Assessing Knowledge Retention, With and Without Simulations

Levin-Banchik, Luba

doi:10.1080/15512169.2017.1405355

Cited by 38 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Crisis escalation is a central topic in international relations research (Asal and Beardsley, 2007; Brecher and Wilkenfeld, 2000; Colaresi and Thompson, 2002: 274; James, 2019; Levin-Banchik, 2018; Reed, 2000). This research can be classified into three general approaches that emphasize different crisis and crisis actor attributes when explaining violent escalation.…”

Section: Research On Crisis Escalation and Precrisis Hostilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precrisis military hostility and escalation in international crises

Levin-Banchik

2020

Conflict Management and Peace Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why do some international crises escalate into violence while others do not? I argue that an understanding of crisis behavior necessitates awareness of the processes preceding a crisis and propose two mechanisms that link precrisis hostility with crisis violence. The population fatigue mechanism suggests that precrisis hostility interrupts the everyday life of a population, strengthening its demand for a harsher response. If leaders behave with restraint during a crisis and after the crisis hostilities resume, leaders risk facing greater dissatisfaction from their now even more fatigued population. The baseline for resolve mechanism suggests that if states are actively hostile before a crisis, they must maintain hostility during a crisis to credibly demonstrate resolve. Findings on international crises between 1918 and 2010 support the interphase relationship: a crisis escalation is significantly more likely after a hostile precrisis period. The behavior of opponents can indicate how crises might unfold even before they begin.

show abstract

Section: Research On Crisis Escalation and Precrisis Hostilitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Precrisis military hostility and escalation in international crises

Levin-Banchik

2020

Conflict Management and Peace Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To evaluate the simulation’s effectiveness as a teaching technique, I tested students’ learning and knowledge retention with an anonymous extra-credit pop quiz six weeks after the simulation (Levin-Banchik 2018). I gave quizzes to two matched classes: one that participated in the simulation and a debriefing and one that learned Kalyvas’s model through active learning and a subsequent classroom discussion applying the model to three cases studied earlier in the course (i.e., Syria, Yemen, and Libya).…”

Section: Assessing Student Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yet, despite its importance to conflict scholarship, Kalyvas’s control–collaboration model has not been previously simulated so that it may be taught in an intuitive manner to advanced students. This is unfortunate because simulations have proven to be valuable pedagogical tools for teaching abstract models of political behavior (Asal 2005; Brynen 2010; Haynes 2015; Kollars and Rosen 2017; Levin-Banchik 2018; Shellman and Turan 2006). Moreover, whereas The Logic of Violence in Civil War builds its theoretical scaffolding with exceptional clarity, the core of the control–collaboration model and its empirical implications may be less clear to undergraduates.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Control and Collaboration: Simulating the Logic of Violence in Civil War for Political Science Students

Mosinger

2019

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article outlines a classroom simulation of Kalyvas’s control–collaboration model of violence in civil war. Although central to conflict studies, the control–collaboration model has not been previously simulated so that it may be taught in an intuitive manner to advanced undergraduate students. The simulation presents students with strategic choices available to both armed actors and noncombatants in a contested village. The simulation captures three core elements of the control–collaboration model: (1) the joint production of violence by combatants and noncombatants; (2) the concentration of selective violence in zones of partial control; and (3) the disjuncture between a conflict’s master and local cleavages.

show abstract

“…Research indicates that active-learning exercises can both increase knowledge retention (Levin-Banchik 2018) and optimize student engagement (Prince 2004). Despite this evidence, the majority of political science instructors continue to rely on a combination of lectures, exams, and written work.…”

Section: Active Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Power Play: A Game Illustrating Power Transition in Authoritarian Regimes

Haynes

2019

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the most alarming trends of the past decade has been the rise in authoritarianism and the growing support of strongman politics among citizens of democratic regimes. College instructors have a unique opportunity to challenge such thinking at a time when many of their students are still forming their political beliefs. Using a game, instructors not only can show students the perils of authoritarianism, they also can potentially expand students’ appreciation of democracy. This article describes a game suitable for this purpose. Students take on the role of workers, soldiers, and rulers in a military dictatorship to learn about the “guns-and-butter tradeoff” and authoritarian uncertainty.

show abstract

Assessing Knowledge Retention, With and Without Simulations

Cited by 38 publications

References 61 publications

Precrisis military hostility and escalation in international crises

Precrisis military hostility and escalation in international crises

Control and Collaboration: Simulating the Logic of Violence in Civil War for Political Science Students

Power Play: A Game Illustrating Power Transition in Authoritarian Regimes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About