Hoffman Politics
International Studies Perspectives (2003) 4, 15–33.
PEDAGOGY IN INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
Making and Remaking the World for IR 101: A Resource for Teaching Social Constructivism in Introductory Classes
ALICE BA AND MATTHEW J. HOFFMANN University of Delaware
Social constructivism is now the main theoretical challenger to established perspectives within the discipline of international relations. Unfortunately, the contributions and standing of constructivist approaches in the discipline are not mirrored in undergraduate textbooks for introductory international relations courses. In this article, we present a lecture template containing a broad synthesis of the main tenets of constructivist thought and discuss how constructivism approaches patterns and phenomena of world politics. The lecture is framed by comparing constructivism with the generally statist treatment that topics receive in mainstream international relations as exemplified by neorealism and neoliberalism. This article is designed to provide accessible supporting material for teaching social constructivism to introductory international relations classes. Keywords: social constructivism, pedagogy
Social constructivism is now the main theoretical challenger to established perspectives within the discipline of international relations. This approach to world politics rose to prominence as an alternative to the dominant paradigms by challenging their positions on the nature of the international system, the nature of actors within it, and indeed the nature of social/political interaction in general. The social constructivist focus on the role of ideas, identities, and norms offers a way to explain change in world politics, a noted weakness of mainstream approaches. The importance of social constructivism in and for the discipline of international relations is, by now, well established. Unfortunately, the contributions and standing of social constructivist approaches in the discipline are not mirrored in
PEDAGOGY IN INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
Making and Remaking the World for IR 101: A Resource for Teaching Social Constructivism in Introductory Classes
ALICE BA AND MATTHEW J. HOFFMANN University of Delaware
Social constructivism is now the main theoretical challenger to established perspectives within the discipline of international relations. Unfortunately, the contributions and standing of constructivist approaches in the discipline are not mirrored in undergraduate textbooks for introductory international relations courses. In this article, we present a lecture template containing a broad synthesis of the main tenets of constructivist thought and discuss how constructivism approaches patterns and phenomena of world politics. The lecture is framed by comparing constructivism with the generally statist treatment that topics receive in mainstream international relations as exemplified by neorealism and neoliberalism. This article is designed to provide accessible supporting material for teaching social constructivism to introductory international relations classes. Keywords: social constructivism, pedagogy
Social constructivism is now the main theoretical challenger to established perspectives within the discipline of international relations. This approach to world politics rose to prominence as an alternative to the dominant paradigms by challenging their positions on the nature of the international system, the nature of actors within it, and indeed the nature of social/political interaction in general. The social constructivist focus on the role of ideas, identities, and norms offers a way to explain change in world politics, a noted weakness of mainstream approaches. The importance of social constructivism in and for the discipline of international relations is, by now, well established. Unfortunately, the contributions and standing of social constructivist approaches in the discipline are not mirrored in
References: ADLER, E. (1997a) ‘‘Imagined (Security) Communities: Cognitive Regions in International Relations.’’ Millennium: Journal of International Studies 26(2):249–277. ADLER, E. (1997b) ‘‘Seizing the Middle Ground: Constructivism in World Politics.’’ European Journal of International Relations 3:319–363. BARKIN, S. J., AND B. CRONIN (1994) ‘‘The State and the Nation: Changing Norms and the Rules of Sovereignty in International Relations.’’ International Organization 48(1):107–130. CARR, E. H. (1964) The Twenty Years’ Crisis, 1919–1939, 2nd ed. New York: Harper and Row. CHECKEL, J. (1998) ‘‘The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory.’’ World Politics 50(2):324–348. DOYLE, M. (1997) Ways of War and Peace: Realism, Liberalism, and Socialism. New York: W.W. Norton. FIERKE, K., AND K. E. JORGENSEN (EDS.) (2001) Constructing International Relations: The Next Generation. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. FINNEMORE, M. (1996a) ‘‘Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention.’’ In The Culture of National Security. edited by P. Katzenstein, pp. 153–185. New York: Columbia University Press. FINNEMORE, M. (1996b) National Interests in International Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. GIDDENS, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. HUNTINGTON, S. (1993) ‘‘The Clash of Civilizations?’’ Foreign Affairs 72(3):22–49. JACKSON, R. (1990) Quasi-States: Sovereignty, International Relations and the Third World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ALICE BA AND MATTHEW J. HOFFMANN 33 JOHNSTON, I. (2001) ‘‘Treating International Institutions as Social Environments.’’ International Studies 45(4):487–515. KANT, I. (1972) Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Essay. New York: Garland. KATZENSTEIN, P. (1996) Introduction to The Culture of National Security, edited by P. Katzenstein, pp. 1–32. New York: Columbia University Press. KEOHANE, R. (1984) After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. KLOTZ, A. (1995) ‘‘Norms Reconstituting Interests: Global Racial Equality and U.S. Sanctions Against South Africa.’’ International Organization 49(3):451–478. KRASNER, S. (1988) ‘‘Sovereignty: An Institutional Perspective.’’ Comparative Political Studies 21:66–94. KRATOCHWIL, F. (1989) Rules, Norms, and Decisions: On the Conditions of Practical and Legal Reasoning in International Relations and Domestic Affairs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. LEBOW, R. N. (1994) ‘‘The Long Peace, the End of the Cold War, and the Failure of Realism.’’ International Organization 48(2):249–277. LIPSHUTZ, R. (2001) ‘‘Because People Matter: Studying Global Political Economy.’’ International Studies Perspectives 2(4):321–339. MASSEY, D., AND N. DENTON (1993) American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. MEARSHEIMER, J. (1990) ‘‘Back to the Future: Instability in Europe After the Cold War.’’ International Security 15:5–56. MORAVCSIK, A. (1998) The Choice for Europe: Social Purpose and State Power from Messina to Maastricht. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. MORGENTHAU, H. (1962) Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace, 3rd ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. ONUF, N. (1998) ‘‘Constructivism: A User’s Manual.’’ In International Relations in a Constructed World, edited by V. Kubalkova, L. Onuf, and P. Kowert, pp. 58–78. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. POLLACK, M. (2001) ‘‘International Relations Theory and European Integration.’’ Journal of Common Market Studies 39(2):221–244. PRICE, R. (1995) ‘‘A Genealogy of the Chemical Weapons Taboo.’’ International Organization 49(1): 73–103. PRICE, R. (1997) The Chemical Weapons Taboo. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. RISSE, T., D. ENGELMANN-MARTIN, H. KNOPF, AND K. ROSCHER (1999) ‘‘To Euro or Not to Euro? The EMU and Identity Politics in the European Union.’’ European Journal of International Relations 5(2):147–187. RUGGIE, J. (1998) Constructing the World Polity: Essays on International Institutionalization. London: Routledge. SYMPOSIUM ON THE EUROPEAN UNION (1999) Journal of European Public Policy 6(4). Thucydides (1975) The Peloponnesian War. Suffolk, England: Penguin Books. WALT, S. (1997) ‘‘The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order.’’ Foreign Policy, no. 106:177–189. WALTZ, K. (1979) Theory of International Politics. New York: McGraw-Hill. WEBER, M. (1964) The Theory of Social and Economic Organization. New York: Free Press. WENDT, A. (1987) ‘‘The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory.’’ International Organization 41(3):335–370. WENDT, A. (1992) ‘‘Anarchy Is What States Make of It: The Social Construction of Power Politics.’’ International Organization 46(2):391–425. WENDT, A. (1999) Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. YEE, A. (1996) ‘‘The Causal Effect of Ideas on Policies.’’ International Organization 50(1):69–108.