- Email: [email protected]
Adult education and the social science toolbox
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCE
TOOLBOX
ERIC LIGGETT Muirhead,
34 Balfron
Road,
Killearn,
Glasgow
G63 9NW,
UK
Abstracl - The demand by many students and by some teachers that the material of social studies should be made ‘relevant’ is a worthy one. That attention is paid to the demand is evident from the fact that ‘project’, ‘case-study’, ‘problem-centred’, and ‘multidisciplinary’ approaches to teaching are sometimes employed. To acknowledge that these approaches are useful is not to admit that they and they alone reflect the ‘real’ world. Academic analysis - of disciplines, of conceptual frameworks - is as ‘real’ as the human beings who carry it forward. There is a ‘grammar’ of social st.udies which exists behind both the many discrete areas of study made available in universities and student-centred methods of teaching mentioned above. The writer, who works in the field of adult education, argues that teachers should stand ready to transmit this ‘grammar’. He seeks to show how this may be done. He outlines briefly the chief concerns of the philosophy of social science, and those of that interdisciplinary area known as international Studies. Finally, to make manifest his concern for students, he examines certain questions - the classification of textbooks, the effectiveness of academics as consultants, the presentation of the syllabus - which relate specifically to the teacher-student relationship, and which have an imporant bearing upon students’ access to studies.
world, rather than the complexity of theory about it’ (Leftwich, 1982, p. 19). One notes the use of the word ‘initial’. The present writer read the well-argued article, from which the quotation is derived, with total sympathy. On reflection, however, came worry about references to the ‘real’ world, of which the student should be informed. Is the academic, or his theory, less real than the prime minister and his speech, the army and its advance? It is legitimate for a student to demand ‘relevant’ information; but can a teacher clearly designate the ‘relevant’ needs of a group, or the ‘practical’ needs of a single student over time? The present writer makes two statements: practicality, or relevance, can be aided by a wider academic view of whatever ‘substantive materials are to be taught (as it happens the writer shares the field of political studies with Leftwich); and, the wider academic view is vital to the teacher because of is position vis-ci-vis both individuals and groups with varying needs and demands. The teacher needs to be aware of a wide conspectus the better to teach appropriately in changing situations. Consider the sequence: (a) ‘social fact’, (b) description, (c) analysis, (d) synthesis. The sequence comprehends everything - from a
INTRODUCTION If I tell you what went on in the British House of Commons yesterday I am a storyteller, a journalist. If I relate what went on ten years ago I may be deemed to be a historian or a political scientist. If I write about yesterday’s events with great skill and a wealth of allusion I may attract all three labels. The writer on historians is sometimes called a hisforiographer: the writer who concerns himself with the most general concerns of history and historians is a philosopher of history, just as his colleague down the corridor is a philosopher of social science. The people designated above work in three spheres of activity, which are not separate from each other. In ascending order of complexity we have: description of discrete areas of social activity; ana/y.sis of disciplinary territories; and synthesis of human knowledge. In an ideal world, academics might all be polymaths, we might all be omnicompetent. But what about students, and our relationship with students? The production of this article was stimulated by the reading of the following: ‘The emphasis of the initial [teaching] objective should be to help students understand the complexity of the 53
E. LIGGETT
54
citizen’s viewing of a street-riot to the professor’s refinement of a methodological technique. Can the student be satisfied with studies of (a) and (b) and dispense with analysis and synthesis, because these latter are redundant? No. The fact is that (c) and (d) condition (a) and (b) - perceptions of ‘fact’ and conceptual appraisals help to shape ‘reality’. If the student neglects (c) analysis, and (d) synthesis, he or she then becomes the passive recipient of somebody else’s*perceptions and appraisals. Of course, one must know one’s students. How deep does this student wish to delve? In the end it is a matter of tools and jobs. The student must develop his tools or resources for academic work - not for making pies, building ships, or eventually shooting other soldiers. The student needs ‘pools of competence’ in order to launch his educational ‘task forces’. This article is a hunt for that rare beast, the ‘conceptual framework’. The writer concedes that it must end in a discussion of narrowlydefined student-centered issues. DELIMITATIONS SOCIAL
OF SCOPE SCIENCE
IN
Mackenzie (1971) gave an overview of the concerns of the political scientist. Leaning heavily on this publication, the present subsection of this article outlines what we might
Table Subject matter (What must be rtudied?)
Objectives
present to students as the baldest statement of the concerns of social science. Note the restricted use of the term ‘Subject matter’. The whole of the table is our subject matter in fact but we need to separate out objectives and methods. We are not speaking of watertight divisions of studies, but of dimensions; this is emphasized if one looks at column one of Table 1 in a political context: Political structures embody norms and frame behaviour, Political norms are realized within structures and illustrated through behaviour, Political behaviour occurs within structure and demonstrates norms. What are the objectives of our studies? The German philospher Windelband made a distinction which appears in column two, Table 1, and is elaborated in Table 2. When we speak about method - column three Table 1 - we first make a fundamental distinction: in the act of philosophizing there are those (the rationalists) who sit and think, and those (the empiricists) who go out and see (Emmet, 1968, p. 11). Again, we may illustrate this distinction in tabular form, in Table 3. The above matter relates to the bare essentials of conceptions of inquiry (Brown et al., 198 1). The writer, Fig. 1, makes an additional distinction, important in discussions of social science.
I Fundamental? of method
(What does one hope IO discern?)
(How doe5 one go about it?)
Structural
Idiographic
Rationalism~Empiricism
Normarivc
Nomothetic
Stage{: decline progress development
Behavioural
Ecology:
\ociery cnvironmenr
Tools: language 01 variable\ model5 decision\
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND
THE
SOCIAL
Inducrion
55
TOOLBOX
Deducrion
Reasoning from the particular to the general, from facts to conclusions Observation of individual cases
SCIENCE
--+
Reasoning from principle or law to consequence or application
General statement or law
--$
Assumed consequences or application
Fig. I.
From the above elements of the philosophy of social science we derive an important short vocabulary: Logic teaches us the rules of good argument, it provides us with a battery of tests to tell us whether a conclusion follows from a given set of premises, it enables us to ‘arrange our ignorance’ (Bell, 1968). Logic is framework, not content; Methodology is a word used by academics for ‘review of methods’. Traditionally a branch of logic, methodology involves a systematic study of the principles guiding scientific investigation. Its interests are in the general grounds for the establishing of the validity of theories, the evaluation of procedures and techniques as to their ability to provide us with degrees of certainty;
A model is a design chosen for or evolving from academic work. It is an abstraction from ‘reality’ - presented mathematically, physically, graphically, or in a simple literary way. It is an artificial device for comparing, measuring, experimenting and guiding observation. ‘One of the most important functions of models is to generate hypotheses which otherwise might not occur to the observer and which can be tested by reference to factual data.’ (Burton, 1965, p. 163); A concept refers to the meaning conveyed by a word which represents an idea, capable of Table Rationalism
Empiricism
Characterization
Metaphysical - concern for the nature of being Search for permanent truths, values, realities
Emphasis on experience Seeks systematic and formulated knowledge
Assertions
Knowledge is founded on intuitions and operations of reason
Knowledge is based upon or derived from sensory experience
Denials
Rejects sensory experience as a source of truth. Science cannot reach beyond its own assumptions, is inadequate for dealing with ultimate causes, values, or permanent truths
Pure reason is is severely limited as a source of factual knowledge
Table 2
Objective
.4pproach or characterization
Roo1s
Idiographic
Nomothetic
Full and exhaustive treatment leading to particular and restricted propositions as in, say. historical studies Cultural analysis, description of concrete, unique. non-recurrent events
Finding of perceived regularities, laws and general propositions as in, say, physics
The humanistic tradition
Empirical search for abstract statements
The scientific tradition
3
56
E. LIGGET’T
forming its own category of objects, phenomena, or processes e.g. power, infegration. A concept is something necessarily indistinct, not clear-cut or precise, something important but tricky, something for endless discussion; An axiom is an established principle, for believers a self-evident truth; An hypothesis is a tentative presumption of relationship between phenomena, a groundless assumption; A theory, proper, relates to a system of validated hypotheses, to logical expectation which has been tested and which, therefore, is regarded as offering acceptable explanation; A law is a correct statement of invariable sequence. Frankel (!973a, p. 20) states: ‘in defiance of scientific usage some theoreticians insist on calling “theories” their conceptual frameworks, approaches and models, however loosely constructed, although these do not consist of propositions leading to testable predictions.’ On the following page he asserts that, ‘a theory claims correctness: a model is merely a convenient way of loking at things’. A word of warning is due, too, in relations to laws: Popper’s solution begins by pointing IO a logical asymmetry between verification and falsification. To express it in terms of the logic of statements: although no number of... observations of white swans allows us logically to derive the universal statement, “All swans are white”, one single observation statement, reporting one single observation of a black swan, allows us logically to derive the statment, “Not all swans are white”. In this important logical sense empirical generalizations, though not verifiable, are falsifiable. (Magee, 1973, pp. 22/23) Is knowledge possible? As academics we worry about this question, and each of us needs a ‘delimitation of scope’. We all feel the need for order, principle, coherence in our lives. As private citizens or as scholars we ask: what are the parts and how do they fit together? McClelland (1966, p. 27) talks of ‘imagebuilding’ and declares: ‘image and its deliberate relative, theory, present and ordering of significance - a working definition of what is to be regarded as important’. The writer works in the field of adult education and does not need to be convinced of the importance of ‘applied’ studies, of projects and
case studies. Nor of the need for interdisciplinarity. In respect of the politics discipline, Crick (1966) points to its lack of autonomy. Long a battle-ground between historians and philosophers, it is not a discipline but a range of conventionally-related problems - at best a discipline of dispersed relevancies. It is the most imperialistic, most cheerfuly ecumenical social science which involves the crossing and recrossing of bridges into philosophy, economics, sociology, and so on. The two points made about ‘applied’ and interdisciplinary studies, however, make one think back to undergraduate days. Often came the fugitive thought that the teacher was not telling all, that he could well have paused awhile to explain vocabulary. We may decide to learn French by the ‘direct method’, and neglect grammar. Or we may decide to approach the task through talk of ‘verbs’, ‘prepositions’, ‘declensions’, and ‘nouns’, ‘conjugations’. The social science student may, in due season, benefit from the provision of a ‘grammar’. THE CASE
OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
‘The limits of my language mean the limits of my world’ declares Wittgenstein (1961, p. 5.6). Not every student will need to have his or her world enlarged by the provision of a formal exposition of the general concerns of social science. But the teacher should hold such general concerns in reserve, to be elaborated as elucidation or interstitial comment. There exists a second method whereby the teacher may help the student to learn in an economical manner, which is, after all, our major concern. This is to explore the disciplinary territory. Advocates of ‘policy studies’ may well find this second method of giving aid more acceptable than the first. Each discipline - politics, economics, sociology, etc. develops its own vocabulary: we can superimpose the disciplinary over the social science vocabulary, as if usmg transparencies with an overhead projector. To illustrate, the writer uses International Studies - which has the advantage of being an interdisciplinary area. First (a) come ‘macro’ approaches, then
ADULT EDUCATION
AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCE
(b) ‘micro’ approaches. (a) Schools of study International Studies, primarily concerned with the interaction of governed countries, emphasizing national interests, is encompassed by no over-arching theoretical framework. The social scientist is, with other scholars, concerned with the distinction between ‘science’ and ‘non-science’: of the output of the academic corpus, George (1978, p. 207) judges that International Studies are pre-scientific. There exist a number of competing, isolated schools and models, each with its own private language. In writing on International Studies there have existed three major schools (and one subschool, below): classical, traditional, and behavioural. Classical writing is quickly described as being simply one division of the field we know as ‘political philosophy’. Here there is broad discussion of ‘war’, ‘just war’, ‘peace’, ‘justice’, and so on. This writing may be approached through Forsyth et al. (1970). Traditional writing which of course includes some contemporary work, is concerned with the state and with power. Here there is concern for the centrality of force in international affairs. Hence the term ‘hard International Studies’. One also reads of ‘state-centric realist’ or ‘atomistic’ studies, of the ‘billiard ball model’ - the billiard table is the world and the billiard balls are the states ‘bouncing’ off each other. Typical of this kind of writing are: Carr (1946), Morgenthau (1973), Hinsley (1963, 1966, 1973) and Wright (1955). Legal writing is a sub-school of classical and traditional writing. Introductions are provided by Akelhurst (1970) or Starke (1947). Behavioural studies are ‘soft’ studies, and the scholar uses, not the ‘billiard’ model, but the ‘cobweb’ model. From a feeling that traditional approaches were sterile, from radical concern for ‘real’ problem focuses, writers have desired to redraw ‘cognitive maps’. Behavioural studies are much more than ‘current affairs’, ‘applied of things-going-on-at-the-moment. studies’ Such studies seek to generate and test verifiable scientific explanations by paying attention to aspects of systems in action. Involved are all the
TOOLBOX
57
activities of governments and apparently unorganized actors, and high-level and lowlevel, total or partial phenomena. The method of the behavioural investigator is to: -
-
-
emphasize quantification, or measurement; search for operational definitions, to convert ideas or concepts into processes of measurement to secure more specific meaning; avoid prescriptive statements, to involve himself in ‘realism’, in causal theory rather than value theory; welcome interdisciplinary research. In political areas, e.g. to welcome psychological and sociological as well as legal or institutional explanations.
One can recommend here Roberts (1971), McClelland (1966), and Forward (197 1). There has been much debate about the split between traditional and behavioural studies. The former have had a strong base in the UK, the latter in the USA. There are cultural explanations. Americans cling to a belief in ‘progress’, have reached for exact knowledge, and have enthusiastically sought the aid of applied science. Confident in their past economic successes, they have tried to extend problem-solving techniques from business studies to the international arena. Admiring mechanical systems - from the automobile to guided-missiles - they have sought to harness the computer to social science needs. If we can control nature, why not human affairs? The cultural thrust of American policy has been reinforced by concern stemming from burdens acquired along with world-role responsibilities. The British, for a much longer period than Americans, have exercised a global outlook and have provided a strong base for traditionalist writing. Behaviouralism in Britain, where accepted, has been a matter of conceptual innovation, not scientific dogmatism (Sims, 1972). The split between traditionalists and behaviouralists may be regarded as a useful division-of-labour among academics, or as leading to the disintegration of an interdisciplinary study-area. Behaviouralism pretends to a global sphere of concern - it will
E. LIGGETT
58
embrace study of great men, states, and language of the indicators, economic diplomatic traffic - but is heavily criticised. Attacked as ‘abstract scientism’, the complaint is that behaviouralism is mainly concerned with methodological advance and neglects substance - much of its effort is formal, providing no coherent pictures of ‘real life’. The search for precise methodological procedures has thrown up an academic joke: ‘With the expenditure of an immense amount of time and money, Political Science (or Psychology, Economics,
achieve a highly desirable general consensus of the majority of scholars, it will be necessary to reach agreement, if not about general theory or model, at least about some common organizing concept, a common nucleus of analysis’. It may be less contentious, more rewarding if we concentrate, not on the traditionalist/behaviouralist split, above, but on other focuses, making whatever use we can of the contribution of the several schools already described. We might accommodate our studies in the Table 4 schema:
Table 4. (0
(ii).
(iii)
(iv)
Actors Organizations Institutions
Environment Ecology Society
Communications Transactions Decisions
Change Transformation Stages Progress Decline Development
Sociology.. .) will eventially overtake commonsense! ’ Behaviouralists need to abandon their computers, their methodology and sit and think about goals and values: traditionalists need to leave the library and ‘science-up’ their activities. In fact, for more than a decade, scholars have spoken of the ‘post-behavioural revolution’ (Spragens, 1973). Our science does not reach far, we do not know laws, we have not been able to move from sets of hypotheses to sets of tested propositions. There has been a falling-back on values and issues of social and political responsibility. Conditions favour a rethinking of positions: Britain has suffered a decline in her world position and cannot afford to maintain her complacent ‘library-based’ world-view; the United States has suffered under the impact of Watergate, Vietnam, social unrest and urban devastation and must shed her naive view of ‘progress’, her faith in a selfjustifying technological-managerial society. (b) Focuses of srudy Alfred Kuhn (1966 p. x) says: ‘Unless the major concepts and types of analysis for dealing with social phenomena can be both standardized and drastically reduced in number, we may be swamped by the sheer mass of information...‘. Frankel (1973a. p. 28) declares: ‘To
One may note, here, that in studying elements of the social whole the items in our tabulation might have been rendered into everyday language by the simple substitution of the interrogatives: Who?, What?, When?, How?, Why? and Where?. (i) Who is involved? Is it a nation, a department of state, a personality, a church, or a We may study multinational company? Anthony Eden and Suez, the Foreign Office view of Southern Africa, or official Catholic opinion on Northern Ireland. Multinational companies are an important focus of study today (see Leifer, .1972, Chapter X). Cosgrove and Twitchett (1970) edit studies of the United Nations and the European Economic Community: the essays seek to show the extent to which these organizations play significant roles in their own right in international affairs. (ii) Where does it happen? The study of system and environment lends a spatial dimension to political studies. Systems anal_vsis embodies a shift in academic interest a departure from attention of international balances and structures towards the processes of relations between states, from forms of institutions to the processes of politics. There is a shift of attention from decisions as the outcome of deliberate acts of choice made by individuals
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND
THE
or groups in institutional settings, to decisions as the outcome of complexes of interdependent events. As its extreme, the ‘systems’ view would hold that there is no such thing as ‘British Foreign Policy’, only a ‘British foreign policy process’. There is justification for this. In studying the UK’s contacts with the EEC in the early 196Os, for example, one finds an infinite number of activities occurring internally and externally: it is better, perhaps, to seek to view these as ‘system’, than to try to impose a sequential order, build a chronology, or to concentrate on the thinking of a particular statesman. Tinker (1964) provides a nice example of system. In the West, political institutions are seen as a source of strength, government provides a national backbone. In the non-West, state-level politics is a cloak which can be discarded: the sources of real strength are religion, family, local community, tradition and magic. The failure of a government or regime does not mean that there will be a breakdown of local life in ‘broken-backed states’. (iii) How and why do rhings happen? Pye ( 1964) says: The standard convention is 10 reserve the term decisionfor one who has formal responsibilities for formulating the policies of an organization, usually an institution of government. Decision-making, however, denores rhe dynamic process of interaction among all parricipants who determine a particular policy choice, officials as well as non-officials.
ruoker
Does the occasion for decision involve action or reaction, response to internal planning or to external initiatives? What degree of anticipation has been possible? Do the decision-makers have ample time, or are they working against an impending deadline? Decisions may involve routine or marginal consequences or high risks: here one may study the scope and domain of values involved - the number and quality of values, the number of persons and groups interested. Rose ( 1969, pp. x-xl) prefers the term policymaking. Attention should focus, not on discrete decisions, but on long processes of related activities. The maintenance of strategic purpose through a sequence of changing tactical goals is tricky. As Deutsch (1967, p. 281) says:
SOCIAL
SCIENCE
TOOLBOX
59
To rhe statesman.guiding a difficult programme IO success may . . . resemble the art of driving an automobile over an icy road: his problem is to anticipate the skids quickly enough so that he can still control them by small corrections at the steering wheel, where slowness of rhe action or oversteering would provide worse skids and might wreck the car.
We have observed, above, that power, ‘the iron law of politics’, is much beloved by statecentrist writers. Power can be treated in a behaviouralist way: here one speaks also of inauthority, intentions, motives, fluence, and outcapabilities, force, manipulation comes. Here, power is not so much an entity as a feature of various relationships. We spoke also, above, of operational definitions. It is possible to examine power in terms of crisis management. Williams (1975) examines decisions made in situations of crisis: how are events controlled? how is miscalculawhat is the process of tion avoided? ‘escalation’? Holsti (1977) looks at Europe in 1914 and Cuba in 1962: he examines both written documents exchanged by governments and stock and bond prices, as measures of ‘financial atmosphere’. How does high stress impair decision-making? What is ‘perceived hostility’, and how is ‘selective perception’ increased? One is aware, at an uncritical level, of the importance of language in politics - in ‘cold war’, ‘unconditional surrender’, ‘iron curtain’, and ‘Ulster Loyalists’ we have examples of words which have developed their own power to command. The cybernetic approach, the social communication approach are more deliberate focuses of study. Examined here are the theory of messages, cross-cultural relations, diplomacy and statecraft. Fisher (1972) is an anthropologist and a diplomat: International Relations, he asset ts, can no longer be conducted in a vacuum by a professional elite policy-makers must have a deeper understanding of foreign cultures. Northrop (1971) looks to the spiritual and philosophical premises characteristic of Western, Asiatic and Communist societies. Merritt (1972) asks: did American journalists in the 195Os, by adopting the administration’s perceptions in the struggle in Vietnam, contribute to subsequent American involvement? Franck and Weisband (1972) examine verbal strategy among the super-powers. (iv) Whar happens, and when? To evaluate
60
E. LIGCETT
stability and/or, change we should look, not to process, but to time-spans. McClelland (1966, Chapter 2) will introduce us to the historical sociologies of transformation - to ‘progress’, ‘revolutionary and ‘cyclical jumps’, movements’. Luard (1976) takes us, with neat chronology, through types of international society: 771-221B.C. Chinese multistate system 600-388B.C. Greek city states 1300-1559 Age of Dynasties 1599-1640 Age of Religions 1648-1789 Age of Sovereignty 1789-1914 Age of Nationalism 1918-1974 Age of Ideology Transformation may be examined in narrower rather than broader historical surveys. Current focuses are: technological development; military technology and the warfare state; the population explosion; environmental and ecological problems: and, the multiplication of the number of states and its efforts on ideologies and alliances. Urban and Glenny (1972) ask: ‘Can we survive?’ See also Sullivan and Sattler (1972). STUDENTS: ACCESS TO STUDIES Adult educators are constantly involved in ‘practical training’ - telling students about libraries, essay-writing, and so on. To justify the proposals related to teaching presented by
the present article, and to fulfii an earlier promise, the writer must end by discussing a number of topics which relate specifically to the teacher-student interface. The first reference is about the student’s introduction to basic textbooks. It will be convenient to remain, in this reference, with the study of International Affairs. We know that in International Affairs there occurs a stream of ongoing events, there exists a complex ‘social actuality’. The work of an academic commentator must have some relationship to this actuality, some connection with the ‘world visible before our eyes’. How can connections be charted? This writer may deal with ‘concrete’ events, that writer with ‘abstractions’ - the latter standing back from ‘reality’ and analysing or synthesizing. There are few pure stylistic this man journalist, that man types philosopher or methodologist - but writers who show variations of emphasis. Table 5, constitutes one method of introducing students to writers. The second reference refers to policymaking. There is a jocular cry known to academics: ‘Never mind the ball, let us get on with the match!’ In other words, essential truth escapes us for the moment but let us keep on talking. Scholars cannot aid statesmen by producing ‘essential trurh’ (the ball) but have, with statesmen, to act (get on with the match) using
Table 5 Author
Burton (1965) Burton (1972) Deutsch (1968) Forward (1971) Frankel (1969) Frankel (1973a) Frankel (1973b) McClelland (1966) Northedge (1974) Reynolds ( I97 I) Reynolds (1973) Ward (1978)
Descriptive orientation (e.g. ‘World politics’)
Descriptive and analytical orientation (subject or topic emphasis)
X
X X X
X
X X
Synthetic or methodological orientation (technical, disciplinary, or philosophical concerns)
X X X X X X
X X X
X X
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND THE SOCIAL
INTERNATIONAL Development
SCIENCE
TOOLBOX
61
AND FOREIGN
I Prelimrnary of international studies. Centres figures in the field
2. Lecture Themes (a) Sub-national concerns: revolution and violence, aspects of economic activity, interest groups
of study,
authoritative
3. International Sfudies Behind the lecture themes recognize the following distinctions:
World Polirics - the apex problems, i.e. ‘current affairs’ with emphasis on topicality and relevance
(b) State and Nation: the affairs of certain states, say USA or Germany in an election year, or Soviet foreign policy-making
International Affairs the analytical instead of the descriptive approach, the boundaries and content of the academic field. Here distinguish:
(c) Relations between states with emphasis on security and economic management at world and regional levels
International Relations from
(d) Supernationality: attempts to order affairs at a level above the state
Comparafive Politics Note that
Interaction Analysis and
(e) The multinational companies - capitalist foreign policies
Linkage Politics draw together study of internal and external politics. Foreign Policy studies look to the articulation of aims, Diplomatic Studies look to accommodations
Current preoccupations Israel, Rhodesia, Ulster are accommodated where appropriate
4. Theory and Method We can study ‘hard’ international relations - the state system, the ‘billiard ball’ model of the world. We can study ‘soft’ international relations, using a behavioural approach. Here one looks to systems in actions - e.g. to ‘communications’ studies - how do states speak to each other? ‘Transformation’ examined through the growth of armaments; ‘Power and influence’ through the Vietnam war; ‘Communication’ through Ulster; ‘System’ through the European Economic Community. 5. Theory and Policy ‘Ask the time, and you get a history of Swiss watch-making’, Frankel (1973b, p. 3). But does discursive description take enough?
us far
Reading A. Boyd, Atlas of Current Affairs, Methuen, latest edition. F. S. Northedge, Descenr from Power - Brirish Foreign Policy 1945-1973, Alien & Unwin, J. W. Burton, World Socief_v, Cambridge, 1972.
Fig. 2.
1974.
E. LIGCETT
62
whatever ‘perceptions of regularity’ or ‘conceptual ‘maps are to hand. One dimension was missing in the table. It should be noted that some writers - e.g. Burton - show a leaning towards prescription. Students should enjoy debating the question of the utility of academics. Shonfield (Morgan, 1972, p. 12) is clear: The business of scholars is to provide models of the international system which can be used by practical men of affairs to interpret new events in a way which assists them to make rational decisions.
But, while certain extra-governmental analysts are well-known and respected Alastair Buchan, Albert Wohlstetter - there are many examples of despairing rejection. ‘Complain of a pain in the stomach, and one is given a description of techniques of appendectomy!’ Can the academic provide appropriate models for practical men? The former can declare: ‘here is the focus of transformation, and this is how we can relate it to the “process of decolonization”; here is the concept of power, examined in the context of Vietnam; here is sysrems theory, let us apply it to “the making of American foreign policy”; and here is the area of communications studies, and this is how it helps us to understand Northern Ireland.’ But have practical men the time to listen? The third reference is to the syllabus, the teacher’s statement of strategy. The syllabus answers the question: what is this course attempting? It should seek to create progressive inquiry with due academic rigour, should demonstrate a sense of direction. There must be flexibility in working through the syllabus. There exists in military thinking the idea of an ‘operation’ something midway between strategy and tactics. This idea or device may solve a teaching problem: an ‘operation’ might involve the launching of an ‘internal series’ of lectures wher.ein there is progression but also overlan for reinforcement: I. British foreign policy + Europe since 1945: 2. Britian and Europe + the concept of
integration; 3. The EEC + the concept of environmenf (US, Commonwealth, NATO, etc.) Summary: what is foreign policy?
In teaching there must be innovation. Can the teacher be wholly involved if he is delivering totally familiar material? There is, however, one standard injunction never to be forgotten: ‘Lead, but not so far ahead that students lose the scent!’ This article has concerned itself with ‘complexity of theory’, and with the question as to how elements of that complexity may be transmitted to students. The answer, the writer feels, lies in the ‘zip-fastener approach’ to teaching - the known, or the easy-to-know, is interlocked with the unknown, the scholarly paradigm. The syllabus which constitutes Fig. 2 is offered as an example of the method. REFERENCES Akehurst, M. (1970) A ,Modern lnlroducrron 10 Itriernational Law. Allen & Unwin, London. Bell. D. B. (1968) Logic and epistemology. In Phi/osoph> (edited by Hirst, R. J.) pp. 17-56. Routledge, London. Brown, S., Fauvel, J. and Finnegan, R. (1981) Conceprronc of Inquir.~, Methuen in association with the Open University Press, London. Burton, J. (1972) WorM .Socie/v. Cambridge Uni\er\it> Press, London. Burton, J. (1965) Inrernatronal Relarions: a eeneral rheor,v. Cambridge University Press. London. Carr, E. H. (1946) The Twen!.v Years’ Crr.rir. Macmillan, London. Cosgrove. C. A. and Twitchetr, K. J. (1970) TheNew Inrernational Actors the UN and rhe EEC. Macmillan. London. Crick, B. (1966) The tendency of political xrudiec. .Ve\r .Socre(_v, 3 November. Deutsch. K. W. (1967) Communication model\ and decision Fyytems. In Contemporary Political Anal_vrk (edited b) Charlesworth, J. C.) Free Press. New York; CollierMacmillan, London. Deutsch. K. W. (1968) The Ana/_vtrs of lnfernarional Relations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliff?. NJ. Emmet, E. R. (1968) Learnrne IO Philosophrze. Penguin, London. Fither, G. H. (1972) Public D!plomac_v and the Behavroral Sciences. Indiana University Press. Bloomington. Forsyth. M. G.. Keens-Soper. H. hl. A. and Savigear, P. ( 1970) The Theon, (?f lrrrernarror~al Relarions. Allen & Unwin. London. Forward. N. (I9711 The Field o/ Narronr. Llacmillan. London. Frank, T. M. and Weisband. E. ted\) (1972) W’orld Polirrcc. verbal rlrole,e_r amone super-powerr. Ou ford rhe University Press. I ondon. Frankel. J. C1969) Inrernariorral Relarw~s. Oxford IJI~IL~~\II? Press, London. I rankel, J. (1973a) Inrernotronul Polr~~cr ~wr~.flrc~ and und hurtt~ot~_v. Penguin. London
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND
THE
J. (1973b) Con/emporary Inrernorional Theorv and (he Behavrour of Stares. Oxford University Press,
SOCIAL
SCIENCE
TOOLBOX
F. S. (197 I) Taming of fhe Notions: a srud_vof fhe culrural bases of international politics. Hafner.
Frankel,
Northrop,
London. George, S. (1978) Schools of thought in international relations. In The Reason of Stores(edited by Donelan, M.) pp. 206-213. Allen & Unwin, London. Hinsley, F. H. (1963) Power and rhe Pursuir of Peace.
New York. Pye, L. W. (1964)
Cambridge University Press, London. Hinsley, F. H. (1966) Sovereign/_v. Basic Books, New York. Hinsley, F. H. (1973) Nationalism and lhe Inrernarional S.vsrem. Hodder & Stoughton, London. Holsti. J. (1977) Inrernarional Politics: a framework for ana/.vsis, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, London. Kuhn , A. ( 1966) The 3ud.v of Society - a mulridisciplinary approach. Tavistock, London. Leftwich, A. (1982) Social science, social relevance, and the politics of educational development. Inrernarional Journal of Educarronal Development I, 13-27. Leifer, M. (1972) Consrrainrs and Adjuslmenrs in Brirish Foreign Policy, Allen & Unwin, London. Luard, E. (1976) Tvpes of Inrernarional Socierv. CollierMacmillan, London. MacKenzie, W. J. M. (1971) The Study of PoliricalScience Todqv, Macmillan, London. McClelland, C. A. (1966) Theory and the Internotional @stem, Macmillan, New York; Collier-Macmillan, London. Magee, B. (1973) Popper. Fontana, London. Merritt, R. L. (ed.) (1972) Communicarion in Inrernofional Politics. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Ill. Morgan, R. (1972) The Srudy of Inrernafional Affairs: essqvs in honour of Kenneth Younger. Oxford University Press, London. Morgenthau, H. J. (1973) Polirics Among Notions: rhe srruggle for power and peace, 5th edn. Knopf, New York. Northedge. F. S. (1974) Descenr from Power British foreign policv 1945-73. Allen & Unwin, London.
63
Decision-making. In A Dictionary of (edited by Gould, J. and Kolb, W. L.) Tavistock, London. Reynolds, P. A. (1971) An Introduction IO Inrernational Relations. Longman, London. Reynolds, P. A. (1973) Theory and Explanarion in Inrernotional Politics. Martin Robertson, London. Roberts, G. K. (1971) A Diciionary of Polirical Analysis. Longmans, London. Rose, R. (1968) Pa/icy-making in Brifain. Macmillan, London. Sims, N. A. (1972) Commitment to the study of international relations. Paper delivered at UK Political Studies Association 23rd Conference, Edinburgh. Spragens. T. A. (1973) The Dilemma of Contemporary
the Social Sciences
Political Theory: foward ‘IIpost-behavioural science of polificol. Martin Robertson, London. Starke. J. C. (1947) Introduction IO Inlernarional Law. Butterworth, Sullivan,
London.
D. and Sattler,
M. J. (1972) Change in the Furure Columbia University Press,
of rhe Inrernarionol System. New York.
Tinker, H. (19644) Broken-backed 30 January. Urban, Our
states.
New
G. R. and Glenny, M. (eds.) (1972) Can We Bodley Head, London.
Sociefy, Survive
Future?
Ward, H. (1978) BBC/Heinemann,
World Powers in rhe Twentieth Century.
Williams, P. (1975) London. Wittgenstein, Routledge,
London.
Crisis Manogemenr.
L. (1961) London.
Martin
Robertson,
Troc~ofus Logico-Philosophicus.
Wright, Q. (1955) The Srudy of Infernational Appleton-Century-Croft, New York.
Relations.
EDUCATION
AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCE
TOOLBOX
ERIC LIGGETT Muirhead,
34 Balfron
Road,
Killearn,
Glasgow
G63 9NW,
UK
Abstracl - The demand by many students and by some teachers that the material of social studies should be made ‘relevant’ is a worthy one. That attention is paid to the demand is evident from the fact that ‘project’, ‘case-study’, ‘problem-centred’, and ‘multidisciplinary’ approaches to teaching are sometimes employed. To acknowledge that these approaches are useful is not to admit that they and they alone reflect the ‘real’ world. Academic analysis - of disciplines, of conceptual frameworks - is as ‘real’ as the human beings who carry it forward. There is a ‘grammar’ of social st.udies which exists behind both the many discrete areas of study made available in universities and student-centred methods of teaching mentioned above. The writer, who works in the field of adult education, argues that teachers should stand ready to transmit this ‘grammar’. He seeks to show how this may be done. He outlines briefly the chief concerns of the philosophy of social science, and those of that interdisciplinary area known as international Studies. Finally, to make manifest his concern for students, he examines certain questions - the classification of textbooks, the effectiveness of academics as consultants, the presentation of the syllabus - which relate specifically to the teacher-student relationship, and which have an imporant bearing upon students’ access to studies.
world, rather than the complexity of theory about it’ (Leftwich, 1982, p. 19). One notes the use of the word ‘initial’. The present writer read the well-argued article, from which the quotation is derived, with total sympathy. On reflection, however, came worry about references to the ‘real’ world, of which the student should be informed. Is the academic, or his theory, less real than the prime minister and his speech, the army and its advance? It is legitimate for a student to demand ‘relevant’ information; but can a teacher clearly designate the ‘relevant’ needs of a group, or the ‘practical’ needs of a single student over time? The present writer makes two statements: practicality, or relevance, can be aided by a wider academic view of whatever ‘substantive materials are to be taught (as it happens the writer shares the field of political studies with Leftwich); and, the wider academic view is vital to the teacher because of is position vis-ci-vis both individuals and groups with varying needs and demands. The teacher needs to be aware of a wide conspectus the better to teach appropriately in changing situations. Consider the sequence: (a) ‘social fact’, (b) description, (c) analysis, (d) synthesis. The sequence comprehends everything - from a
INTRODUCTION If I tell you what went on in the British House of Commons yesterday I am a storyteller, a journalist. If I relate what went on ten years ago I may be deemed to be a historian or a political scientist. If I write about yesterday’s events with great skill and a wealth of allusion I may attract all three labels. The writer on historians is sometimes called a hisforiographer: the writer who concerns himself with the most general concerns of history and historians is a philosopher of history, just as his colleague down the corridor is a philosopher of social science. The people designated above work in three spheres of activity, which are not separate from each other. In ascending order of complexity we have: description of discrete areas of social activity; ana/y.sis of disciplinary territories; and synthesis of human knowledge. In an ideal world, academics might all be polymaths, we might all be omnicompetent. But what about students, and our relationship with students? The production of this article was stimulated by the reading of the following: ‘The emphasis of the initial [teaching] objective should be to help students understand the complexity of the 53
E. LIGGETT
54
citizen’s viewing of a street-riot to the professor’s refinement of a methodological technique. Can the student be satisfied with studies of (a) and (b) and dispense with analysis and synthesis, because these latter are redundant? No. The fact is that (c) and (d) condition (a) and (b) - perceptions of ‘fact’ and conceptual appraisals help to shape ‘reality’. If the student neglects (c) analysis, and (d) synthesis, he or she then becomes the passive recipient of somebody else’s*perceptions and appraisals. Of course, one must know one’s students. How deep does this student wish to delve? In the end it is a matter of tools and jobs. The student must develop his tools or resources for academic work - not for making pies, building ships, or eventually shooting other soldiers. The student needs ‘pools of competence’ in order to launch his educational ‘task forces’. This article is a hunt for that rare beast, the ‘conceptual framework’. The writer concedes that it must end in a discussion of narrowlydefined student-centered issues. DELIMITATIONS SOCIAL
OF SCOPE SCIENCE
IN
Mackenzie (1971) gave an overview of the concerns of the political scientist. Leaning heavily on this publication, the present subsection of this article outlines what we might
Table Subject matter (What must be rtudied?)
Objectives
present to students as the baldest statement of the concerns of social science. Note the restricted use of the term ‘Subject matter’. The whole of the table is our subject matter in fact but we need to separate out objectives and methods. We are not speaking of watertight divisions of studies, but of dimensions; this is emphasized if one looks at column one of Table 1 in a political context: Political structures embody norms and frame behaviour, Political norms are realized within structures and illustrated through behaviour, Political behaviour occurs within structure and demonstrates norms. What are the objectives of our studies? The German philospher Windelband made a distinction which appears in column two, Table 1, and is elaborated in Table 2. When we speak about method - column three Table 1 - we first make a fundamental distinction: in the act of philosophizing there are those (the rationalists) who sit and think, and those (the empiricists) who go out and see (Emmet, 1968, p. 11). Again, we may illustrate this distinction in tabular form, in Table 3. The above matter relates to the bare essentials of conceptions of inquiry (Brown et al., 198 1). The writer, Fig. 1, makes an additional distinction, important in discussions of social science.
I Fundamental? of method
(What does one hope IO discern?)
(How doe5 one go about it?)
Structural
Idiographic
Rationalism~Empiricism
Normarivc
Nomothetic
Stage{: decline progress development
Behavioural
Ecology:
\ociery cnvironmenr
Tools: language 01 variable\ model5 decision\
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND
THE
SOCIAL
Inducrion
55
TOOLBOX
Deducrion
Reasoning from the particular to the general, from facts to conclusions Observation of individual cases
SCIENCE
--+
Reasoning from principle or law to consequence or application
General statement or law
--$
Assumed consequences or application
Fig. I.
From the above elements of the philosophy of social science we derive an important short vocabulary: Logic teaches us the rules of good argument, it provides us with a battery of tests to tell us whether a conclusion follows from a given set of premises, it enables us to ‘arrange our ignorance’ (Bell, 1968). Logic is framework, not content; Methodology is a word used by academics for ‘review of methods’. Traditionally a branch of logic, methodology involves a systematic study of the principles guiding scientific investigation. Its interests are in the general grounds for the establishing of the validity of theories, the evaluation of procedures and techniques as to their ability to provide us with degrees of certainty;
A model is a design chosen for or evolving from academic work. It is an abstraction from ‘reality’ - presented mathematically, physically, graphically, or in a simple literary way. It is an artificial device for comparing, measuring, experimenting and guiding observation. ‘One of the most important functions of models is to generate hypotheses which otherwise might not occur to the observer and which can be tested by reference to factual data.’ (Burton, 1965, p. 163); A concept refers to the meaning conveyed by a word which represents an idea, capable of Table Rationalism
Empiricism
Characterization
Metaphysical - concern for the nature of being Search for permanent truths, values, realities
Emphasis on experience Seeks systematic and formulated knowledge
Assertions
Knowledge is founded on intuitions and operations of reason
Knowledge is based upon or derived from sensory experience
Denials
Rejects sensory experience as a source of truth. Science cannot reach beyond its own assumptions, is inadequate for dealing with ultimate causes, values, or permanent truths
Pure reason is is severely limited as a source of factual knowledge
Table 2
Objective
.4pproach or characterization
Roo1s
Idiographic
Nomothetic
Full and exhaustive treatment leading to particular and restricted propositions as in, say. historical studies Cultural analysis, description of concrete, unique. non-recurrent events
Finding of perceived regularities, laws and general propositions as in, say, physics
The humanistic tradition
Empirical search for abstract statements
The scientific tradition
3
56
E. LIGGET’T
forming its own category of objects, phenomena, or processes e.g. power, infegration. A concept is something necessarily indistinct, not clear-cut or precise, something important but tricky, something for endless discussion; An axiom is an established principle, for believers a self-evident truth; An hypothesis is a tentative presumption of relationship between phenomena, a groundless assumption; A theory, proper, relates to a system of validated hypotheses, to logical expectation which has been tested and which, therefore, is regarded as offering acceptable explanation; A law is a correct statement of invariable sequence. Frankel (!973a, p. 20) states: ‘in defiance of scientific usage some theoreticians insist on calling “theories” their conceptual frameworks, approaches and models, however loosely constructed, although these do not consist of propositions leading to testable predictions.’ On the following page he asserts that, ‘a theory claims correctness: a model is merely a convenient way of loking at things’. A word of warning is due, too, in relations to laws: Popper’s solution begins by pointing IO a logical asymmetry between verification and falsification. To express it in terms of the logic of statements: although no number of... observations of white swans allows us logically to derive the universal statement, “All swans are white”, one single observation statement, reporting one single observation of a black swan, allows us logically to derive the statment, “Not all swans are white”. In this important logical sense empirical generalizations, though not verifiable, are falsifiable. (Magee, 1973, pp. 22/23) Is knowledge possible? As academics we worry about this question, and each of us needs a ‘delimitation of scope’. We all feel the need for order, principle, coherence in our lives. As private citizens or as scholars we ask: what are the parts and how do they fit together? McClelland (1966, p. 27) talks of ‘imagebuilding’ and declares: ‘image and its deliberate relative, theory, present and ordering of significance - a working definition of what is to be regarded as important’. The writer works in the field of adult education and does not need to be convinced of the importance of ‘applied’ studies, of projects and
case studies. Nor of the need for interdisciplinarity. In respect of the politics discipline, Crick (1966) points to its lack of autonomy. Long a battle-ground between historians and philosophers, it is not a discipline but a range of conventionally-related problems - at best a discipline of dispersed relevancies. It is the most imperialistic, most cheerfuly ecumenical social science which involves the crossing and recrossing of bridges into philosophy, economics, sociology, and so on. The two points made about ‘applied’ and interdisciplinary studies, however, make one think back to undergraduate days. Often came the fugitive thought that the teacher was not telling all, that he could well have paused awhile to explain vocabulary. We may decide to learn French by the ‘direct method’, and neglect grammar. Or we may decide to approach the task through talk of ‘verbs’, ‘prepositions’, ‘declensions’, and ‘nouns’, ‘conjugations’. The social science student may, in due season, benefit from the provision of a ‘grammar’. THE CASE
OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
‘The limits of my language mean the limits of my world’ declares Wittgenstein (1961, p. 5.6). Not every student will need to have his or her world enlarged by the provision of a formal exposition of the general concerns of social science. But the teacher should hold such general concerns in reserve, to be elaborated as elucidation or interstitial comment. There exists a second method whereby the teacher may help the student to learn in an economical manner, which is, after all, our major concern. This is to explore the disciplinary territory. Advocates of ‘policy studies’ may well find this second method of giving aid more acceptable than the first. Each discipline - politics, economics, sociology, etc. develops its own vocabulary: we can superimpose the disciplinary over the social science vocabulary, as if usmg transparencies with an overhead projector. To illustrate, the writer uses International Studies - which has the advantage of being an interdisciplinary area. First (a) come ‘macro’ approaches, then
ADULT EDUCATION
AND THE SOCIAL SCIENCE
(b) ‘micro’ approaches. (a) Schools of study International Studies, primarily concerned with the interaction of governed countries, emphasizing national interests, is encompassed by no over-arching theoretical framework. The social scientist is, with other scholars, concerned with the distinction between ‘science’ and ‘non-science’: of the output of the academic corpus, George (1978, p. 207) judges that International Studies are pre-scientific. There exist a number of competing, isolated schools and models, each with its own private language. In writing on International Studies there have existed three major schools (and one subschool, below): classical, traditional, and behavioural. Classical writing is quickly described as being simply one division of the field we know as ‘political philosophy’. Here there is broad discussion of ‘war’, ‘just war’, ‘peace’, ‘justice’, and so on. This writing may be approached through Forsyth et al. (1970). Traditional writing which of course includes some contemporary work, is concerned with the state and with power. Here there is concern for the centrality of force in international affairs. Hence the term ‘hard International Studies’. One also reads of ‘state-centric realist’ or ‘atomistic’ studies, of the ‘billiard ball model’ - the billiard table is the world and the billiard balls are the states ‘bouncing’ off each other. Typical of this kind of writing are: Carr (1946), Morgenthau (1973), Hinsley (1963, 1966, 1973) and Wright (1955). Legal writing is a sub-school of classical and traditional writing. Introductions are provided by Akelhurst (1970) or Starke (1947). Behavioural studies are ‘soft’ studies, and the scholar uses, not the ‘billiard’ model, but the ‘cobweb’ model. From a feeling that traditional approaches were sterile, from radical concern for ‘real’ problem focuses, writers have desired to redraw ‘cognitive maps’. Behavioural studies are much more than ‘current affairs’, ‘applied of things-going-on-at-the-moment. studies’ Such studies seek to generate and test verifiable scientific explanations by paying attention to aspects of systems in action. Involved are all the
TOOLBOX
57
activities of governments and apparently unorganized actors, and high-level and lowlevel, total or partial phenomena. The method of the behavioural investigator is to: -
-
-
emphasize quantification, or measurement; search for operational definitions, to convert ideas or concepts into processes of measurement to secure more specific meaning; avoid prescriptive statements, to involve himself in ‘realism’, in causal theory rather than value theory; welcome interdisciplinary research. In political areas, e.g. to welcome psychological and sociological as well as legal or institutional explanations.
One can recommend here Roberts (1971), McClelland (1966), and Forward (197 1). There has been much debate about the split between traditional and behavioural studies. The former have had a strong base in the UK, the latter in the USA. There are cultural explanations. Americans cling to a belief in ‘progress’, have reached for exact knowledge, and have enthusiastically sought the aid of applied science. Confident in their past economic successes, they have tried to extend problem-solving techniques from business studies to the international arena. Admiring mechanical systems - from the automobile to guided-missiles - they have sought to harness the computer to social science needs. If we can control nature, why not human affairs? The cultural thrust of American policy has been reinforced by concern stemming from burdens acquired along with world-role responsibilities. The British, for a much longer period than Americans, have exercised a global outlook and have provided a strong base for traditionalist writing. Behaviouralism in Britain, where accepted, has been a matter of conceptual innovation, not scientific dogmatism (Sims, 1972). The split between traditionalists and behaviouralists may be regarded as a useful division-of-labour among academics, or as leading to the disintegration of an interdisciplinary study-area. Behaviouralism pretends to a global sphere of concern - it will
E. LIGGETT
58
embrace study of great men, states, and language of the indicators, economic diplomatic traffic - but is heavily criticised. Attacked as ‘abstract scientism’, the complaint is that behaviouralism is mainly concerned with methodological advance and neglects substance - much of its effort is formal, providing no coherent pictures of ‘real life’. The search for precise methodological procedures has thrown up an academic joke: ‘With the expenditure of an immense amount of time and money, Political Science (or Psychology, Economics,
achieve a highly desirable general consensus of the majority of scholars, it will be necessary to reach agreement, if not about general theory or model, at least about some common organizing concept, a common nucleus of analysis’. It may be less contentious, more rewarding if we concentrate, not on the traditionalist/behaviouralist split, above, but on other focuses, making whatever use we can of the contribution of the several schools already described. We might accommodate our studies in the Table 4 schema:
Table 4. (0
(ii).
(iii)
(iv)
Actors Organizations Institutions
Environment Ecology Society
Communications Transactions Decisions
Change Transformation Stages Progress Decline Development
Sociology.. .) will eventially overtake commonsense! ’ Behaviouralists need to abandon their computers, their methodology and sit and think about goals and values: traditionalists need to leave the library and ‘science-up’ their activities. In fact, for more than a decade, scholars have spoken of the ‘post-behavioural revolution’ (Spragens, 1973). Our science does not reach far, we do not know laws, we have not been able to move from sets of hypotheses to sets of tested propositions. There has been a falling-back on values and issues of social and political responsibility. Conditions favour a rethinking of positions: Britain has suffered a decline in her world position and cannot afford to maintain her complacent ‘library-based’ world-view; the United States has suffered under the impact of Watergate, Vietnam, social unrest and urban devastation and must shed her naive view of ‘progress’, her faith in a selfjustifying technological-managerial society. (b) Focuses of srudy Alfred Kuhn (1966 p. x) says: ‘Unless the major concepts and types of analysis for dealing with social phenomena can be both standardized and drastically reduced in number, we may be swamped by the sheer mass of information...‘. Frankel (1973a. p. 28) declares: ‘To
One may note, here, that in studying elements of the social whole the items in our tabulation might have been rendered into everyday language by the simple substitution of the interrogatives: Who?, What?, When?, How?, Why? and Where?. (i) Who is involved? Is it a nation, a department of state, a personality, a church, or a We may study multinational company? Anthony Eden and Suez, the Foreign Office view of Southern Africa, or official Catholic opinion on Northern Ireland. Multinational companies are an important focus of study today (see Leifer, .1972, Chapter X). Cosgrove and Twitchett (1970) edit studies of the United Nations and the European Economic Community: the essays seek to show the extent to which these organizations play significant roles in their own right in international affairs. (ii) Where does it happen? The study of system and environment lends a spatial dimension to political studies. Systems anal_vsis embodies a shift in academic interest a departure from attention of international balances and structures towards the processes of relations between states, from forms of institutions to the processes of politics. There is a shift of attention from decisions as the outcome of deliberate acts of choice made by individuals
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND
THE
or groups in institutional settings, to decisions as the outcome of complexes of interdependent events. As its extreme, the ‘systems’ view would hold that there is no such thing as ‘British Foreign Policy’, only a ‘British foreign policy process’. There is justification for this. In studying the UK’s contacts with the EEC in the early 196Os, for example, one finds an infinite number of activities occurring internally and externally: it is better, perhaps, to seek to view these as ‘system’, than to try to impose a sequential order, build a chronology, or to concentrate on the thinking of a particular statesman. Tinker (1964) provides a nice example of system. In the West, political institutions are seen as a source of strength, government provides a national backbone. In the non-West, state-level politics is a cloak which can be discarded: the sources of real strength are religion, family, local community, tradition and magic. The failure of a government or regime does not mean that there will be a breakdown of local life in ‘broken-backed states’. (iii) How and why do rhings happen? Pye ( 1964) says: The standard convention is 10 reserve the term decisionfor one who has formal responsibilities for formulating the policies of an organization, usually an institution of government. Decision-making, however, denores rhe dynamic process of interaction among all parricipants who determine a particular policy choice, officials as well as non-officials.
ruoker
Does the occasion for decision involve action or reaction, response to internal planning or to external initiatives? What degree of anticipation has been possible? Do the decision-makers have ample time, or are they working against an impending deadline? Decisions may involve routine or marginal consequences or high risks: here one may study the scope and domain of values involved - the number and quality of values, the number of persons and groups interested. Rose ( 1969, pp. x-xl) prefers the term policymaking. Attention should focus, not on discrete decisions, but on long processes of related activities. The maintenance of strategic purpose through a sequence of changing tactical goals is tricky. As Deutsch (1967, p. 281) says:
SOCIAL
SCIENCE
TOOLBOX
59
To rhe statesman.guiding a difficult programme IO success may . . . resemble the art of driving an automobile over an icy road: his problem is to anticipate the skids quickly enough so that he can still control them by small corrections at the steering wheel, where slowness of rhe action or oversteering would provide worse skids and might wreck the car.
We have observed, above, that power, ‘the iron law of politics’, is much beloved by statecentrist writers. Power can be treated in a behaviouralist way: here one speaks also of inauthority, intentions, motives, fluence, and outcapabilities, force, manipulation comes. Here, power is not so much an entity as a feature of various relationships. We spoke also, above, of operational definitions. It is possible to examine power in terms of crisis management. Williams (1975) examines decisions made in situations of crisis: how are events controlled? how is miscalculawhat is the process of tion avoided? ‘escalation’? Holsti (1977) looks at Europe in 1914 and Cuba in 1962: he examines both written documents exchanged by governments and stock and bond prices, as measures of ‘financial atmosphere’. How does high stress impair decision-making? What is ‘perceived hostility’, and how is ‘selective perception’ increased? One is aware, at an uncritical level, of the importance of language in politics - in ‘cold war’, ‘unconditional surrender’, ‘iron curtain’, and ‘Ulster Loyalists’ we have examples of words which have developed their own power to command. The cybernetic approach, the social communication approach are more deliberate focuses of study. Examined here are the theory of messages, cross-cultural relations, diplomacy and statecraft. Fisher (1972) is an anthropologist and a diplomat: International Relations, he asset ts, can no longer be conducted in a vacuum by a professional elite policy-makers must have a deeper understanding of foreign cultures. Northrop (1971) looks to the spiritual and philosophical premises characteristic of Western, Asiatic and Communist societies. Merritt (1972) asks: did American journalists in the 195Os, by adopting the administration’s perceptions in the struggle in Vietnam, contribute to subsequent American involvement? Franck and Weisband (1972) examine verbal strategy among the super-powers. (iv) Whar happens, and when? To evaluate
60
E. LIGCETT
stability and/or, change we should look, not to process, but to time-spans. McClelland (1966, Chapter 2) will introduce us to the historical sociologies of transformation - to ‘progress’, ‘revolutionary and ‘cyclical jumps’, movements’. Luard (1976) takes us, with neat chronology, through types of international society: 771-221B.C. Chinese multistate system 600-388B.C. Greek city states 1300-1559 Age of Dynasties 1599-1640 Age of Religions 1648-1789 Age of Sovereignty 1789-1914 Age of Nationalism 1918-1974 Age of Ideology Transformation may be examined in narrower rather than broader historical surveys. Current focuses are: technological development; military technology and the warfare state; the population explosion; environmental and ecological problems: and, the multiplication of the number of states and its efforts on ideologies and alliances. Urban and Glenny (1972) ask: ‘Can we survive?’ See also Sullivan and Sattler (1972). STUDENTS: ACCESS TO STUDIES Adult educators are constantly involved in ‘practical training’ - telling students about libraries, essay-writing, and so on. To justify the proposals related to teaching presented by
the present article, and to fulfii an earlier promise, the writer must end by discussing a number of topics which relate specifically to the teacher-student interface. The first reference is about the student’s introduction to basic textbooks. It will be convenient to remain, in this reference, with the study of International Affairs. We know that in International Affairs there occurs a stream of ongoing events, there exists a complex ‘social actuality’. The work of an academic commentator must have some relationship to this actuality, some connection with the ‘world visible before our eyes’. How can connections be charted? This writer may deal with ‘concrete’ events, that writer with ‘abstractions’ - the latter standing back from ‘reality’ and analysing or synthesizing. There are few pure stylistic this man journalist, that man types philosopher or methodologist - but writers who show variations of emphasis. Table 5, constitutes one method of introducing students to writers. The second reference refers to policymaking. There is a jocular cry known to academics: ‘Never mind the ball, let us get on with the match!’ In other words, essential truth escapes us for the moment but let us keep on talking. Scholars cannot aid statesmen by producing ‘essential trurh’ (the ball) but have, with statesmen, to act (get on with the match) using
Table 5 Author
Burton (1965) Burton (1972) Deutsch (1968) Forward (1971) Frankel (1969) Frankel (1973a) Frankel (1973b) McClelland (1966) Northedge (1974) Reynolds ( I97 I) Reynolds (1973) Ward (1978)
Descriptive orientation (e.g. ‘World politics’)
Descriptive and analytical orientation (subject or topic emphasis)
X
X X X
X
X X
Synthetic or methodological orientation (technical, disciplinary, or philosophical concerns)
X X X X X X
X X X
X X
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND THE SOCIAL
INTERNATIONAL Development
SCIENCE
TOOLBOX
61
AND FOREIGN
I Prelimrnary of international studies. Centres figures in the field
2. Lecture Themes (a) Sub-national concerns: revolution and violence, aspects of economic activity, interest groups
of study,
authoritative
3. International Sfudies Behind the lecture themes recognize the following distinctions:
World Polirics - the apex problems, i.e. ‘current affairs’ with emphasis on topicality and relevance
(b) State and Nation: the affairs of certain states, say USA or Germany in an election year, or Soviet foreign policy-making
International Affairs the analytical instead of the descriptive approach, the boundaries and content of the academic field. Here distinguish:
(c) Relations between states with emphasis on security and economic management at world and regional levels
International Relations from
(d) Supernationality: attempts to order affairs at a level above the state
Comparafive Politics Note that
Interaction Analysis and
(e) The multinational companies - capitalist foreign policies
Linkage Politics draw together study of internal and external politics. Foreign Policy studies look to the articulation of aims, Diplomatic Studies look to accommodations
Current preoccupations Israel, Rhodesia, Ulster are accommodated where appropriate
4. Theory and Method We can study ‘hard’ international relations - the state system, the ‘billiard ball’ model of the world. We can study ‘soft’ international relations, using a behavioural approach. Here one looks to systems in actions - e.g. to ‘communications’ studies - how do states speak to each other? ‘Transformation’ examined through the growth of armaments; ‘Power and influence’ through the Vietnam war; ‘Communication’ through Ulster; ‘System’ through the European Economic Community. 5. Theory and Policy ‘Ask the time, and you get a history of Swiss watch-making’, Frankel (1973b, p. 3). But does discursive description take enough?
us far
Reading A. Boyd, Atlas of Current Affairs, Methuen, latest edition. F. S. Northedge, Descenr from Power - Brirish Foreign Policy 1945-1973, Alien & Unwin, J. W. Burton, World Socief_v, Cambridge, 1972.
Fig. 2.
1974.
E. LIGCETT
62
whatever ‘perceptions of regularity’ or ‘conceptual ‘maps are to hand. One dimension was missing in the table. It should be noted that some writers - e.g. Burton - show a leaning towards prescription. Students should enjoy debating the question of the utility of academics. Shonfield (Morgan, 1972, p. 12) is clear: The business of scholars is to provide models of the international system which can be used by practical men of affairs to interpret new events in a way which assists them to make rational decisions.
But, while certain extra-governmental analysts are well-known and respected Alastair Buchan, Albert Wohlstetter - there are many examples of despairing rejection. ‘Complain of a pain in the stomach, and one is given a description of techniques of appendectomy!’ Can the academic provide appropriate models for practical men? The former can declare: ‘here is the focus of transformation, and this is how we can relate it to the “process of decolonization”; here is the concept of power, examined in the context of Vietnam; here is sysrems theory, let us apply it to “the making of American foreign policy”; and here is the area of communications studies, and this is how it helps us to understand Northern Ireland.’ But have practical men the time to listen? The third reference is to the syllabus, the teacher’s statement of strategy. The syllabus answers the question: what is this course attempting? It should seek to create progressive inquiry with due academic rigour, should demonstrate a sense of direction. There must be flexibility in working through the syllabus. There exists in military thinking the idea of an ‘operation’ something midway between strategy and tactics. This idea or device may solve a teaching problem: an ‘operation’ might involve the launching of an ‘internal series’ of lectures wher.ein there is progression but also overlan for reinforcement: I. British foreign policy + Europe since 1945: 2. Britian and Europe + the concept of
integration; 3. The EEC + the concept of environmenf (US, Commonwealth, NATO, etc.) Summary: what is foreign policy?
In teaching there must be innovation. Can the teacher be wholly involved if he is delivering totally familiar material? There is, however, one standard injunction never to be forgotten: ‘Lead, but not so far ahead that students lose the scent!’ This article has concerned itself with ‘complexity of theory’, and with the question as to how elements of that complexity may be transmitted to students. The answer, the writer feels, lies in the ‘zip-fastener approach’ to teaching - the known, or the easy-to-know, is interlocked with the unknown, the scholarly paradigm. The syllabus which constitutes Fig. 2 is offered as an example of the method. REFERENCES Akehurst, M. (1970) A ,Modern lnlroducrron 10 Itriernational Law. Allen & Unwin, London. Bell. D. B. (1968) Logic and epistemology. In Phi/osoph> (edited by Hirst, R. J.) pp. 17-56. Routledge, London. Brown, S., Fauvel, J. and Finnegan, R. (1981) Conceprronc of Inquir.~, Methuen in association with the Open University Press, London. Burton, J. (1972) WorM .Socie/v. Cambridge Uni\er\it> Press, London. Burton, J. (1965) Inrernatronal Relarions: a eeneral rheor,v. Cambridge University Press. London. Carr, E. H. (1946) The Twen!.v Years’ Crr.rir. Macmillan, London. Cosgrove. C. A. and Twitchetr, K. J. (1970) TheNew Inrernational Actors the UN and rhe EEC. Macmillan. London. Crick, B. (1966) The tendency of political xrudiec. .Ve\r .Socre(_v, 3 November. Deutsch. K. W. (1967) Communication model\ and decision Fyytems. In Contemporary Political Anal_vrk (edited b) Charlesworth, J. C.) Free Press. New York; CollierMacmillan, London. Deutsch. K. W. (1968) The Ana/_vtrs of lnfernarional Relations. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliff?. NJ. Emmet, E. R. (1968) Learnrne IO Philosophrze. Penguin, London. Fither, G. H. (1972) Public D!plomac_v and the Behavroral Sciences. Indiana University Press. Bloomington. Forsyth. M. G.. Keens-Soper. H. hl. A. and Savigear, P. ( 1970) The Theon, (?f lrrrernarror~al Relarions. Allen & Unwin. London. Forward. N. (I9711 The Field o/ Narronr. Llacmillan. London. Frank, T. M. and Weisband. E. ted\) (1972) W’orld Polirrcc. verbal rlrole,e_r amone super-powerr. Ou ford rhe University Press. I ondon. Frankel. J. C1969) Inrernariorral Relarw~s. Oxford IJI~IL~~\II? Press, London. I rankel, J. (1973a) Inrernotronul Polr~~cr ~wr~.flrc~ and und hurtt~ot~_v. Penguin. London
ADULT
EDUCATION
AND
THE
J. (1973b) Con/emporary Inrernorional Theorv and (he Behavrour of Stares. Oxford University Press,
SOCIAL
SCIENCE
TOOLBOX
F. S. (197 I) Taming of fhe Notions: a srud_vof fhe culrural bases of international politics. Hafner.
Frankel,
Northrop,
London. George, S. (1978) Schools of thought in international relations. In The Reason of Stores(edited by Donelan, M.) pp. 206-213. Allen & Unwin, London. Hinsley, F. H. (1963) Power and rhe Pursuir of Peace.
New York. Pye, L. W. (1964)
Cambridge University Press, London. Hinsley, F. H. (1966) Sovereign/_v. Basic Books, New York. Hinsley, F. H. (1973) Nationalism and lhe Inrernarional S.vsrem. Hodder & Stoughton, London. Holsti. J. (1977) Inrernarional Politics: a framework for ana/.vsis, 3rd edn. Prentice-Hall, London. Kuhn , A. ( 1966) The 3ud.v of Society - a mulridisciplinary approach. Tavistock, London. Leftwich, A. (1982) Social science, social relevance, and the politics of educational development. Inrernarional Journal of Educarronal Development I, 13-27. Leifer, M. (1972) Consrrainrs and Adjuslmenrs in Brirish Foreign Policy, Allen & Unwin, London. Luard, E. (1976) Tvpes of Inrernarional Socierv. CollierMacmillan, London. MacKenzie, W. J. M. (1971) The Study of PoliricalScience Todqv, Macmillan, London. McClelland, C. A. (1966) Theory and the Internotional @stem, Macmillan, New York; Collier-Macmillan, London. Magee, B. (1973) Popper. Fontana, London. Merritt, R. L. (ed.) (1972) Communicarion in Inrernofional Politics. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, Ill. Morgan, R. (1972) The Srudy of Inrernafional Affairs: essqvs in honour of Kenneth Younger. Oxford University Press, London. Morgenthau, H. J. (1973) Polirics Among Notions: rhe srruggle for power and peace, 5th edn. Knopf, New York. Northedge. F. S. (1974) Descenr from Power British foreign policv 1945-73. Allen & Unwin, London.
63
Decision-making. In A Dictionary of (edited by Gould, J. and Kolb, W. L.) Tavistock, London. Reynolds, P. A. (1971) An Introduction IO Inrernational Relations. Longman, London. Reynolds, P. A. (1973) Theory and Explanarion in Inrernotional Politics. Martin Robertson, London. Roberts, G. K. (1971) A Diciionary of Polirical Analysis. Longmans, London. Rose, R. (1968) Pa/icy-making in Brifain. Macmillan, London. Sims, N. A. (1972) Commitment to the study of international relations. Paper delivered at UK Political Studies Association 23rd Conference, Edinburgh. Spragens. T. A. (1973) The Dilemma of Contemporary
the Social Sciences
Political Theory: foward ‘IIpost-behavioural science of polificol. Martin Robertson, London. Starke. J. C. (1947) Introduction IO Inlernarional Law. Butterworth, Sullivan,
London.
D. and Sattler,
M. J. (1972) Change in the Furure Columbia University Press,
of rhe Inrernarionol System. New York.
Tinker, H. (19644) Broken-backed 30 January. Urban, Our
states.
New
G. R. and Glenny, M. (eds.) (1972) Can We Bodley Head, London.
Sociefy, Survive
Future?
Ward, H. (1978) BBC/Heinemann,
World Powers in rhe Twentieth Century.
Williams, P. (1975) London. Wittgenstein, Routledge,
London.
Crisis Manogemenr.
L. (1961) London.
Martin
Robertson,
Troc~ofus Logico-Philosophicus.
Wright, Q. (1955) The Srudy of Infernational Appleton-Century-Croft, New York.
Relations.