Teaching Southeast Asian Regional Dynamics: Reflections on Simulations and Policy Briefs as Signature Pedagogies
Article Number: e2025348 | Available Online: July 2025 | DOI: 10.22521/edupij.2025.17.348
Bama Andika Putra
Full text PDF |
1692 |
948
Abstract
|
Background/purpose. This study argues the prospects of simulations and policy briefs as signature international relations (IR) pedagogies by examining their potential benefits in region-focused case study subjects such as the Southeast Asian Regional Dynamics course. In doing so, it looks back to the need for creativity and student-centered learning in IR teaching and provides a guideline of how simulations and policy brief assessments can be adopted in furthering students’ understanding of the intra-dynamics within the Southeast Asian region, how the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and its extra-regional forums operate, and the relevance of various IR concepts and theories in deciphering regional dynamics in the region. Materials/methods. Qualitative empirical case study inquiry that discursively situates simulations and policy brief assessments as signature pedagogies in the study of Southeast Asian Regional Dynamics course, drawing upon existing studies on alternative pedagogical methods within social sciences. Results. In simulations, instructors provide background context on IR themes related to Southeast Asia, determine an ASEAN-centered forum for the simulation, renegotiate the curriculum by facilitating students’ voices on their preferred theme, and adopt the ‘immerse theater’ approach to expose students to a sense of formality throughout the simulation. Meanwhile, the emphasis in policy briefs as an assessment tool in IR emphasizes student-centered, problem-based learning, where students are given the independence to explore different forms of solutions for a given case. |
Conclusion. The potential positive outcomes of the methods redefine what Shulman mentioned as 'signature pedagogies' due to the methods' aims of preparing students for their professional careers.
Keywords: Pedagogy; Higher Education; International Relations; Signature Pedagogy; Southeast Asian Regional Dynamics; Student-Centered Learning
ReferencesAcharya, A. (2014). Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds: A New Agenda for International Studies Global International Relations (IR) and Regional Worlds: A New Agenda for International Studies. International Studies Quarterly, 58(4), 647–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/isqu.12171/2/isqu12171-fig-0001.jpeg
Acharya, A. (2019, August 11). Why ASEAN’s Indo-Pacific outlook matters. East Asia Forum. https://www.eastasiaforum.org/2019/08/11/why-aseans-indo-pacific-outlook-matters/
Acharya, A. (2021). ASEAN and Regional Order Revisiting Security Community in Southeast Asia. Routledge.
Acharya, A., & Buzan, B. (2010). Non-Western International Relations Theory: Perspectives On and Beyond Asia. Routledge.
Alencar, E. M. L. S., Fleith, D. S., & Pereira, N. (2016). Creativity in Higher Education: Challenges and Facilitating Factors. Trends in Psychology, 25(2), 553–561. https://www.redalyc.org/journal/5137/513754617009/html/
Anwar, D. F. (1994). Indonesia in ASEAN: Foreign Policy and Regionalism (Issue 3). ISEAS. https://doi.org/10.2307/2761169
Anwar, D. F. (2020). Indonesia and the ASEAN outlook on the Indo-Pacific. International Affairs, 96(1), 111–129. https://doi.org/10.1093/IA/IIZ223
Ariza, E. N., Yahya, Noorchaya., Zainuddin, Hanizah, Morales-Jones, C. A., & Gerena, L. M. (2015). Fundamentals of teaching English to speakers of other languages in K-12 mainstream classrooms. Kendall Hunt publishig Company.
Arnautu, D., & Dagenais, C. (2021). Use and effectiveness of policy briefs as a knowledge transfer tool: a scoping review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 2021 8:1, 8(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00885-9
Arnold, R. (2015). Where’s the Diplomacy in Diplomacy? Using a Classic Board Game in “Introduction to International Relations.” PS: Political Science & Politics, 48(1), 162–166. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096514001711
Asal, V. (2005). Playing Games with International Relations. International Studies Perspective, 6(3), 359–373. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44218419
Baker, T., & Clark, J. (2010). Cooperative learning – a double‐edged sword: a cooperative learning model for use with diverse student groups. Intercultural Education, 21(3), 257–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675981003760440
Beeson, M. (2009). ASEAN’s ways: still fit for purpose? Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 22(3), 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1080/09557570903137776
Bhardwaj, V., Zhang, S., Tan, Y. Q., & Pandey, V. (2025). Redefining learning: student-centered strategies for academic and personal growth. Frontiers in Education, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1518602/bibtex
Bilgin, P. (2016). “Contrapuntal Reading” as a Method, an Ethos, and a Metaphor for Global IR. International Studies Review, 18(1), 134–146. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viv018
Blaney, D. L., & Tickner, A. B. (2017). International Relations in the Prison of Colonial Modernity. International Relations, 31(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047117817691349
Bobula, M. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education: a comprehensive review of challenges, opportunities, and implications. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education, 30. https://doi.org/10.47408/jldhe.vi30.1137
Caballero-Anthony, M. (2018). Negotiating Governance on Non-Traditional Security in Southeast Asia and Beyond. In Negotiating Governance on Non-Traditional Security in Southeast Asia and Beyond. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/caba18300
Campillo, X. R., Hernandez, K. C., & Cantano, A. M. (2021, March 15). Enhancing Creativity and Communication Skills Through IR Signature Pedagogies. E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2021/03/15/enhancing-creativity-and-communication-skills-through-ir-signature-pedagogies/
Chagas-Bastos, F. H., & Burges, S. W. (2019). The “Briefing Note” as a Pedagogical Tool for Teaching Politics and International Relations. Journal of Political Science Education, 15(2), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2018.1472001
Chan, C. K. Y., & Hu, W. (2023). Students’ voices on generative AI: perceptions, benefits, and challenges in higher education. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-023-00411-8/tables/5
Clausen, D. (2021, May 9). What English Language Teachers Can Teach IR about Pedagogy. E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2021/05/09/what-english-language-teachers-can-teach-ir-about-pedagogy/#
Cropley, A. (2014). Neglect of creativity in education: A moral issue. In Moran. S., D. H. Cropley, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Ethics of Creativity (pp. 250–264). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137333544_15
Cuyvers, L. (2019). The 'ASEAN Way' and ASEAN's Development Gap with Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam: A Critical View. Asia Pacific Business Review, 25(5), 683–704. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2019.1652980
Dacombe, R., & Morrow, E. A. (2017). Developing immersive simulations: The potential of theater in teaching and learning in political studies. PS - Political Science and Politics, 50(1), 209–213. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096516002456
Dunlop, L., Rushton, E. A. C., Atkinson, L., Blake, C., Calvert, S., Cornelissen, E., Dècle, C. C. M., DeSchrijver, J., Dhassi, K. K., Edwards, R. P. R., Malaj, G., Mirjanić, J., Saunders, W. E. H., Sinkovec, Y., Stadnyk, T., Štofan, J., Stubbs, J. E., Su, C., Turkenburg-van Diepen, M., … Yuan, X. (2023). An introduction to the co-creation of policy briefs with youth and academic teams. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 47(1), 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098265.2021.2001793
Edwards, S., & Bradford, J. (2023, March 28). Southeast Asia’s Maritime Security Challenges: An Evolving Tapestry . Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative. https://amti.csis.org/southeast-asias-maritime-security-challenges-an-evolving-tapestry/
Engel, S., Pallas, J., & Lambert, S. (2017). Model United Nations and Deep Learning: Theoretical and Professional Learning. Journal of Political Science Education, 13(2), 171–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2016.1250644
Ettinger, A. (2024). Global International Relations and Worlding Beyond the West: A Pedagogical Critique. International Studies Review. https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viad052
Florida, R. (2004, October). America’s Looming Creativity Crisis. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2004/10/americas-looming-creativity-crisis
Francis, N. J., Jones, S., & Smith, D. P. (2024). Generative AI in Higher Education: Balancing Innovation and Integrity. British Journal of Biomedical Science, 81(1), 14048. https://doi.org/10.3389/bjbs.2024.14048/bibtex
Fravel, M. T. (2011). China’s Strategy in the South China Sea. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 33(3), 292–319. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs33-3b
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum.
Goh, E. (2007). Great Powers and Hierarchical Order in Southeast Asia: Analyzing Regional Security Strategies. International Security, 32(3), 113–157. https://doi.org/10.2307/2761169
Hammond, A., & Albert, C. D. (2020). Learning by Experiencing: Improving Student Learning Through a Model United Nations Simulation. Journal of Political Science Education, 16(4), 441–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/15512169.2018.1548967
Harper, R. W. (2015). Southeast Asia—Crossroads of the East. The Social Studies, 51(4), 128–130. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1940.11018319
Hensley, M. K. (2013). The Poster Session as a Vehicle for Teaching the Scholarly Communication Process. In S. Davis-Kahl & M. Kensley (Eds.), Common ground at the nexus of information literacy and scholarly communication (pp. 113–132). Association of College and Research Libraries.
Horn, L., Rubin, O., & Schouenborg, L. (2016). Undead Pedagogy: How a Zombie Simulation Can Contribute to Teaching International Relations. International Studies Perspectives, 17(2), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12103
Hu, L. (2021). Examining ASEAN’s effectiveness in managing South China Sea disputes. The Pacific Review , 36(1), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1934519
Hunter, G., Abelmann, N., Cain, T., McDonough, T., & Prendergast, C. (2008). Interrogating the University, One Archival Entry at a Time. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Publications, 40(5), 40–45. https://ir.library.illinoisstate.edu/sotlpubs/9
Judge, A. (2021). Designing and implementing policy writing assessments: A practical guide. Teaching Public Administration, 39(3), 351–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0144739420961442
Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2004). Introduction: How people think, work, and act creatively in diverse domains | Request PDF. In J. C. Kaufman & J. Baer (Eds.), Creativity across domains: faces of the muse (pp. 1–10). Taylor & Francis Group.
Kausikan, B. (2008). East and Southeast Asia and the Post-Cold War International Politics of Human Rights. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 16(4), 241–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/10576109308435934
Kodabux, A. (2019, November 11). The Future of IR Lies in Creativity Rather than ‘New Thinking.’ E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2019/11/11/the-future-of-ir-lies-in-creativity-rather-than-new-thinking/#
Kuik, C. C., & Rozman, G. (2015). Light or Heavy Hedging: Positioning Between China and the United States.
Lamy, S. L. (2007). Challenging Hegemonic Paradigms and Practices: Critical Thinking and Active Learning Strategies for International Relations. PS: Political Science & Politics, 40(1), 112–116. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096507250279
Lee, D., Arnold, M., Srivastava, A., Plastow, K., Strelan, P., Ploeckl, F., Lekkas, D., & Palmer, E. (2024). The impact of generative AI on higher education learning and teaching: A study of educators’ perspectives. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 6, 100221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2024.100221
Leib, J., & Ruppel, S. (2020). The learning effects of United Nations simulations in political science classrooms. European Political Science, 19(3), 336–351. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-020-00260-3/tables/2
Lightfoot, S. (2020). Using policy briefs as assessment to integrating research-led employability in foreign policy courses. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 16(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v16i1.1083
Lüdert, J. (2016). Signature Pedagogies in International Relations. E-International Relations. http://www.e-ir.info/about/donate/
Ludert, J., & Stewart, K. (2017, November 7). Structuring a Mixed-Methods Course. E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2017/11/07/structuring-a-mixed-methods-course/
Lundin, S. C. (2009). The Nine Lives of Innovation. McGraw Hill.
Mansour, I. (2017). A Global South Perspective on International Relations Theory. International Studies Perspectives, 18(1), 2–3. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekw010
Masset, E., Gaarder, M., Beynon, P., & Chapoy, C. (2013). What is the impact of a policy brief? Results of an experiment in research dissemination. Journal of Development Effectiveness, 5(1), 50–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/19439342.2012.759257
McLean, A. C. (2012). Destroying the Teacher: The Need for Learner-Centered Teaching. English Teaching Forum, 50(1), 32–35.
McMillan, S. L. (2014). Bravo for Brevity: Using Short Paper Assignments in International Relations Classes. International Studies Perspective, 15(1), 109–120. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44631202
Mikalayeva, L. (2016). Motivation, Ownership, and the Role of the Instructor in Active Learning. International Studies Perspective, 17(2), 214–229. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44218816
Mubarok, M. Z., & Hamid, A. F. A. (2018). The Rise of Radicalism and Terrorism in Indonesia and Malaysia. Review of Islam in Southeast Asia, 1(1). http://103.229.202.71/index.php/risea/article/view/9645
Nakano, T. de C., & Weschsler, S. M. (2018). Creativity and innovation: Skills for the 21st Century. Estudos de Psicologia (Campinas), 35(3), 237–246. https://www.redalyc.org/journal/3953/395357145002/html/
Nunan, D. (2013). Learner-centered English language education: the selected works of David Nunan. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203096888
O'Dea, X. (2024). Generative AI: Is It a Paradigm Shift for Higher Education? Studies in Higher Education, 49(5), 811–816. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2332944
O’neill, G., & Mcmahon, T. (2005). Student-centered Learning: What does if mean for students and lecturers? In G. O. O’Neill, S. Moore, & B. McMullin (Eds.), Emerging issues in the practice of University Learning and Teaching (pp. 30–39). AISHE. http://www.aishe.org/readings/2005-1/
Putra, B. A. (2023). The rise of paragunboat diplomacy as a maritime diplomatic instrument: Indonesia’s constabulary forces and tensions in the North Natuna Seas. Asian Journal of Political Science. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185377.2023.2226879
Putra, B. A. (2024a). Non-western theorizing: the challenge of International Relations curriculum in Indonesia. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1378316. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1378316/bibtex
Putra, B. A. (2024b). The politics of countering climate change in Southeast Asia. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2024.1486796
Richards, J. C. (2008). Growing Up with TESOL. English Teaching Forum, 46(1), 2–11.
Sasley, B. E. (2010). Teaching Students How to Fail: Simulations as Tools of Explanation. International Studies Perspectives, 11(1), 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2009.00393.x
Sharan, Y. (2010). Cooperative learning: a diversified pedagogy for diverse classrooms. Intercultural Education, 21(3), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675981003760390
She, X. (2021, May 2). Teaching International Relations Through Short Iterated Simulations. E-International Relations. https://www.e-ir.info/2021/05/02/teaching-international-relations-through-short-iterated-simulations/
Shulman, L. S. (2005). Signature Pedagogies in the Professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20027998
Simpson, A. W., & Kaussler, B. (2009). IR teaching reloaded: Using films and simulations in the teaching of international relations. International Studies Perspectives, 10(4), 413–427. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1528-3585.2009.00386.x
Stanzel, V. (2018). New Realities in Foreign Affairs: Diplomacy in the 21st Century. Stiftung Wissenschaft Und Politik. https://www.swp-berlin.org/en/publication/new-realities-in-foreign-affairs-diplomacy-in-the-21st-century
Storey, I. (2014). Disputes in the South China Sea: Southeast Asia’s Troubled Waters. Politique Étrangère, 3(1), 35–47. https://shs.cairn.info/journal-politique-etrangere-2014-3-page-35?lang=en&tab=texte-integral
Storey, I. (2018). ASEAN’s Failing Grade in the South China Sea. In International Relations and Asia’s Southern Tier (pp. 111–124). Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-3171-7_8
Tekunan, S. (2015). The Asean Way: The Way To Regional Peace? Jurnal Hubungan Internasional, 3(2), 142–147. https://doi.org/10.18196/hi.2014.0056.142-147
Tickner, A. B. (2003). Seeing IR differently: Notes from the third world. Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 32(2), 295–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298030320020301
Till, G. (2022, March 31). Order at sea: Southeast Asia’s maritime security. Lowy Institute. https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/order-sea-southeast-asia-s-maritime-security
Varkkey, H. (2024, January 11). Borderless Haze Threatens Southeast Asia. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2024/01/borderless-haze-threatens-southeast-asia/
Wagener, M. (2011). Lessons from Preah Vihear: Thailand, Cambodia, and the Nature of Low-Intensity Border Conflicts. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 3, 27–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/186810341103000302
WB. (2018). Belt and Road Initiative. Belt and Road Initiative. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/regional-integration/brief/belt-and-road-initiative
Yahuda, M. (2013). China’s new assertiveness in the South China Sea. Journal of Contemporary China, 22(81), 446–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2012.748964
Yu, H. (2024). Understanding China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-9633-9
Yusuf, A., Pervin, N., & Román-González, M. (2024). Generative AI and the future of higher education: a threat to academic integrity or reformation? Evidence from multicultural perspectives. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 21(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1186/S41239-024-00453-6/figures/11