The Statecraft Effect: Assessment,Attitudes, and Academic Honesty

Abstract

This article uses a multimethod research design to compare Statecraft to non-Statecraft assignments and courses along three dimensions: student engagement, political attitudes, and academic honesty. The results indicate that Statecraft increased student engagement and academic honesty. In terms of political attitudes, students generally remained on the left side of the political spectrum, but shifted toward the right and became more hawkish by the end of a semester. Changes in attitude are more strongly associated not with playing Statecraft, but taking a political science class by the coauthor, or some other external variable. Statecraft, however, did reduce support for pacifism.     

What's the Next Step after Mt. Laurel?

Since its beginnings, zoning has been at its core a tool for achieving exclusionary objectives. Judge Westenhaver, who wrote the lower court decision in Ambler Realty Co. u. Village of Euclid, 297 Fed. 307, 316 (N.D. Ohio 1924) invalidating the village's zoning ordinance, observed that its purpose “is really to regulate the mode of Living of persons who may here-after inhabit [the village]. In the last analysis, the result to be accomplished is to classify the population and segregate them according to their income or station in life.” In reversing his decision, Justice Sutherland classified apartments as “mere parasites … which would deprive children of the privilege of quiet and open spaces for play, enjoyed by those in more favored localities,” In effect, he held that the state's police power could be used to create different levels of health, safety and genera1 welfare for different classes of people. One level was adequate for the poor and another level could be enforced at the behest of the rich who could afford to buy homes in single-family, low-density districts. Even Justice Douglas, a most unlikely bedmate for Justice Sutherland, reflected the same attitude when he wrote recently.     

Ambassador David Bruce and “LBJ's War”: Vietnam Viewed from London, 1963–1968

Recent decades have seen growing historical interest in “second rank” officials who, whilst they do not play a leading role in government or political movements, can influence the way decisions are shaped and executed. At the same time, the interest of scholars in American policy during the Vietnam War shows no signs of abating. This article investigates the experience of one second rank official during the war, David Bruce, who was Ambassador to London during 1961–1969. Making particular use of Bruce's extensive diaries, it traces his shifting views on the war, looks at the extent to which he shared the outlook of other official,s and asks what influence, if any, he had on events. It argues that, whilst he always remained loyal to his own government and often mirrored the outlook of the Johnson Administration, Bruce had his own perspective on events, was consistently critical of American tactics on the ground, and, in Spring 1967, influenced by Robert McNamara, became an early advocate of retrenchment.