Blogstorm 1

Hello all: we just finished a e-War staff meeting in which we discussed, among other things, the use of the blogs. Some of you participated in a questionnaire on the matter. I thuoght I might share with you the results of it along with my own thuoghts on the blogs also. First, my own thuoghts:

1. I like the blogs a lot. I find it easier to give generic advice here than in the Discussion Board's 'Housekeeping' section. It's easier to keep things organized and somehow I feel able to be more candid and informal on the blog than in the 'classroom'. I suppose I think of it as rather equivalent to conversations with students in the hallway after class.
2. I enjoy reading your blogs as well. I find the off-topic discussions in the comments section interesting and very worthwhile. It's certainly helped me to build a mental image of some of you to communicate in this manner--it's also more efficient than e-mail for that kind of discussion.
3. But, as is clear from the questionnaire--and was obvious even without that--most of you haven't the time or the inclination to update your own blogs regularly (or at all). I am fine with that--it's a tool in your toolbox, use it when and if you see a use for it. Or don't, it's your call entirely. I do have the impression, however, that you get some value out of my blog and since I like using it and find it convenient I shall continue to use it to deliver course relevant advice and comment. In other words, at the very least I suggest that you check my Blog regularly.
4. Having said that it occurs to me that possibly one reason beyond the constraint of time which has kept people from using blogs is that people are turned off by the idea of an on-line journal. Again, fine. It strikes me though that a very good way of using the blogs for us is to coordinate among unit presenters. I usually hear from presenters by email about how they plan to divvy up the work, what approach they intend to take and so on. Why not do this on your blog? It's much easier for me to comment on it that way, to provide direction and so on. It also makes it rather more straightforward for you to comment and brainstorm. No forwarding emails, managing replies and whatnot. The same holds for essay outlines which some of you have asked me to comment on (and I am happy to do). We've been doing this by email but why not on your blog? It's more efficient, for one thing (if less private--if that's an issue then, OK, email it to me). Moreover, I think that you will find this way of learning can be much more naturally collaborative that way. In other words, what I'm suggesting is that you think of your blog as the hallway outside class where a lot of student-student and student-teacher interaction takes place.

Anyway, here's what the questionnaire analysis had to say (MY COMMENTS ARE INTERSPERSED IN UPPER CASE)

WiMW: Blogging and Communication tools
December 2005 survey
Returns: 22 out of 37 (59%)

Q1. How would you rate your confidence in using computers and technology?

Not at all confident
1
Somewhat confident
3
Fairly confident
12
Very confident
6
Total
22

The majority (82%) of students self assessed themselves as feeling confident in their IT skills (i.e. ‘fairly confident’ and above).


Q2. How often have you used your blog to post messages?

Never
4
Occasionally
15
Regularly
2
Frequently
1
Total
22


Q.3 Would you prefer you blog to be a private journal not accessible by others?

Yes - private blog preferred
6
No - public blog preferred
15
Total
21
Not answered: 1


Q.4 Do you find it easy or difficult to keep your blog up to date?

Major categories identified in using the blogging tool:

Time
· “Very difficult. It is hard enough to do the reading and posting to the discussions. I have no time to blog.”
· “Quite difficult. Finding the time is difficult with everything else going on.”
Purpose
· “No, It seems somewhat superflous to the studying element of the course.”
Help
· “I have given up trying to create one and don't really see the point of one.”
Low threshold
· “Easier than falling off a banana boat.”
Location
· “Do not find it difficult. However, view it as yet anither site that really plays second fiddle to main KCL site. Given time available the blog is not utilised to its full potential, if at all.”
Own tools
· “I write my own notes as I go through the course, mostly mind maps of either the course material or ideas.”


Q.5 How often do you read or check the blogs of the other participants?

Never
4
Occasionally
10
Regularly
4
Frequently
4
Total
22


Q.6 Do you have a preference for using either the discussion boards or your blog to post comments?

Prefer blog
0
Prefer discussion board
15
Both: no preference
7
Total
22

Comments:
· “Blog for useful though unrelated info e.g top tips etc. Discussion boards should be kept "on topic" otherwise it becomes a nightmare to navigate through.”
· “Discussion boards. It feels more part of the course, although I appreciate this is not exactly true as such.”
· “I prefer the discussion boards as it is easier to follow specific threads within them (as long as people title their entries). The blogs are, however, great for the "red herrings" and other interesting issues not directly related to the main discussion theme.”
· “Blog for useful though unrelated info e.g top tips etc. Discussion boards should be kept "on topic" otherwise it becomes a nightmare to navigate through.”

I THINK THAT ALL OF THESE ARE SALIENT POINTS. AS I'VE SAID BEFORE, HOWEVER, I THINK THE DISCUSSION BOARD CAN GET VERY CLUTTERED WITH OFF-TOPIC MATERIAL AND OTHER OBSERVATIONS. IF YOU'VE NOT A LOT OF TIME THEN I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO KEEP THE DISCUSSION IN THE 'CLASSROOM' VERY FOCUSSED AND STREAMLINED. BUT YOU, OR AT LEAST I, WOULDN'T WANT TO MISS OUT ON ALL THE OFFTOPIC STUFF WHICH IS OFTEN HIGHLY INTERESTING AND VERY USEFUL. I STILL SEE THAT AS A MAIN FUNCTION OF THE BLOG.

Q.7 Do you use the Bloglines aggregator to check other the blogs?

Yes
11
No
11
Total
22


Q.8 Would you like to have more help in using your blog?

Yes
11
No
11
Total
22


Q.9 Would you like more help in using the blog aggregator (Bloglines)?

Yes
12
No
10
Total
22


Q.10 Do you think the blogging is a useful tool? Please give your reasons?

Yes
9
No
6
Undecided
7
Total


Comments:
· “Absolutely, its the place where free discussion on topics outside of the course can be discussed and it allows more interaction between students”
· “yes because in the internet world it is hard to communicate directly, particularly in the class room because it's a bit more formal. the blog allows you to be more expressive and you see more personalities shine through”
· “NO. I haven't distilled the point of blogging yet with regard to this course.”
· “No, or at least not yet. It is hard enough keeping up with the course using the different elements of the VLE. Add to that the need to go into the KCL IMP webmail (with another 3 password portals) and it is time-consuming enough. Having then to check the tutor's blog in case you've missed an instruction or comment is massively over-complicated and strikes me as another example of using technology simply because it's there. We need one simple portal, with one simple access, so that there can be no confuson. Blogs add nothing for me thus far.”
· “I'm sure it is a useful tool if given greater guidance and more time I would undoubtedly benefit from its utility.”
· “Probably. I have not used it that much as yet and will most likely not be in a position to provide a proper reflective answer until much later in the course.”


Q.11 Do you have any suggestions or changes which might enhance your use of the blogs?

No
9
Yes (selected comments):
· “More prompting to use the blogs within the units (there have been a couple of occasions) might stimulate greater use, if this is desired.”
· “Get it into KCL...! 5MB space per student?.”
· “More enforced utility of the site especially with long discussions. Short answers on main site, example essays and long answers on the blog.”
· “Set them up and aggregate them for us so that they work from the start.”
· “Although the coursework is hectic at times especially with travel etc. The only way to incorporate the Blog format would be to make it a more designed part of the learning experience.”
· “I do not have any confidence that everyone is utilizing the Blogs as intended. The subscription levels on some blogs seem very low and the input is also low from certain areas. That said, there are those who clearly utilize the blogs frequently. I think that the use of the blogs (as in our Tutorial group) to communicate important information from our "leader" about the course is a good way of ensuring that all students access the blogs regularly.”

I'LL JUST SPEAK TO THE LAST OF THESE COMMENTS DIRECTLY, UTILIZING THE BLOGS 'AS INTENDED'. WHEN WE WERE PUTTING THE COURSE TOGETHER I CONFESS TO BEING SKEPTICAL OF THE BLOGS. I WASN'T SURE OF THEIR PURPOSE. I'D BEEN TURNED OFF BY AN EARLIER EXPERIMENT WITH A BLOGGING TOOL. I THUOGHT THE AGGREGATOR WAS A BIT CLUNKY. I STILL THINK THAT IT COULD BE STREAMLINED AND PERHAPS MORE INTUITIVE. I HATE HAVING TO REMEMBER ANOTHER LOGIN AND PASSWORD. I WOULD PREFER THAT THE TOOL WAS 'IN-HOUSE'. AND IF THE WORLD WERE PERFECT SOMEONE WOULD SET IT UP FOR ME. BASICALLY, I'M SAYING THAT I MYSELF DID NOT HAVE A FIRM IDEA OF WHAT WAS 'INTENDED'. I HAVE, HOWEVER, BECOME A BELIEVER. I THINK WE SHOULD, AND WILL, MAKE IT EASIER AND TIE IT MORE INTO COURSE CONTENT BUT I AM CONVINCED THAT OVER THE LONG TERM IT IS A USEFUL THING.


Q.12 Have you subscribed to other non-War in the Modern World blogs? If so please give examples?

No
10
Yes
Types: mainly news and political

10
Total
20
Not answered: 2

Comments:
· “KCL could provide advice on blogs relevant to the course.”
· “No can I do that???”
· “Yes. Some news: BBC News and Reuters; and a bit of entertainment: Dilbert and Quotes of the Day. I subscribed to a lot more to start with, but have cut down as they are too time consumming - I need to use my limited spare time to study after all.”

I DON'T. I HAVE MY OWN HABITS AND WAYS OF BROWSING FOR NEWS. I HAVE AN IDEA FOR HOW I CAN SHARE THAT WITH YOU. I JUST USE THE AGGREGATOR FOR THIS COURSE. I LOOK IN, SEE IF THERE'S ANYTHING NEW AND LOG OUT. QUICK. EASY.

Q.13 What other forms of communication have you used within the course?

Email
100%
Skype
14%
Chat oom
32%
Telephone
45%

I'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF YOU BY PHONE OR ON SKYPE. FEEL FREE TO CALL ME MORE. SKYPE IS CHEAP (FREE) AND ACTUALLY HAS BETTER SOUND QUALITY MOST TIMES. IF YOU HAVE A QUICK QUESTION AND DON'T WANT TO TYPE THEN CALL!

Q.14 What is your preferred method of communication? e.g. e-mail, telephone, blogging, discussion forum, chat.


First choice
Email
10
Discussion forum
9
Chat room
0
Telephone
2
No preference
1

Comments:
· “e-mail and discussion. I have enabled a Skype account and would use that.”


Q.15 Can you identify on which part(s) of the course you spend the majority of your time? e.g. reading, writing discussion posts etc.

Reading
13
Reading and discussion
9
Total
22

Comments:
· “Reading: by a long way. I wish there was more reading time.”
· “Split between reading and discussion posts.”
· “The reading is the most time-consuming part of the course. That said, in the early days, the writing of discussion posts also took a long time. In our group we agreed to cut down posts to a paragraph (or so) and this not only saved time but also focussed the discussions a bit more.”
· “Reading both the background material and other peole's postings.”

THE THIRD POINT ABOVE SHOULD BE ADOPTED BY OUR GROUP TOO. VERY SENSIBLE. AS FOR READING TIME, THAT'S WHAT AN MA IS: READING, READING and MORE READING.

Q.16 Do you feel you have enough time to participate in all aspects of the course?

Plenty of time
1
Enough time
2
Somewhat under time pressure
10
A lot of time pressure
9
Total
22

Probably as we might expect, most students perceive themselves as ‘somewhat under time pressure’ with nearly half (41%) reporting that they are under “a lot” of time pressure. Students must therefore have to prioritise their workload – it would be interesting to know what criteria they choose to make these decisions. From Q.15 it appears that reading is the major area that impacts upon their available study time.


Q.17 How would you rate the importance of the discussion boards to your study?

Not at all important
1
Moderately important
6
Important
4
Very important
11
Total
22


Q.18 How would you rate the importance of the blogs to your study?

Not at all important
14
Moderately important
5
Important
2
Very important
1
Total
22

This is interesting as 14 responses here rate the blogs as ‘not at all important’. This it does not match the responses to Q.10 where 9 students answered positively regarding the usefulness of the blogging tool and 6 remained undecided.


Q.19 How would you rate the importance of the e-mail to your study?

Not at all important
1
Moderately important
12
Important
3
Very important
6
Total
22


Q.20 Do you prefer studying alone or as part of a group?

Alone
18
Part of a group
4
Total
22

It will be interesting to see if these figures change over time and students become more closely associated with each other and perhaps open to group work at a later date.


Q.21 How closely associated do you feel with the other group members on the course?

Closely
3
Somewhat
11
Distant
6
Very distant
2
Total
22

8 students report that they feel either ‘distant’ or ‘very distant’ from the group. This seems a high figure?

I THINK IT SOUNDS HIGH. ANYWAY, I DO NOT LIKE IT. ANY IDEAS WHAT WE COULD DO BETTER?

Ready for units 6-10?

Looking at my blog I'm slightly horrified to see that I have not posted here in over a month! I must admit that the Group Activity took up most of my attention and after that I was determined to do very little eLearning while on my holiday. But it's 2006, a new term and a new year and time to begin the lst half of this course. I hope that you are reenergized as I am. Personally, my interests are more contemporary than historical and so I am keen to get going on these last five units which take us up to the end of the Cold War. There's a lot of interesting ground to cover.

In the meantime before we get started I must complete my mountain of marking. I remember when I was an MA student one of my professors grumbling about how difficult and stressful the job of marking was. He seemed to be implying that this was tougher than the actual writing. At the time, having just handed in a major paper which I had agonized over for weeks I didn't have a lot of sympathy for the man. In fact, what I felt was the distinct--thuogh slightly guilty--pleasure of schadenfreude. Having seen both sides now I can assure you that writing is more challenging--creating is always more difficult than critiquing. But marking is a lot less fun, for the most part which makes it all the more exciting when I read a really good, well-written and incisive paper.

I wonder if any of you would be prepared to post on your blog one of your marked essays? Some of them have been truly excellent and would be a good example for others. Besides, you'd get bragging rights.

Miscellania PLus Group Activity

You'll probably have noticed that the platform was down over the weekend. I had intended to leave the discussion on Cuba and Berlin going over the weekend because I wasn't too happy with the frequency of posting. There's more to be explored on this issue. But as things were not working over the weekend I shall leave it going for another day or two.

Meanwhile I expect that you are all starting on Unit 5 'The Cold War and the Third World'. Our presenters thsi time are Jim and Chris.

We will be assigning tutor groups to play Cabinets today or tomorrow. If you've a preference as to whether our group plays the US, Soviets or Cubans say so now.

Short Essays: The Devil's Infernal Creation?

I have now received and marked enough of your Short Essays to make some general comparative observations which I hope will be of help to you next time.

The first point I'd like to make is well illustrated by this extract of an email from one of you where it was remarked of the Short Essay that...

...(there should be a law against this particular instrument of torture by the way). I have at least a 1500 words already (some of them are actually joined together in sentences!) but I need to seriously edit the whole thing before I can say that I have even come close to breaking the back of the task.

The point being that it is, in fact, more difficult to write short, concise, pointed and penetrating arguments then it is to write longer ones. The parameters of the exercise are such that your argument must be very parsimonious and focussed--which calls for the exercise of stringent editorial judgement.

And what you should take from this point is that you need to treat the Short Essay quite seriously in terms of the time you leave yourself to consider your argument. It may not take a long time to write but it should take you a good deal of thought before you put pen to paper (finger to keyboard).

This brings me to my second point, which is that the whole exercise of discussing the questions as a group is integral to writing a really good essay. The great thing (at least I think it's great) is that your colleagues are helping you refine your ideas, feed you information and develop an appreciation for the range of opinion on the assigned question. Take advantage of the fact that others are helping you with the intellectual effort of engaging with your assigned presentations.

There's an important corollary to this last point and that is that there is an element of quid pro quo embedded in this process. The better the unit discussion, the better your essay is likely to be and, therefore, the better your mark will be. Further, it follows that if you'd like your colleagues to help you with the intellectual heavy-lifting then it would be sensible for you to contribute when they are in the 'hot-spot'. Translation, should you need one: the more you participate in units in which you have not specialized the more likely it is that you will benefit from the participation of others when it comes your turn.

There is a third point which follows so closely to the second that I'm not sure it is actually a separate point at all; no matter, it's worth pointing out wherever it might fit in the schema of this train-of-thuoght post: For each unit discussion I have a list of points which I think ought to be covered to give something like a logical answer to the question posed (note that I do not say 'complete' or 'right' answer because neither is possible). As we go along I tick off points that have been covered and if there are any left at the end I point them out. As it happens, thus far, I've really had nothing major which I felt was missed in the discussions. So, hint (as above): the discussions matter a lot--they help you to shape your ideas and they act as a resource. You've heard the expression 'two heads are better than one'; in this case, we've got 12 heads.

Finally, an afterthuoght, we've been having a discussion in the comments section of this blog and others about matters including the nature and desirability of American hegemony in the context of which I gave a link to this collection of articles in the journal Commentary which even if you've no particular interest in the topic of the Bush Doctrine strikes me, in hindsight, as a very good illustration of the Short Essay genre. All of these are short, punchy and focussed essays. What they're lacking is footnotes to sources which you are expected to use in your Short Essay, but otherwise they are exemplary of the form. Have a look.

Essays

I'd hope that most of you are thinking about your 3,000 word essays now if not actually writing them. My 'door' is open should you have any questions. Contact me by any means you like. Email for privacy but if you started a thread in the 'Housekeeping' Forum then everyone could benefit from it.

Debates in the Comments section

If you're not in the habit of visiting each other's blogs and looking at the comments sections therein you are missing out on on-going debates which may be of interest. None of this is specifically course-related but it is interesting nonetheless and as you may not be aware of it I thuoght I'd bring it to your attention. Over on Pip's Blog we've been having a debate on, among other things, US hegemony, the utility of military force and whether or not democracy can be imposed, which began with his post 'review of module 2.2'. Have a look.

My last comment there had a lot of links embedded in it which don't come through properly in comments so I'll repost it here.

Sean, Pip, we've raised a number of big issues here--each of which we could discuss for ages. Let me try and address them in turn.

ANTI-AMERICANISM
Sean you express the concern of Americans for how they are seen in the world. All that I can say is that from my perspective there are few things more off-putting then the 'why do they hate us?' debate. Yes, the US is widely reviled; equally it is widely envied--usually by those bleating the loudest. Over my summer holiday I read a book called Hating America: A History by Barry Rubin and Judith Colp Rubin which I took out from my local library. It's worth having a look at. Anti-Americanism is nothing new. I don't even think it is particularly more prevalent now than it was in the past. Times have changed: the Soviet Union no longer exists to unite Europe and America in quite the same way as it did before (and even during the Cold War tensions were often very close to the surface--France pulled out of NATO in the aerly '60s!). The protests in London have all streamed past my office so I've had a lot of opportunity to observe them. There was nothing coherently anti--American about them; in fact there was nothing coherent about them at all! Never have I seen a more motley collection in my life. Anti-Israel, Anti-fur, Anti-globalization, Anti-everything. As for Middle Eastern Anti-Americanism I think most of what is worth saying about it was said by Bernard Lewis 15 years ago in his famous Atlantic Monthly article 'The Roots of Muslim Rage' http://www.cis.org.au/policy/summer01-02/PolicySummer01_3.html

DECLINE OF US POWER This is a tricky one. This article is worth reading. http://www.worldpolicy.org/journal/articles/wpj05-2/hendrickson.html

For my part I am far from convinced that US power is declining relative to any of its competitors. Europe is beset with deep structural economic problems, not to mention social (look at France right now) far worse than those of the US; militarily it's no competition at all--actually the question of US-Europe military competition strikes me as more than faintly ridiculous. Russia--don't get me started on Russia. It will take a hundred years for Russia to repair the damage done to it by almost a century of Soviet 'communism'. A lot of attention is focused on China as the next rival. That seems the most plausible to me, but it is worth keeping in mind the huge problems which China faces: its economy rests upon a foundation which is decidely shaky in some important respects. The Chinese banking system is riddled with bad loans. Chinese industry is burgeoning at a point in history in which critical resources, notably oil and gas, are becoming scarcer. The distribution of wealth is so skewed in China that the wealthy coast and impoverished interior seem like different countries. The environmental cost to China of industrialization is mounting alarmingly. Even still I am optimistic about China in the long term. The thing is, thuogh, I still don't think they'll be a threat. In order to keep its economy growing China will have to liberalize its political system. In which case, there's not terribly much to argue about--nothing on the order of the Cold War anyway. The Muslim world is in terminal decline with no way out. The UNDP's Arab Human Development Report makes sobering reading. You can download it on-line but it costs 10$. This article in The Economist summarizes the main findings well. http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=1213392

India is a place which fascinates me. I confess to knowing no more about the place than the average well-read citizen (I spent a month in Goa but I shant claim that lounging on the beach in the sun reading Tom Clancy novels did much for my understanding of the place). Even so the combination of a relatively high-skilled, literate, low-cost, English-speaking and youthful work force combined with a democratic system and rule of law seems to me a winning combination. I don't think that the US can be sanguine about its place in the world. India and China could put up some fierce competition but if any country in the West is able to meet that challenge it will be America.

UTILITY OF MILITARY POWER
I'm not sure I agree that the source of American might is its military power. Clearly, it expends vastly more than any other country on its armed forces and, accordingly, it has an abundance of strategic assets which no one else does. The UK has one working aircraft carrier as I recall--and that's about to be retired (when its replacement will arrive, and what aircraft will fly from it who knows?); France has one too, as does Spain; the US has 12 (or 13?). The question is how much use is all that power? The way I see it: not much--certainly not at the current moment and arguably not much in the future either--thuogh admittedly there's scope for debate here. By my rough count the US has about 90 infantry battalions plus SF and a few other ground forces amounting to, say, 100,000 'boots'. That's an extremely thin line relative both to the American population and the jobs they are given to do. Effectively the world's preeminent military and economic power is almost completely (maybe more than completely, if such a state can exist), with operations in Afghanistan (pop. 29 million) whose international ranking in GDP per capita is 209th of 223, Iraq (pop. 26 million) whose GDP per capita is 160th of 223, and a deployment in South Korea against an attack from the North, a country of 23 million people whose GDP per capita is 175th of 223. (Statistics generated at this incredibly useful site: http://www.nationmaster.com/index.php)

Clearly, then, 'military might' is not all it's cracked up to be. Which is why it's a good thing that US power is not really based on it at all. I think if anything unites anti-Americans from London to Kabul it's not the American army but what they see as the insidious onslaught of American culture.

CAN DEMOCRACY BE IMPOSED?
There's a stock answer to this: yes, of course it can be, as was demonstrated in postwar Germany and Japan. A better question is whether it can be done in the same manner again. On that count, I'm not sure. Germany, for all its faults, shared a common Western cultural inheritance of the Age of Reason and Enlightenment, and it had had a democracy which was perverted by the Nazis in the interwar period. Moreover, after two world wars it was presented with a stark choice by its conquerors between mending its ways or being forcibly dismembered and deindustrialized. Basically, a metaphorical gun to the nation's metaphorical head. Japan, one could argue along similar along similar lines while adding that Japanese 'democracy' even today is not really all that democratic having had one-party rule for almost the entirety of its postwar history. These are good questions but I think, Pip, its incumbent on those who would say 'Democracy has to come from within. It cannot be imposed and certainly not with the big "stick" of the military too much in evidence. When a state/nation is ready for it they will surely embrace it.' to explain how this spontaneous embrace could take place somewhere like, say, Saddam Hussein's Iraq?

UPDATE: On rereading this I'd like to strengthen my suggestion that if you are interested in the question of an American empire, if it exists and if it does ho wlong wil it last, then I strongly urge you to read the worldpolicy.org article which I linked to. It's long, but very good.

On Marking

I've been marking your short essays as we go along and have already sent back to several of you your papers. Bearing in mind that almost none of you are taking this course having just completed a first degree, most of you are in full-time employment, and some of you have never studied in the British system (let alone at King's) I thuoght I'd say a word or two about marking.

First, I should say that all, or most, of this is explained in your Student Handbook. I do find, however, that students either don't read it or, more likely, when they look at the marking scheme which is laid out there they have difficulty working what exactly it means in practical terms. So, for what it's worth, this is the what I look for when I am marking a paper in order of importance.

1. Does it engage with the question? This is not the same thing as answering the question which is actually less important. There's almost never a single right answer in social sciences or history; and you probably already know my answer because I've stated it in the discussion forum. Moreover, most questions need to be further broken down and interrogated themselves before you start answering them. This is what I mean by 'engaging' with a question. When I get the sense that you are really grappling with the complexity of something then I look very favourably upon the paper.
2. In the same vein as above, is it internally coherent and critically analytical? By which I mean does it systematically and in detail examine all the logically necessary elements for a convincing critique?
3. Is it empirically sound? This is not simply getting your facts right, althuogh that is a part of it. It means providing enough evidence to support the argument being made. (And exercising some judgement about the quality of some evidence).
4. Does it suggest a fluency with the main debates in the secondary literature?
5. Is it well organized and well-presented?

Now some practical points which may interest you.

1. All your essays are marked twice and potentially three times. First, I mark it. Then I pass it on to a colleague who marks it again, at which point we resolve any disagreement between ourselves. Then it is forwarded to an external examiner who will read a selection of essays to ensure that the process is fair and that procedures are being followed adequately and uniformly as possible.
2. What you get back from me is a provisional mark or 'first mark'; it may change depending on the 2nd and external marker. This is why your essay cover sheet comes back to you with an indication of grade 'fail' >50, 'pass' 50-60, 'merit' 60-70 or 'distinction' 70+ but not a percentage mark.
3. In the British system marks are typically much lower as a percentage than in the US or Canada. In Britain 70 is a very good mark; in North America it's not very good at all. If you are American add, say, 20 per cent to translate. There are formulas for doing this but for me that's a rule of thumb that works more or less.

The Importance of Having Fun

We're about to begin our third unit discussion on the Arms Race and Nuclear Strategy. The question this time:

What role did nuclear weapons play in Soviet–American relations in the 1950s and 1960s?

I am looking forward to this discussion. We're getting into parts of early Cold War history that I find very interesting not just for the events but because of the strategic issues involved. In this era we really get into how a series of important thinkers were grappling with the problem posed by nuclear weapons for traditional notions of strategy.

I was fairly pleased with how the last unit's discussion went, although one of you has mused, ruefully it seemed to me, on whether Group 1 (we need a group name!) dominance of the discussion board was threatened as Group 2 and 3 had posted more. Having thuoght about it I think number of posts is a crude and misleading measure of the effectiveness of a discussion. For better or worse our group has a tendency to long and quite detailed interventions. I am pleased about this; in fact, I think the tendency to think more deliberately and compose one's thuoghts more calculatedly is a strength of this medium of education. Having said that, I would like to repeat a point I made after the first discussion: short, pithy comments are also effective. Basically, we're after quality rather than quantity.

A related point: last time around I suggested that some posts which seemed a bit tangential--albeit interesting--be moved to Blogs. My intention was, and remains, to keep the unit discussions quite focussed for good pedagogical reasons as well as with a view to keeping people's workload under control. This does not mean I don't want you to go off on to tangents. I do! That's often where people show their real brilliance.

But there's not been a lot of activity on Blogs lately--some but not a lot--which makes me wonder if I've put the brakes on too hard. Let me know your thuoghts in comments if you have any. Advice is always gratefully received (if not always followed).

I suppose at root what I mean to say is that from an academic perspective I am relatively comfortable with how things are going. In both previous units we covered more ground and in more detail than I'd ever dare hope accomplishing in a 2 hour face-to-face seminar. What I'm hoping is that you're having fun with it too.

Skype Internet Telephone

You've all received an email from me about Skype. This is an internet telephone system which I have downloaded and added to my machine at work. It will allow you to see when I am on-line and, if you should choose to do so, to speak to me directly--for free. I should point out to you that this is really completely optional. As one of you has pointed out to me already:

One of the benefits of this course, as well as its limitations, as we've already
discussed, is the means by which we communicate. For the last few weeks I have
really enjoyed having the luxury of deliberate thought, knowing that my every
interaction with this course has been an opportunity for a deliberate and
prepared statement. I have regretted very little of what I have written to date
because I have had this liberatingly limited communication opportunity.

On the other hand, some conversations are more efficient spoken than written. (Case in point: I had to think about whether the preceding sentence was grammatical or not). In short, it's another communication tool available to you. Use it or don't, as you prefer.

Scraps of Consciousness, Vol. 2: Midway through Unit 2

I've been somewhat neglectful of my blog it would seem, having posted nothing for over a week. Nick, on the other hand, has been industrious as ever and has a post on nuclear weapons over on his blog which I will respond to in another post. For the time being my purpose is to make a few passing comments on the events of the last week.

1. The discussion is shaping up nicely. Thanks to the presenters. It's a little more structured this time which is to the good as it makes it easier to follow the logical progression of people's thuoghts. I wonder if we are going to come to a natural synthesis as we did last time. Perhaps not, which is not surprising to me as the parameters of the assignment--'discuss NSC 68 and Korean War--are looser.
2. There are a lot of important threads in this unit which don't figure directly (or haven't yet anyway) into the discussion: the origins of Containment, the Marshall Plan, Kennan's Long Telegram, Stalin's role in the outbreak of the Korean War. All of these are covered in the unit contents in which some Learning Objects ask you to consider something (example: LO3 'Comparing Truman and Marshall' says 'Consider the audience being addressed in each case in these two speeches. What similarities and/or differences do you detect in the tone and focus of each?'). Are you considering these things? You should be even if you do not post your thoughts on your blog. This is a 'meaty' unit with a lot to take on board. I expect that you will be au fait with these concepts, that you know what the Truman Doctrine was and how it related to the Marshall Plan, to pick an example, as we go forward. It's important.
3. Blogs--not much traffic lately. This is a shame. I know it can be difficult to post something lengthy when you've got a zillion other things to do. As you can see from my own neglected blog I can sympathize. Try posting short comments and updates. Let me tell you how it helps me. With my 'analog' students on campus I usually have a gut-feeling for how they are doing. I see them on the street or in the hallway and I deduce from the fact that they are standing upright that they are alive and at least physically present. I see them in class and deduce from the presence (or absence) of dark circles around eyes, caffeine jitters and nicotine stained fingers whether or not they are feeling stressed about assignments etc. Here, I have much fewer cues as to your mental state. In short, help me out by giving me more cues on blogs.
4. In that vein, I take note of several quite interesting digressions in the discussion forum which I'd really rather took place in the blogs.

More later...

Ps. I am feeling a little stressed myself today. I must rush off now to lead a seminar on Vietnam, Beirut and the Weinberger Doctrine. It's a very interesting subject but I'm feeling a slight crunch as I change mental gears from early to late Cold War.

Scraps of Consciousness: End of Unit 1

We have reached the end of Unit 1. I have posted my 'round-up' of the discussion in which I point out the three 'takeaway points' that I'd like you all to have gotten from the exercise. I won't repeat them, presumably you are here reading this because you've just been on the platform reading what I said there. (Actually, that's a good question. Do you check your Bloglines aggregator first or the platform? I always start with the discussion forum, myself. Reply in comments, please).

Here are some other things I'd like for you to bear in mind, in no particular order:

1. I expect specialized students students (in this case Gordon and Peter) to submit their short essays to me today (the last Friday of the unit), unless we have agreed a different date.
2. Please use the Assignment tool on the platform to submit your essays. You may send it to me by email attachment also if you feel nervous about whether or not it went through. But i assure you that the system works and I'd like you to use it.
3. Specialized students should recall that they are obliged to post a response to commenters at the beginning of the second week of discussion.
4. I have made this point before but it bears repeating: You have all subscribed to my blog, now you must do the same with your colleagues' blogs. This is important. If you do not aggregate your blogs you are missing a lot of discussion and, to put it plainly, you're probably not having as much fun as you might otherwise.

I thuoght that we had a very interesting free for all discussion in which a good deal of excellent points were made. I was frankly impressed, first, by Bill's very fine summation earlier this week and his incisive comments, second, by Jim's aggregation of the key areas of agreement, and third, by Owen's putting them in order. This is very much a strength of this mode of learning. I was enthusiastic about it before but I am tentatively more confident about how it will work in practice now. (See my post below about synthesis). There was a lot of self-synchronizing going on which really is how it is supposed to work.

That said, there are areas we need to work on. Perhaps the 'free for all' got a bit confusing to follow. Do not take this to mean I would like fewer interventions! More please! But if we are to make this more efficient we need to exercise a bit more discipline. I suggest:

1. When the 'presenters' make their first post they remember to 'Create Mesage'. Do not post it as a 'reply' to a previous message.
2. When commenters introduce sustantively new interpretation or evidence they take care to change the title of their post (ie., use 'reply' so it stays in the same thread but is distinguishable from the rest by the title). This way we can avoid having long chains of RE: XXXX. I found myself having to search through a lot of posts to find things I had recollected reading but couldn't remember exactly where.

A final thuoght. I spent the last two days attending a departmental event at Cumberland Lodge which is a large country house located in Windsor Great Park. I brought along my laptop in order to connect to the course. The connection, however, while wireless was not fast. It brought home to me the importance of broadband. For those of you using dial up I salute your patience and dedication. It works but it is slow. I appreciate your effort.

Do you have any ideas for improving how we work? I'm eager to hear them. Sound off in comments please.

On Promptness

With the anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar coming up (21 October) I have been doing some light reading about Britain's greatest military leader, Admiral Nelson (anyone want to challenge that?). I came across this Nelson quote which struck me as a highly sensible approach to life and elegantly and succinctly phrased in a manner which modern writers of English rarely seem to achieve:

I have always been a quarter of an hour before my time, and it has made a man of me.

It got me thinking about what other military leaders had to say about it. Here's the famous Marine General John Lejeune:

In war, procrastination is a crime, and promptness is a handmaiden to victory.

I would not go so far as to draw a direct parallel--as it is in 'war' so it is in 'War in the Modern World. Nobody's actually going to die if your essay is late. But still there is a not-so-tenuous link. My view 'On Promptness' in academia is this. Procrastination is the main cause of poor performance. Occasionally you have absolutely genius students and sometimes you have students who are just genuinely thick. Yet more often than not the difference between an excellent student and a poor one is the difference between someone who has started early enough on a task that they have the luxury of subjecting the penultimate draft to one more round of 'sobre second-thuoght' and someone who has left themself no time at all.

'Promptness', that is meeting deadlines in our context, is to some extent a relative rather than absolute virtue. It is absolute in the sense that managing your time in order to meet your obligations and work within the time constraints set for the assignment is a 'transferable skill' (to use the jargon) which we are meant to inculcate in our students. However, I do see it also in relative terms. Or perhaps 'relational' terms is more to the point in the sense that a deadline is a contract which defines a part of the relationship between you and me. You meet your obligations to me, and to your colleagues, and I reciprocate. In this course, we also try to make things work in relation to your Real World day-job. What it boils down to is this:

1. You should endeavour to meet all deadlines, notably for the submission of assignments and first and second posting in the units in which you are specializing;
2. When you can't meet a deadline for reasons relating to, inter alia, your health, work or personal life you let me know so that,
3. We can 'renegotiate' the terms of our contract in a way that is mutually acceptable.

Today's afterthuoght: Normal rules of etiquette apply

A very good question was asked of me yesterday by email:

David
In your opinion, would it be considered bad form to post responses
to comments and presentations on the other groups' message boards?
Nick

Perhaps the same question has occurred to others so let me share my reply:

Basically, yes it's bad form. We debated whether or not we would have all the discussions groups visible to everyone. It seemed to us useful--in any case harmless--to have it all open. But we do ask that you not contribute to discussions in other groups. Think of it this way. It's like any other seminar if you walked into someone's classroom and started talking away they'd say, naturally enough, 'uh, who are you?'

Having given this some further thuoght I'd like to add another thing to what I said. One of the good things about this form of learning is that you CAN 'see' into other classrooms if you want and benefit from what is going on there. You may 'lurk', to use the proper term, without causing harm because the 'classroom' is never going to run out of chairs. In fact, if you have the time and inclination I encourage you at this point to have a look at what is going on in other groups. The reason for that, beyond the content, is that in this beginning stage of the course it is instructive not only what people say in their 'presentations' but how they say it. If someone in another group has a bright idea, say, to post a PowerPoint file as their presentation, then you can learn from that.

We are divided into tutor groups for administrative reasons, and because more than 15 people talking at once quickly descends into a chaotic mishmash--but still you are a cohort of 45 going through the same course.

In other words, if you feel like looking in other group's discussions and have the time to do so then feel free. I do ask that you not contribute to the discussion in an active way. If you feel compelled to say something then the normal rules of etiquette apply. Contact Rachel or Sergio and ask before chiming in.

The Long War

The discussion has started in our Unit 1 discussion forum. I expect to see the thread growing through the weekend as those who haven't yet commented join in also.

One of our presenters will be away for part of next week so he will not be in a position to respond for a bit. That shouldn't hold back the rest of us. I've nothing I'd like to add yet except to pick up on something from Gordon's post in which he said:

Whilst I do not subscribe to the notion that the Cold War started in 1917 its
roots can certainly be traced back to this period and as such an understanding
[of it] is important.

Gordon has hit on something that I'd like you all to file somewhere in your minds for later which is the idea that what is called the Cold War from c. 1945-c. 90 should in fact be seen as just half of what was a larger eopchal war beginning in 1917 with the Russian Revolution which was fought in order to determine whether the 19th century's imperial constitutional order would be replaced by nation states governed by communism, fascism or parliamentarianism. According to this theory the Second World War sealed the matter as far as fascism was concerned but left open the question of whether or not parliamenarianism or communism would ultimately prevail (parenthetical bad movie reference--you guess which: 'there can be only one!'). I find it a pretty compelling idea, personally. It was brilliantly argued in Philip Bobbitt's The Shield of Achilles: War, Peace and the Course of History and to my mind is essentially a main element of what Francis Fukuyama's The End of History argues: at the end of the 20th century parliamentarianism 'wins'--thuogh he himself does not use the term Long War.

Anyway, we will return to this idea when we get to the end of this course when we look at the End of the Cold War so I'm glad that it's made an appearance right at the very beginning. There's a word for this which is, frustratingly, escaping me at the moment... foreshadowing. Thanks Gordon!

Ps. It would seem that most of you have now aggregated your blogs as I appear now to have fifteen subscribers which sounds about right to me. But you're not done yet. You need to aggregate each others blogs too. If you're only reading mine then you're missing half the discussion. Moreover, you won't have the faintest idea what a 'sturmtruppenkampfgruppe' is. Nick has that all sorted out on his blog. If you go to the homepage of the module you'll see a folder there with the addresses of all our group's blogs with the exception of Peter's which I'll have added to the list as soon as our site administrator gets around to it. (Steve are you listening? I'll send it to you by email anyway.)

The view from where I'm sitting

I gather from your blogs and other communications that most of you are grappling with the Unit 1 question. Pip Leighton had a long post yesterday which I rather enjoyed. I found it very interesting to hear his reflection on the Cold War as viewed through the prism of his own experience of serving on its frontline with the British Army 'all tooled up' as he puts it through the 1980s.

As educators we often talk about getting students to 'engage' with the question. For my part, I see what is happening in some of your blogs as evidence of that. I think it's a strength of learing in this manner. One has a record of how one's thoughts develop over time which is both illustrative of your own learning curve and a resource for others. I'm impressed.

He has another post today giving voice to some second thuoghts which to me is great. One could easily get all Hegelian at this point about the progress of knowledge--thesis, antithesis and synthesis--but as was said in The Times 'T2' section about Hegel's philosophy recently it boils down, more or less, to what normal people call 'learing from one's mistakes'.

I don't want to get ahead of the discussion by interjecting my own view on the question. I find that can shut further discussion down some time. I'd like to add just one thing to the question of Stalin's personality which has figured into what several of you have said. Gaddis points out how the Soviet system was so much a reflection of Stalin's own personality. One should not underestimate the enormous fear which Stalin provoked in his subordinates. He was certainly much more than primus inter pares in the Politburo of the time. His chief of staff wrote without shame (because many people had this reaction to Stalin) that he always kept a spare set of trousers in his office because he'd quite literally s**t himself when forced to meet with him.

An illustration: If you ever go to Moscow you should take note of the facade of the building just off Red Square facing on to Manezh place (I forget the name of the building). It's completely different one side from another. The story goes that the architects drafted two plans for the front of the building and submitted them to Stalin so he could choose which one he preferred. What he did was sign both drawings--absent-mindedly one would suppose. And the architects rather than return to Stalin for clarification, to get him to actually make a usable decision just built half the thing according to one plan and half according to another. That's fear. There are thousands of stories like this. I think it gose some way to explaining also the inefficiency of the Soviet system--which Gaddis also points out.

Week 1 of Module 2: Legacy of the Second World War

We've started the course properly now and so I am glad to see that most of you are getting down to reading through the Unit contents and assigned readings. Sean has another good end of induction post on his blog. He's made a quick start on Legacy of the Second World War and has posted some of his observations already. I am looking forward to our discussion. I've some points of my own to pass on:

1. As a general point I expect that in the first week of each Unit most of your efforts will be focussed on doing the readings. There haven't been many posts in the unit discussion forum which is what I would expect at this time. As we get to the end of the week when the specialized students have made their contribution and into next week I expect that efforts will shift from individual self-study to group discussion. That's the plan anyway. In short, you should all be reading right now.
2. Reading Sean's post and more exactly the comments reminds me that it is a good idea to review the comments section of your blog once in a while. 'Spam' comments offering, inter alia, services for the enlargement of parts of one's anatomy creep in there rather like your email inbox. The blog owner can delete them easily.
3. Over the last few weeks I have noticed the number of subscribers to my blog has been going up slowly. Currently there are thirteen which would suggest that while most of the group have figured out how to aggregate the blogs in our group a few have not. Go back to the Induction and review how it is done. It's really very simple and it is the easiest way by far to keep track of activity as you can see at a glance the blogs which have had content added and can scan them quickly and therefore need not review each individually.

That's all for now.

Random Observation Vol. 1

Over the years I've heard or read probably dozens of stories about soldiers having a brush with death, surviving what should have been a mortal injury because a bullet fired at their chest was stopped by some object in their pocket like a cigarette case, or a Bible, or stack of letters from their 'sweetheart back home'--the more sentimental the value the better the story. Times have changed. Check out that guy's bullet stopper (scroll down).

That's it for Week 2

Nick Dymond has a good end of Induction post. Funny title! He's made a start on Gaddis's Now We Know and is considering finishing it and moving on to Young and Kent over the weekend. I admire his enthusiasm. No, scratch that. I'm in awe of his energy because mine is almost utterly spent. Friday, Yay! My son kindly infected me with conjunctivitus recently which is bad enough at normal times but having spent the week staring gummy-eyed at a computer screen my right eye feels mightily raw.

I think it might be payback. When I was 18 I was a fresh Master Corporal in the Canadian Forces. One of my privates came to me and asked what he could do to prevent him from falling asleep on sentry again. I'd given him a serious bollocking over it once already and decided to take an alternate reproach, I mean approach: humour. I told him he should unroll a cigarette and take a pinch of tobacco. Then when his eyelids felt droopy he should peel back an eyelid and pop a piece of the tobacco in there. The next morning he's eyes were so redrimmed, goopy and enrusted with yellowy discharge that he had to go on sick parade. I was probably lucky that either the medical officer had a sense of humour or the private never explained what happened this way: 'My section commander told me to!' It would not have gone down well for me, I fear.

I've always been a believer in learning from one's mistakes. That time I learned that one should never take for granted the gullibility (sometimes plain stupidity, but let's be charitable) of those for whom you are in a position of power. It never occurred to me for even a fraction of a second that he would take me seriously. I thuoght he would take from the ludicrousness of my advice the bigger lesson that one stays awake when one is tired--assuming one has tried the obvious (caffeine in large quantities)--by sheer force of will. But he didn't. It made me a better NCO and, I think, a better teacher too. The thing is if this is payback, if there is some Karmic effect which is revisiting upon me my sins of the past, then I am worried because the other thing I advised him was to bury his bayonet hilt down in the lip of his trench so when his head drooped it would stab him in the chin. So now I'm a little nervous, is my jaw going to get sliced off on the way home?

See you next week!

'Analog vs Digital' War Studies: Crossover Vol. 1, Plagiarism

For a while now I have taken to referring to 'on-line' learning and/or students as 'digital' and 'non-on-line' learning and/or students as 'analog' (ie., like digital computing as opposed to wind-up analog clockwork). I confess that the meme hasn't exactly caught on in the educational literature which persists in attaching 'e-' in lieu of 'on-line', which has the benefit of brevity (e-Learning, e-Student, etc) but seems to me somehow a little inelegant. And refers to 'normal', 'non-on-line' learning and/or students as 'face-to-face', which I do not like because it takes too long to type, has a faint connotation of confrontation ('in your face!' but perhaps that's just me), and when shortened to 'f2f', as it sometimes is, just looks from an esthetic perspective, well, horrible. So when I say 'Digital War Studies' what I mean is: us, which is to say you reading this. And when I say 'Analog War Studies' what I mean is the live bodies who occasionally knock on my door here on The Strand and whom I could, if the notion took me, poke and/or prod in the flesh.

Teaching both 'analog' and 'digital' I notice that there is some useful crossover. Case in point: yesterday I was asked to give a talk on 'Plagiarism' to this year's cohort of analog MA students at their Orientation session. This talk is meant to be over and above what isalready said in the Handbook. I had 15 minutes to fill and was feeling a little challenged as to what to say else as the Handbook is pretty clear on what plagiarism is, that it's considered the most serious academic misdemeanour and that when it's discovered it generally means the perpetrator is expelled from the programme. Pretty cut and dry, I thuoght. So I tried to be a bit more proactive and positive in my talk and explain why it was taken so seriously (unless that was not obvious) and how it could be avoided, which it is worth repeating here.

Plagiarism is considered such a serious offence in academia because it is effectively a form of theft and fraud. It's not a 'victimless' crime. Genuinely original, genuinely good ideas actually come along fairly rarely. When you've had one and gone to the effort of systematically working through it, relating it to other ideas, and saying something useful about your field with it--which is basically what it means to write an academic article and have it published in a peer-reviewed professional journal--then it is pretty seriously annoying to have it used by someone else as if it were their own. Perhaps in the case of most student essays which have been plagiarized this would seem not to matter for they are not published and so, it could be argued, there is no diminishing of the kudos owing to the originator because he/she will never know about it. This does not change the principle, however, which is that a theft has occurred. We could get into a philosophical discussion here along the lines of, you know, 'if a tree falls in the forest...' But that's unnecessary coffee-talk because there is another transgression involved in plagiarism which is that the plagiarist misrepresents his or her actual intellectual abilities in a way that, if it goes undetected and unpunished, will eventually undermine the integrity of the degree awarded.

What I find disappointing in a lot of cases of minor plagiarism which I see the root cause is a quite unnecessary lack of confidence and tendency of new academic writers to second-guess the effectiveness of their own words and thinking. Bear in mind:

•It is almost always better to use your own words. It may seem that what another has written is so much more eloquent than what you have. And indeed that may be the case. But what an examiner is looking for before he begins to judge an argument on the basis of felicity of expression and style is to understand the underlying thinking which is more often than not obscured when you use someone else's words than your own. Yes it may sound better but the meaning and rhetorical impact can be less. I don't know how many times I have put big red question marks beside a paragraph in a student's essay which has been 'shaped' strongly by someone else's manner of explaining a point that when I ask them to explain 'but what do you really mean?' in person they do so easily and clearly.

•Acknowledging the source of ideas does not diminish your own brilliance. On the contrary, it shows a fluency with the literature and the key concepts within it that demonstrate it very clearly.

•The more provocative the point made the greater the burden of proof required—and vice versa. What this means is that there is no 'magic number' of footnotes for an essay of a given length--a relatively common student fallacy. If my paper is 3,000 words long how many footnotes does it need to have to be considered 'good'? Unfortunately, there's no answer. In theory, one could have an excellent paper which had no footnotes or very, very few because it was wholly composed of the student's original thuoght. In practice, never. Knowledge advances by building upon itself so even original ideas need contextualizing in the literature which means referring to others whether to rubbish them or salute them. And furthermore, unlike, say, philosophy the social sciences are really not given to wholly abstract arguments. You're almost always talking about something in the Real World and in order to construct a convincing argument about something in the Real World you need to have way of quantifiably measuring it or qualitatively describing it. In other words, you need data, proof, and the more 'way out there' what you're saying is the more of it you have to have.

•And, finally, no one loses marks for excessive footnoting! You may get marginal comments along the lines of 'is this really necessary?' when you provide a footnote to the Oxford Companion to Military History for the sentence 'The First World War began in 1914' (to give a silly, extreme example), after which you will adjust your notions of what needs footnoting and what does not in order to make a convincing original argument. Getting good at that in whatever your chosen subject may be is, in a nutshell, what being a student is all about.

Really egregious cases of plagiarism, on the other hand, always seem to come down to sheer laziness often, but not necessarily, accompanied by ineptitude in which case there really is no excuse.

Reflection: First week of Induction

We're now into the second week of the induction. It seems to me that things are progressing fairly well. I have the feeling that people are still getting used to the mode of delivery. On-line learning is different in some respects and it takes some getting used to. About half of you have created your blogs and almost all of you have logged on at some point (did you know, aporops of the post about Orwell below, that I can track when people are logging on--talk about Big Brother!). There don't seem, however, to have been any major technical difficulties.

From my perspective, I find it interesting how quickly one begins to build up a mental image of students just from their posts--Nick wearing a fireman's hat. I wonder if others find this?

In any case, I am more or less happy with thing so far. My concerns for the coming week are that:

• we find two people who want to specialize in Unit 1 'Legacy of the Second World War' which means kicking off the discussion on the question 'was the Cold War inevitable?'
• We get the rest of the blogs up (and don't forget about aggregating them unless you relish the idea of checking fifteen different blogs every time)

Otherwise, I feel that things are on track. What do you think? Comments?