Teaching International Relations Program

Dear Jessica,

Thank you for participating in TIRP outreach! This folder is for your four session reports. This is a public forum and we encourage your professors and teachers to review your journal entries for feedback. Make sure your report of classroom activity is appropriate for public viewing.

Remember:
1. Each entry must be submitted within a week or before the next session, whichever comes first.
2. Entries need to be at least 500 words. It is your responsibility to save a copy of your report.
3. Your reports should focus on the content of the TIRP session. Spend no more than one paragraph discussing logistics. Include the key IR concepts and specific student responses.
4. Select "Post Reply" not "New Topic" when submitting each entry. This will ensure that all your
reports are posted in a way that will be easy for CALIS staff, professors and teachers to read.


A CALIS staff member will review your entry each week and leave a posted message approving it toward your extra credit. Thank you for your participation in TIRP!
~~~~~
Report 1 - NOT SUBMITTED as of 10-23-09 - Kate

Report 1 - LATE/CONTENT APPROVED - 10-28-09 - Kate
Nice first report.

Report 2 - APPROVED - 10-30-09 - Kate
You nailed it - technology is unreliable. That stinks but I'm glad the lesson went well.

Report 3 - NOT SUBMITTED as of 11-6-09
Please submit your report as soon as possible.

Report 3 - LATE/CONTENT APPROVED - 11-11-09 - Kate

Report 4 - NOT SUBMITTED as of 11-13-09 - Kate
Hey Jessica! Please submit your report as soon as possible. Thank you.

Report 4 - LATE/CONTENT APPROVED - 11-16-09

Session 1:
In the first session we explored the question, “What types of virtues and ethical behavior are necessary for a safe and thriving community?” We listened to the NPR case “A Victim Treats His Mugger Right” using the media system available in the classroom. The students were able to look at the photo as well as listen to the voice of Julio Diaz, the subject in the NPR case. We chose a few questions from the guide and talked about them in small groups with the students. When asked, “Who is responsible for helping this young teenager?” students’ replies varied. Some students said it should be his family, some said the government; others said friends or institutions like churches or community centers. We also asked the students to write some of their answers in their notebooks. Next we related it to Kidder’s six pillars. We also did this in small groups. There were a few students that were quite intrigued to find parallels between the NPR case and Kidder’s six pillars. One student questioned the fairness of what Julio Diaz did. The student did not feel it was “fair” for Diaz to offer his coat and a free meal to a man who had just stolen from him. It was interesting to hear the other students in the group describe how they saw it as a way for Julio to change the teenager’s behavior. They saw what Julio was doing as setting an example for others that will hopefully change the mugger’s mind about stealing again. The students tend to be more talkative and are able to discuss the material in depth when in small groups. We then briefly introduced the four worlds of the international system to the students. We went through a couple of the circumstances in which the students were asked to identify which world should be responsible. The four worlds were a difficult concept for the students to grasp. We will return to review the four worlds of the international system in the third and fourth lessons. Next, still in small groups, using the responsibility continuum, we asked them who they think is responsible for insuring human rights within the international system. They shared with us that they are studying specific countries in small groups right now in their International Business class. We talked to them about looking up the human rights situation in the country they are studying. What kinds of rights are given to each person in the country? Is there a genocide happening? Does everyone get healthcare and social security from the government? How does the government in that country define human rights? We were able to have a short discussion on this and then ran out of time. As they were leaving we asked them to think about where their personal code of ethics, morals and values came from. Hopefully they thought about that throughout the day. The students responded very well to the NPR media. They seem to engage with something they can look at and hear rather than simply read. Leticia is very helpful in ensuring that they all have their notebooks ready and are attentive during our lessons. Leticia is excited to incorporate the subjects that we bring to the students attention into their daily course work. It’s encouraging to be working with such an enthusiastic teacher.

Session Two:
For our second session, we planned to use PowerPoint as we had in our last session. It worked quite well to keep all of the groups on the same page as well as relate to students that are living in a highly technologically savvy world. Unfortunately, the PowerPoint presentation that we had prepared could not be used because the District blocks Gmail on the school computers. Bummer! :/ Technology is so unreliable! So we improvised and were still able to display some of the text and images that had been on the PowerPoint.

After introducing this session as “The Ethics of Human Rights and Government Involvement,” we asked them the question, “How is the role of government a balancing act? What determines the balance?” A couple of the students had something to say right away, but most of them, as we had anticipated, needed some time to learn and discuss the topic in these terms. We used the UK Surveillance Laws NPR case. It was quite effective to have them listen to the case last week, so we decided to do it the same way this week. Using the classroom media set up, we displayed an image of surveillance cameras in the UK while they listened to the case. Some students began to comment during the recording because they were so shocked at some of the surveillance laws in the UK. Most of Leticia’s students are interested in international affairs, since they are in an International Business class; therefore it is inspiring to talk through some of these issues with them. They are usually intrigued by the topics we bring up. After listening to the UK Surveillance Laws case, we introduced Kidder’s 3 Principles to them and discussed the 3 principles generally for a few minutes. We had some students read off the table and then discussed the definitions of the principles within our small groups. Then we asked them to apply the principles to the UK Surveillance laws case. Next, we brought in China’s One Child Policy. We discussed what they already knew about China’s One Child Policy and then discussed the facts behind it. We read a bit of the case from the PowerPoint to clarify some of the issues they did not understand. Then, we talked about the correlation between the UK Surveillance Laws case and the China’s One Child Policy case. Still in small groups, we asked them why were these similar and why these were different? We discussed what would happen if the Surveillance Laws or the One Child Policy were proposed in America. We also discussed what each of those situations would mean to their personal lives. We asked how they would respond. Initially students said they would revolt or simply have as many children as they liked without bothering with government policy. After discussing the reasoning behind such implementations, they began to see why the government chose to do such things. When asked again, the students responded that if they believed in the end result or if they felt respected in the situation they might give it a chance. We then moved to bigger questions like, “What would you do if you were in charge of the ethics of government? And how do you feel as a citizen of the US?” As we ran out of time again we asked them to think about one last question, “What happens when government is not concerned with balancing and is not responsive and accountable?”

Session 3:
For session 3, we brought the Powerpoint on a USB drive. We will conquer technology!

Session 3 was devoted to exploring the concept of International Law with the students. We introduced the topic by asking the students if they think the laws we live by here in the US could be made into law in all other countries. After some prompting, the students had a good discussion about what would and would not work if that were to happen. This was a good segway into the cultural relativism segment we would get to later. They seemed to all have the automatic inclination that all countries could live by the same laws as the US. One student in my group brought up religion as one of the reason why not all countries could live by the laws of the US. It was interesting to hear the students debate this topic.

We started with the Declaration of Human Rights case. We returned to the concepts that have been recurring throughout the sessions. What is the definition of a human right? What is the official definition by the US, the UN, etc. We went through the list attached to the Declaration of Human Rights lesson plan and read them aloud, discussing each one as we went. Some were commonsensical to the students and others seemed bizzare. We tried to come up with a real life example of each right as we went through the list.

We asked a representative from each group to share the three most controversial or most interesting human rights with the class. After a short class discussion, we moved on to the Cultural Relativism lesson.

We started by reviewing the vocabulary terms. That is always benficial. It took them a while to get their heads wrapped around “cultural relativism” and “human rights.” We went through most of the questions on the cultural relativism lesson. The three questions: “Is there such thing as a universal human right? Are some rights cultural rather than universal? Is the concept of a Universal Declaration of Human Rights a good thing or a bad thing?” Kept the discussion going for quite a while. Students realized how complicated this International System is. It was fun to watch them grapple with it and then come to the conclusion that they in fact could not solve it. We then moved on to the cases and tried to find the best choice out of a lot of not preferable choices.

After going through about 3 of the cases we ran out of time. Some groups got through more than others, depending on group participation. We left the students with the question of what they would include in a declaration of univseral human rights if they were responsible for creating such a document. It was interesting to see what they came up with the next week. These students are quite involved since they are in fact already interested in the subject. Many of them understood what some of the cases were replicating from US history. It was great to see them so involved in the discussion of what international law and human rights.

Session 4 :

Wow, we've already finished our last session. It’s gone by so quickly.

We used the LAT: Oil and Power in Latin America for our last session. We started by reading the case together as a class. We projected it on the screen from the computer and had students volunteer to read. Of course, not many student s like to read for the class, but we found that to be more effective than either reading it to them or having them read it to themselves. As they read, we pointed out certain sections or vocabulary that we could talk about later. After we finished reading the case, we allowed them to have the donuts that we had brought in for them. They enjoyed that and were very polite and thankful. They’ve been a really sweet, respectful group. I think that reflects on Leticia; she was wonderful to work with.

After everyone had a chance to get a donut, we split into our usual groups. With past TIRP classes, my group has switched around the small groups, meaning each TIRPer was with a different small group each time. This time, we kept the same group throughout the sessions. It was nice to do it that way. We were able to get to know the student’s names and a bit about them. If we finished ahead of other groups we were able to talk to them about college or simply how their week had gone. Developing that personal relationship proved to be valuable when evaluating how comfortable they were in discussion.

In my small group, I started by asking them to summarize exactly what happened in the case to ensure that they were able to comprehend what we had read. As we reviewed it, they were surprised to find that it happened so recently. They assumed that there would be laws against such things. This was a great place to start the discussion, but first I asked them to review the case on the screen and ask me questions about any of the vocabulary they were struggling to understand. Of course, they asked about the two phrases or terms that were on our guide: “bearding business lions” and “Chernobyl.” I explained each to them. One of the boys in my group vaguely knew what Chernobyl was and explained to everyone else what he knew of it.They thought the phrase “bearding business lions” was sort of strange but the concept was admirable. To come up against a company that is so powerful, as simply one man, they said, is quite noble. We discussed how he must have a great deal of trust in the US legal system to even feel comfortable traveling all the way here to challenge a very well-known, powerful US company. We discussed why he may have chosen to bring it to the US court rather than to the Peruvian court.

Next, we discussed the case in the context of the four worlds. It was easy for them to identify the actors in the economic and political world, but they struggled a bit with the social and cultural work. I had to prompt them quite a bit before they got those, especially the social world. Then I asked them to draw the arrows as links and explain to me why they were linked. It was great to see how they really had a bit of a grasp on the four worlds and how they work together. Referring back to the four worlds in almost every lesson proved to work well in their comprehension of the concept.

Overall, they were a wonderful class. It’s great to work with kids that are already studying international concepts. Leticia was an outstanding teacher to work with, I hope to work with her again through TIRP.