The Political Economy of Modern Spain: Policy-Making in an Authoritarian System. By Charles W. Anderson. (Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press, 1970. Pp. 282. $12.50.)

1971 ◽  
Vol 65 (4) ◽  
pp. 1196-1197
Author(s):  
Joan C. Ullman
Keyword(s):  
Political Economy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
The Political ◽  
University Of Wisconsin ◽  
The University

Using controversy as a teaching tool

2017 ◽  
Vol 99 (4) ◽  
pp. 15-20
Author(s):  
Joan Richardson
Keyword(s):  
The Political ◽  
Teaching Tool ◽  
School Of Education ◽  
University Of Wisconsin ◽  
The University

In a time of hyperpolarization and hyper partisanship, preparing students to deliberate about their differences becomes even more important. In this interview, Diana Hess, dean of the School of Education at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and co-author of The Political Classroom, describes the challenge of ensuring that students have access to multiple and competing viewpoints about issues of public importance. In her research with co-author Paula McAvoy, Hess said she learned that students value hearing their teachers’ viewpoints as long as teachers aren’t pressing those views on students but that hearing a teacher’s viewpoint didn’t often change a student’s own opinion.

IR, the Critic, and the World: From Reifying the Discipline to Decolonising the University

2020 ◽  
pp. 030582982093706
Author(s):  
Isaac Kamola
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Political Economy ◽  
Critical Theory ◽  
The Political ◽  
Scholarly Work ◽  
Disciplinary Knowledge ◽  
The World ◽  
The University

Why does IR scholarship seem so resistant to travel into other disciplinary spaces? To answer this question, I look at the tendency for scholars within our discipline to talk to the discipline, about the discipline, and for the discipline. We obsess over ‘IR’ and, in doing so, reify IR as a thing. I turn towards Edward Said’s arguments about the worldliness of texts, and how reification shapes how ideas travel. I then provide two illustrations of how scholars have reified IR as a thing: Robert Cox’s approach to critical theory and Amitav Acharya’s call for a ‘Global IR’. In both cases, contrary to expectation, the authors reify IR as a thing, portraying the discipline as distinct from the world. IR is treated as something with agency, ignoring how disciplinary knowledge is produced within worldly institutions. I conclude by looking at three strategies for studying worldly relations in ways that refuse to reify the discipline: showing disloyalty to the discipline, engaging the political economy of higher education, and seeking to decolonise the university. Rather than reifying IR, these strategies help us to engage our scholarly work in a way that prioritises worldly critical engagements within our disciplinary community, and the world.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document