Tag: academic conferences (page 1 of 3)

ISA’s Sapphire Series – Is Blue the New White?

*This is a guest post by Cynthia Weber, Professor of International Relations at the University of Sussex

As the International Studies Association gears up for its 2015 annual convention in New Orleans, USA, an email announcing its Sapphire Series of panels was sent to ISA members. The email reads: ‘Introducing ISA’s new initiative THE SAPPHIRE SERIES. Covering key issues in the field and in international affairs, these talks will feature scholars discussing current world events, trends in academic research, and new challenges in teaching and learning’.

Great idea, it seems to me, so I click on the link to ‘Find Out More.’ This is where things get troubling. For the more I find out, the more troubled I become. On the ISA Sapphire Series page, I find descriptions of four up-coming panels – Epistemology in IR, The State of IR Theory: Questions Big and Small, Topics in Teaching and Professional Development, and Commentary on Breaking Current Events. So far, so good. Each panel is composed of prestigious members of the discipline, men and women. Again, so far, so good. Then things start getting weird.

Every IR scholar is from the Global North, which seems strange to me given the conference theme of ‘Global IR, Regional Worlds’ and given the post-colonial expertise and commitments to post-colonial scholarship of this year’s ISA Program Chairs. Then I see the profile pictures of each speaker embedded next to their description, and here I audibly go ‘huh?’ Because every one of the 17 Sapphire participants appears to be white. Again, I’m confused. For at ISA 2015 in particular – with its two Program Chairs who are variously racialized against standards of normalized whiteness and who contest racialized IR knowledges – how is it that seemingly superior Sapphire Series knowledge appears to be universally white? Continue reading

FacebookTwitterGoogle+TumblrRedditShare

How to Lose a Conference in 4 Days: why we attend the ISA to miss the ISA

I can still remember my first ISA conference. I was a PhD student eager to present early work at the freezing Montreal conference (not the last Montreal, the one before that). I remember being gobsmacked hearing academics talking about how they were booked up with meetings and hadn’t attended a single panel. I thought: What did that mean?; What was this ‘other’ conference or set of meetings happening and why was it happening at the same time as the ISA?; How was it possible to attend the ISA, but not attend any panels? But several years later, as I look at my ‘ISA Schedule’ I’m struggling to carve out time to attend panels that aren’t my own. Don’t get me wrong- this isn’t going to be a post about how important I am, or how busy I am: I’m not, and I’m not. And, don’t get me wrong, I love attending panels. For me, there is no greater conference satisfaction than folding over pages, highlighting panels, and placing stars beside ‘must see’ roundtables. But conference creep happens! With four days of conference, and 4 panels a day, there are exactly 16 opportunities to attend a panel…in theory. Here’s how to loose those opportunities, one at a time.

1. Your own presentations. This is a no brainer- the average ISA-er is on 2-3 panels (based on my total guestimation- note that participants are technically only supposed to be on 4, but there are a whole host of ways that gets ignored…a good topic for another post). Let’s round up to 3. That means you only have 13 possible panels to attend.

2. After-panel creep. Continue reading

Conversation Hijacking: How Not To Insert Yourself into a Conversation by Pushing a Woman Out of It

This is a guest post from Kathleen Gallagher Cunningham, an associate professor of government and politics at the University of Maryland.  She is the author of Inside the Politics of Self-determination (Oxford University Press, 2014).

I was recently at a relatively small academic conference, one that I’ve been attending for years whenever I can. The size of the meeting encourages engagement between big names and small names, grad students and professors, and across genders. It is a classic academic mixer, filled with slightly awkward people, many of whom are slightly disheveled, talking about things that are really interesting in really boring ways (to outsiders).

I started attending as a grad student and have made a number of critical personal and professional connections. In addition to getting useful feedback on my own work, this venue is a great opportunity to reconnect with people in my field and get to know some new ones. While I began as a young grad student, I am now at place where I am a (newly) senior member in the field.

After the final session one day, while people trickled out of the room, I sat down with a colleague I hadn’t seen for years. I was just hearing about a fascinating research project he’s working on when another person (another senior man in the field, though I’m not sure that matters) walked up and sat down, smiled at me but did not introduce himself and started a totally independent conversation with my colleague. I got up a few minutes later to make another meeting, but this small event stayed with me.

Continue reading

How the Blogosphere Helps Junior Scholars?

duck

Dear Readers,

In this post, I would like to focus on the few ways in which the blogosphere and social media more generally help junior scholars. I will use myself as an example.

It is not easy for me to reach out to senior colleagues and start a dialogue. I find it much easier to respond to a blog post they publish than to email them out of the blue. Right before last ISA, I contacted a senior scholar about his guest post on the Duck. He replied in the kindest manner possible. And I had the privilege to have lunch with him at ISA. I am very thankful.

I am interested in meeting new colleagues, finding collaborators, and making new friends. But networking is not my forte. Even though I have only contributed a handful of posts to the Duck thus far, I had the opportunity to get acquainted with a few contemporaries. I look forward to meeting them in person at upcoming conferences.

Remember the times you had to dine alone at conferences because you didn’t know anyone other than your graduate school friends. I had my fair share of isolated nights. I didn’t enjoy eating alone in my hotel room.  I and many others, I think, will have pleasant dinners at conferences thanks to the social media.

Academic blogs also help me stay connected to the field. I have heavy teaching responsibilities. I admit that I am not always on top of what is hot in all the subfields during the academic year. Blogs give me an idea of what I should read during the summer months. And as Jon mentioned, blog posts make good reading materials in some courses.

Facilitating a sense of community is another contribution of the blogosphere. A few people told me that they appreciated the simple post I wrote about letter of recommendation requests. The post signaled to them that they weren’t alone. Their feedback signaled to me that I wasn’t out there.

Academic blogs also offer a great opportunity to junior scholars to figure out how things work. Colleagues generously share their experiences on social media. Some offer advice. I continue to learn from them. I am glad I don’t need to reinvent the wheel.

I think junior faculty and grad students have a lot of reason to support the ISA “Online Media Caucus.” Thank you Steve and others for coming up with this proposal.

 

 

 

The Cash Prize: A Decision Experiment

Tomorrow, my great friend and coauthor Dursun Peksen and I will collect our $200 for winning the best paper award at the annual meeting of ISA-Midwest in St. Louis.  The paper, which I’ve talked about a little bit before at the Duck, is actually forthcoming now at the Journal of Politics.[1]  Dursun has won quite a few prizes before but this is my first time winning any sort of best paper award.[2] The award information says the prize is supposed to be in cash.  I’m hoping it is because this will probably be the first time I’ve had access to cash with my name on it since I was a kid.[3] I’m unsure what to do with my take of the winnings but I know the money has to be spent while I’m at the conference – otherwise, I’m sure I’ll rethink my plan of action and want to do something sensible with it.[4]  Here are my ideas:

Continue reading

Don’t Stress About Networking

Editor’s Note:  This is a guest post from Professor Peter M. Haas of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

Finding myself on the grey haired side of the academic divide and having experienced both sides of the process, let me reiterate David Lake’s points about networking with senior faculty.  While networking to make friends is a lovely idea, it doesn’t always work at a large professional event, nor with senior people who aren’t necessarily looking for junior friends.  The point at major international conferences, like APSA or ISA, is that networking isn’t really a social activity. It is an instrumental activity aimed at establishing name recognition for later interaction.  As they say, it is what it is.  I have found more specialized workshops and conferences a better place to network and meet, such as the annual Earth Systems Governance conferences.  They are more laid back and welcoming and they have far fewer distractions (fewer colleagues with whom to catch up, fewer publishers, fewer concurrent panels, and generally more time with less to do in more isolated venues).

Senior scholars do value the ideas of, and interactions with, junior scholars.  Indeed the source of change in the discipline comes from new ideas.  So the interaction is healthy and necessary.   Yet, everyone tends to be too busy at the large conferences.  The vast size and overbooking is actually a lamentable thing, and truly counterproductive for facilitating serendipitous contacts.

What you can hope for from networking at ISA or APSA is probably rather limited. Continue reading

Networking at Conferences: Not Just for Graduate Students and Junior Faculty

NetworkingEditor’s Note: This is a guest post by David Lake, who is the Jerri-Ann and Gary E. Jacobs Professor of Social Sciences and Distinguished Professor of Political Science at the University of California, San Diego.

I want to weigh in on “networking at conferences” debate here on the Duck (and elsewhere), some of which has been lost in subsequent controversy.

I agree with the prior posts by Saideman, Nexon, Sjoberg, and others, available here, that networking is less important than good research, and that networking among peers is far more valuable than networking with senior scholars. The most valuable thing you, as a junior scholar, can do at a conference is cultivate a group of peers who share your intellectual interests, who come from sufficiently different intellectual backgrounds (e.g., graduate programs) that you can learn lots of new things from them, and with whom you are personally comfortable and compatible.

Some of my closest and most trusted colleagues are those I met at the first few APSAs I attended. We started off as competitors for “attention” on panels, and ended up as collaborators, commiserators, sometimes colleagues, and in the end, good personal friends. These are the people who will keep you sane in the profession. They will read and comment on your work, share your professional worries and fears, understand the frustrations of balancing career and family, applaud your successes and, yes, cry with you at your failures (I remember one devastatingly bad presentation at an NBER conference from which I would not have recovered were it not for a couple of these good friends also attending and even more bottles of wine). You can’t plan these relationships, nor randomly roam the halls of the hotel looking for them, but be open to possibilities and take risks: ask a fellow panelist to coffee at the conference, follow up on an interesting discussion, and most important collaborate in organizing a panel on your mutual interests for a future conference.

But let me offer a slightly different perspective on networking from the other posts on this topic. Yes, approaching senior scholars is hard. I have done my share of approaching over the years, and recognize the courage it takes to introduce yourself to someone you know only through their writings. Now, more often than not, I’m the senior scholar– at least by age, if not yet self-image – who is being approached. Having been on both sides of these interactions, I recognize they can often (always?) be awkward. You will sometimes get shot down, as I was on numerous occasions. Not every overture will be reciprocated. But some will — and truly rewarding interactions and mutually beneficial intellectual relationships can follow. Continue reading

Social Media Before Conference Networking

This is a guest post by Brent Sasley. Sasley is Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Texas at Arlington. He blogs at Mideast Matrix and Open Zion. Follow him on Twitter.

The political science/IR blogosphere has been engaged in an interesting discussion in recent days: whether and how junior scholars should network at academic conferences (just follow the links from this piece to get them all or scroll down through Duck of Minerva’s main page).

My own two cents is that it depends on the conference, on the specific sub-field, and on the individual academic. Some conferences—like APSA and ISA—are so big that giants in the field are always going to know they’re in demand, especially if they’ve been established for awhile. They will choose according to their own criteria whether and how to respond to people clamoring for their interest, and that doesn’t bode well for most of us.

Some sub-fields, though, are small enough that you can contact the big names and you’ll likely get a positive response and—even more importantly—genuine interest in meeting. The same goes for smaller conferences: The Association for Israel Studies is really small compared to APSA and ISA, and there is a much more intimate feel to its annual conventions. You can pretty much go up to anybody there and expect some engagement—although like at the bigger ones, you can (I know from experience) still get scholars who treat you like you’re a first-year undergrad excited simply to be in the same room as them, regardless of your own standing. Ego isn’t field-specific.

And, of course, some people are simply better at networking in person than others. Some people are more outgoing, charismatic, and insistent. Others, not so much. Continue reading

In Defense of Networking

There’s been a lot of discussion, here (1)(2) and elsewhere (3)(4) about the value of networking. Dan Drezner suggests that the best kind of networking is doing good research, and that there is a small professional benefit to networking, but not much. Eric Voten agrees, suggesting that networking is not going to lead to significant professional opportunities. Dan Nexon suggests that one not network at all, but talk to and meet people as an end in itself. While there are a lot of gems of advice in all of these posts (do good research, be professional, have fun, don’t chase around “big names” all star-struck), I think that the punchline of these posts (individually and collectively) misses the mark pretty significantly in a couple of ways. One way, as Will Moore points out, is that both the need to network and the act of networking is very different for (even junior) people positioned differently in the field on a number of axes, including graduate school, mentors, race, gender, socioeconomic status, sexual identity, sexual preference, social skills, and competitiveness, to name a few. The need to network, the value of networking, the performance of networking, the reception of attempts to network, and the success of networking all differ across these and other axes. That is crucially important, and something where we should recognize the positions of privilege that we have … Continue reading

Academic Conferences: From “Networking” to Forming and Nurturing Social Ties

I don’t care much for APSA. Indeed, this year I am continuing my recent tradition of skipping it entirely. But it always occasions discussion in the political-science blogsphere. This year the focus of that discussion, at least as it pertains to conferencing as an activity, appears to be on “networking.”

Steve recently echoed the substantive part of Brian’s post in recommending a focus on meeting younger scholars rather than pursuing brief meetings with “big names” in the field. He also suggests a variety of social and professional events as good venues to meet people. Dan Drezner advises PhD students and untenured faculty not to get stressed about networking, and also provides some similar advice:

I would recommend that younger scholars realize the following when it comes to networking at APSA:

1)  The best kind of networking is always — always — to research, write and present really good papers.  Really.

2)  There is a small arbitrage opportunity to be had with the kind of networking that Rathbun is discussing.  You can try to make the Milners and the Keohanes and the Lakes of the world remember you.  That’s a very crowded market, however, and they are bombarded with people trying to Get to Know Them.  Instead, connect with the people who seem to be writing/presenting the work that you find to be the most interesting.  That’s how you’ll improve your own ideas — and then see (1) above.

3)  You don’t have to network at all.  It likely helps your professional development a little bit on the margins, but not nearly as much as you would think.  The opportunity costs are small compared to researching and publishing good work.  Pour your manic energy into the latter far more than the former, and don’t fret that you’re missing all the cool parties if you don’t feel like schmoozing.

Erik Voeten agrees with Dan:

I think this is both right and potentially useful for mental sanity. Small talk at conferences is not going to get your article accepted in that prestigious journal nor will it land you a job at that university you always wanted to be at. It is important to get to know the people in your field but that is a gradual process much of which takes place after people start inviting you because they like your work. Stay focused on meeting people with whom you share intellectual interests and don’t be too worried if some other grad student manages to line up coffees with all the “big people.” If you have to spend time in lobbies at all, consider playing bingo rather then seeking opportunities to have small talk with “VIPs.”

This is all good advice. But I have a slightly different spin: don’t “network” at all. Continue reading

Networking is Hard-Working

The question of networking tends to arise as conferences approach.  With APSA less than two weeks away (which means discussants are going to be getting papers any day now–ok, in about a week if they are lucky), I thought I would post some thoughts about networking.  There was a post earlier today that did address such stuff, but, well, stuff happened.  A key point was lost in the course of events–that networking sideways and down is far easier and perhaps far more fruitful than trying to connect with the big names in the discipline.

Continue reading

Belated Conference Proposal Advice

A twitter friend of mine was trying to figure out how to put together his proposal for the International Studies Association’s Annual Meeting.  The ISA has gotten into a nasty habit of having a really early deadline.  So, folks are thinking about it today since the deadline is tomorrow.  I have had a fair amount of experience on the other end, organizing the program for the Foreign Policy section of the APSA about a decade ago, doing the Ethnicity, Nationalism and Migration section of the ISA [ENMISA] a few years back, and then this masochism year of the Foreign Policy Analysis section of the ISA this past spring and the International Security section (with Idean Salehyan) of the APSA for the meeting in September.  So, I have opinions (no surprise to anyone):

Continue reading

Call for Abstracts: Millennium Conference, 19-20 October, 2013

Civilization-Gods-and-Kinfs-ss1Millennium. Journal of International Studies
Annual Conference
“Rethinking the Standard(s) of Civilisation(s) in International Relations”
19-20 October 2013
London School of Economics and Political Science
Deadline for abstracts: 7 June, 2013

The theme of this year’s conference will focus on the standard(s) of civilisation(s) in International Relations. In recent years, there has been a renewed scholarly interest in the concept of ‘the standard of civilisation’ in examining international norms, practices and policies entrenched in world politics, including international law, human rights, the status of women, good governance and globalisation, global markets, the EU policy of ‘membership conditionality’, and state-building. These are only some of the key aspects of international relations that illustrate the crucial relationship between civilisation and standards of conduct in global politics. Continue reading

Call for Papers: 2013 International Studies Association-Northeast Annual Conference

When: 8-9 November 2013
Where: at the Providence Biltmore, Providence, RI, USA
Submissions accepted 5 – 28 June 2013

The annual conference of the International Studies Association-Northeast (ISA-NE) will be held 8-9 November 2013 at the Providence Biltmore in Providence, Rhode Island. ISA-NE invites paper and panel proposals on any subject related to international studies, broadly defined. Topics might include international relations theory, international law and organizations, foreign policy, globalization, human rights, international development, conflict resolution, military/strategic studies, the environment, feminist and queer theory, gender studies, international political economy, and international political sociology, among others. ISA-NE expressly welcomes research from the full range of approaches to and philosophies of IR, including those using critical and postmodernist lenses.

We also encourage paper, panel, and roundtable proposals on subjects related to this year’s conference theme, Rethinking International Relations as International Hierarchies. Possible topics include, but are not limited to, theories of hierarchy, whether hierarchy/ies provides a more useful starting point for understanding global politics than the traditional anarchy problematique, and empirical analyses of international hierarchies. We especially encourage proposals from varied disciplinary and interdisciplinary perspectives. We seek to showcase the work of advanced graduate students and junior as well as senior scholars, and we welcome innovative ideas about the format, structure, and content of conference sessions.

Continue reading

The worst questions to be asked at a conference

The following is a guest post by Peter Henne.

Once again, the International Studies Association annual meeting is upon us, followed by the Midwest Political Science Association conference. It’s a good bet that most readers of the Duck will be attending one or both of these, or other upcoming meetings.

One of the best parts of academic conferences is the Q-and-A portion of panels, when scholars get to respond to critiques and comments on their cutting-edge research.

Of course, as anyone who has been to a conference knows, not all questions are useful. So I’ve decided to do my part and present examples of the worst questions to be asked at a conference, with my thoughts on how to respond to and deal with them.

1. Why didn’t you bring up this tangential detail in your 10 minute presentation?

You’ve just presented a case study of increasing restrictions on religious practice over time in Pakistan. The first question you get is, “But, everyone says Jinnah wanted a secular state. He really just wanted authority over something.” Never mind that you didn’t say anything about the intentions of the founder of Pakistan, and even if you had the questioner’s detail wouldn’t really affect what you said.

We’ve all experienced variations of “I know this piece of information, and you didn’t raise it, so I will criticize you for that.” It’s impossible to respond to, or least respond in a polite manner. I try to respond by mumbling something about scope conditions.

2. Any gotcha methodological question

“How did you cluster your standard errors?” “Why didn’t you exclude that country?” “Shouldn’t you have used [FANCY NEW ESTIMATOR]?”

These questions are the worst because they are one of two things. They’re just wrong, and the questioner doesn’t get your research design. Or they’re minor details you didn’t have time to bring up. The response is a shrug on your part and smug smirk on the part of the questioner (in case of the latter) or a polite correction of the question if the case of the former.

Of course, it’s possible this might come from a methodologist, in which case you acknowledge their superior wisdom and thank them for their kindness.

3. How can you compare X to Z? They’re so unique!

Upon completion of a presentation comparing civil-military relations in Turkey and France, someone asks how you can look at the two countries, since there are so many differences between them.

This is annoying as it kind of misses the point of comparison, which requires some difference between cases. And it overlooks the general consensus in the social sciences that comparison is pretty useful, even if the comparison is only intended to highlight different pathways towards an outcome.

And you’re left with a choice between two bad responses. You can sigh with displeasure that the discipline requires you to compare, when all you want to do is dwell on the wonders of a single country. Or you can pull out your copy of Przeworski and Teune, slam it onto the podium, and march out of the room.

4. But how would this apply to COUNTRY?

“That is an interesting study of conflict resolution in South America, but how does it apply to the Israel-Palestine dispute?”

This one can be asked in good humor, a way for someone who knows nothing about your topic to participate. More often, though, it’s meant as a critique; “if your findings don’t apply to this country I wrote my MA thesis on, then they aren’t valid.”

Now, external validity is important. But unless you claim your findings are true everywhere and all the time, this question is not very helpful. I wish I could just say “my paper doesn’t look at Israel-Palestine” and move on, but I’m usually compelled to tell them how interesting the case is and I’ll definitely look at it in my next project.

5. [scoffs] How do you define X?

This is usually delivered with a smirk and crossed arms, and is directed towards a key concept of the paper, either the explanation or the outcome.

Yes, definitions are important, and yes, bad definitions can lead to flawed research. But really, you can assume the person has thought through their concepts, even if they don’t sufficiently spell it out in the paper. Even if they didn’t, debating definitions is guaranteed to lead nowhere and irritate the other panelists or audience members who had questions beyond “how do you define nationalism?”

Admit it, what you really meant was: “I know you didn’t define X the way I would, and I don’t like it.”

Peter Henne is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Government at Georgetown University.

ISA Survival Guide for Grad Students: the essential clothing, food, shelter, and networking dos and don’ts

blog1It is time again for the International Studies Association Annual Conference. With thousands of attendees, a phone book full of panels, and a slough of receptions, dinners, meetings, and opportunities, the whole thing can be a bit overwhelming as a grad student (and for everyone else too!). You’ve likely received advice on how to present your work in 10 seconds or less- but what about the rest of the conference? Here are a couple of key tips for surviving the four days and getting the most out of the experience.
Before we get to the real essentials (food, shelter, and clothing), let’s start with networking:
In addition to all the obvious tips (always wear your name tag, ask your supervisor to invite you along to some key dinners/meetings, hang out in the common areas and just generally act like you are speed dating, but for a job and contacts rather than for a mate) here are some more unconventional tips for making an impression:

  • Do get up and head down to the lobby if you have jet lag and can’t sleep at 4am. There is always the potential that you’ll be invited to join a tequila tasting/debate on the norm diffusion/poker game, or that you’ll see your academic idol passed out in the lobby- who wants to miss that for reruns of ‘What Not To Wear’ in the hotel room?
  • Do Google image all of your academic idols. If you end up behind Ole Waever in the Starbucks lineup you don’t want to miss the chance to (quickly) introduce yourself and tell him you use his work in your thesis. Also, if Ole comes to your panel, and you don’t recognize him, and he asks a difficult question about securitization (hey, it is possible!) you don’t want to a) accuse him he doesn’t know what he’s talking about b) go into detail about what an idiot you think Ole Waever is c) ask him if he’s related to Kevin Bacon because there is something familiar about him. On that note, Don’t (ever) use the coffee lineup, receptions, or the bar as an opportunity to ask someone like Ole to explain what they mean by social security or to tell them what aspects of their theory you think they got wrong. You may be right, and you may be brilliant, but there is a fine line between making an impression and burning a bridge/looking like a total douche.
  • Don’t follow the advice “ask a question at every panel, but start by talking about your research first.” People who tell you to do this want you to fail. Yes, you should ask questions if and only if you have a strong, relevant question- let’s be honest, that won’t be at every panel. And, yes you should always introduce yourself first. But no one wants the Q&A time hijacked by someone pitching their own research- save that for the bar or receptions.

Ok, on to the other essentials: Continue reading

Call for papers: European Consortium on Political Research, Sept 4-7

In case folks have missed it, there is an upcoming deadline (FRIDAY!) for the 2013 ECPR General Conference in Bordeaux, September 4-7th.  Unlike many other conferences, EPCR paper proposals are submitted to already-organized panels. This often results in more cohesive panels and, one hopes, more helpful feedback.  Paper proposals are due this coming Friday and can be submitted through the various organized sections listed here.  … And the conference is in Bordeaux, which is lovely and features nifty, futuristic trams built by Alain Juppé (pre-scandal).

For those of you who work on political violence, I’ve posted that section’s call below. For those working on intra-state violence, please take a look at the abstract for my own panel, “New Methodological Approaches to Local Context & Violence.”

Continue reading

Note for ISA-NE Participants

The ISA-NE leadership is monitoring the weather situation. We hope that everything is cleared out in time for the conference. We will keep you all posted as to developments.

Continue reading

Announcing the 2013 Blogging Reception and Awards at ISA

The staff of the Duck of Minerva is very pleased to announce: (1) the first-ever blogging reception at the International Studies Association (ISA) annual convention; and (2) the Online Achievement in International Studies (OAIS) Awards.

Thanks to the generous support of SAGE and the efforts of SAGE editor David Mainwaring, we will be hosting a reception at the 2013 International Studies Association Annual Convention in San Francisco. Details to follow in updates, but the reception is scheduled for the night of Thursday, April 4th.  A number of prominent bloggers will give brief Ignite-style presentations—verbal versions of blog posts, if you will. The current schedule includes Dan Drezner, Erica Chenoweth, Robert Farley, and Steve Walt.

At the 2013 reception we will announce the winners of the first-ever Online Achievements in International Studies Awards.  For 2013 there will be five awards:

  • Special Achievement in International-Studies Blogging;
  • Best Blog (Group) in International Studies;
  • Best Blog (Individual) in International Studies;
  • Best Blog Post in International Studies; and
  • Most Promising New Blog (Group or Individual) in International Studies.

We intend for each of these awards – with the exception of the “Special Achievement” category – to become an annual institution. The “Special Achievement” award will be awarded at the discretion of the Duck of Minerva staff. More about the awards below the fold. This same information is collected here (the link is also on the menu bar). UPDATE: Nominations should be logged on this post.

Continue reading

#virtualAPSA2012 – Issues of and Responses to Internet Governance


A partial panel, via Luke M. Perez, who has set up a page for the #virtualAPSA2012 project.

Older posts

© 2015 Duck of Minerva

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑