity and Social Justice 57 8.4 Internationalization 59 9.0 The Faculty Experience 60 9.1 Faculty Statistics 60 9.2 Research and Professional Engagement of the Faculty 62 9.3 Supervision of the Culminating Experience 63 9.4 Discipline-Specific Standards for Teaching Graduate Courses 64 9.5 Interdisciplinarity 64 9.6 Overview of Faculty Quality Indicators 65 10.0 Resource Support for the Program 10.1 Internal Support 68 10.2 External Support 69 APPENDIX A-Faculty CVs (in alpha order) APPENDIX B-Select IR Graduate Course Syllabi (in course number order)

of 70

List of Tables Page Number Table 1-Thumbnail of Standards Met 13 Table 2A-International Relations Majors and Graduate Students by Year 17 Table 2B-International Relations Department FTES, FTEF, and SFR 20 Table 2C-Number of Applicants, Students Accepted, and Students Actually Enrolled 22 Table 3-Number of Non-Native Speakers Admitted 28 Table 4A-Five Year Course Rotation Schedule 30 Table 4B-Seven Year Course Rotation Table (Last 4 Years Plus Forecast by Course) 31 Table 4C-Five Year Class Size Analysis 33 Table 4D-International Relations Master’s Degrees Granted 34 Table 5-Seven Year Course Rotation Table (Last 4 Years Plus Forecast by Faculty Member) 38 Table 7A-Student Demographics-International Relations Department 40 Table 7B-Student Demographics-Overall University 41 Table 7C-Graduate Course Grade Distribution 42 Table 7D-Proposed Curriculum Alignment Matrix/Curriculum Map 44 Table 9A/9B-Faculty by Rank, Gender, and Age 60 Table 9C-Faculty by Rank and Ethnicity 60 Table 9D-Faculty Work Load Matrix 61 Table 9E-Culminating Experience Supervision 63

of 70

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Brief History of the Program At San Francisco State University (SFSU), International Relations as an independent area of inquiry goes back to 1919 when Professor Olive Cowell was hired to teach international and intercultural relations. After the end of World War II, Professor Cowell convinced her colleagues that SFSU undergraduates should be required to have a general education course in international and intercultural relations. The need for a significant number of faculty members to teach the required general education course and to develop a curriculum in international studies became apparent. Thus began the international relations major under the leadership of Professors Charles McClelland and Urban Whitaker. Under the leadership of then Chair DeVere Pentony, the International Relations Department (the “Department”) received grants from the Carnegie Corporation for improving the teaching of international relations that helped to develop the curriculum with an almost unique set of courses and skill development experiences. A major grant from the Chancellor’s Office assisted the Department to take the lead in organizing area studies minors and “Segment III” general education programs in which more than 25 departments around campus have participated. Around the same time, the Department joined with the Political Science Department and the Urban Studies Department to obtain a National Science Foundation grant enabling it to establish the PSIRUS computer lab, a major technology resource for students. Historically, the Department has worked closely with other departments to cross list courses. In addition, two Department faculty serve as members of the Political Science Department, while one serves in Africana Studies. Department faculty have been or are present on innumerable College and university committees, are active as Segment III advisors, and currently are playing critical roles in the campus wide effort to reinvigorate area studies on the campus. Professor Aguibou Yansane, for instance, is Director of the African Area Studies minor and a member of faculty teaching in the Africana Studies minor. Over the past few years, the Department has been integrating new faculty to replace those that have departed or retired, to maintain the currency and excellence of its faculty, and to enrich the diversity of its faculty. Specifically, since 2003, the Department has brought six new faculty members on board, enabling it to meet the strong demand that SFSU undergraduate and graduate students alike have for IR courses and the IR major. In Fall 2001, the Department made a number of changes to its MA program curriculum in order to better serve the needs of its students and to ensure they received a proper foundation regardless of their interests. In regards to the former, the Department created two emphases, the academic and the professional (both are described at length later in this report). The former emphasis was established for students interested in pursuing doctoral studies while the latter was created for students interested in moving into a career in business, government, or the non-government organization (NGO) sector. In addition to this important change, the Department mandated that all students take IR 728, a course in the International Political Economy (IPE). Below, we discuss the Department’s recommendation regarding the two emphases.

of 70

Notably, IR faculty helped to found the International Studies Association (ISA), the major professional association in the field and have remained active in it, as have many of the department’s graduate students. Illustrating this, Professor Andrei Tsygankov served as Program Chair and a Member of the Governing Council for the 2007 Annual ISA Convention in Chicago. Moreover, 5 and 2 Department MA students, respectively, gave papers at the 2006 and 2007 ISA annual meetings while 5 will present in 2008. Beyond this, the Department was one of the founders of the Model United Nations of the Far West, whose annual conference it subsequently hosted twice. Department faculty have been intimately involved, too, in the creation of the Center for U.S.-China Policy Studies (CUSCPS), a SFSU-affiliated research unit that seeks to advance knowledge of China and improve the understanding of US-China relations. Traditionally, the Department has evidenced a close relationship among its students as well as between students and faculty. Graduate students have their own organization, known as Masters in International Relations (MIR), which is supervised by the graduate coordinator, to represent their interests as well as advance their academic and professional opportunities. In the past, MIR has organized a number of social activities, brought conference, funding, and internship/professional opportunities to the attention of the MA student population, and helped to foster a sense of camaraderie among the Department’s MA students. MIR also has coordinated speaker events, a MA student “brown bag” series, and even trips to academic conferences such as the ISA annual meeting. Another manifestation of the Department’s student orientation and close faculty student interaction is the International Relations Journal, formerly The Journal of Contemporary Revolutions. This journal, which was circulated to universities worldwide, gives our MA students an outlet for publishing their work and has provided some with editorial experience. 1.2 Brief Synopsis of the Previous Program Review Recommendations In 2001/2002, the Department underwent a normal review as part of the university’s 5th cycle review of undergraduate and graduate programs. The Department’s external reviewers, who labeled the Department’s program largely excellent, complimented the Department on its development of student computer and presentation skills and its culture of high expectations and hard work. They further highlighted the Department’s interdisciplinary orientation and the professional engagement of its faculty. In the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) flowing from the review, the Department agreed to take a variety of actions. With respect to those relating to the graduate program, the Department agreed to: 1) develop and implement better assessment instruments; 2) expand curricular attention to post-structuralist and feminist theory; 3) introduce a new course on Gender and International Relations; 4) improve its internship procedures and student internship experiences as well as to endeavor to expand internship opportunities; 5) increase its sensitivity to the need to hire individuals diverse in gender, ethnicity, and intellectual perspectives; 6) expand opportunities for communicating with students; 7) develop and implement a better program of student orientation and advising; 8) improve its web presence; 9) develop a plan for improving contacts with alumni; and 10) evaluate admissions requirements and procedures and develop a plan to increase the size and the quality of the applicant pool.

of 70

Some of these commitments were reflective of feedback from external reviewers who also offered other observations that warrant recapitulation. First, they backed an expansion of Department faculty. Second, they advocated that moneys be sought or allocated to the IR Department so it could hire an internship coordinator or release faculty to focus on internships. Third, they called for a review of the internship writing assignment to ensure it met the needs of students in the professional emphasis as well as this emphasis’s overall objectives. Fourth, they advised the Department to join the Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs (APSIA). Fifth, they supported greater flexibility for professional emphasis students already holding IR jobs. Sixth, they recommended the Department consider introducing a language or statistics requirement. Seventh, they called for more electives in areas such as Asia, Global Environmental Policy, Latin America, IPE and International Finance, and Gender and IR and the elimination of courses from the catalog that have not been offered in 3 or 4 years. Below, we detail how the Department has responded to the 5th cycle MOU and the recommendations of the external reviewers. The discussion tracks the ordering of points above, though we combine elements that relate to the same theme. Assessment instruments: The 5th cycle MOU and the university’s push for departments to develop methods for assessing the quality of their programs and progress in achieving their learning objectives led the Department to develop assessment procedures for its graduate program which were used in 2005 for the 2004/05 academic year (AY) and 2006 for AY 2005/06. The cover memo to the Department’s 2005 graduate assessment report sets forth the guiding tenet of the assessment process, which is that assessment should comprise a review of both student performance within the department and student performance outside the department. The former aspect has entailed the formation of a graduate assessment committee that subsequently reviews a selection of papers from a variety of graduate courses, internship reports, and theses. In particular, the committee assesses if papers excel in representing scholarly background and debate, formulating an argument, thoroughly researching an issue, and offering strong writing. The latter component of the Department’s graduate consists of inter alia an examination of student involvement at professional conferences, publications, and awards. Curriculum: In regards to expanding curricular attention to post-structuralist and feminist theory, Department graduate offerings in recent years, as reflected in the syllabi attached in Appendix B, clearly demonstrate an effort to provide students with exposure to such approaches. For instance, Professor Sanjoy Banerjee’s International Relations Theory (IR 720) course has several segments relating to constructivism and feminism. Similarly, Professor Andrei Tsygankov’s graduate foreign policy course (IR 725) offers extensive coverage of constructivism. Furthermore, the Department has hired a number of faculty with expertise in post-structuralism and feminism. For example, Professor Burcu Ellis, who joined the Department in 2003, published a book, entitled Shadow Genealogies, which explores identity transformation under conditions of intense sociopolitical change and identifies the strategies that communities undertake to protect their identities. On a related note, the Department offered a course on Gender and International Relations. In their recommendations, external reviewers suggested the addition of a language or statistics requirement. After further discussion, the Department decided not to adopt such a requirement questioning its value, necessity, and ease of administration.

of 70

Internships: As detailed below, the Department works closely with its students to guide them into meaningful internship experiences and coordinates with other parties around campus to ensure students have diverse internship opportunities. Aside from face-to-face student mentoring, the Department regularly alerts its graduate students, via its graduate student listserv as well as via word of mouth, about internship opportunities. It also hosts internship/career workshops at least once a year. This past fall it had an internship/careers workshop which consisted of a speaker from SFSU Career Services, a speaker from the BSS Student Resource Center, an SFSU alumna from business, and an SFSU alumna doing an internship in the field of international education. At the workshop, Ambassador David Fischer not only discussed opportunities in the government at this event, but continues to serve as a valuable networking resource for those of our graduate students who do seek internships or jobs in the government. The Department has also pushed campus groups such as Career Services to make an effort to develop expertise in internship and career opportunities for our graduate students. Integral to the Department’s 6th cycle review is an analysis of the internship writing assignment to ensure it met the needs of students in the professional emphasis, the emphasis’s overall objectives, and program objectives. To date, the Department has been very flexible in its interpretation of the internship requirement for student already holding full-time jobs, recognizing that students often rely on the income from such jobs. However, the Department also notes that building an internship around an existing job often does not allow students to integrate their education and their internship or contribute to their career development and thus that such an arrangement might not be suitable. The Department’s recommendations regarding the internship writing assignment are discussed in Section 2.2 below. Faculty diversity and expansion: The department has done a good job building a more diverse faculty. Tables 9A-9C show that a large percentage of department faculty, many hired only over the past four years or so, are female or non-white. In terms of faculty expansion, the department has absorbed 6 new faculty members over the past 5 years, which has meaningfully enhanced its ability to offer courses, to supervise MA students, and to provide career advice. Communication: The Department has been diligent in expanding opportunities for communicating with students. Every semester, the Department’s graduate coordinator holds extensive and flexible office hours. Moreover, Department graduate coordinators have met with students off campus, been receptive to communicating with students by phone after hours and on weekends, and demonstrated a track record of quickly responding to student emails. Not long ago, Prof. Blanchard, current graduate coordinator established a graduate student listserv, in which he automatically enrolled all graduate students, to facilitate communication with them. On a related note, he obtained authority from the university’s technology division for MIR to distribute messages to the graduate student listserv. Lastly, he set up a bulletin board dedicated to graduate student matters and worked with MIR to set up a MA student bulletin board. Orientation and advising: The Department has regularly hosted an orientation program for incoming students. It further orients incoming students to the program through informational emails and the distribution of literature. To enhance its ability to introduce students to the Department, the Department also has coordinated with MIR. In the beginning of fall 2007, for example, the Department assisted MIR in holding a student resource orientation session.

of 70

In the area of advising, the Department’s view is that the ongoing growth of the Department’s faculty has and will expand its ability to provide high quality advising to its graduate students. Earlier, in an effort to strengthen its advising, the Department had initiated the process of making use of the College of Behavior and Social Sciences (BSS)’ Webvising (online advising) system. Unfortunately, for financial and programmatic reasons, BSS discontinued the system. Nonetheless, the Department is pursuing other steps that will improve its ability to give high quality advising. We detail these steps in Section 7.2. Admissions requirements/quality of applicant pool: After the 5th cycle review, the Department evaluated its admissions requirements. It decided that the GRE requirement should be retained since it serves as a useful complement to the other information (GPA, letters of recommendation, and so on) that the graduate admissions committee weighs. Nevertheless, the Department periodically reassesses the effectiveness of its admissions requirements. Later, we discuss our recommendations relating to admissions requirements based on our experience with the most recent applicant pool (see Sections 3.1 and 3.2). In terms of increasing the size and quality of the applicant pool, the external reviewers recommended that the Department join APSIA. The Department investigated the possibility of joining APSIA, but found it too costly given existing budgetary constraints. On a related note, in Section 2.2, we detail our recommendations for enhancing the number of students that enroll in the program after acceptance. We now turn to a discussion of 5th cycle review recommendations that were deferred. The first issue that warrants attention is the department’s “web presence.” Since the last program review, the Department has done a strong job in ensuring that syllabi are regularly available on its website. More ambitious plans to improve the “look and feel” of the Department’s website, to enhance the volume of information available through the site, and to ensure consistency among the department’s website, the Department’s bulletin information, and Departmental print and other informational materials have been delayed for a number of reasons. The most important factor which has inhibited the Department’s desire to enhance its website is the instability and inadequacy of Department staffing (this issue is discussed further in Section 10.1). To preview, nearly every year since 2003 has witnessed a new occupant in the office manager’s position. As well, there are fewer work-study students working fewer hours which thus requires the office manager to devote more of his or her time to basic administrative tasks rather than broad program improvements. Another issue is that the most recent graduate coordinator and current graduate coordinator have had to devote extensive time to the 6th cycle review, either College-wide planning or the actual preparation of the report. After the Department finalizes the report, the graduate coordinator can focus on assisting the Department in its current initiative to revamp its website. Following the 5th cycle review, the Department made an effort to contact its alumni. Only a limited number of alumni responded to the Department’s outreach initiative. New steps have been a challenge due to the aforementioned staffing constraints and the policies of the university which result in the termination of SFSU student email accounts after graduation. The Department has developed a strategy, though, for maintaining contact with alumni that will leverage the listserv system that the university Information Technology Division offers. The Department plans to work closely with Ms. Senem Ozer, the College’s newly hired Alumni Relations Program Officer. Specifics on both of these items are detailed below.

of 70

The Department responded to calls by reviewers to offer more electives in areas such as Asia, Global Environmental Policy, Latin America, the International Political Economy, and International Finance. For example, over the past few years, it has offered graduate level area studies courses on Africa (IR 741) and Latin America (IR 745), a graduate level course on American foreign policy (IR 742), and a graduate course on the Management of NGOs in an International Context (IR 758). The Department recognizes, though, that it could offer more elective courses, courses that serve the needs of a wider range of graduate students, as well as more professionally-oriented courses. The addition of new faculty will make it easier for the Department to do this. The Department’s recommendations relating to course offerings are indicated in Section 4.5. In regards to curriculum, the external reviewers recommended that the Department eliminate from its catalog graduate courses that have not been offered in 3 or 4 years. The Department considered this recommendation and opted not to pursue it in most cases because the Department was hiring new faculty and thus might be able to staff courses in the catalog that had not been offered in over the past 3 to 4 years. 1.3 Summary of how the program meets the standards Table 1 shows that the Department is meeting its admissions standards with respect to GPA. It does not have data that would enable it to confirm that all applicants meet the thresholds for GRE or TOEFL scores set in its application procedures. However, the Department graduate admissions committee does insist that applicants provide GRE, TOEFL, or other relevant scores before it will consider their files. Looking at program requirements, Table 1 notes that the Department is easily meeting program requirements in terms of course offerings and has a perfect record with respect to frequency of course offerings, class size, and number of graduates. The Department, though, needs a published map leading to graduation. It will prepare one to reflect the Departmental program recommendations presented in Section 2.2 and will post it on the Department’s revamped website. Aside from this, the Department is meeting the standard relating to the number of faculty in the graduate program. The standard relating to number of faculty per concentration is not applicable because the Department does not have formal concentrations. This said, we do recommend that our graduate students have an emphasis linked to a theme, region, or country.

of 70

1.4 Summary of present program review recommendations This section summarizes the Department’s more significant recommendation. In every case but one (1.4.1), the relevant analysis and recommendation justification appears elsewhere in this report. 1) We recommend that, subject to availability, the Department only assign a tenured faculty member to serve as Graduate Coordinator primarily since this would make it easier for the individual serving in this role to promote consistent and high quality culminating experiences, to encourage constant and high quality faculty advising/culminating experience supervision, and to address special student circumstances. We also believe that the heavy burdens of being Graduate Coordinator are hard on untenured faculty members who already have considerable teaching and research obligations. 2) The Program: We recommend that the Department eliminate the academic emphasis and embrace a program where all students’ culminating experience entails a 70-100 page thesis (see Section 2.2). 3) The Program: We recommend the Department develop a new MA program curriculum which entails a core (IR 720 and IR 750), two required classes (selected from IR 728, 725, 738, or 739), 15 units reflecting a thematic or regional concentration, IR 708 or IR 892, and IR 898 (see Section 2.2). 4) The Program: We recommend that the Department do a better job promoting itself abroad as an option for advanced studies by inter alia improving its website, advertising its program to the many consulates in the Bay Area, and achieving a better presence on sites like Gradschools.com (see Section 2.2). 5) The Program: To enhance enrollment, we advise that, among other steps, individual faculty members should contact prospective students with area/thematic emphases paralleling those of the individual faculty member, the Department consider an earlier application deadline, and the Department improve data gathering to support future analyses of the factors shaping enrollment patterns (see Section 2.2). 6) Admissions: We recommend that the Department raise the GPA standard for applicants to 3.3. On a related note, we recommend that the Graduate Committee look into raising its TOEFL standard and adding, where feasible, a requirement that foreign students take the TOEFL listening test (see Section 3.1). 7) Admissions: We recommend that the Department require its MA program applicants to submit a more substantive writing sample such as a graded research paper (see Section 3.2). 8) Program Requirements: We recommend that the Department formally drop two courses that have remained in the course catalogue but have not been taught in a long time—IR 732 and 737. We also recommend that it establish the goal of offering no fewer than 12 courses per year and increase course offerings. We further recommend that the Department make increased use of IR 705. In addition, we recommend that the Department offer more courses with broader appeal (see Section 4.5). 9) Program Requirements: We recommend that the Department vigorously enforce the restriction that seminars are limited to 15 students (see Section 4.5). 10) Program Requirements: We recommend that the Department develop a path to graduation as part of the revamping of our website (see Section 4.5).

of 70

11) Faculty Requirements: We recommend providing the graduate coordinator with one course off per semester in recognition of his/her substantial duties (see Section 5.1). 12) Program planning and quality improvement process: We recommend that the graduate committee meet at least twice a semester to discuss the graduate program. Second, we recommend that the Department enhance “record” keeping. We specifically recommend that the Department mandate that all its graduate students submit one bound copy of their culminating experience and a CD containing their culminating experience as a PDF file for storage in their files that the Department already is obligated to keep. Third, we recommend that second year students be surveyed each year and that all graduating students be given an exit survey (see Section 6.0). 13) Assessment: As we note, we recommend requiring that all culminating experiences be archived in each student’s Department file. We also recommend developing standardized rubrics which make clear what features a culminating experience must manifest to merit passage. We further recommend that the graduate assessment committee systematically examine graduate course syllabi (see Section 7.1). 14) Advising: We recommend that we upgrade our website. In addition, we need to create a handbook for the graduate program that is available on the website and in print. Lastly, we recommend the Department consider moving to a system of mandatory advising for our graduate students (see Section 7.2). 15) Writing Proficiency: We recommend, as repeated stated, that the Department improve its record keeping. We also recommend that the Department create rubrics that the members of culminating experience committees must sign. Moreover, we encourage the graduate assessment committee to examine the writing quality of a wider range of materials (see Section 7.3). 16) Culminating Experience: We again support the recommendation of archiving culminating experiences. We reiterate the recommendation that the Department should develop rubrics that can be used to judge if culminating experience papers should be passed. Aside from these steps, the Department will require its students to give a formal presentation of their culminating experience (see Section 7.4). 17) Professional Engagement: We recommend that Department develop an alumni listserv. Second, we recommend that the graduate coordinator work closely with the College Relations Officer. Third, we recommend that the Department consider creating an annual newsletter to alumni that it can distribute to the alumni listserv (see Section 8.1). 18) Culminating experience supervision: We recommend that faculty be given credit for supervising culminating experience projects. To diversify faculty supervision, we recommend that the Department pursue various avenues to introduce students and faculty to one another (see Section 9.3). 19) Interdisciplinarity: We recommend an increased number of interdisciplinary activities, including team-teaching and collaborative research with our colleagues in other departments. We also would like to encourage faculty ask other faculty to offer guest lectures. In addition, we recommend that the Department consider organizing an IR-driven public lecture series (see Section 9.5). 20) Internal support: We recommend that the graduate coordinator be assigned, at minimum, a part time (5-7 hours/week) work study or paid graduate assistant. In addition, we advocate that faculty teaching summer classes who advise incoming graduate students or assist with application processing be given some compensation. The Department further recommends that the College and SFSU make a greater effort to fund paid graduate student research and teaching assistantships (see Section 10.1)

of 70

TABLE 1

Thumbnail of Standards Met

Indicator

Standard Adherence to Standard (percentage or other)

Page of this

discussion University-wide Standards

3.0 ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS 3.1 Evidence of Prior Academic Success

2.75 GPA and Higher 100% of applicants meet this standard

26

3.2 Evidence of Competent Writing

GRE (above median in verbal and analytical), personal statement, and short essay

No historical data available. We only consider students who submit such materials

27

3.3 English Preparation of Non-Native Speakers

TOEFL (minimum of 565) No historical data available. We only consider students who submit such materials

28

4.0 PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS 4.1 Number of course offerings

2 graduate courses/semester Average is 4 per semester over the past 5 years

30

4.2 Frequency of course offerings

At least once every 2 years 100% meet this requirement 31

4.3 Path to graduation Published map leading to graduation in 5 years @1/2 time attendance

No 32

4.4 Course distribution on GAP

Proper distribution of grad, paired, and undergrad courses

Approximately 100% meet standard

32

4.5 Class size Enroll 8-30 and 5-15 for seminars

100% of classes complying 33

4.6 Number of graduates 5 graduates per year average over 5 years.

Yes 34

5.0 FACULTY REQUIREMENTS 5.1 Number of Faculty in Graduate Program

Minimum of 2 Actual number is 8 active (with 2 others intermittent)

37

5.2 Number of Faculty per concentration

Minimum of 1 Not applicable N/A

Program-Specific Indicators and Standards Indicator Page

6.0 PROGRAM PLANNING PROCESS

39

7.0 THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE

40

8.0 THE PROGRAM AND THE COMMUNITY

53

9.0 THE FACULTY EXPERIENCE

60

10.0 RESOURCE SUPPORT FOR THE PROGRAM 68

of 70

2.0 PROFILE OF THE PROGRAM 2.1 Overview of the Program The MA program’s broad mission is to increase our students’ knowledge of international relations, to endow our students with the tools to understand the world around them, to develop options for responding to various policy issues, and to give students skills that they can use to excel in further academic study or a profession. An additional program mission is to contribute to SFSU’s Strategic Plan goals of internationalizing the curriculum, serving the community, and supporting equity and social justice. Finally, the program endeavors to expand the educational opportunities of graduate students in other programs. With respect to knowledge, we aim to deepen and broaden our students’ understanding of the actors, structures, and processes that characterize the current international system, the historical origins of this system, and a region, country, or international theme. In addition, we seek to increase our students’ awareness of serious global problems, ethical issues pertaining the allocation of international goods and externalities, and biases inherent in various approaches to the analysis of international relations. We further strive to inform our students about the field’s most prominent epistemological approaches and theoretical perspectives. Regarding tools and skills, the program works to build its students’ research skills, oral communication abilities, and writing capabilities. Moreover, it seeks to enhance its students’ ability to interpret and utilize statistical data, to prepare policy memos, to make presentations and to learn the art of synthesizing material and making an argument. Data from 2002 to 2007 show that the Department continues to draw strong interest (Table 2C). Over this period, the Department has had an average of 69 applicants from which it has accepted 55 percent and of which 55 percent have enrolled. Enrollment in the Department’s core classes, which it offers on a regular basis, continues to score at the higher end of desired enrollment ranges. Furthermore, the Department has succeeded in graduating an average of 14 students each year. A number of these graduates have pursued doctorates, others have garnered careers in the diplomatic corps or intelligence agencies, and yet others have assumed weighty responsibilities in NGOs such as Global Exchange, an international human rights organization dedicated to promoting social, economic and environmental justice around the world. Compared to other universities, the Department’s MA program has several unique aspects. One is that it is one of only three “pure” IR MA programs in the California State University (CSU) system and the only one in the Bay Area. A second is that it is a standalone IR program whereas many other IR MA programs such as those at U.C. Berkeley and Stanford are specialties within the broader field of Political Science or interdisciplinary programs primarily housed in Political Science. A third special feature of the Department’s MA program, is its impressive and broad array of IR-specific courses and faculty which allows students to obtain more IR-focused knowledge and skills, advising, and career guidance. MA programs such as those at the University of San Francisco or U.C. San Diego offer well regarded IR-related programs, but these often have a narrow regional or thematic focus. A fourth is that it is an extremely affordable program which permits it to serve a broader range of constituencies than other programs. A fifth is its strong interdisciplinary character.

of 70

Program of Study As presently structured, the MA Program has two emphases, the academic and the professional. The academic emphasis requires 33-34 units, comprised of 18 units of core courses (listed below), 6 units of electives, a 3-4 unit data analysis class, a 3 unit methods course (IR 750), and a 3-unit Master’s thesis (IR 898). The professional emphasis encompasses a 33 unit program, involving 18 core course units, 12 elective units relate to a theme, region, or country, and a 3-unit culminating experience or graduate internship (IR 892). Graduate Core Requirements The chart below shows the Department’s core courses, which students in both the academic emphasis and professional emphasis must take. Aside from basic core courses such as Theory and Approaches to International Relations (IR 720), the Analysis of Foreign Policy (IR 725), and the International Political Economy (IR 728), students must take one course in the IR 730 series (or IR 760 itself), one course in the IR 740 series, and one course in the IR 730 or IR 740 series. This program of study has fostered a sense of camaraderie among our students and developed a common and broad foundation of knowledge while concurrently offering students an opportunity to focus their studies and to acquire the expertise needed for their graduate internship paper or thesis.

International Relations MA Program

Graduate Core Courses I R 720 Theory and Approaches in International Relations 3 I R 725 The Analysis of Foreign Policy 3 I R 728 International Political Economy 3 I R 730-I R 739, I R 760

The International System and its Problems 3

I R 740-I R 749 Comparative Foreign Policies 3

Units chosen from either of the above series (I R 730-739 and I R 760, or I R 740-749) 3 Paired Graduate Elective Courses The Department offers one paired course: IR 460/IR 760 (Gender in International Relations). This course was last offered, in response to the 5th cycle MOU and external review as well as student interest, in Fall 2002.

of 70

Graduate Elective Courses in Other Departments The Department traditionally has been very flexible in allowing its graduate students to profit from electives offered by other departments. For example, our MA students can take courses in international economics and economic development offered by the Economics Department. They also are able to take regional studies courses, political geography, and cartography that the Geography Department teaches. Furthermore, the Department permits its students to take diverse History Department courses such as Latin America (HIST 501), History of Mexico (HIST 520), and History of the Islamic World, 1500-present (HIST 605). Aside from this, our students can take International Business courses like Doing Business in Greater China (IBUS 592) and International Business Negotiations (IBUS 859). Finally, they can enrich their knowledge by taking courses such as Women and International Development (WOMS 531) and Third World Women and Ecology (WOMS 578). This is but a sampling of the courses that we allow our MA students to take. We believe flexibility in this regard allows our students to build the program that suits their intellectual and professional needs, to supplement their programs of study at times when they need to find additional courses beyond those available through the Department, or to develop further expertise to prepare for their culminating experience. Culminating Experience The specific culminating experience undertaken by our graduate students depends upon the emphasis they have selected. Academic emphasis students produce a thesis under the close supervision of a faculty member and at least one other tenured or tenure-track member of the Department. The thesis, which runs 100 double-spaced pages or more, is expected to address a traditional research puzzle. As well, it should offer a hypothesis and strong empirical work (more detail is provided below). The standards for the thesis are quite demanding and anecdotal evidence suggests that many of our students have used their theses as writing samples for doctoral program applications or applications to jobs and internships. Professional emphasis students prepare an internship paper drawing upon an approximately one semester internship experience (entailing 150 hours) which ideally relates to a theme, country, or region in which they have specialized. The content of the internship paper, which runs 60-80 double-spaced pages, may take one of three possible angles. First, it could examine what light an internship experience sheds on the usefulness of an international relations theory. Second, it could discuss what value an international relations theory sheds on the operations of the organization in which the student is involved. Third, it could discuss the students’ organization from a public administration or international business—i.e., managerial—perspective. Challenges The department has faced a number of challenges since the time of the last program review. Three of the most salient are rising undergraduate enrollments, changes in Department faculty (departures and retirements), and the diverse interests and composition of our MA student body. Other important issues are limited financial resources to support Department faculty and students and instability in Department office staffing. These issues are discussed below and in Section 10.

of 70

Enrollment Issues: Over the last 5 years the Department has experienced considerable growth in the number of undergraduate majors, from approximately 254 majors in AY 2001/02 to 347 majors in AY 2006/07. Graduate enrollment has remained relatively high reaching, at one point almost 50 students, and averaging 42.5 since AY 2001/02.

TABLE 2A

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS MAJORS AND GRADUATE STUDENTS BY YEAR

2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07Undergraduate

Majors (average)

254 284.5 318 334

328 347Graduate Students

(average)

34 40.5 42 48.5

47 43 Source: Graduate Studies Statistic Reports/SIMS

Rising undergraduate enrollments limit, in concept, the number of elective graduate courses that the Department can offer since the Department’s primary mission is undergraduate education and it must ensure faculty are available to staff undergraduate courses. To date, the Department has met the challenge that rising undergraduate enrollments pose for its graduate program offerings in two ways. It has used non-tenure track faculty to staff undergraduate courses which frees tenure and tenure-track faculty to teach graduate courses. Similarly, it has used skilled non-tenure track faculty to teach graduate courses which allows Department faculty to offer undergraduate courses. Indirectly, the Department has dealt with the challenge posed by rising undergraduate enrollments by making its MA students aware of useful course options in other departments. Faculty Expansion: In the last 5 years, the Department has undergone significant changes in the faculty. Professors Raymond Miller and DeVere Pentony, long-time members of the Department, who staffed some of the Department’s key graduate core courses retired. The Department also suffered the untimely death of Dwight Simpson who taught a graduate elective course on the Middle East. The absence of these individuals not only deprived our graduate students of courses, but the programmatic and professional guidance that these faculty members previously dispensed. Fortunately, the Department has been able to hire six excellent faculty to make up for the aforementioned losses. As shown by the brief bio sketches provided below, our new hires bring research and teaching interests that should nicely serve our MA students. Better still, the sketches show many of our new faculty already have contributed to the program. Professor Jean-Marc F. Blanchard (hired 2003) serves as our current graduate coordinator and Associate Director of the CUSCPS. He teaches courses in international political economy (graduate and undergraduate), multinational corporations (MNCs), globalization (graduate and undergraduate), and Chinese foreign policy. His research interests include MNCs, the political economy of national security, and Chinese foreign security and economic policy. Professor Blanchard received his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Pennsylvania.

of 70

Professor Sophie Clavier (hired 2003) served as the graduate coordinator from AY 2004/05 through AY 2006/07. She teaches introduction to international relations, international relations theory and analysis, international organizations (graduate and undergraduate), international law (graduate and undergraduate), and comparative law courses. Her research interests include immigration issues in France, international trade law, and human rights issues. She received her diploma in international public law from the University of Paris au Pantheon-Sorbonne. Professor Burcu Akan Ellis (hired 2003) teaches courses in transnational relations of Muslim societies and core courses in international relations. Her research interests include identity formation within the Muslim communities of the Balkans, and gender and transnationalism among young Turkish elites. She obtained her Ph.D. in international relations from American University. Professor Kathleen McAfee (hired 2006) teaches about environment and development (graduate and undergraduate), the international political economy (graduate and undergraduate), and the global politics of food and hunger. Her current research concerns “selling nature to save it” – the treatment of living things, genes, knowledge, ecosystems, and environmental services as market commodities. She earned her Ph.D. in Geography from U.C. Berkeley. Professor Mahmood Monshipouri’s (hired 2007) teaching and research areas include Middle Eastern Politics and societies, European Politics, international relations, human rights in world politics, identity construction in the Muslim World, and theory and application in international relations. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Georgia. Professor Amy Skonieczny (hired 2007) teaches courses in U.S. foreign policy, international political economy, IR theory and approaches, and core courses in international relations. Her research interests include foreign policy analysis, US trade politics, constructivist IR theory and methods, and globalization and its alternatives/activism. She expects to receive her Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Minnesota in spring 2008. Vision for the future: In coming years, our Department will aim to uphold its unique and challenging program leading to a Master of Arts in International Relations (IR). We will actively seek to attract students from diverse backgrounds, countries and undergraduate majors. We will endeavor to offer students the experience, expertise, and enhanced knowledge of global issues and theoretical debates in the field of IR and to prepare them for professions in governmental agencies, the Foreign Service, international organizations, non-governmental organizations, international business, and further academic study. Our program will strive to provide every student exceptional training in analyzing data, preparing policy memos, designing and performing professional presentations, and understanding the art of synthesizing complex material. We will continue to deliver a program well-suited for working professionals and that is sensitive to the individual student’s educational and career objectives. We also will strive to allow students to build a program that prepares them for a profession in the field of international relations or the pursuit of a Ph.D. in the field at top-ranked institutions.

of 70

2.2 The Program in the Context of the Academic Unit The graduate program is an important program for the Department. It serves to advance the Department’s mission of increasing knowledge of international affairs. Furthermore, it aids the Department in recruiting faculty who value the opportunity to teach graduate students and also look forward to drawing upon graduate students to improve their teaching and research. As well, the program helps to bolster the reputation of the Department which helps our undergraduates locate internships and jobs. Also significant, the program yields a coterie of students who provide assistance to undergraduates as teaching assistants and mentors. Finally, the program augments the Department’s goals (shared with BSS and the university) of internationalizing the curriculum, serving the community, and contributing to equity and social justice. The Distribution of Department Resources Table 2B below shows the FTES, FTEF, and SFR (respectively, Full Time Equivalent Students; Full Time Equivalent Faculty, and Student Faculty Ratio) for all programs in the Department. Not surprisingly given the enrollment trends indicated in Table 2A above, Table 2B reveals that the Department’s overall FTES now rest at a much higher level than in the base year of Fall 2001 (194.3), though there has been a decrease since the peak year of Fall 2004 (309.9). Lower division FTES surged between Fall 2001 (26.8) and Fall 2004 (43.2) with a decline to Fall 2001 levels by Fall 2005 (25.8) followed by a rebound between that year and Fall 2007 (31.8). Upper division FTES dramatically grew between Fall 2001 (184.3) and Fall 2005 (250.0), falling and then stabilizing over the past couple of years to a level between that experienced in Fall 2003 and Fall 2004. Graduate FTES jumped during the period between Fall 2001 (10.1) and Fall 2004 (23.8), reaching a high of 24.1 in Fall 2006. FTEF with respect to the graduate program has run between 1.2 in Fall 2002 and 2.0 in Fall 2006. The average is 1.57. SFR for the graduate program rose steadily between Fall 2001 and Fall 2004, dropping in Fall 2005 and then remaining relatively consistent in Fall 2006 and Fall 2007. Graduate program fluctuations in FTEF and SFR do not seem to be linked to any one factor, but rather appear to be a combination of factors such as turnover in Department faculty and changes in graduate student enrollments. The percentage of Department faculty resources devoted to lower division courses registered 4.51 percent over the period between Fall 2001 and Fall 2007. The percentage of resources committed to upper division courses averaged 79.44 percent over the same period. These figures show that the Department is allocating the vast majority of its faculty resources to undergraduate courses, especially upper division courses for majors. As for the graduate program, the Department has been allocating an average of 15.49 percent of its faculty resources towards graduate courses over the aforementioned span. This ranges from a high of 18.63 percent in Fall 2005 to a low of 13.22 percent in Fall 2007. These ratios, which seem high relative to those for lower division education, are to be expected given the size of graduate courses.

of 70

TABLE 2B

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DEPARTMENT FTES, FTEF, SFR

(Fall 2001 to Fall 2007)

Fall 2001 Fall 2002 Fall 2003 Fall 2004 Fall 2005 Fall 2006

Fall 2007

FTES FTEF SFR FTEF FTEF SFR FTES FTEF SFR FTES FTEF SFR FTES FTEF SFR FTES FTEF SFR FTES FTEF SFR Lower Division

26.8 .3 77.2 32.4 .6 50.6 40.2 .7 57.5 43.2 .7 61.4 25.8 .3 79.1 25 .3 88.7 31.8 .3 96.7

Upper Division

157.3 7.3 21.6 186.4 7.0 26.5 220.7 7.5 29.3 242.9 7.9 30.9 250.0 7.9 31.5 229.9 8.7 26.3 227.9 10.1 22.5

Undergraduate 184.3 7.6 24.1 218.8 7.7 28.5 260.2 8.2 31.7 286.1 8.6 33.4 275.8 8.3 33.3 254.9 9.0 28.3 259.7 10.5 24.8 Graduate 10.1 1.4 7.0 15.1 1.2 12.2 19.1 1.4 13.3 23.8 1.5 15.6 21.9 1.9 11.7 24.1 2.0 12.3 20.2 1.6 12.6 All Divisions 194.3 9.1 21.3 233.9 8.9 26.2 279.3 9.6 29.0 309.9 10.1 30.7 297.7 10.2 29.3 279.1 11.0 25.4 279.9 12.1 23.2 Source: Academic Planning and Educational Effectiveness (APEE)-Academic Program Review Reports

of 70

Lower Division Courses IR 104-Introduction to World Affairs is the only lower division course offered by the Department. It is a crucial because it is the first required course for undergraduate IR majors. Aside from serving as a gateway course, IR 104 also is a GE course and is cross listed. Upper Division Courses All other Department undergraduate courses are upper division courses. They are divided into “core” classes (or gateways to the major) and “elective” classes. As of Fall 2007, the Department had the following undergraduate core classes: 1) IR 308-Fundamentals of IR Theories, Issues and Perspectives (4 units); 2) IR 309-IR Analysis and Application (4 units); 3) IR 310-US Foreign Policy (4 units, also a GE course); 4) IR 312-International Political Economy (4 units); and 5) IR 550-Pro-seminar in Foreign Policy Analysis (6 units). 20 percent of the Department’s core courses are service courses. As of Fall 2007, the Department offers 49 elective courses, some cross-listed, of which 31 (63 percent) are service courses. There are far too many courses to list. However, it is useful, for illustrative purposes, to show how the diversity and quantity of the Department’s electives permit its undergraduate students to build concentrations (which we recommend but do not require) around diverse themes, regions, and countries. For instance, students interested in the International Political Economy can take IR 336-Politics of Globalization, IR 428-International Political Economy of Food and Hunger, and IR 520-Modernization and Third World Countries. Students wishing to build an emphasis in International Security can take IR 342-Strategy and War, IR 360-Intelligence and Intelligence Agencies, IR 361-Terrorism and Covert Political Warfare, IR 515-The Two Koreas, and IR 530-Arab Israeli Conflict. Students oriented towards regional studies can build emphases in Europe by taking, e.g., IR 327-Europe: Forming of a More Perfect Union and IR 346-Recent European History while students with an passion about Africa can take IR 321-Development and Foreign Policy and IR 540-Rich and Poor Nations. Paired Courses There is one paired course: IR 460/IR 760-Gender in International Relations. The instructor decides on the respective requirements for graduate and undergraduate students. Proportion of the GAP- Graduate Numbered, Graduate Paired, and Undergraduate Courses An analysis of GAPs from summer 2001 through summer 2007 reveals that more than 87.5 percent (2231 out of 2549) of the units have come from graduate numbered courses. None have come from graduate paired courses while roughly 12.5 percent have come from undergraduate numbered courses. However, this is somewhat misleading because more than 18 percent of these undergraduate numbered courses are methodology courses (typically Political Science 493) that we require academic emphasis students to take. If we exclude these courses, then nearly 90 percent of the units on the GAP come from graduate numbered courses.

of 70

Graduate Student Enrollments Data on applicants, acceptances, and enrollments appears in Table 2C below. Table 2C shows that the number of applicants has averaged 69 students over the past six years. Of these 69 applicants, we have accepted an average of 38 students, representing an acceptance rate of 55 percent. From this pool of 38 potential students, 21, on average, enroll in the program, a 55 percent enrollment rate. Enrollments generally account for 30% of the applicants.

TABLE 2C

NUMBER OF APPLICANTS, STUDENTS ACCEPTED, AND STUDENTS ACTUALLY ENROLLED

Number of applicants

Number of students accepted (percent)

Number of accepted students that enrolled (percent)

Spring-Fall 2002 74 41 (55.4%) 21 (51.2%) Spring-Fall 2003 78 32 (41%) 18 (56.3%) Spring-Fall 2004 62 35 (56.5%) 24 (68.6%) Spring-Fall 2005 64 37 (57.8%) 19 (51.4%) Spring-Fall 2006 69 39 (56.5%) 23 (59%) Spring-Fall 2007 66 41 (62.1%) 20 (48.8%) Average 69 38 (55.0%) 21 (55.2%) Source: Graduate Studies Statistical Reports

Table 2C reveals that the number of applicants has fallen somewhat since the highs recorded at the beginning of the period under consideration. We believe this is partly a reflection of the difficulties that foreign students encountered in pursuing studies in the U.S. after 9/11 (suggestive of this is the fact that we had 12 non-native speakers enrolled in the program as of Fall 2003, but only 4 as of Fall 2006). We do not believe the number of students enrolling in the program has created any issues with respect to the minimum number of students in our graduate classes or the maximum number of students enrolled in them. On a related note, we do not feel the number of MA students enrolled in the program has created challenges in terms of the supervision of culminating experiences, the number of faculty able to teach undergraduate courses, or the availability of faculty to perform advising and service. Impact of Graduate Student Enrollments on Deployment of Lecturers and Tenure Track Faculty All MA level courses in the period under review have been taught by tenure-track hires and tenured faculty. Rarely have graduate faculty taught more than one or two MA courses per year in a normal lord of six courses. Thus the graduate program is not a major drain on faculty

of 70

resources. Since teaching MA students is vital to the intellectual maintenance of the faculty, we consider our MA and BA programs to be symbiotic.

We are satisfied with the number of graduate students enrolling in the program. The average enrollment of 21 students means that we have roughly 40 to 50 students in the program in any given semester. A larger number of students might enable us to support a greater number of electives or the offering of certain electives each semester, but it would place strong pressure on enrollments in our core classes and present added challenges in terms of the supervision of culminating experiences, internship placement, and student advising. Thus, we feel an ideal number of students entering the program each year is 20-25. In our opinion, there is no ideal ratio of international versus domestic student enrollments. What is more consequential is the language ability of those foreign students that opt to enroll in our program. When they have a high level of fluency, their presence in seminars, assuming they are good students, can be very beneficial to the classroom experience as well as their peers. When this is not the case, it presents challenges for instruction, program cohesiveness, and the supervision of culminating experiences. In any event, international students have, in the past, often been some of our best students because of their motivation, training, and well developed career objectives. As for perceptions of the quality of the program, Table 2C suggests that the Department has become somewhat less selective in admitting students, which is not surprising since we have maintained a relatively consistent program size in the face of the decreased number of applicants between 2004 and 2007. While some faculty have noted differences between recent incoming pools of students and earlier (more selective periods), the broad sense is that the quality of the Department’s student pool has remained relatively constant as evidenced by the significant number of students that continue to give ISA presentations. In considering perceptions of the Department’s quality, one must look at other data besides admission selectivity. First, one should look at the placement of some of our graduates, an issue we tackle at length in Sections 4.7 and 7.5. Second, one must acknowledge the numerical expansion of the Department’s faculty and related infusion of new talent. Over time, these new faculty’s achievements will enhance the standing of the Department. Furthermore, the excellent instruction and culminating experience supervision that our new hires provide will produce students that employers in government, business, and the NGO sectors value, which can only work in favor of the Department’s reputation. Recommendation Curriculum: We recommend several curricular changes that we believe will enhance the quality of the program, provide a foundation that will better prepare students for more advanced core and elective offerings, and will aid students in achieving success in their post-graduation endeavors. These curricular changes relate to the Department’s two program emphases, the structure of its curriculum, and the content of various courses including its Methods and Thesis Selection in International Relations (IR 750) course.

of 70

We recommend that the Department eliminate the distinct academic and professional emphases and embrace a program where all students’ culminating experience entails a 70-100 page thesis, which may coursework, work, or an internship may inspire. Under this plan, our professional emphasis culminating experience course (IR 892) would function solely as an internship course—with requirements for a rigorous paper and activity log, for students who wanted the experience and networking opportunities that such an internship would provide. For those students who did not want to do an internship, we recommend that they be required to do a teaching assistantship (IR 708). Given this new culminating experience arrangement, all students in the program, not just academic emphasis students, would enroll in IR 898 (thesis) for their culminating experience. To implement the aforementioned programmatic change, the Department will update the bulletin, its website, and develop a rubric for the thesis which specifies the standards for passage. As for the structure of the curriculum, we believe the Department should require its students to follow a program entailing a core (IR 720 and IR 750), two required classes (selected from IR 728, 725, 738, or 739), and a thematic (e.g., IPE, security, international organizations and law) or regional concentration (e.g., Africa, Asia, or Latin America). We believe a core essential since it provides a common foundation to incoming students, provides a cohort experience, and is the norm in every other international relations oriented MA programs. The Department’s revised MA program, then, would consist of the following:

IR 720 3 units IR 750 3 units Two courses from IR 725, 728, 738, 739 6 units IR 708 or IR 892 3 units Thematic or regional emphasis (drawn from, e.g., History, International Business, International Relations, Political Science, Public Administration, and so on).

15 units

IR 898 (thesis) 3 units Total Units 33 units

Regarding course content, we advocate greater emphasis on theory-based and theory-conscientious research in elective regional and thematic courses (in addition to the already existing emphasis on theory and methodology in core courses) because this will further strengthen students’ methodological and research design skills. We also recommend that students be required to develop, in their first class in their concentration, a research proposal, expecting its further development into a series of research papers leading towards the thesis. Given the above, we recommend that IR 750 (suitably renamed) become a required core class for all students during their second semester in the program because a research methods/data analysis course, which is the norm in other IR MA programs, would significantly profit our students. We also suggest that IR 750 be designed to ensure coverage of a wide range of methods including quantitative methods so that our students develop the ability to become sophisticated readers of data and research using quantitative methods. We further note that the

of 70

instructor of IR 750, whoever he or she may be, consider asking faculty from the Department to present the different methodologies that they employ for their research. Through normal graduate coordinator advising and interactions between faculty/culminating experience faculty and students, we may advise students, on an individual basis, to take language, statistics, or research methods courses beyond IR 750. Application numbers: We generally are satisfied with the number of applicants to the program, though we would welcome 10-12 additional applicants per year as this would allow greater selectivity and help to ensure continued diversity in our student population. A bigger issue than the number of applicants is the diversity of the applicant pool in terms of home country. We have been able to construct some of our best incoming classes, for instance, when we been able to attract top quality international students. Our recommendation, therefore, is that the Department do a better job promoting itself abroad as an option for advanced studies. First and foremost, it needs to do this by enhancing its website. The Department also can regularly promote itself by advertising its program to the many consulates in the Bay Area, to the U.S. State Department, and to OIP. More generally, the Department needs to promote itself to other California State University schools, to achieve a better presence on sites like Gradschools.com where we have neither substantive text nor graphics, and to get moneys for graduate students (and issue addressed in Section 10.1 below). As reported earlier, we examined and rejected membership in APSIA for cost reasons given existing budgetary constraints. Enrollment percentages: The large percentage of students that do not enroll in the program after acceptance may be more noteworthy than the Department’s acceptance rate. This raises concerns because the Department may be losing the best of the students that it accepts. We recommend three steps to tackle the enrollment drop-off. First, individual faculty members should contact prospective students with area/thematic emphases paralleling those of the individual faculty member since this evidences Department interest in accepted students. Second, the Department should consider an earlier application deadline since an earlier deadline will allow it to issue earlier acceptances and, in turn, to enroll applicants who might enroll elsewhere in order to firm their graduate study plans. Third, the Department should improve data gathering to support future analyses of the factors shaping enrollment patterns. Regarding data gathering, the Department will require students in their personal statement to indicate the other programs to which they have applied. Furthermore, the Department will send out inquiry letters over the next 2 to 3 acceptance/enrollment cycles, though this is not a high priority, to students who were accepted into the program but chose not to enroll. While recognizing that responses will be limited, we believe whatever data is gathered can help the Department to determine the cause of the shortfall between the number of students accepted and the number of students enrolling. Such information could aid the Department in determining whether it might need to change its admissions procedures and processes, to work more closely with the Office of International Programs on visa issues, or collaborate with BSS and other university entities to build up funds to attract exceptional, but financially needy students. Of course, this endeavor requires having good office support to distribute, track, and tabulate data.

of 70

3.0 ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS 3.1 Evidence of Prior Academic Success For admission to the graduate program, all students must first meet the general university requirements as noted in the SFSU Bulletin. As a result, all current IR MA students meet the current threshold. Given the Department’s separate GPA requirement, the increase in SFSU’s minimum GPA threshold for graduate applicants to 3.0 in 2008 will not change admissions to the program. The Department’s current application requirements state that applicants should have a bachelor’s degree, a grade point average of at least 3.2 (out of 4.0) in the last 60 units of undergraduate study, and have taken an upper division course in international relations. Successful applicants should score above median in verbal and analytical sections of the Graduate Record Examination (GRE) and at least median in the quantitative section. Usually the minimum acceptable TOEFL score (for students whose bachelor’s degree was not in English) is 565. We also look favorably on applicants if they have skills in statistics, computer applications, media production, or foreign language. Students applying to the Masters in International Relations must concurrently submit materials to both the Graduate Division and to the graduate coordinator of the Department. These materials include an unofficial transcript, results of the GRE (or TOEFL), and three letters of recommendation. Beyond this, we ask students to provide a personal statement of reasons for embarking on graduate study in international relations and a 3-4 page short essay on an international issue of their choice. The Department’s graduate admissions committee has no rigid formula for weighing factors other than GPA in determining evidence of prior academic success. Traditionally, members of the graduate admissions committee have given strong weight to letters of recommendation, followed by GRE (TOEFL) scores, professional experience, the short essay, and the personal statement. While the personal statement is not an indicator of prior academic success, it is valuable in determining whether an applicant is familiar with our program and thus whether it will be a good fit for him or her. The vast majority of students admitted into the Department’s MA program are fully classified. This means that the Department’s graduate admissions committee or, in select cases, graduate coordinator has deemed that they have sufficient international relations, political science, or related coursework which makes it unnecessary for them to complete prerequisite or preparatory coursework prior to entering the program or in the very early stages of entering the program. In cases where students do not satisfy the Department’s standards for admission to fully classified status (i.e., where they lack sufficient relevant coursework), the Department has required students to do undertake preparatory readings and to prepare guided essays which demonstrate that the student has developed a good working knowledge of facts and theories relating to international relations and the international political economy. In a rarer number of instances, the Department has required some students to take additional coursework in one or both of these areas as well as courses in statistics.

of 70

Recommendations Procedures: The Department has been attracting an applicant pool and building an incoming class that it can serve well and that also sustains a relatively vibrant program. Thus, we do not advise any significant toughening of application standards. On the other hand, rigorous standards enable the program to maintain a high quality, to graduate or place students who will enhance the reputation of the program (to the advantage of the program and students), and to attract high quality faculty and students. As an experiment, the Department recommends raising the GPA standard for students to 3.3, which is but one of a menu of tools its uses to evaluate the suitability of applicants to the program. On a related note, we recommend that the Graduate Committee look into raising its TOEFL standard and adding, where feasible, a requirement that foreign students take the TOEFL listening test. For future planning purposes, the Department also needs more data. Thus, we suggest that it work with Graduate Studies to track, for a 3 year period, data in order to determine the correlation between its GPA, GRE, and TOEFL application requirements and the final GPAs of its graduates. In cases where students lack IR or PLSI training, but have promise as evidenced by their GPAs, GREs, letters of recommendation, and other metrics, the graduate admissions committee has been willing to admit them provided that they prepare some “conditions papers” prior to their first semester in the program, take a statistics class, and/or take IR 310 (US foreign policy). We recommend that Department update the readings for the conditions papers and also that it develop a list of recommended readings for incoming MA students. Furthermore, the Department recommends that it require IR 312 (IPE) as a condition in lieu of IR 310 as IR 312 provides a foundation for a broader range of graduate courses and is more suitable given the disciplinary diversity of students in IR 310. We would not change our statistics condition. 3.2 Evidence of Competent Writing The University requires that graduate students must demonstrate both initial English proficiency (level one) upon entrance to graduate study and an advanced English proficiency (level two) prior to graduating. To meet these needs, the Department requires the following from all graduate students: a) Level One: Each student is required to successfully complete IR 720 with a grade of B or better; and b) Level Two: to demonstrate advanced level proficiency, the student must complete IR 892 or IR 898 with a grade of CR (credit). Recommendation We recommend that the Department consider requiring its MA program applicants to submit a more substantive writing sample (e.g., a graded research paper). As for non-native speakers, the data generally indicate that the Department is doing a strong job of appealing to foreign students as well as screening non-native speakers for English proficiency. The Department believes, nevertheless, that the TOEFL does not always seem to provide us with a reliable metric for gauging a foreign student’s ability to write in English. Thus, as noted above, we recommend that the Graduate Committee investigate the merits of requiring higher TOEFL scores. We also believe a new requirement for a more rigorous writing sample will aid us in ensuring students can write competently.

of 70

3.3 English Preparation of Non-Native Speakers The number of non-native speakers in the MA program soared between Fall 2001 and Fall 2003, dropping significantly in the 3 year subsequent period. As we discussed earlier, we think post-9/11 visa issues influenced this development. Of course, rising out of state tuition and fees are likely to have played a role, too.

TABLE 3

NUMBER OF NON-NATIVE SPEAKERS ADMITTED

Year Department BSS Fall 2001 4 35 Fall 2002 9 39 Fall 2003 12 49 Fall 2004 9 44 Fall 2005 6 27 Fall 2006 4 31 Source: Graduate Studies Statistical Reports

To ensure our non-native students have an adequate command of the English language, we use a variety of devices. For example, non-native students, as with regular students, prepare a diverse range of written products ranging from short briefing memos for policymakers to short literature critiques to lengthy research papers. On a related note, all MA students must write an internship paper or thesis as part of their culminating experience. These experiences develop non-native English speaking students’ higher-level writing skills such as making and defending an argument, framing a policy issue or research question, or synthesizing knowledge. On the oral communication front, our non-native speakers have many occasions in the classroom to enrich their English speaking skills. Among them are opportunities to give in-class presentations, to lead group discussions, and to give briefings. We also encourage our students to make presentations at professional conferences and at campus events. In the past, the internship papers that some of our professional emphasis, non-native students experience prepared offers yet another source of English-language training. 3.4 Overview of Program Admission Policy The Department takes the position that its admission policies have served it well. While there are some years where the incoming student population is stronger than others, the Department feels this has more to do with variations in the quantity of students that apply to the program (which shapes our ability to be selective) rather than its admissions procedures. Positively, our admission procedures have ensured we have sufficient students to maintain a vibrant program while concurrently allowing us to build a graduate student body that continues to excel in many venues. Other implications of our admissions policies are discussed below.

of 70

The demographics of our MA student population are addressed in Section 7 below, but it is clear from Tables 3 (above) and 7A (below) that our admission procedures allow a mix of female and male students, domestic and international students, and students of different ethnicities. Although we do not have specific age data, anecdotal data suggests we have a mix of students, age-wise. We have so-called “younger” students who have matriculated directly after earning their bachelor’s degree as well as older students who have one or more degrees and extensive professional experience. Our program does an excellent job serving students who wish to deepen their knowledge of international relations, to determine if they are interested in more advanced study of international relations, to acquire a richer knowledge in certain area specialties, to develop an expertise relating to or relevant for NGOs, and to build skills that can help them acquire a position in the private sector. It is our assessment, too, that our program well serves those who are working, those who possess limited financial means, and those who have families. Table 2C (above) provides information on application, admission, and enrollment trends. To briefly recapitulate, the number of applicants to the program is stable, but fewer than in the early part of the period under analysis. Similarly, we have become somewhat less selective in admissions, an issue that we discuss above. Lastly, enrollment trends are fairly constant, but raise some concerns as we note earlier. There is no doubt that we are developing students that can engage diverse communities in a competent and culturally appropriate way. Just noted is the fact that our admissions procedures allow for a diverse student population. In addition, our curriculum and the content of the courses in our curriculum allows for students to become more knowledgeable about and thus more able to deal with diverse countries, cultures, ethnicities, religions, and ideologies. Besides, our flexibility in student culminating experience choices—we allow students to study many different countries, many different regions, and many different themes (e.g., third world development)—helps broaden the ability of students to engage diverse communities in a competent and culturally appropriate way.

of 70

4.0 PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS 4.1 Number of course offerings The Department routinely offers at least four graduate courses per semester, easily exceeding the minimum requirement of two graduate courses per semester. In many semesters the Department offers more than four graduate classes.

TABLE 4A

FIVE YEAR COURSE ROTATION SCHEDULE

FOR GRADUATE INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS COURSES

(Fall 2002 to Fall 2007) Course F 02 S 03 F 03 S 04 F 04 S 05 F 05 S 06 F 06 S 07 F 07 IR 720 X X X X X X IR 725 X X X X X X IR 728 X X X X X IR 730 X X IR 732 IR 735 X X IR 736 X IR 737 IR 738 X X X X IR 739 X X X X X IR 741 X IR 742 X X X X IR 744 X X IR 745 X IR 746 X X IR 747 IR 748 X IR 749 X X X X IR 750 X X X X X IR 758 X X Source: SFSU Class Schedule

of 70

4.2 Frequency of course offerings The Department has provided the required courses for the graduate program on a regular basis. In addition, the department has also emphasized serving working students by offering these courses primarily in the evening. We believe that we have met these two goals historically and in anticipate doing so in the future. Table 4A and 4B demonstrate that all required courses are offered every year. Table 4B shows the graduate course offerings in the Department from Fall 2003 to Spring 2008 and the projected offering until Fall 2009. We have offered 3 to 6 graduate level courses every semester and new hires will allow us, in the future, to offer 1 or 2 more courses, on average, each semester.

TABLE 4B

SEVEN YEAR COURSE ROTATION TABLE

(LAST 4 YEARS PLUS FORECAST)

Course F 03

S 04

F 04

S 05

F 05

S 06

F 06

S 07

F 07

S 08

F 08

S 09

F 09

IR 720 X X X X X X X IR 725 X X X X X X X IR 726 X IR 728 X X X X X IR 730 X X X IR 732 IR 735 X X IR 736 X X X IR 737 IR 738 X X X X X X IR 739 X X X X X X IR 741 X IR 742 X X X X X IR 744 X X X IR 745 X X IR 746 X X X X IR 747 X X X X X IR 748 X X IR 749 X X X IR 750 X X X X X X IR 758 X X IR 760 Source: SFSU Class Schedule, Department Chair

of 70

4.3 Path to graduation As a result of the regularity with which the Department offers its courses, our graduate students can reasonable expect to graduate within two years by taking 3 courses a semester. Moreover, the Department usually is quite flexible in allowing, subject to the approval of the graduate coordinator, its students to take courses at other institutions. This means that students have the potential to graduate in two years, even if they cannot take 3 courses per semester, by supplementing their programs of study with courses taken elsewhere during the winter and summer sessions (when the Department does not offer graduate courses). Importantly, a working student should be able to complete the approximately 30 unit major with evening courses as virtually all our courses have been or will be offered in the evening. The Department does not have a formal roadmap for graduate students but is preparing one in conjunction with the redesign of its website (since any such roadmap should be posted on its website) and the possible creation of a Department Graduate Student manual. Nevertheless, the current SFSU Bulletin and the Department website clearly identify the courses that students must take to graduate. Beyond this, when graduate students present their GAP for approval, they are asked to specify the courses that they will take over the balance of their tenure in the program. In so doing, they create a roadmap for themselves. Finally, students are encouraged to make use of the program of study planning tables that the Graduate Studies Division makes available in its Graduate Student Handbook. 4.4 Class Distribution on GAP An analysis of more than 89 GAPs from summer 2001 through summer 2007 reveals that nearly 90 percent of the units are from exclusively graduate courses. There is no reason to believe that this will change in the future. In fact, there is reason to believe that the number may slightly increase due to the Department’s hiring and subsequent ability to use its new faculty to offer more graduate courses. Data obtained from an analysis of the aforementioned GAPs does not reveal any units obtained from paired courses. Thus, the percentage of units on the GAP coming from exclusively graduate or paired courses is the same as that from exclusively graduate courses—i.e., 90 percent. Our examination of past GAPs does not reveal any concerns with respect to the breakdown of units on the GAP. Consequently, we do not have any recommendations with respect to this issue.

of 70

4.5 Class Size Enrollment ranges from 5 to 27 with the vast majority of seminars having 20 students or less and many having 15 or less. Table 4C shows that, over the past 5 years, 83.5 percent (51 out of 61) of our courses meet the requirement that they run between 8-30 students. If we exclude IR 750, the seminar which is geared exclusively to graduate students in the academic emphasis, then 88.5 percent of our classes (54 out of 61) meet this standard. The same table further reveals that 80 percent of our graduate seminars (35 out of 44) meet the requirement that they run between 5 to 15 students.

TABLE 4C

FIVE YEAR CLASS SIZE ANALYSIS

(Fall 2002 to Fall 2007)

Course F 02 S 03 F 03 S 04 F 04 S 05 F 05 S 06 F 06 S 07 F 07 IR 720 24 22 23 19 26 20 IR 725 18 29 22 18 15 12 IR 728 20 27 25 24 17 IR 730 15 14 IR 732 IR 735 22 12 10 IR 736 9 IR 737 IR 738 27 19 11 18 IR 739 7 14 12 13 13 11 IR 741 9 IR 742 22 19 15 12 IR 744 6 9 IR 745 19 IR 746 7 15 IR 747 12 5 6 IR 748 8 IR 749 9 9 19 15 7 IR 750 6 5 5 10 IR 758 8 6 IR 760 Source: SFSU Enrollment Analysis

of 70

Recommendations Number of courses, course rotation, and class sizes: The Department recommends that it formally drop courses that have remained in the course catalogue but have not been taught in a long time: IR 732 and 737. We also recommend that it establish the goal of offering no fewer than 12 courses per year and increase course offerings by adding at least two classes in 2008 (Fall) and 2009 (Spring), which our recent and upcoming hires will facilitate. Students have often requested courses that deal with contemporary issues. Thus, we recommend that the Department make increased use of IR 705. In addition, we recommend that the Department offer more courses with broader appeal. If necessary, we should consider offering more popular seminars twice a year, rather than the current once a year. As enrollments in the program have increased, so have the size of popular seminars. We recommend therefore that the Department vigorously enforce the restriction that seminars are limited to 15 students since this improves the seminar experience and frees students for other elective courses. Path to graduation: The Department does not have a formal roadmap for its graduate students. To some extent, it would be redundant given the information available through our bulletin, the Graduate Studies Division, and graduate advising. Still, we will develop one as part of the revamping of our website. In addition, if we do pursue the development of a graduate studies handbook, then we will incorporate said roadmap into the handbook. 4.6 Number of graduates Table 4D shows the number of Masters Degrees granted over the last 5 years. The department has graduated an average of approximately 13 students per year over the last 5 years with a low of 12 in 2003/2004 and a high of 18 in 2005/2006.

Table 4D

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS MASTER’S DEGREES GRANTED

(2002/2003 to 2006/2007)

Academic Year

Number of Students Graduating

2002/03 13 2003/04 12 2004/05 13 2005/06 18 2006/07 13 5 year average 14 Source: Graduate Studies Statistical Reports

of 70

Table 4D indicates that the Department easily meets the requirement that it graduate at least 5 students per year over the past five years. As a result, the Department does not have any recommendations relating to its graduation rates. 4.7 Overview of Program Quality and Sustainability Indicators The evidence is strong that the Department’s MA program is on a sustainable trajectory. It is continuing to attract a substantial number of applicants, including some top-notch students (the qualities and achievements of our students receive further treatment below). Furthermore, it is enrolling a quantity of students which enables it to offer a diverse number of electives as well as which ensure there are not too many students. Also noteworthy is the regularity with which the Department offers its courses, the Department’s ability to fill the GAPs of its students with pure graduate courses, and the consistent number of students it graduates each year (far above the university requirement). Another manifestation of the Department’s quality and sustainability is its adaptation to trends in this field. This is demonstrated in the methodological, theoretical, and empirical content of its courses. It is reflected in the composition of the faculty which, being a largely new faculty, are well aware of the latest teaching methods and disciplinary debates. It is shown by the abundant publications and conference presentations of its faculty, a fact chronicled in Section 9.2. It is demonstrated by the program’s curriculum which was modified in 2001 (as detailed in Section 1.1 above) and is currently undergoing review to ensure it is current as well as suitable given the needs of our students. Finally, it is evidenced by the frequency with which Departmental faculty members are solicited by broadcast, print, and radio media to give interviews. There is every reason to believe that the program size is appropriate to its present circumstances and student demands. Students are able to find courses, to obtain faculty supervision on their culminating experiences, and to get high quality advising on a consistent basis. And students have been able to graduate in a timely fashion. Classes have good enrollments and there are enough students in the program to support multiple electives each semester. On a more general basis, we are meeting all the university requirements relating to maximum and minimum number of students in classes, the frequency with which we offer courses, and the number of students we graduate. There are a variety of bases for concluding that the Department has a good reputation relative to other programs in the U.S. One is the number of faculty members and, perhaps more importantly, graduate students who deliver high quality presentations at ISA conferences and other major conferences such as the American Political Science Association annual meeting. A second is the fact that we have, in the past, been able to attract a large number of foreign graduate student applicants who can be quite selective because of the demands and costs of attending school abroad. A third is the frequent media appearances of Department faculty despite the presence of U.C. Berkeley, Stanford, and other prestigious institutions of higher learning in close proximity to San Francisco. Prof. Sanjoy Banerjee, for example, has been a regular commentator on South Asian affairs as well as the situation in Iraq.

of 70

Beyond this, the Department has been able to place its students in highly competitive internships and jobs with the U.S. Department of State as well as various U.S. intelligence agencies. Furthermore, our faculty have been assigned to serve in highly prominent service roles. To illustrate, Professor Andrei Tsygankov served in the role of Program Chair for the 2007 ISA annual meeting. Similarly, Professor Mahmood Monshipouri is a reviewer for the American Political Science Review, International Studies Quarterly, and The Journal of Armed Forces and Society.

of 70

5.0 FACULTY REQUIREMENTS 5.1 Number of faculty in graduate program The Department has staffed its graduate courses primarily with tenure track and tenured faculty, though it has occasionally used lecturers to teach graduate courses in order to broaden the number of available electives or to replace faculty on leave. In other instances, it has used lecturers because of their unique expertise. Since Fall 2005, the graduate program has benefitted from the skills of David Fischer, a former American Ambassador, who has taught a graduate course on American Foreign policy. There are eight faculty members that have taught in the graduate program on a regular basis since Fall 2003. Below, we identify them and the graduate courses they teach. Professor Sanjoy Banerjee teaches Theory and Approaches in International Relations (IR 720) and Methods and Thesis Selection in International Relations (IR 750). Professor Jean-Marc F. Blanchard offers courses in International Political Economy (IR 728) and the Politics of Globalization (IR 730). Professor Sophie Clavier teaches classes on Contemporary International Legal Issues (IR 738). Ambassador David Fischer regularly offers IR 742, Seminar on American Foreign Policy. Professor Andrew Hanami delivers classes on International Security (IR 739) and Asia and the World System (IR 749). Professor Kathleen McAfee teaches International Political Economy (IR 728), Seminar in Global Environmental Policy (IR 735), and Third World Modernization (IR 736). Professor Andrei Tsygankov offers The Analysis of Foreign Policy (IR 725) and Russia's Foreign Policy (IR 747). Professor Angelika Von Wahl teaches Current European Politics (IR 744). The current graduate coordinator is Professor Jean-Marc F. Blanchard. The coordinator supervises all conditional papers, which are submitted in August by incoming students with little IR background. These students are required to register, in the Fall semester that they enter the program, for 1-2 units of independent study (IR 699), depending on the amount of supplementary work the graduate admissions committee assigns them. Traditionally, IR 699 enrollments have been sufficient to provide enough FTEs for the coordinator to have one course release/semester. Recommendation: In lieu of the existing practice, we recommend providing the graduate coordinator with one course off/semester in recognition of his/her substantial duties which entail a large number of time intensive tasks such as managing the application process, student advising, paperwork approvals, organizing career/internship related workshops, culminating experience supervision, and overseeing MIR.

of 70

TABLE 5A

SEVEN YEAR COURSE ROTATION

(LAST 4 YEARS PLUS FORECAST)

Course F 03 S 04 F 04 S 05 F 05 S 06 F 06 S 07 F 07 S 08 F 08 S 09 F 09 IR 720 Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee IR 725 Pentony Pentony Pentony Banerjee Tsygankov Tsygankov Tsygankov IR 726 Bar-

Joseph

IR 728 Miller Miller Miller Blanchard McAfee Blanchard IR 730 Blanchard Blanchard Blanchard IR 732 IR 735 Fieldman McAfee IR 736 McAfee McAfee McAfee IR 737 IR 738 Clavier Clavier Clavier Clavier Clavier Clavier IR 739 Hanami Hanami Hanami Hanami Hanami Hanami IR 741 Yansane IR 742 Fischer Fischer Fischer Fischer Fischer IR 744 Von

Wahl Von Wahl Von Wahl

IR 745 Cabello-Barrueto

New Hire

IR 746 Simpson Araim Monshipouri Monshipouri IR 747 Tsygankov Tsygankov Tsygankov Tsygankov Tsygankov IR 748 Hanami Hanami IR 749 Hanami Hanami Hanami IR 750 Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee Banerjee IR 758 Paarlberg Stowers IR 760 Source: Compilation using SFSU Class Schedule (online) and information provided by Department Chair

of 70

6.0 PROGRAM PLANNING AND QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROCESS We have two major processes for evaluation and planning in the MA program, which were developed partly in response to the 5th cycle MOU and external review. One is a continuous monitoring of the quality of student work and achievement. First, the Department regularly examines term papers—excellent, median, and poor work—and other student work products to assess the quality of teaching. The Department has criteria for excellent papers and theses. These criteria include representation of scholarly background and debate, consistent application of a methodology with a basis in the literature, and careful empirical research. To ensure independent evaluation, papers are assessed by faculty other than those who taught or advised the writers against departmental criteria. We further compare MA student work to the IR literature and look for gaps in the training we provide. We believe this process allows us to determine whether those who are getting high grades are truly doing excellent work. We take excellent student work as evidence of excellent graduate teaching. Second, in faculty meetings, we discuss the curriculum of the graduate program as well as its achievements and future directions, drawing upon our graduate course instructors and thesis advisers who have great insight into what is being done well and what needs improvement in our MA teaching. Curriculum revision and hiring are shaped accordingly. Recommendation: Although the Department utilizes several useful techniques for program planning and quality improvement, we nevertheless recommend the implementation of a more rigorous program planning and quality improvement process entailing three dimensions. First, we recommend that the graduate committee meet at least twice a semester (at the beginning and end of fall and at the beginning and end of spring) to discuss the graduate program. Second, we recommend that the Department enhance “record” keeping so that we have materials to review. To generate a reservoir of written materials to review and also which may serve as resource for students in the program, we specifically recommend that the Department mandate that all its graduate students submit one bound copy of their culminating experience and a CD containing their culminating experience as a PDF file for storage in their files that the Department already is obligated to keep. This can be done when students process their completion of culminating experience form and be made part of the checklist of items that the graduate coordinator reviews prior to signing the form. Third, we recommend that second year students be surveyed each year and that all graduating students be given an exit survey that they must complete as part of the processing of their graduation paperwork. The graduate committee will design the exit survey no later than fall 2008.

of 70

7.0 THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE Table 7A provides a two-year snapshot of the gender and ethnic composition of our Department’s graduate students. In general, the figures for our entire MA student population show that we have a fairly balanced mix of female and male students with 60 percent female and 40 percent male. Ethnicity data, which is only for our American MA students, reveals that most of them are white non-Latino followed by students who classify themselves as Asian and Latino. In percentage terms, we have more female MA students than the university as a whole, though we have less diversity in terms of ethnicity. It is hard, though, to draw any meaningful conclusions about ethnicity given that the data excludes foreign students and also has a significant number of non-responders (“no response” or “decline to state”) as well as individuals who classify themselves as “Other.”

TABLE 7A

STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS-INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DEPARTMENT

FALL 2006/FALL 2007 GRADUATE STUDENT GENDER AND ETHNICITY DATA

Female Male Total Ethnicity #2006 #2007 % 2006 %2007 # 2006 #2007 %2006 %2007 # 2006 #2007% 2006%2007Native American 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0African American 1 1 4.3 4.5 0 0 0 0 1 1 2.6 2.6Chicano, Mexican American 0 0 0 0 1 0 6.3 0 1 0 2.6 0Latino 3 3 13 13.6 1 1 6.3 6.3 4 4 10.3 10.5Asian 2 4 8.7 18.2 2 2 12.5 12.5 4 6 10.3 15.8Filipino 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Pacific Islander 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0White Non-Latino 15 10 65.2 45.5 10 12 62.5 75 25 22 64.1 57.9Other Responses 2 4 8.7 18.2 2 1 12.5 6.3 4 5 10.3 13.2 SUBTOTAL 23 22 100.0 100.00 16 16 100.0 100.00 39 38 100.0 100.00 No Response 1 0 --- --- 0 1 --- --- 1 1--- --- Decline to State 0 1 --- --- 4 1 --- --- 4 2--- --- Non-Resident Alien 5 5 --- --- 1 0 --- --- 6 5--- --- Transitory 0 0 --- --- 0 0 --- --- 0 0--- --- TOTAL 29 28 21 18 50 46 Source: APEE-Academic Program Review Reports

of 70

TABLE 7B

STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS-OVERALL UNIVERSITY

FALL 2007 GRADUATE STUDENT GENDER AND ETHNICITY DATA

Female Male Total Ethnicity Number PercentageNumber Percentage Number PercentageNative American 18 0.6 12 0.8 30 0.7African American 175 6.0 82 5.3 257 5.8Chicano, Mexican American 205 7.0 95 6.1 300 6.7Latino 197 6.8 93 6.0 290 6.5Asian 570 19.6 274 17.7 844 18.9Filipino 129 4.4 73 4.7 202 4.5Pacific Islander 17 0.6 4 0.3 21 0.5White Non-Latino 1398 48.0 821 52.9 2219 49.7Other Responses 204 7.0 98 6.3 302 6.8 SUBTOTAL 2913 100.0 1552 100.0 4465 100.0 No Response 141 101 242 Decline to State 280 202 482 Non-Resident Alien 330 189 519 Transitory 25 16 41 TOTAL* 3689 2060 5749 Source: APEE-Academic Program Review Reports

of 70

7.1 Assessment of Student Learning Table 7C shows the distribution of grades for graduate courses from Spring 2001 to Spring 2007. It does not have cells for D-, F, IC, or U grades because none were given.

TABLE 7C

GRADUATE COURSE GRADE DISTRIBUTION

(SPRING 2001 TO SPRING 2007)

A A- B+ B B- C+ C C- D+ D WU GPATotal 497 225 96 62 26 6 1 1 4 3.70Percentage 54.15 24.5 10.45 .067 .028 .006 .001 .001

This table shows that the vast majority of grades given in our MA courses are A or A- grades (68.5 percent) while a significant number (10.50 percent) are B+ or B grades. This is not surprising because the Department’s policy has been that passing students receive an A or B. Thus, virtually all grades have been A’s or B’s. Aside from this, all students must achieve a B or better in our very vigorous IR 720 course to remain in good standing in the program. This helps to ensure that only students for whom the program is a good fit remain. There are some oddities in the table, however. First, there are several C- or lower grades, though in absolute and percentage terms the numbers are extremely small. The C- or lower are oddities because they cannot be counted towards the number of units a student must earn to graduate. Second, there are a number of WU (withdrawal unauthorized) grades. A WU essentially means that a student stopped attending to class and failed to complete sufficient work to merit the assignment of an incomplete grade with a later possibility of finishing the class. Recommendation The data above do not suggest that the Department needs to revamp any of its grading policies as the distribution of grades is what is to be expected. However, we do recommend that faculty in the Department bring to the attention of the graduate coordinator any situations which seem likely to lead a given student to earn a C- or lower grade or a WU. While it is the responsibility of any given instructor to guide students in his/her courses, students on track for a C- or lower grade or headed towards a WU are likely to present issues in other courses or in other areas. The involvement of the graduate coordinator might allow him/her to pursue remedial action.

of 70

Our expected student learning outcomes are enumerated below. 1. Identify and discuss the historical origins and key operating features of as well as the major theoretical perspectives on the current global political system. 2. Understand cultural, political economy, legal, and military-security aspects of the currently existing system of international relations and identify its main problems, such as terrorism, environmental depletion, and the disparity between rich and poor nations. Be able to identify possible solutions to these problems. 3. Identify and discuss major ethical issues including the role of ethics and morality in relations between nations, the nature of the “just war” doctrine, raison d’état, pacifism, global accountability, wealth disparities, the principle of reciprocity, and cultural relativism versus universalism. 4. Identify and discuss the major epistemological approaches to the study of inter-state relations including the nature of evidence, explanation, and prescription. Understand the relative strengths and weakness of various methodologies, the nature of trade-offs (parsimony vs. complexity; explaining vs. understanding, etc), and validity problems in conducting empirical inquiry. 5. Demonstrate the ability to analyze international problems from an interdisciplinary framework, including politico-military, economic, social, historical and cultural perspectives using multiple methodological approaches. 6. Demonstrate information/research acquisition skills including expert use of library data bases, the World Wide Web, IR journals, and statistics. Understand the academic culture of citing and building on others’ work, including the nature of plagiarism and the reasons for avoiding it. 7. Develop at least one paper of a publishable quality suitable for submission to an academic or policy-oriented International Relations journal. 8. Develop appropriate presentation/public speaking skills and demonstrate the ability to present papers in academic and policy settings.

of 70

TABLE 7D

PROPOSED CURRICULUM ALIGNMENT MATRIX/CURRICULUM MAP

Course Outcome 1

Outcome 2

Outcome 3 Outcome 4

IR 720 I D I D I D IR 725 I M I D IR 728 I M I D IR 730 I D I D IR 732 I D D D IR 735 I D I D IR 736 I D I D IR 737 I D I D IR 738 I D M D IR 739 I M I D IR 741 I D I D IR 742 I D I D IR 745 I D I D IR 746 I D I D IR 747 I D I D IR 748 I D I D IR 749 I D I D IR 750 M M I M IR 760 I D D D I = Introduced, D = Developed and Practiced with Feedback, M =Demonstrated at the Mastery Level

of 70

TABLE 7D (CONTINUED)

PROPOSED CURRICULUM ALIGNMENT MATRIX/CURRICULUM MAP

Course Outcome 5 Outcome 6 Outcome 7 Outcome 8 IR 720 I I I IR 725 D D I D IR 728 D D I D IR 730 D D D D IR 732 D D D D IR 735 D D D D IR 736 D D D D IR 737 D D D D IR 738 D D I D IR 739 D D D D IR 741 D D D D IR 742 D D D D IR 745 D D D D IR 746 D D D D IR 747 D D D D IR 748 D D D D IR 749 D D D D IR 750 M M M D IR 760 D D D D I = Introduced, D = Developed and Practiced with Feedback, M =Demonstrated at the Mastery Level

In 2005, pursuant to the 5th cycle MOU and external review, the Department developed procedures that a “graduate assessment committee” could use to measure the attainment of its learning outcomes. These procedures called for a review of accomplishments within the Department, such accomplishments to be determined through an examination of course syllabi, grades, various written assignments such as research papers, oral presentation evaluations, and other products such as internship reports and theses. In addition, Department procedures call for a review of accomplishments outside the Department by looking at university awards, presentations at professional conferences, publications, acceptance in Ph.D. programs, and so on. In AY 2003/04, partly responding to the 5th cycle MOU and external review, the Department distributed a survey to graduate students and alumni to ascertain their views on the learning they had achieved from the program. While few alumni responded and the cover memo to the survey does not isolate the responses of alumni, neither does the cover memo indicate any feeling by alumni that they had not developed useful skills. On occasion the Department has encouraged a dialogue across discipline subfields such as IR Theory, IPE, and US Foreign Policy to allow faculty to assess if they feel the learning objectives appropriate to their fields are being achieved.

of 70

Graduate program assessments in 2005 and 2006 reported that graduate student accomplishments within the Department and outside the Department were generally high. To develop the former assessment, a graduate assessment committee evaluated syllabi, a few of the best papers from several core and elective classes, and grading patterns. In both years, the graduate assessment committee observed that excellent papers really were excellent in terms of reviewing the literature, following methodological guidance or using appropriate methodologies, formulating arguments, and writing. To complete the latter assessment, the graduate assessment committee looked at university awards, student presentations at conferences, publications, acceptance in Ph.D. programs, and so on. The graduate assessment committee learned that Department MA students had earned four University Outstanding Grad Student Awards, presented five papers at ISA conferences and one paper at the International Conference on Social Science Research, and published one article in a refereed academic journal. Moreover, one student passed the highly competitive German Foreign Affairs exam after which he received placement in China. Since the 2005 and 2006 assessments, our graduate students have continued to present at major international conferences, to publish, to earn awards, to gain acceptance to Ph.D. programs, and to obtain prominent positions in the field of IR. Their achievements are chronicled elsewhere below. Since the Department is generally satisfied with quality of “above average” papers, it has, since 2003, maintained the structure of graduate curriculum and the content of its courses. However, the Department continues to look for ways to strengthen the overall quality of the Program including work by students of “average” and “below average” level. We now turn to a discussion of our recommendations for achieving this. Recommendations The foregoing narrative indicates that the Department has well defined learning outcomes and a detailed process for assessing the attainment of these outcomes. Given the intrinsic difficulties of obtaining work products (papers, exams, and presentations) for review—they are distributed to students or much be recycled due to lack of storage space—we recommend that the Department supplement its existing methodology in several ways. One is, as we note in Section 6.0 above, to require that all culminating experience papers (coupled with a CD containing a copy of the culminating experience in PDF format) be collected as part of a student’s processing of their completion of culminating experience form and that all such papers be stored in the relevant student’s file. Another is to develop standardized rubrics for evaluating student papers that closely mirror the learning outcomes that the Department has established and which make clear what features a culminating experience must manifest to merit passage. A final step is for the graduate assessment committee to more systematically examine graduate course syllabi to ensure students are getting a diversity of perspectives, sufficient writing opportunities, and so on.

of 70

7.2 Advising MA student advising entails inter alia course selection and program planning, the construction of a culminating experience committee, internship identification and application, career planning, and the selection of doctoral programs. The Department’s standard for high quality advising is to offer accessible, accurate, frequent, ongoing, and thorough guidance to its MA students throughout their tenure in the program. If the volume of emails the current graduate coordinator has handled (more than 450 from currently enrolled students alone since fall 2007) and graduate student survey conducted in AY 2003/04 are any indication, the Department is doing quite well in meeting its advising standards. The low number of returned culminating experience approval and graduation application forms is indicative, as well, of the Department’s high quality advising. Graduate student advising begins from an early stage. During the first week of classes in the fall semester, we have a program orientation for incoming students. Thereafter, advising takes place formally and informally through electronic, face-to-face contact, and other mechanisms. Our graduate coordinator has been leveraging the listserv he established to send out regular emails to our students with information about deadlines, forms, and useful links relating to university policies and procedures. Moreover, our graduate coordinators have provided advising to students when they approve their GAPs, culminating experience plans, and their applications for graduation. Beyond this, advising is available through faculty, particularly Professors Sanjoy Banerjee (who teaches the first course that every graduate student must take), Sophie Clavier (who teaches a graduate course with high enrollment and served as the previous graduate coordinator), and Andrei Tsygankov (who teaches a core course on foreign policy and is an ex-graduate coordinator). As well, the committee members who supervise student internship papers and theses historically have provided an additional advising resource to our students and should be an important advising resource to them. Finally, advising is provided on an ongoing basis through regular graduate coordinator office hours. While we have not afforded and do not intend to allocate a key role to MIR, it is our hope that MIR, under Department tutelage, can provide some general advising to our MA students. The Department’s graduate student population does present a challenge for effective advising. This is because many students work or have families and thus can only receive advising in the evening or at other non-traditional times. The Department has does a strong job serving the advising needs of such students. First, graduate coordinators often have scheduled “after hours” office hours specifically for our students. Second, graduate coordinators have responded frequently and thoroughly to student emails, literally 24/7. Third, graduate coordinators have conducted phone meetings with students or met with them off campus and after hours.

of 70

Recommendation: The Department’s view is that it currently offers high quality advising to its graduate students. Nevertheless, we can make it even stronger. In this vein, we recommend first and foremost that we upgrade our website. We need to create a separate tab or page, embedded within the overall Department web page, for our graduate program. Through this page, we need to make available more information, more accurate and current data, and more links to resources both within and outside the campus. In addition, we need to create a handbook for the graduate program that is available on the website and in print, but which does not duplicate excessively or unnecessarily print and electronic materials that Graduate Studies produces or that exist in the bulletin. Lastly, we recommend the Department consider moving to a system of mandatory advising for our graduate students (but only after the revamping of the website and development of a handbook). Mandatory advising should be feasible given the number of students in our program and the fact that we have a designated graduate coordinator every year. We also recommend that the Department designate one week every semester as “advising week.” This does not preclude advising throughout the semester, but puts every student on alert before registration starts for Fall and the Spring. 7.3 Writing Proficiency The Department has several tools it uses to gauge the post-admission development of graduate level, student writing proficiency. The most important are the evaluations of the instructors in whose courses our graduate students enroll. These instructors have the opportunity to judge the performance of students in generating academic and professional writing such as outlines, policy memos, literature critiques, legal briefs, and research papers. More specifically, they can assess if students are learning to frame policy issues or research questions, to properly organize their written products and the sections within these products, and to make and support an argument as well as rebut counterarguments. Instructors also determine if students are effectively presenting and synthesizing existing writings as well as following the basic principles of good writing. We further review the post-admission development of our graduate students’ writing through committee supervision of culminating experiences. The final way in which we formally assess student writing is through the previously described assessment of graduate student learning outcomes. Yet another technique, though episodic, is the reading by one or more of our faculty members of the papers that some of our students have presented at international conferences. The foregoing mechanisms mean that student writing is evaluated every semester, at least once and more likely several times given that many graduate courses incorporate multiple writing assignments. Neither is the review of internship papers and thesis a one-time process as committee chairs and committee members often examine multiple internship paper or thesis drafts before they approve the final product. The aforementioned graduate assessment process is designed to take place at least once every academic year. The Department has not developed any standard writing tests or rubrics that it uses as an integral part of the aforementioned evaluation of the development of post-admission graduate student writing proficiency. This matter is addressed further below.

of 70

Previous graduate student assessment committee reports indicate that the writing of our above average students can be quite impressive even where English is not the native language of the student. Along these lines, the publication of one of our student’s work in a peer reviewed journal as well as the frequent acceptance of our students’ conference paper proposals is indicative of the high quality that our top students can produce. More generally, our graduate assessment committee noted in its 2006 report that the Department is fulfilling its goals in terms of “writing complex ideas and arguments coherently” and “writing brief memos that advance a position within a sophisticated debate.” Recommendations As we note above, the written products of our above average students can be quite good and some of our top notch students in our program have produced papers of publishable quality. That said, there are still additional tools the Department should adopt to improve its assessment of writing proficiency. One is to improve, as repeated stated, its record keeping. A second is to create rubrics that the members of culminating experience committees must sign when they approve a culminating experience, such rubrics to be submitted along with the completion of culminating experience form to the graduate coordinator. A third suggestion is to encourage the graduate assessment committee, which may or may not be the same as the graduate committee, to examine the writing quality of a wider range of materials. Another possibility is to encourage the program’s best students to submit their works to student or other journals/print media as publication in such journals is a way to get external assessment on an ongoing basis of the quality of our students’ written products. A final, related proposal is to encourage even more students to submit papers to conferences, the rationale being the same as that just noted. 7.4 The Culminating Experience Our graduate program has two culminating experience options: the academic and the professional. Below, we expand on the brief description given above, identify the percentage of students selecting each, detail the general requirements of each emphasis, and discuss the standards that we use to ensure not only that the writing facet of the emphasis merits acceptance, but also to ensure the culminating experience was of sufficient caliber (relevant for the academic emphasis). Academic emphasis: The academic emphasis, which 32 percent of our students selected over the period between summer 2002 and summer 2007 (with the numbers declining over time), involves a thesis. The thesis must run a minimum of 100 double-spaced pages. Every thesis should have an introductory chapter, a chapter which situates the work’s contribution to a broader set of discussions within the field, a chapter that explains the methodology and the nature of data used, at least one rigorously researched chapter that defends the thesis, and a conclusion. In evaluating theses, the Department considers, among other factors, if there is a clearly identified problem, the thoroughness of the literature review, the appropriateness of the methodology used, the coherence and backing for the hypothesis, the writer’s attentiveness to counterarguments, and the quality of empirical work.

of 70

Professional emphasis: Aside from an internship paper (60-80 double spaced pages), those students following the professional emphasis (57 percent during the aforementioned period) must supply a letter from their internship supervisor which proves they worked a total of 150 hours and which describes the nature of their internship tasks as well as their contribution to it. Students also are supposed to maintain a daily log. The prototypical internship paper should have an introduction, a background on the organization for whom the student is working, a discussion of the issue that forms the mandate for the organization, an evaluation of the organization’s record in addressing the issue, and a recommendation. In the past, though, the Department has allowed flexibility in the structure of internship papers, subject to negotiation between students and their committee members. The standards for judging the quality of the archetypal internship paper are inter alia the quality of writing, the thoroughness of the literature review, and the insightfulness in the student’s marriage of theory and fact (e.g., using theory to shed light on his/her internship organization or using his/her internship organization experience to shed light on IR theory). To ensure comparability within the emphasis we attempt to clearly specify our standards to faculty and students and the importance of following them. Periodically, our Department has discussed the quality of the products yielded by the various culminating experiences. The collective wisdom with respect to theses is that they represent high quality final experiences. Some faculty, however, have raised concerns about quality of the professional emphasis culminating experience, both the internships that students have as well as internship papers that they produce. Other faculty have expressed issues with respect to the consistency of the guidance that is given about the nature of the culminating experiences and the standards that should be used to evaluated them, whether an internship paper or thesis. Recommendations To assess culminating experiences, it is necessary first to have culminating experience products to evaluate. Thus, we again support the recommendation of archiving culminating experiences in the student files that the Department already is obligated to maintain. To ensure this is done, we recommend making it a requirement that students submit one bound copy of their culminating experience and a CD containing their culminating experience as a PDF file for storage in their files. This can be done when students process their completion of culminating experience form and be made part of the checklist of items that the graduate coordinator reviews prior to signing the form. Beyond this, we reiterate the recommendation that the Department should develop rubrics that can be used to judge if culminating experience papers should be passed. Such rubrics will help to ensure consistency among culminating experiences. Aside from these steps, the Department will require its students to give a formal presentation of their culminating experience.

of 70

7.5 Overview of Program Quality Indicators There are many indicators of the quality of our program. Among these are the high level of interest in our program, the strength of our MA curriculum, the advising support we give to our students, our students’ achievements while in the program, and our students’ achievements outside the program. Also relevant are the findings of our graduate assessment committee, past external reviews, and the caliber of our faculty. This section will focus upon areas that do not receive extensive treatment in Sections 8 and 9 below. The quality of our MA program, coupled with other factors, allows us to attract individuals with diverse academic training and varied professional backgrounds such as the medical and legal field, the military, and K-12 teachers. It also allows us to attract individuals from different geographic areas around the world including South America, Western and Eastern Europe, East Asia, Southeast Asia, and South Asia. Other useful indicators of our program quality are the Department’s MA curriculum and the service that we render to students in it. The Department has a clearly defined and well developed set of requirements for its students to earn the MA degree. In addition, it has succeeded in offering courses (which fall within class size thresholds) on a regular basis and in sufficient quantity that allow students to build specialized expertise and to graduate in a timely manner. Aside from this, the Department has standardized procedures for its culminating experiences. Warranting recognition, too, is the Department’s faculty which hails from the four corners of the globe, from leading American universities and international doctoral programs, and which offers a variety of research and teaching interests, theoretical and methodological perspectives, and experiences and traditions. We not only have a full spectrum of academics, but also real world practitioners. The last 9 years, the Department has been fortunate to have Ambassador David Fischer who has worked for the U.S. Government for 30 years. He personally met and negotiated with world famous leaders including Mikhail Gorbachev, Nelson Mandela, and Margaret Thatcher and was deeply involved in the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks. In 2007, we hired Banafsheh Keynoush, a former Iranian scholar and political insider to the Government in Tehran. Dr. Keynoush has done translation and interpretation work for many Iranian leaders. Below, we provide more information about our faculty. With respect to serving students, the Department takes pride in and has been offering high quality advising as discussed previously. Briefly, this high quality advising involves multiple forms of advising at multiple times by multiple faculty members. As well, the Department regularly holds speaker’s forum or invites guest speakers to give talks on pressing international issues. Department faculty regularly speak at campus events that reach our graduate students. We have a good relationship with organizations such as the Commonwealth Club of California, World Affairs Council, and United Nations Association. Not surprisingly, then, we encourage our students to attend events organized by these entities which often involve specialists and figures of regional, national, and global stature.

of 70

In terms of other measures, earlier sections of this report as well as later ones document the strong presence of our MA students in professional conferences. Furthermore, the Department is proud to report that it consistently sends a number of students to Ph.D. or terminal programs. A sample list of our students in Ph.D. or post-doctoral programs includes Randall Cohn (George Mason), Nathaniel Cogley (Yale), Skyler Crummer (UC Davis, post-doc Harvard), and Lee Ann Fujji (George Washington University). Dr. Landon E. Hancock is on the faculty of the Center for Applied Conflict Management and Political Science Department at Kent State. Professor Amy Skonieczny, a newly hired member of our faculty, is a graduate of our MA program as well as the University of Minnesota. A substantial number of our graduates enter diplomatic or other government service. Conrad Hässler is Second Secretary in the German Ministry of Culture, posted in Beijing, China. Past graduates who have set an example include Saeb Erakat, who became Chief Negotiator for the Palestine Authority, and Javad Zarif who later became the Iranian Ambassador to the U.N. Nicolas Roncagliolo Higueras has been the Peruvian Consul in San Francisco and has held other posts in Peru’s Foreign Ministry. At least eight of our graduates are in the U.S. Foreign Service, including Valerie Davies, a political officer in Oman. Others are Cynthia Plath and Susanne Sullivan, who has served in Baghdad and Kosovo. Nine MIR graduates are in the intelligence community. Andrew Tennyson is an analyst on Central Asia at the CIA. Jonathan Morgenstein who was profiled in the New Yorker is now a senior program officer at the Carnegie Endowment for Peace, with responsibility for programming pertaining to Darfur, Baghdad and Kosovo. Bjorn Nuland works with Fafo Norway on welfare policy issues. Other graduates have taken positions in United Nations and other international agencies. For instance, Michael Rejbrand works with UNICEF in support of women and children coping with HIV/AIDS in Africa. Many graduates become administrators of NGOs that focus on international issues or the needs of U.S. immigrant communities. Mariam Hosseini is Donor Services Coordinator for the PARSA Community Foundation, a U.S.-based Iranian-America philanthropy that encourages civic engagement through nonprofit capacity building and voter registration. Rory Cox serves as California Program Director at Pacific Environment. Justine Miley works as a Program Officer at the Hispanic Scholarship Fund, which serves Latinos in the United States. Katherine Zavala is Coordinator of Programs at International Development Exchange, which raised funds and provides other support to grassroots initiatives in the developing world. Malia Everett is the Director of Reality Tours for Global Exchange. Many of our students have won University awards, including some of the most prestigious ones.

of 70

8.0 THE PROGRAM AND THE COMMUNITY

8.1 Professional Engagement of Students and Alumni The Department encourages its students to become involved in academic and other professional activities. Limited financial support for tuition, research, and attendance at professional conferences can be an obstacle, but an impressive number of our students succeed in producing, presenting, or publishing their research, including in venues and journals where master-level participation and publication is unusual. One common venue where our students professionally engage with the field of International Relations is at international conferences. Viz., at the 2007 ISA-West, the following students presented papers: 1) Timothy Sandoe, “Biopiracy as Neocolonialism: TRIPs and the Norms of Jus Cogens;” 2) Suzanne Levi-Sanchez, “Iran: On the Nuclear Question–Norm Adherence and the International System,” 3) Mireille Bachir, “‘Hijacking’ Gender-Islamic Female Terrorism: Pathological Expressions of Suppressed Feminisms” and “Lebanon: Everlasting Pawn of Israel and Hezbollah,” 4) John Du, “The Triumph of the People’s Republic of China: Adaptive Repression and the Maintenance of the Chinese Communist Party’s Absolute Dictatorship;” and 5) Amanda Moreno Shepard, “The Fault line of Revolution: Rent-seeking Norm Cascades & Their Limiting Effect on the Revolutions of Latin America.” Six of our students presented papers at the 2006 ISA-West while four presented papers at the 2005 ISA-West. At the 2006 ISA annual meeting, we had five students give presentations, an impressive fact given that presentation proposals pass through a peer review process. The students are: 1) Beate E. Antonich, “Shared Government Responsibility In Fighting Profit Fundamentalism;” 2) Brendan M. Kelly, “Storming the Reality Studio: Online Terror and Surveillance in the Public Infosphere;” 3) Christopher David Fiene, “The Poetics of US Foreign Policy: Cuba Reconsidered;” and 4) Thomas Gangale, “NATO’s Expansion Eastward.” One of our MA students (Conrad Hässler) even served as a discussant for the panel “Chinese Foreign Policy.” At the subsequent year’s ISA, Amanda Bradford (“The Affaire du Foulard: A New French Identity?”) and Prerna Lal (“The Complex of IR-The Faulty Epistemology of Dominant IR Discourse-Mapping Memories Beyond the Nation-State”) delivered papers. At the 2008 ISA, we will have five students give presentations. The students are: 1) Suzanne Levi-Sanchez, “Iran: On the Nuclear Question-Norm Adherence and the International System;” 2) Mireille B. Bachir, “‘Hijacking’ Gender-Islamic Female Terrorism: Pathological Expressions of Suppressed Feminisms” and “Lebanon: Everlasting Pawn of Israel and Hezbollah The July 2006 Invasion of Lebanon;” 3) Ted Everts, “Genocapital: Modifying and Commodifying Genus Homo Sapiens in a Capitalist World-Economy; 4) Amanda Moreno Shepard, “Historical Identity & Human Rights: A Lesson in Entanglement Diffusing the Mythical Transnational Advocacy Network: Increasing Acknowledgement of Domestically-Forged Human Rights Advocacy,” and 5) John Du, “The Triumph of the People’s Republic of China: Adaptive Repression and the Maintenance of the Chinese Communist Party’s Absolute Dictatorship.”

of 70

Students also are deeply engaged with the local community as interns. Our students have interned at Room to Read, an NGO which partners with local communities throughout the developing world to establish schools, libraries, and other educational infrastructure, the Center for International Relations in Virginia, the Global Citizens Center, and U.S. Department of State. One of our students recently finished an internship with Global Exchange. She specifically gathered background data and writing materials to prepare U.S. residents to be better-informed participants in Global Exchange-run international “reality tours.” In addition, we have students currently interning at the office of Congressman Tom Lantos and serving with Asylum Access in Ecuador. Aside from these ways in which students engage with the profession, many students work with faculty as research or teaching assistants. In the former pursuit, students broaden their empirical knowledge, research skills, writing abilities, critical thinking talents, and time management and organizational capabilities. In the latter pursuit, students enhance not only some of the aforementioned skills—e.g., by giving advice on research to undergraduate—but also increase their knowledge of the craft of IR teaching and the tools and techniques that academics use to instruct students in the fascinating topic of IR. The Department maintains both formal and informal contact with its alumni and integrates alumni into the program in a variety of ways. Informal contacts with alumni occur primarily between alumni and their former instructors, most typically between those Department faculty who served on their culminating experience committees. If students have gone into the teaching profession, our Department has further opportunities to interact with its alumni at professional conferences. On occasion, faculty report they have met alumni at venues such the aforementioned ones hosted by the Commonwealth Club or World Affairs Council. The Department also reaches out to its alumni through their classmates that remain in the program. Formally, the Department has used two devices in recent times to reach out to alumni. First, partly in response to the 5th cycle MOU and external review, it distributed an alumni survey in AY 2003/04. As previously noted, not many alumni responded to this survey. Second, it has publicized, albeit episodically, events and activities in campus publications that might be read by alumni. As for integrating alumni into the program, the Department taps its alumni as guest speakers in classes and workshops, as reference sources for students looking for internships and jobs, and has attempted to tap them for financial support for the Department. Recommendations The data indicate that the Department is doing a nice job professionally engaging its students in research, internships, collaborations with faculty, conference participation, and the like. Conference participations are particularly a strongpoint. The Department should reinvigorate the International Relations Journal and to give it extensive support since it is a potentially valuable option for students seeking to publish their work. The Department also should disseminate the International Relations Journal to a wide audience, either electronically (e.g., through web posting) or in print to increase the professional engagement of students and alumni.

of 70

We acknowledge that we can improve our efforts to maintain contact with alumni as well as to integrate alumni into our program. To achieve this, we have four recommendations. First, we should develop an alumni listserv in which the graduate coordinator enrolls graduating students using the email address that they have listed on their application for graduation form. This will allow us to maintain contact with alumni on an ongoing basis and to receive and distribute news from alumni. Second, we recommend that the graduate coordinator work closely with the College Relations Officer (currently Senem Ozer) of BSS in order to ensure the College’s outreach efforts serve the Department’s needs. Third, we recommend that the Department consider creating an annual newsletter to alumni that it can distribute to the alumni listserv. Fourth, we suggest that the Department look into creating an alumni community on MySpace or Facebook. We do not recommend the distribution of any alumni surveys or newsletters via the postal service. Such projects are time consuming, costly, and, based on past experience and communications with other departments, unproductive. 8.2 Civic Engagement Civic concerns and public issues such as security, conflict resolution, international justice and equity, environmental conflicts and sustainability, intercultural communication, trade, and economic development are prominent in the research agendas and teaching interests of Department faculty. Not surprisingly, then, our faculty are often called upon to share their expertise, directly or through the mass media, with the public, government officials and agency staff, private enterprises, and charitable and policy-focused non-profit organizations. As the following, partial account illustrates, most faculty are more than willing to engage. JoAnn Aviel is a leader of civic processes in support of the United Nations as member of Board of Directors of the UN Association (UNA) in San Francisco and as organizer of SFSU’s involvement in annual Model UN courses and events. In the US, she has given talks to the World Affairs Council of Northern California and the International Business Association as well as the UNA. Her overseas engagements have included talks to the Diplomatic Academy of Ecuador and the European College Teaching and Learning Conference in Santorini, Greece. Sanjoy Banerjee has given more than 20 television interviews in the past five years about Pakistan and South Asia issues to KGO-TV Channel 5, KCBS-TV, and KCBS Radio, and writes a column on international politics every two months for India Currents of San Jose, CA. Jean-Marc F. Blanchard is Associate Director of the SFSU CUSCPS, a Board member of the Association of Chinese Political Studies, and a member of the National Committee on US-China Relations. Dr. Blanchard has contributed to the Bay Area Economic Forum’s 2007 report “The Bay Area-China Connection.” He has appeared on San Francisco’s KPIX-TV Channel 7, KTSF-TV Channel 26, and KALW radio and has published numerous opinion editorials and letters in newspapers and on websites in the U.S., China, and Europe.

of 70

Sophie Clavier was interviewed by CBS news on the topic of military justice commissions. With our graduate student Suzanne Levi-Sanchez, she published an Op-Ed on US-Iran relations in the San Francisco Chronicle and an article in that paper’s Insight section on women’s rights in Iran. She has given presentations to the Commonwealth Club and numerous talks to the San Francisco Arts and Humanities Seminar, the Western division the American Society of International Law, the International Law Society, and the Marin County Chapter of the World Affairs Council. Ambassador David Fischer is called upon approximately 6-10 times a year by SFSU public relations staff and Bay area news media, usually KGO-TV Channel 5 and KPIX-TV Channel 7 television, to give interviews on subjects involving terrorism and intelligence matters. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Pacific Council on International Policy. Burcu Akan Ellis has served as an advisor to the U.S. Institute of Peace, the Social Science Research Council, the Model United Nations Club, and other organizations. Kathleen McAfee has been an advisor to or proposal reviewer for private foundations and international and community development organizations including the U.S. National Family Farm Coalition, the Indigenous Peoples Forum on Biodiversity, and the MacArthur Foundation. She has been consultant to international agencies such as the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute, the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization, and the NAFTA Commission for Environmental Cooperation. In 2007, Dr. McAfee gave presentations on the causes of world hunger and the international movement for fair trade at free, public events sponsored by ITVS Community Cinema and KQED public television. Mahmood Monshipouri has appeared on the Jim Lehrer News House segment on “Reformists Boycott Elections in Iran (February 20, 2004). He also participated in a session on Islam & Democracy, held at the United States Institute of Peace in August 2002. As a visiting fellow at Yale between 2003 and 2007, he regularly participated in Middle Eastern Studies forums held at Brown & Yale Universities. Andrei Tsygankov, an expert on Russia and post-Soviet international relations, has made around 35 publicly accessible contributions to non-academic news outlets and electronic media. Examples include several hour-long interviews with Voice of America, interviews with National Public Radio, Washington Profile and Russia Today television, and an interview with Brazil’s largest newspaper. Dr. Tsygankov has given more than 30 invited lectures since 2001 at universities and public affairs organizations such as the World Affairs Council, the Center of Citizen Initiatives, and the Commonwealth Club. He provides consulting services to the U.S. Department of State. Angelika Von Wahl, in addition to her extensive scholarly work on civic issues such as gender equality and restorative justice, has been an advisor to public institutions including the U.S. National Science Foundation and the National Science Center in Berlin, Germany.

of 70

Aguibou Yansane has been a speaker at programs sponsored by a variety of non-governmental organizations and networks in the S.F. Bay area and abroad including the Black Community Services Center, Food First Institute, the FESPACO International Film Festival in Oudgadougou, Burkina Fasso, the Government of Senegal, the Addis Ababa African Union, the African American Museum and Library in Oakland, the World Affairs Council, and the National Summit on Africa. IR Department faculty are frequent contributors to public lecture series sponsored by BSS. For example, the widely-attended Fall 2007 course on “China Rising” included two lectures by Dr. Jean-Marc F. Blanchard and lectures by Dr. Sanjoy Banerjee and Dr. Kathy McAfee. Service Learning The Department does not have service learning per se. However, many of our students contribute to the community through their internships, which are required for students in the professional emphasis. Earlier in this self-study we have described the professional emphasis and the associated internship culminating experience. Elsewhere, we also have identified and expounded upon a number of the community-oriented internships in which our students are engaged. Recommendations Service learning has been an integral component of the MA program because of the structure of the professional emphasis option. Even if we eliminate the professional emphasis as proposed above, we will not diminish the ability of our students to engage in service learning through internships. This is because we will retain an internship (IR 892) class option, with requirements for a rigorous paper and activity log, for students in our program. Later we might later reexamine the hours we expect students to devote to such a class (currently 150 hours over the course of a semester) to check if it is comparable to other programs as well as sufficient. 8.3 Equity and Social Justice According to the 2005-2010 Strategic Plan, the goal of equity and social justice means that the university and its units “facilitate understanding and appreciation of human diversity,” “develop the cultural and professional skills students and employees need to participate as informed, responsible, and active members of diverse communities at levels from local to global,” and “promote a sense of intragroup and intergroup understanding, pride, and community.” The Department meets this goal in various ways. For instance, it facilitates understanding and appreciation of human diversity through its curriculum. More specifically, our courses teach students about the historical origins and contemporary features of the current international system, the key actors in it (e.g., international organizations, multinational corporations, and NGOs), and the major processes. We also provide opportunities to our students to learn about the foreign policies of diverse countries, the nature of regional dynamics such as in the Middle East, non-Western ideologies, regional institutions such as the European Union, and global and regional politico-economic and environmental problems.

of 70

Furthermore, our MA students acquire over the course of the program “the cultural and professional skills students and employees need to participate as informed, responsible, and active members of diverse communities.” They learn to identify sources of information and how to gather data. They learn to frame and analyze research and policy issues. They further learn to engage in dialogue with their peers and to present information and recommendations to others. Finally, we promote a sense of intragroup and intergroup understanding, pride, and community through our Departmental activities and our student and faculty engagement with our profession as well as civic engagement. Aside from these ways in which we are responsive to the goals of equity and social justice, we have a diverse faculty in terms of gender, age, and ethnicity. Not only are our faculty demographics diverse, but their teaching and research interests are, too. We have expertise in developing regions and regions of conflict such as Africa, Eastern Europe, Russia, West Asia, Central Asia, South Asia, and Northeast Asia. The hiring of a new faculty member specializing in Latin America in 2008 will further strengthen the Department’s diversity. Also relevant is the diversity of our student population. The Department provides awareness about international relations to students from communities that have participated less than average in democratic foreign policy making and in non-governmental actions across borders. Yet another dimension of diversity is that the Department and its graduates make knowledge of the impact of external events more accessible among widely diverse communities, including immigrant, minority, and working class communities in the U.S. Many faculty in our faculty touch upon issues of equity and social justice in direct ways in their classes as shown by the syllabi of faculty that teach IPE related courses. For example, in her graduate Third World Modernization course, Professor Kathy McAfee touches upon social movements & NGOs and reactions to neoliberal globalization. Professor Aguibou Yansane’s African Development course tackles refugee, political, and economic problems in Africa and potential solutions. Generally, it can be said that the causes of and possible solutions to inequities infuse the syllabi of many graduate seminars in the Department. Beyond IPE-oriented courses, Professor Sophie Clavier’s Contemporary International Legal Issues course addresses issues such as state responsibility, human rights, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. The program does much to ensure opportunities for engagement in meaningful discourse and activities around issues relating to equity and social justice. Drawing upon their academic and professional contacts, Department faculty regularly bring guest speakers into their classrooms to talk about issues of equity and social justice. Moreover, faculty and students frequently have participated in the various public lecture series available around campus. To illustrate, Professor Burcu Ellis delivered a talk on “Human Trafficking: Profiting from Women in Disaster Zones” at the recent annual public lecture series in celebration of Women’s History Month and International Women’s Day. What is more, Professor Angelika von Wahl spoke on the equity and social justice issue of human right and democracy in China at the fall 2007 public lecture series on China Rising.

of 70

The Department has held colloquium where it has tackled equity and social justice issues. Moreover, in past years, MIR has organized “salons” where students gathered to discuss contemporary issues and problems. Lastly, as evidenced by earlier discussion of graduate student internships, the Department supports the participation of its professional emphasis students in internationally oriented internships with organizations whose mandate includes matters of equity and social justice. Recommendations: We have no further recommendations for this section. 8.4 Internationalization According to the 2005-2010 Strategic Plan “internationalization” refers to the providing “students, faculty, and staff with international experiences, perspectives, and competencies.” It goes without saying that the Department is excelling in realizing this goal. The preceding discussion of our curriculum provides evidence of this. Aside from this, a large percentage of our faculty go abroad to conduct their research, to consult, and to engage with their disciplinary communities. Many of our faculty have foreign heritage while some were born abroad. On a related note, we have admitted, over the years, many students with foreign heritage or who were born abroad. Beyond this, we have been very supportive of students who want to study abroad or pursue opportunities such as the Peace Corps. We also encourage students to build up their foreign language skills, to contemplate appropriate overseas opportunities whether for internships or jobs, and to do internship field work where relevant.

of 70

9.0 THE FACULTY EXPERIENCE 9.1 Faculty Statistics As of Fall 2007 the Department has thirteen tenure-track/tenured faculty members, with one participating in the Faculty Early Retirement Program (FERP), and four FTEF lecturers. Tables 9A-9C provide a profile of our faculty, including lecturers.

TABLE 9A-9B

FACULTY-FALL 2007 BY RANK, GENDER AND AGE]

Rank Number Gender Age Female Male <40 40-49 50-59 >=60 Professor 3 3 2 1 Associate Professor 3 1 2 3 Assistant Professor 5 4 1 2 2 1 FERP 1 1 1 Lecturer 4 2 2 1 3 Source: Department compilation

TABLE 9C

FACULTY-FALL 2007 BY RANK AND ETHNICITY

Rank Ethnicity African-American Asian Hispanic White non-Hispanic OtherProfessor 1 2 Associate Professor 2 1Assistant Professor 3 1FERP 1 Lecturer 4 Source: Department compilation

The tables above reveal that the Department is relatively balanced on a gender basis, an issue raised in the 5th cycle MOU and external review, and may become even more so if hiring trends continue. They also show that the Department also is relatively balanced on an age basis. The data further indicate that the Department is largely “white non-Hispanic” but it is difficult to conclude that this implies a lack of diversity given that many of our faculty members come from foreign countries. It should be noted that the tables were compiled from anonymized SFSU Personnel data. Thus, we could not independently verify the figures above, though we believe them largely correct.

of 70

TABLE 9D

FACULTY WORK LOAD MATRIX (FALL 2003-FALL 2007) Name Courses

Aviel Banerjee Blanchard Clavier Ellis Fischer Hanami McAfee Tsygankov Von Wahl

Yansane

IR 720 F03,04,05,06,07 IR 725 S07 F07 IR 728 F06 IR 730 S04,05 IR 732 IR 735 S07 IR 736 F07 IR 737 IR 738 F04,05,06,07 IR 739 S04,05,06,07;

F07

IR 741 S04 IR 742 S05,06,07 IR 744 S06 IR 745 IR 746 IR 747 F03,05,06 IR 748 F05 IR 749 F03,04,06 IR 750 S04,05,06,07 IR 758 IR 760 Leaves AY

2004/05 AY

2005/06-AY 2006/07

Fall 2004 and Spring 2007

Source: Department compilation from Table 5A. Note: Table 9D excludes Professors Mahmood Monshipouri and Amy Skonieczny who only joined the faculty in Fall 2007.

of 70

9.2 Research and Professional Engagement of the Faculty Department faculty are active researchers. In the period between 2002 and 2007, the faculty published eleven books. More incredibly, Department faculty produced over 70 refereed journal articles, book chapters, encyclopedia entries, review articles, and the like. If we included book reviews, mass media publications, technical and consultant reports, and translations, a count of publications might well exceed 100 during the specified five year span. With the influx of many newly hired professors, the Department expects even more research activity. Select faculty publications from the period 2002 to 2007 include: JoAnn Aviel et al., eds., Multilateral Diplomacy and the United Nations Today, 2nd ed. (Westview Press, 2005). JoAnn Aviel, “The Role of NGOs in El Salvador and Guatemala in Establishing the Rule of Law,” In Oliver P. Richmond and Henry F. Carey, eds., Subcontracting Peace: NGOs and Peacebuilding in A Dangerous World (Ashgate, 2005). Sanjoy Banerjee, “Actions, Practices, and Historical Structures: The Partition of India,” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, Vol. 2, No. 2 (2002). Jean-Marc F. Blanchard, “China, MNCs, and Globalization: Beijing and Microsoft Battle over the Opening of China’s Gates,” Asian Perspectives, Vol. 31, No. 3 (2007). Jean-Marc F. Blanchard (with Sujian Guo), eds., Harmonious World and China’s New Foreign Policy (Lexington Books, 2008) Sophie Clavier, “Contrasting Perspectives on Preemptive Strike: the United States, France, and the War on Terror,” Maine Law Review, Vol. 58, No. 2 (2006). Burcu Ellis, Shadow Genealogies: Memory and Identity among Urban Muslims in Macedonia (East European Monographs, Columbia University Press, 2003). Burcu Ellis, “Urban Identities: Southeast Europe,” In Suad Joseph, ed., Encyclopedia of Women and Islamic Cultures (Brill Academic Publishers, 2006). Andrew K. Hanami, ed., Perspectives on Structural Realism (Palgrave MacMillan, 2003). Kathy McAfee, “Patents, Power, and Intellectual Property in the New Global Governance Regimes,” In Rachel Schurman and Dennis Takahashi Kelso, eds., Engineering Trouble: Biotechnology and Its Discontents (University of California Press, 2003). Kathy McAfee, “Beyond Techno-Science: Transgenic Maize in the Fight Over Mexico’s Future,” Geoforum (2008). Mahmood Monshipouri et al., eds., Islam and Human Rights: Advocacy for Social Change in Local Contexts (Global Media Publications, 2006).

of 70

Mahmood Monshipouri et al., eds., Constructing Human Rights in the Age of Globalization (M.E. Sharpe, 2003). Andrei Tsygankov, Russia’s Foreign Policy: Change and Continuity in National Identity (Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2006). Andrei Tsygankov (with Pavel A. Tsygankov), Sociology of International Relations: Theory Formation in Russia and the West (Aspekt Press, 2006). Andrei Tsygankov, “Modern at Last? Variety of Weak States in the Post-Soviet World,” Communist and Post-Communist Studies Vol. 40, No. 4 (2007). Andrei Tsygankov, “Finding a Civilizational Idea: ‘West’, ‘Eurasia’ and ‘Euro-East’ in Russia’s Foreign Policy,” Geopolitics Vol. 12, No. 3 (2007). Angelika Von Wahl, “Reparations, Gender, and Ethnicity: Why, When and How Democratic Governments Get Involved,” In Manfred Berg and Bernd Schäfer, eds., Historical Justice in International Perspective (Cambridge University Press, 2007). Angelika Von Wahl, “EU Enlargement and Gender Equality in Employment,” In Silke Roth, ed., Gender Issues and Women’s Movements in an Expanding Union (Berghahn Books, 2007). 9.3 Supervision of Culminating Experiences The numbers of culminating experience (IR 892) and thesis (IR 898) papers supervised by faculty between summer 2002 and summer 2007 are shown in Table 9E below.

TABLE 9E - CULMINATING EXPERIENCE SUPERVISION

Name of Faculty

Number of IR 892 (internship papers)

IR 898 (thesis)

JoAnn Aviel 7 Sanjoy Banerjee 7 13 Jean-Marc F. Blanchard 6 Sophie Clavier 28 13 Burcu Ellis 1 David Fischer 15 4 Andrew Hanami 17 7 Kathleen McAfee 3 Amy Skonieczny* Mahmood Monshipouri* Andrew Tsygankov 5 4 Angelika Von Wahl 2 4 Aguibou Yansane 2 Source: Department compilation from IR 892 and 898 forms. *Joined faculty in Fall 2007

of 70

To date the Department has not given credit for the extensive time that faculty spend supervising culminating experience papers. Another issue is that, in recent years, the graduate coordinator has handled a disproportionate amount of culminating experience supervision work. While the graduate coordinator is not directly compensated for this additional workload, he/she has been able to make use of some of the time yielded from the course relief given in recognition of work done reviewing the conditions essays assigned to incoming graduate students (see Section 5.1). Recommendation Our first recommendation here is that faculty be given credit for supervising culminating experience projects. As for the overconcentration problem noted above, we recommend that the Department formally introduce all its faculty–in person, via the Research Catalog published by BSS, and/or through a handout given to the incoming class at orientation—to all students so the latter can be aware of the expertise of the former. We recommend that the Department strongly advise its graduate students to seek the mentorship or assistance of faculty members who can best read/supervise their culminating experience project. Concurrently, the Department should educate faculty of the research interests of students with whom they have not otherwise interacted. One suggestion would be for students to circulate the culminating experience proposal to all faculty via email. Our previous recommendation that faculty contact prospective enrollees into the program (see Section 2.2) should help to diversify the faculty with whom students seek to work. 9.4 Discipline-Specific Standards for Teaching Graduate Courses The Department employs a policy of using the best trained faculty for all graduate courses. It has always used tenured and tenure track faculty as instructors for its core graduate courses. Likewise, its graduate elective seminars are always taught by faculty who, while not necessarily tenured or tenure track, specialize professionally in the relevant topical area. With our additions to the Department, we expect that we will be able to use our newly hired faculty to staff a larger proportion of our elective courses. For instance, Professor Mahmood Monshipouri, who joined the Department in 2007, is likely to teach the graduate elective on human rights in the near future. Already, Professor Kathy McAfee is playing an important role in staffing some of our Department’s IPE related graduate electives. 9.5 Interdisciplinarity Our program is interdisciplinary in many respects. An obvious one is the training of our faculty who, while largely from Political Science, also have advanced degrees in applied economics, geography, and international public law. As well, many of our faculty have interdisciplinary research interests or use methods from other disciplines to advance their research objectives. Another interdisciplinary aspect of our program is the curriculum. We traditionally allow and, where appropriate, encourage our graduate students to take advantage of offerings in other departments such as Economics, History, and Sociology. Not surprisingly, many of our classes are interdisciplinary in the analytical methods used/taught as well as in the issues covered in the course.

of 70

Yet another way that our program is interdisciplinary is in the types of internships that we allow students to undertake to meet their culminating experience requirement. For instance, we allow students to engage in internships relating to international business or public administration. Finally, we are interdisciplinary in our civic engagement, with faculty contributing to or consulting for business, foundations, government, NGOs, and think tanks. The Department does not have any formal mechanisms in place to ensure that it maintains an interdisciplinary approach. However, the Department creates a supportive environment for interdisciplinary activities as manifested in its hiring activities, its ongoing communications with other departments and programs around campus, and its stance on campus initiatives to promote collaborative research among faculty in different departments, programs, and colleges. Furthermore, the Department actively participated in the development of area studies minors and plans to be involved in the operation of such minors, which are inherently interdisciplinary. Recommendations The Department would like to recommend an increased number of interdisciplinary activities, including team-teaching and collaborative research with our colleagues in other departments, such as Anthropology, Economics, Geography, History, Philosophy, Linguistics, International Business, and Sociology. One suggestion is to resume offering our graduate seminar on the topic of globalization (IR 730), but, this time, to involve faculty from, e.g., our Department, International Business, Political Science, and Sociology. Another suggestion is to place the emphasis on constructivist approach, which could bridge departments of IR and Linguistics on matters of identity, interests, and social justice. Still other suggestion is to offer a course on human rights, with particular emphasis on culture. This approach has the potential to lead us to a team-teaching opportunity with Anthropology and Sociology, among other departments. Team-teaching courses tend generally to lead to collaborative research and workshops on and off the campus. Such course offerings are certain to draw students from different disciplines, making it possible for students to combine majors or minors, especially for those students who aspire to diversify their knowledge base in an attempt to go to Ph.D. programs. To support team teaching, we, reiterating a point noted above, recommend that the College give credit to faculty for their culminating experience supervision activities in order to facilitate teach teaching. Aside from these suggestions, we also would like to encourage faculty ask other faculty to offer guest lectures. In addition, we recommend that the Department consider organizing an IR-driven public lecture series. 9.6 Overview of Faculty Quality Indicators The curricula vitae (CV) in Appendix A are an ideal source of information about the excellence of our faculty. They show training from premier institutions such as U.C. Berkeley, the University of Minnesota, the University of Pennsylvania, Stanford, and Yale. They also reveal tremendous research productivity as well as faculty publication in top notch journals such as The China Quarterly, Geopolitics, and International Studies Quarterly. Lastly, they demonstrate extensive service to the professional, to the academy, and to the community. Service to the community has been wide ranging in terms of organizations, impressive in terms of quantity and frequency, and stellar in terms of the quality of the service.

of 70

Available data do not make it possible to determine the monetary value of faculty grants and fellowships between 2002 and 2007 or to distinguish between fellowships, grants, and other types of financial awards. An analysis of faculty CVs shows, however, that our faculty won nearly 20 fellowships, grants, and awards during the aforementioned five year period. These awards include best paper awards, lifetime membership awards for organizational contributions, competitive sabbatical awards, and Fullbrights. They also include university Presidential, Vice President assigned time, and university summer stipend research awards. The Department has done quite well in such competitions despite the rising number of faculty competing for such awards. There are other relevant indicators of the faculty’s strong contribution to the program. Almost all the Department’s tenured and tenure track faculty have or currently teach graduate courses. This enables the Department to offer diverse courses to satiate the variegated nature of its students’ interests. Importantly, faculty participate in the graduate program with a frequency that allows students to readily obtain culminating experience supervision and to graduate in a timely manner. Table 2B above does not suggest any issues with respect to graduate program FTES or SFR. Indeed, statistics for graduate program FTES and SFR are quite positive. For the most part, faculty graduate course teaching loads have been evenly distributed. One faculty member, though, has borne a heavy burden of teaching the program’s introductory theory course as well as the Department’s methodology course for thesis students. Although most faculty get to teach one graduate course per academic year, there is room to expand graduate course teaching opportunities to a wider range of faculty. As for culminating experience supervision workloads, over the past three years or so, the workload fell heavily on the graduate coordinator as did program advising. The former raises some concerns which we discuss in Section 9.3. Regarding advising loads, we offer various suggestions throughout this report. With respect to the task of graduate admissions, the burden of such has generally been shared on an equal basis in recent years. Qualifications of the graduate coordinator: The current graduate coordinator is Prof. Jean-Marc F. Blanchard who assumed the position of graduate coordinator in fall 2007. He has five years of experience in the Department of IR and has taught three graduate courses since his arrival at SFSU in fall 2003. Prof. Blanchard also has contributed to graduate student programs such as department colloquia and has been on a number of IR 892 committees. Prof. Blanchard brings a distinguished academic record, having published two edited volumes, eleven peer reviewed journal articles, and ten book chapters. Students also can profit from Prof. Blanchard’s experience in government as well as the private sector. Prior to Prof. Blanchard assuming the role of graduate coordinator, the position was occupied by Prof. Sophie Clavier. Prof. Clavier served as graduate coordinator for three years, bringing seven years of experience as a Lecturer/Assistant Professor coupled with three years of experience garnered as a student in the MA program. These stints imbued Prof. Clavier not only with rich knowledge of our program and course offerings, but also the backgrounds, interests, and needs of our students.

of 70

There are no special professional development opportunities afforded by the Department’s graduate program. The Department itself primarily encourages its faculty to partake of information sessions, workshops, and campus resources such as Faculty Affairs and Professional Development (Faculty Affairs) and the Center for Teaching and Faculty Development (CTFD). Faculty Affairs has organized programs on university research awards, the retention, promotion, and tenure process, and so on. For its part, the CTFD has hosted programs on academic integrity, grading rubrics, fostering discussion in large classes, teaching techniques for students with learning disabilities, and using technology in the classroom. SFSU has only a limited number of programs to support faculty research. Most important for faculty in our Department are so-called “Award Programs in Support of Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity.” These encompass the Vice President’s Assigned Time Awards (which offers a one course relief), the Faculty Diversity Support Awards (which provides moneys), CSU Mini Grants (which provides moneys), and CSU Summer Stipends (which yields moneys equivalent to one paycheck). The mission of these award programs is to support the professional achievement and growth of tenure-track and tenured faculty at SF State by funding projects that significantly contribute to faculty members’ professional achievement and growth, including artistic and other creative works, the scholarship of teaching and learning, and research and scholarship related to civic and community engagement. Relevant too is the highly competitive and prestigious Presidential Award for Probationary faculty which supports one semester off for successful applicants. Department faculty have been able, on occasion, to get research travel support from the BSS Dean. The program does not currently have any procedures for recognizing and honoring faculty contributions.

of 70

10.0 RESOURCE SUPPORT FOR THE PROGRAM 10.1 Internal Support The Department’s office staff makes a vital contribution to its mission. The Department currently has a full-time office manager and a part-time work study. This allocation usually has been adequate when the Department’s has a “normal” workload. This limited staffing, however, has presented serious challenges, however, when the Department is hiring, at the beginning, middle, and end of semesters when the academic calendar and other factors result in increased faculty and student demand for services, and when the Department is processing applications for its graduate program. The existing level of staffing also makes it difficult for the Department to pursue new initiatives such as the revamping of its website, improved record keeping and document retention, or better alumni outreach. More problematic than the level of staffing, perhaps, has been instability in staffing. Since 2003, the Department has had 4 different office managers involving 3 different people. This leads to inconsistencies, downtime as the old office manager leaves his/her post and the new office manager assumes his/her post, and a loss of institutional memory and interpersonal comfort. Computer hardware and software are an issue for some faculty, though we have no survey data to underpin any refined observations on this subject. Nevertheless, we feel that BSS computer support is a bright spot in terms of internal support. BSS Computing staff are pleasant, readily accessible, and extremely knowledgeable. Aside from computing, limited office space, tight supply budgets, and little or no funds for graduate student assistants or graduate research assistants present some issues for faculty generally and the graduate program in particular. To elaborate, the small amount of moneys available for graduate student assistants and graduate research assistants hinders the program in running or sustaining new initiatives, makes it difficult for the Department to recruit or retain some students, and limits the ability of the Department to offer a better working environment to its faculty. Money for research and travel also seems to have been diminishing over the past few years. Recommendations Graduate coordinator related: It is our recommendation that the graduate coordinator be assigned, at minimum, a part time (5-7 hours/week) work study or paid graduate assistant whose sole function would be to support the graduate program. This graduate assistant’s duties would include helping the graduate coordinator with administrative tasks (filing, the scanning of document, and responses to prospective applicants), organizational duties such as the coordination of colloquia, and the oversight of MIR. We further recommend that the Department allocate a separate office space to the graduate coordinator. In addition, we advocate that faculty teaching summer classes who advise incoming graduate students or assist with application processing be given some compensation. Even though the Department makes admission decisions in spring, it was the experience of the former graduate coordinator that paperwork often was delayed or that last minute, often attractive, candidates needed to be processed.

of 70

Other: The Department further recommends that the College and SFSU make a greater effort to fund paid graduate student research and teaching assistantships. This would help us compete with other programs and help to attract and retain quality students. It would also be helpful for faculty in terms of professional growth, which in turn would help the department in terms of national visibility. 10.2 External Support The Department as a unit does not receive any external support. Recommendation We recommend that the Department do more to encourage its graduate students to apply for travel grants from ISA earlier in the Fall even before their proposals have been accepted. For the faculty, several avenues can be pursued. Faculty can apply for the APSA Small Research Grant Program, which supports research in all fields of political science at non-Ph.D. granting departments. These grants are designed to help further the careers of scholars and teachers. Individual grants do not exceed $2,500 and are not renewable. Funds may be used for such activities as: travel to archives; travel to conduct interviews; administration and coding of instruments; research assistance; and purchase of data-sets. Another option is to apply for the Graduate Research Fellowships (GRF) of the National Science Foundation Funding. In some grants, one could include in the overall budget request both overhead and student assistant expenses. These grants are super-competitive. The National Endowment for Humanities also offers grants, known as Challenge Grants, for the purposes of research and developing innovative courses. These grants are highly competitive as well. Challenge grants most commonly help support education, public programming, and scholarly research. These grants are also well suited for the purposes of staff support for research and development. Yet another other channel is Social Science Research Council (SSRC) that offers fellowship for both institutions and professors. SSRC fellowship and grant programs provide support and professional recognition to innovative knowledge production and of building research capacity in critical social science fields, and especially to younger researchers whose work and ideas will have significant impact on society and scholarship. A final avenue of significance is for faculty to pursue Fullbright awards.

of 70

SUMMARY The Department has dedicated a significant amount of resources to the preparation of this report. The Department has taken seriously the opportunity to consider its strengths and weaknesses, its progress in addressing recommendations that arose from the 5th cycle review, and its outstanding resource needs. We have appreciated the opportunity to discuss the merits of program features, the program’s success in serving its students, and the relationship between the Department’s graduate and undergraduate programs. This report reveals a vibrant program which draws considerable interest, reaches out to diverse communities, serves the intellectual needs of its students through diverse course offerings, creates opportunities for students to graduate in a timely manner, and aids students in developing the skills they need to pursue higher level study or employment in the field. This report further shows a program which helps its students connect with the profession, highlights issues of equity and social justice, and is extensively internationalized. Beyond this, the report evidences a faculty that are actively engaged in the program, have impressive research and professional achievements, and collaborate well around and outside the campus. Stated simply, it is clear that the program is viable, sustainable, and valuable. Nonetheless, the Department recognizes that there are some areas for improvement and hence it has given its full attention to developing numerous recommendations which will make the program even stronger, without requiring substantial new financial resources. Since these recommendations are detailed in the beginning of and throughout this report, we highlight some of our most important recommendations (albeit in general terms) below. First, we recommend the elimination of our two emphases, the restructuring of our MA program curriculum, and some thematic changes in our research methods (IR 750) course (see Section 2.2). Second, we recommend, in some cases, that the Department increase certain admissions standards and, in others, that it look into increasing them (see Section 3.1). Third, we recommend that the Department offer more graduate courses, design courses that appeal to a wider number of graduate students, and vigorously enforce the restriction that seminars are limited to 15 students (see Section 4.5). Fourth, we recommend that the Department improve record keeping, requiring all students to submit a bound copy of their culminating experience (as well as a CD with the culminating experience in PDF format) for storage in their Department files (various sections). Fifth, we recommend that the Department design rubrics that can be used to evaluate culminating experiences and class papers (various sections). Sixth, we recommend that the Department upgrade its website (various sections). Seventh, we recommend that the Department undertake various initiatives to improve ties with its alumni (see Section 8.1). Eighth, we recommend that faculty be given credit for supervising culminating experience projects. Ninth, we recommend an increased number of interdisciplinary activities (see Section 9.5). Tenth, we recommend that the graduate coordinator be assigned a part time work study or paid graduate assistant (see Section 10.1).

san francisco state university · san francisco state university academic program review self-study...

Documents