IR induction

Eating in the New Refectory

We had the first portion of the International Relations induction today and, while daunting at times, it was mostly quite helpful. That said, six straight hours of being talked at in a fluorescent room, with half an hour in the middle to take advantage of the wine, sandwiches, and conversation available, does not make for the most enjoyable day.

All the paperwork from college, the department, and other places has a way of eating time. For instance:

Letter from NatWest bank, where the staff informed me that the two letters I already provided from Wadham were quite adequate for opening an account: “Please have your college draft a letter modeled exactly upon the one enclosed.” 

Form letters enclosed: none

Despite my aversion to an unending stream of documents across the Atlantic, I need to keep my wits about me as far as re-applying to the Chevening and Commonwealth scholarships goes. Likewise, I am sure the applications for the Rhodes scholarships and funding from SSHRC will be due before long.

Probably the most exciting event today was meeting my supervisor: Dr. Andrew Hurrell, the Director of the Centre for International Studies. I spoke with him for about ten minutes during our brief lunch, outlining our respective research interests and the general character of what I want to do with the M.Phil program. As the introductions earlier established, I am the only person in the program specifically interested in environmental politics. Talking with Dr. Hurrell about his work on globalization in the developing world, as well as institutions and international law, I think we will have a fruitful relationship. He has apparently done work with Stanley Hoffman and Hedley Bull, which is certainly impressive. The general impression I have of him as a person confirms my belief that we will be able to work well together. I am meeting him in Nuffield College on Wednesday at five.

Actually, this seems a good time to give a quick overview of the program demographics:

M.Phil students admitted this year: 25 (89%)
D.Phil students admitted this year: 3 (11%) 

Distribution by Nationality:
United States 10 (36%)
United Kingdom 5 (18%)
Canada 5 (18%)
Australia 2 (7%)
Germany 2 (7%)
Hungary 1 (4%)
Egypt 1 (4%)
Japan 1 (4%)
Austria 1 (4%) *

Sex Ratio: Female 9 (32%) Male 19 (68%)

Judging by what people said about themselves during our brief introductions, this is quite an exciting group. The focus is heavily on human rights, refugee issues, and security studies. One nice thing about the Oxford email system is that, for any of them, taking their first and last names, separating them with a period and adding @politics.ox.ac.uk will yield their email addresses.

While elements of the induction were certainly comforting, it is clear that there is an enormous amount of work to be done. Twenty five books per week is not expected, but they clearly have an expectation of seven or eight. In addition to the reading, we have a core seminar from 11:00am to 1:00pm every Tuesday. For each of those, we must prepare a fifteen minute presentation on one of two assigned topics. Then, one person from the seminar group (half the first year M.Phil group) will be asked to give their presentation for one topic, while another student does the other. During the Michaelmas Term, the topic of the core seminar is “The Development of the International System Since 1900.” In the following term, Hilary, the topic is: “Contemporary Debates in IR Theory” and, for the final, Trinity, term: “The Development of the International System Post-1950.” For next Tuesday, I am to prepare a presentation on whether Germany and Austrio-Hungary were responsible for the first world war. There is a one in seven chance that I will be called upon to deliver it. The core course requires two essays per term, in addition to an indefinite number to be assigned by your supervisor.

In addition to the core seminar, we have a course in research methods. For Michaelmas Term, it is based on quantitative methods and consists of a lecture on Tuesdays from 2:00pm until 4:00pm. There are also eight hands-on workshops on Fridays from 11:00am to 1:00pm. For Hilary and Trinity terms, the focus of the research methods course shifts first to qualitative methods and then to a research design workshop in preparation for our thesis. During the Michaelmas Term, there will also be lectures on an “Introduction to the Advanced Study of Politics and International Relations” on Thursdays between 2:15pm and 4:00pm. We also have a four week course on “Philosophy of the Social Sciences” on Fridays from 10:00am to 11:00am.

There are, in any event, no departmental functions tomorrow. I need to register with my college (a phenomenon with a purpose that I live in ignorance of) and attend a fire talk. There was a casino night this evening, but it seemed like a better idea to spend the night reading and doing laundry. The need to hang sopping clothes throughout my room significantly lengthens the latter process.

PS. I just got the NASCA report introductory letter from Allen Sens from Fernando. Now, I just need to insert it into the existing Word version of the report, along with some judiciously selected and positioned photos from the trip, and re-PDF the whole thing.

*Due to rounding, numbers do not add to 100%

4 thoughts on “IR induction”

  1. Twice as many Yanks as Brits and only 32% female? Less than ideal. Still, the proportion of Canadians is strangely high. Wandering back to the seat of empire, are you?

  2. I agree about the sex ratio being problematic, but I have no objection to the number of Americans. A program trying to understand contemporary international relations simply couldn’t be functional or legitimate in their absence.

    As for the appeal to Canadians, I think it has a lot to do with the M.Phil level of graduate study. Most of the people I’ve spoken to didn’t want to go directly into an American doctoral program, but they did want to study outside of Canada. By offering a rigorous academic course in an interesting environment, Oxford seems to have developed a very strong combination.

  3. Until I realised that I was a term I was utterly confused as to why you were directing that first comment specifically at me. Sorry we got cut off earlier, apparently my brother had some online gambling to attend to.

    Keep having fun,
    Hilary

  4. Doesn’t it induce an awful lot of wasted effort to require seven people to prepare the same presentation, six of which will be completely redundant and unused? I suppose it will “lay the groundwork for a good discussion,” but it still strikes me as inefficient.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *