I do wish there was a more explicit organizing principle or thread throughout the book that you often find in introductory textbooks.Įach chapter can stand alone. The author avoids jargon and presents the ideas in a way that I think undergraduates would find compelling and accessible. I appreciate the readability of the book.
I think the aspects that are current could easily be updated without a complete overhaul of the book. The treatment of the various topics integrates both historical and contemporary cases in a way that makes it relevant without too tied to the publication date. I believe the book is very relevant and up-to-date but not in a way that would make it obsolete. I especially appreciate the efforts to highlight ways the discipline of IR is traditionally taught from a Western perspective, why that is problematic, and to point out differing perspectives. I also think it does a good job being unbiased. I think as an overview of the discipline the book would work well, but would likely need supplemental material - especially with respect to interstate war and international political economy - to fully flesh out an Intro to IR course. However, compared to other introduction to International Relations textbooks, the treatment of conflict and explanations of war is not as comprehensive as I would need for an Introduction to IR course. technology, food) and the short chapters mean the students could quickly gain insights into those topics. There are many topics that I don't typically cover in an Intro to IR course but that I could see being interesting to students (e.g. The book covers a very wide and comprehensive set of topics in a concise way. Reviewed by Michelle Allendoerfer, Assistant Professor, The George Washington University on 12/17/20 Experienced instructors should be able to provide additional and supplementary readings (i.e., academic journal articles, relevant websites, etc.) via institutions' own library database that are free to students. Of course, it's not a perfect IR textbook, but there's no "perfect" textbook, either. It can be easily adopted as an Intro IR textbook in any English-speaking college/university in the world. I think it's pretty much well written and organized. Still, some materials (e.g., religion, colonialism, etc.) could be better served if instructors provide/explain fundamental values of DEI in all human communities/societies as they cover culture issues in IR.
I don't think it has culturally offensive parts. It's simply natural and not an issue at all. Some authors are from the UK and they use British English, not American English. Some chapters have too many subsections, but I found undergraduate students usually prefer short paragraphs with single terms/concepts to longer paragraphs with multiple terms/concepts. I think each chapter is very well organized. It's great to have two main parts (i.e., the basics and global issues, respectively), and 18 chapters can be easily covered in a semester by instructors' own class schedules. Actually, students would even appreciate the fact that IR scholars may have distinctive views/perspectives on historical/current events in IR. Still, I believe it's highly consistent, and any small discrepancy across authors would not generate any confusion to students.
It's an edited textbook written by multiple authors, and not necessarily perfectly consistent in depicting/describing historical events or explaining theories. Possibly, a glossary can be provided at the end of book so that students can refer to definitions of main terms easily. Mostly yes, materials are clearly written. In an intro IR class, instructors may assign readings from Foreign Affairs or Foreign Policy to cover the most recent events in IR. Highly relevant, but, of course, the most recent IR events (e.g., the evolution of US foreign policy during the Trump and the Biden Administrations, etc.) are not covered. Yes, they provide accurate information and I could not find misinformation. Possibly, below stuffs can be added: democratic peace theory, capitalist peace theory, domestic audience costs, power transition theory, etc. Reviewed by Hakseon Lee, Professor, James Madison University on 11/26/21 Journalism, Media Studies & Communications.
0 kommentar(er)
