Session 4 Materials: Vox Article- Putin’s War on Ukraine, Explained
Focus Question: Why did Russia launch an offensive against Ukraine? How can the factors be analyzed at the individual, national and international level?
After covering more historical wars, we shifted our last lesson to be to the more contemporary causes of the Russian-Ukraine War. We opened the class with the Vox video before debriefing on the video’s main components, especially the implications of NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Following our typical structure, we then split the class into three groups to answer all four questions in a small-group discussion. Our final Thursday lesson was a Think-Pair-Share activity with a Q&A session at the end.
Contrary to the previous week’s lesson, this video was actually engaging to the students. Some students were still on their phones, but, when we did the debrief after, more students were willing to raise their hands to either answer our questions or ask questions before we even breached them. Student A, who I had barely heard from in the past month, was quick to raise their hand in clarifying what countries were within the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence. Guiding them through the article, we pointed out Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Poland and Czechoslovakia as well as what alliances they fell under after the fall of the Soviet Union.
After splitting them into groups, Kayli, Josh and I each took charge of a different group where I had a chance to work with students I had never worked with before. The only thing I had noticed about these students before was how disconnected they were from most topics we discussed.. So, I was pleasantly surprised when it was these students who answered my question from the get-go. Student B was especially vocal in their approach to the questions, matching recurring variables within the levels of analysis to details mentioned in the article. For example, when I had them analyze the causes of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Student B was quick to mention the aggression and military capability of the Soviet Union as well as its imperialistic goals. They were also the one to connect the Soviet Union’s imperialism as a justification for waging a war on their sovereignty. Student C, who I noticed was almost always on their phone or looking to the teacher for a bathroom pass, was equally as vocal. Though they required a bit more guidance and persuasion, they were eventually able to answer questions of Ukraine’s perspective on the war. Citing variables like violations of sovereignty and the public opinion of Ukrainians, the student concluded that Ukraine is fighting for their right to self-determination. When we eventually came back together as a class, these two students were quick to answer the questions, persuading others in the group to raise their hands too.
By the request of the teacher, we wrapped up the class with a quick college Q&A, where we discussed the importance of time management, alternative routes to getting a college degree and the different ways students can afford college. Students didn’t seem super interested in the session, but I think it would’ve been more effective if we split them into smaller groups and answered questions that way.
Out of all four classes, I’d say this was the most engaging class for the students. There was more of a collective participation, and the students seemed more willing to adhere to our class structure than before. It was also nice to get to know the students a little bit in the smaller groups. When students were stuck on a question or there was a lull in the conversation, I’d ask them what other topics they were interested in, even if it’s outside the scope of IR. From answers that ranged from their future careers to subjects they like to study, I was able to maneuver it back to how the skills we’re teaching them can be transferable to their other interests, hopefully making them just a bit more connected to why we study history and politics.
Word Count: 643
Focus Question: Why did Russia launch an offensive against Ukraine? How can the factors be analyzed at the individual, national and international level?
After covering more historical wars, we shifted our last lesson to be to the more contemporary causes of the Russian-Ukraine War. We opened the class with the Vox video before debriefing on the video’s main components, especially the implications of NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Following our typical structure, we then split the class into three groups to answer all four questions in a small-group discussion. Our final Thursday lesson was a Think-Pair-Share activity with a Q&A session at the end.
Contrary to the previous week’s lesson, this video was actually engaging to the students. Some students were still on their phones, but, when we did the debrief after, more students were willing to raise their hands to either answer our questions or ask questions before we even breached them. Student A, who I had barely heard from in the past month, was quick to raise their hand in clarifying what countries were within the Soviet Union’s sphere of influence. Guiding them through the article, we pointed out Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Poland and Czechoslovakia as well as what alliances they fell under after the fall of the Soviet Union.
After splitting them into groups, Kayli, Josh and I each took charge of a different group where I had a chance to work with students I had never worked with before. The only thing I had noticed about these students before was how disconnected they were from most topics we discussed.. So, I was pleasantly surprised when it was these students who answered my question from the get-go. Student B was especially vocal in their approach to the questions, matching recurring variables within the levels of analysis to details mentioned in the article. For example, when I had them analyze the causes of the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Student B was quick to mention the aggression and military capability of the Soviet Union as well as its imperialistic goals. They were also the one to connect the Soviet Union’s imperialism as a justification for waging a war on their sovereignty. Student C, who I noticed was almost always on their phone or looking to the teacher for a bathroom pass, was equally as vocal. Though they required a bit more guidance and persuasion, they were eventually able to answer questions of Ukraine’s perspective on the war. Citing variables like violations of sovereignty and the public opinion of Ukrainians, the student concluded that Ukraine is fighting for their right to self-determination. When we eventually came back together as a class, these two students were quick to answer the questions, persuading others in the group to raise their hands too.
By the request of the teacher, we wrapped up the class with a quick college Q&A, where we discussed the importance of time management, alternative routes to getting a college degree and the different ways students can afford college. Students didn’t seem super interested in the session, but I think it would’ve been more effective if we split them into smaller groups and answered questions that way.
Out of all four classes, I’d say this was the most engaging class for the students. There was more of a collective participation, and the students seemed more willing to adhere to our class structure than before. It was also nice to get to know the students a little bit in the smaller groups. When students were stuck on a question or there was a lull in the conversation, I’d ask them what other topics they were interested in, even if it’s outside the scope of IR. From answers that ranged from their future careers to subjects they like to study, I was able to maneuver it back to how the skills we’re teaching them can be transferable to their other interests, hopefully making them just a bit more connected to why we study history and politics.
Word Count: 643