Teaching War from a Sociological Perspective : The West Point Exemplar

By Morten G. Ender & Remi M. Hajjar

In this paper we focus on war taught at the Military Academy (USMA) at West Point, New York, from a sociological perspective. We first provide background on the development of studies of military and war in the field of – with emphasis in the US, but also with global applicability. Second, we deliver an overview of West Point and its unique learning environment. In particular we discuss the structure, content, and process of specific sociology courses taught at West Point in the sociology programme, and how they have focused on war. Despite being in the longest war in the history of the United States beginning in 2001 to the present in Afghanistan, and also in Iraq from 2003 to 2011 and from 2017 to the time of this writing (and with sabre rattling and activity in countries in the Middle East), the topic of war within the sociology programme is not taught at West Point as much as an outsider might expect. Nonetheless, war receives more attention in the sociology programme at West Point than in most colleges and universities around the world. American sociology has a rich history.1 But sociological interest in the military and war has waxed and waned over the past three centuries.2 Sociology has long played a major role in liberal education in the United States’ higher education system, and in the general education of students. Criteria for designing and maintaining strong sociology programmes are available from the American Sociological Association.3 Indeed, sociology offers both a major area of focus (depth) and contributes to the core general education requirements of college students (breadth). Early sociology focused on meliorism, empiricism, , locality, and reform representing turn-of-the-century American pragmatism in the founding traditions of American sociology. Early sociologists such as Spencer, Weber, Sorokin, Lasswell, among others, studied the role of the military in society.4 Within a couple of generations, sociology had developed subfields. Yet the establishment of the specialty of did not initially take hold until the 1970’s, despite a significant interest following World War II.5 At that time, military sociology emerged alongside the and became a source of knowledge about peace, war, and the military institution. A consequence is that the sociology of war and military sociology became inextricably linked.

 The views of the authors are their own and do not purport to reflect the position of the United States Military Academy, the Department of the Army, the US Department of Defense, or the United States Government. 1 For an application of these ideas to another region of the country, see Ender & Huang, 1999. 2 See Soeters, 2018. 3 McKinney, Howery, Strand, Kain & Berheide, 2004. 4 Spencer, 1883 ; Sorokin, 1937 ; Lasswell, 1941 ; Weber, 1947. 5 Caforio, 2003 ; Siebold, 2001.

Published/ publié in Res Militaris (http://resmilitaris.net), vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 2

As Segal and Clever note, The sociology of war is a subfield of sociology that focuses primarily on the macro- level patterns of war making, including how societies engage in warfare, the meaning that war has in society, and the relationship between state structure and war making. The sociology of war is strongly related to, although in many ways distinct from, the subfield of military sociology that focuses on the organization and functioning of military forces with a particular focus on military personnel and civil military relations. What binds these lines of scholarship together is the basic premise that to understand war, it is necessary to understand those who fight it, and vice versa.6

Early World War II and post-war studies focused on war and provided significant insights including The American Soldier,7 “The Small Warship”,8 “Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II”,9 and a July 1946 special issue of the American Journal of Sociology dedicated to “Human Behavior in Military Society”.10 Later classics would include The Soldier and the State (Huntington); The Power Elite (Mills), and The Professional Soldier (Janowitz).11 It took another major American war in Vietnam for sociologists to develop significant interest in war and the military following the publication of The American Enlisted Man (Moskos).12 In terms of classroom instruction, the tome A Sociology for Special Circumstances: Using the Vietnam War in the Classroom, an important collaborative work by Elise Boulding et al, became the nucleus for the now named Peace, War, and Social Conflict Section of the American Sociological Association,13 which led to greater institutionalization of military sociology and the study of war.14 Following the 1970’s, public and general sociological interest in military matters increased but ebbed and flowed in diverse directions including nuclear disarmament and protests, major military events such as peacekeeping missions, mass military casualties, military scandals, and military interventions in the Persian Gulf, Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Macedonia, and Kosovo.15

6 Segal & Clever, 2013. 7 Stouffer et al., 1949. 8 Homans, 1946. 9 Shils & Janowitz, 1948. 10 Boëne, 2000. 11 Huntington, 1957 ; Janowitz, 1960 ; Mills, 1956. 12 Moskos, 1970. 13 See Peace, War, and Social Conflict Section, American Sociological Association at http://www.asanet.org/asa- communities/sections/peace-war-and-social-conflict. 14 Boulding et al., 1974. 15 During this time, a few articles are published in Teaching Sociology that focus on war. They include Intro- duction to Contemporary Social Problems courses : Nusbaumer, Kelley & DiIorio, 1989 ; Hannon & Marullo,

1988 ; courses and material about genocide and the Holocaust : Abowitz, 2002 ; Friedman, 1985 ; and on student action including war protestt : Cornelius, 1998 ; or specific wars such as Vietnam : Long, 1993; Starr, 1995. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 3

Despite research by and the production of the next generation of military sociologists at major institutions in the United States such as the University of Chicago, Northwestern

University, University of Maryland, and Texas A & M University, and military sociology’s growth around the world, the subfield remained rather insular.16 Indeed, war, peace, and the military had a relatively invisible presence in mainstream sociology prior to September 11, 2001.17 The research shows a marginalization of peace, war, and military topics in sociology textbooks; a lack of conceptual and reference continuity across textbooks, yet a prominence of photographs of peace, war, and the military themes. Military and war appeared relegated to the back pages of the politics chapter – war essentially being an extension of politics. Prior to 9/11, war from a sociological perspective in various forms began to be taught around the United States. Enough so that three editions of syllabi, course and curriculum guides, and instructional materials had been produced during the 1990’s and 2000’, until the American Sociological Association went to online materials. This ultimately dispersed such courses throughout the database clearing house known as TRAILS – Teaching Resources and Innovations Library for Sociology (http://trails.asanet.org/Pages/TDLContent.aspx).18 This advancement of technology has McDonaldized and essentially undermined horizontal cohesion of fellow teachers through hyper and over-centralization. In the first decade after 9/11, 2001, and the subsequent US and coalition forces’ invasions in Afghanistan and Iraq, indeed what Baudrillard has called “World War IV”,19 a slow and seemingly deliberate scholarly and curricular movement appeared across disciplines in a myriad universities.20 Yet little is published about how war and the military are taught in the post-9/11 era—certainly not is the same way sociology informed teaching about war after Vietnam. West Point and the Teaching and Learning Context The United States Military Academy at West Point, New York was established during Thomas Jefferson’s presidential administration in 1802. It was the first military academy of its kind in the United States. For the nineteenth century, West Point graduated men as both engineers with degrees in engineering, science, and mathematics and commissioned second lieutenants for the US Army. Other academies emerged in the United States during the early to mid-1800’s including the American Literary, Scientific, and Military Academy located in Norwich, Vermont (now Norwich University), the Citadel located in Charleston, South Carolina, the Virginia Military Institute (VMI) located in Lexington, Virginia, and the United

16 See Ender, 2016. 17 See Ahmad & Wilke, 1973 ; Kurtz, 1992 ; Ender & Gibson. 2005. 18 See MacDougall, Ender & Raisz (eds.), 1998 ; MacDougall & Ender (eds.), 2003 ; Ender, Woerhle & Kelty (eds.), 2007. 19 Baudrillard, 2002. According to that author, WWIV (War against Terrorism) is the latest in a series comprising WWI (War against Imperialism), WWII (War against Fascism) and WWIII (War against Communism). 20 See Burgos, 2008. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 4

States Naval Academy located at Annapolis, Maryland. The US Air Force Academy located in Colorado Springs, Colorado, was established in 1955 following the creation of a separate US Air Force after WW II in 1947. Today, all US military academies continue to produce military officers but all have broadened their academic curriculums and modelled them more along civilian institutions of higher education21 offering Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) and Bachelor of Science (B.S.) degrees, while also providing direct professional focus and military training. All of the military academies are accredited by professional associations, such as the Middle States Commission of Higher Education, as degree-granting institutions.22 West Point offers 36 different majors at the undergraduate level including sociology.23 Recent major additions include Kinesiology and Defense and Strategic Studies (DSS). The English, History, and Sociology programmes combined to establish a new Diversity and Inclusion Studies minor at West Point in 2018. In 2011, West Point ranked 14th (tied with Vassar College) on the U.S. News & World Report (2011) annual rankings of national liberal arts colleges in the United States. Perennially, the Academy rates as a top national public liberal arts college. The federal government academies – West Point, Annapolis, and the US Air Force Academy – commission roughly 100 percent of their graduates as officers in the US military.24 Applicants are not married, have no dependent children, and are between the ages of 17 and 23. Applicants must pass physical fitness tests and medical examinations. Most applicants obtain a Congressional nomination letter of recommendation from their home-state Congress person or Senator.25 Cadets compete successfully against their civilian peers and one another in intercollegiate athletics and extracurricular activities, as well as for Rhodes, Truman, Rotary, and numerous other scholarships. For example, West Point graduated a Rhodes Scholar sociology major in 2010 and both a Schretzmann and Fulbright scholar each in 2018.

The Sociology Programme at West Point, much like the Department of Behavioral Sciences & Leadership (BS&L) in which it resides, combines elements of new teaching 26 techniques and approaches and also pragmatic traditions. The early teaching in the department deployed the Socratic Method and problem-focused teaching. In recent years, both active constructivism and service-learning approaches have been integrated into the department and

21 Forsythe and Keith, 2004. 22 Watson, 2007. 23 Ender, Kelty & Smith, 2008. 24 Academies also graduate a handful of foreign cadets each year who then return to their home country and serve in the military. 25 The United States Coast Guard Academy, a federal military academy of the United States Coast Guard established in 1876 and located at New London, Connecticut, does not require a Congressional letter of nomination. However, the United States Merchant Marine Academy, another federal military academy of the United States Merchant Marines established in 1936 and located at Kings Point, New York does. 26 Segal, Segal & Wattendorf, 1990. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 5 its sociology courses. Students have greater latitude to study topics they find intellectually engaging. Contrary to many expectations and combined with greater intellectual curiosity and autonomy, cadets in the programme are inclined, perhaps like their civilian peers, to study 27 topics focused on West Point culture and structure – what we affectionately call “Cadetland”. A minority of cadets over the years have chosen to write theses associated with war.28 They do indeed tend to be strong efforts and are often presented at conferences, such as Cadet

Ian McWilliams, who presented his senior thesis, Why do Veterans Miss War ?, at the 2015 Eastern Sociological Society.29 Additionally, two cadets received undergraduate student paper competition awards.30 The sociology faculty have a relatively free learning model with approaches at three levels of measurement and assessment : the personal (micro-level), the professional (meso- level), and the societal (macro-level). We build upon this pragmatic orientation of three levels of analyses by employing examples from the personal, including the cadet military experience. Further, we highlight the role of officers as leaders to enlisted soldiers and followers to senior officers. Finally, we emphasize how the sociological imagination helps understanding national and global events, patterns, and phenomena. In addition to employing a hybrid pragmatic tradition with contemporary constructivist, student-centred teaching approaches, we emphasize how sociology differs from other disciplines through its unique value-added to Army officers and global citizen-leaders. Sociology’s Relevance to the Army One larger question we address is the added value sociology brings to future Army officers. Sociology applies the Academy’s overall mission in many ways, including ten examples of disciplinary values or learning outcomes31 :

27

Some recent examples include the following cadet projects : Tattoos and the West Point Cadet (Mary Tobin);

Masculine Sex Role Strain at the United States Military Academy (Sara Ewing) ; Dual Career Couples in the Army (Katie Powell) ; A Qualitative Analysis of Military Academy Cadets and their Perceptions of Alcohol Use (Mike Izzo) ; Perceptions of Women in the Military : A Semester Exchange at USMA as an Agent of Change (Carolyn Kehn) ; Black Positionality – An Ontology (Michael Barlow) ; Tokenism among Women at West Point (Kaitlyn Lindquit) ; Every Cadet an Athlete ? (Josette Antilla) ; and Female Relational Aggression among Cadets at West Point (Chelsey Miranda). 28 Notably, it is the exchange cadets, already officers in their respective militaries in Germany, France, and Austria working on M.A. degrees that are more outwardly oriented. See Peinhaupt, 2015 ; Hyron, 2015 ; and Reinwand, 2015. 29 See McWilliams, 2015, senior thesis paper supervised by Remi Hajjar. 30 Cadet Chelsea Cunningham received the Elise M. Boulding Undergraduate Student Paper Award from the Peace, War, and Social Conflict Section of the American Sociological Association in 2008 with her senior thesis,

United States Army Spouses : Fear, Communication, and Job Satisfaction during Operation Iraqi Freedom II. Rachel Beck received the same award in 2005 for her senior thesis, Attitudes towards Democracy in Post- Saddam Iraq: A Socio-Cultural Analysis. 31 McWilliams, 2015, See also Snow, 1999. We’ve adopted the values articulated in these two sources. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 6

1. Window to the World : Exposure to and comprehension of cultural diversity both within the U.S. and also internationally. Helps students to cultivate cross-cultural competence ;

2. Knowledge of Society : Educate cadets about their own culture and society, their individual social location in society, and the social problems of that society ;

3. Methodological Literacy : Teach both the use and the strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative empiricism ;

4. Critical Thinking : Foster an ability to define a social problem, contextualize it including all nuances, and create integrative, empirical solutions ;

5. Social Responsibility : Prepare students to actively participate and engage civically in maintaining functional features of society, and ameliorate dysfunctions ; 6. Written and Oral Analysis : Use pedagogical techniques that encourage, foster, and develop students’ written and verbal communication skills ; 7. Moral Reasoning : Develop students’ sophisticated appreciation of ethical and moral practices linked to research in and thorough understanding of the human domain, which helps educate and build leaders of character;

8. Collaboration and Teamwork : Teach students to work collectively, appreciate others’ viewpoints, and engage, work well with, and include all kinds of people;

9. Diversity & Inclusion : Expose students to different people and develop students’ appreciation, respect for, and understanding of differences, especially with regards to the intersection of race/ethnicity, class, gender, sexual orientation, ability, age, and spiritual affiliations. Build cross-culturally competent and inclusive leaders for a diverse Army, nation, and world ;

10. An Ironic Perspective : In American society especially, sociology must take the high (intellectual) road and present scientific “truths”, and challenge taken for granted assumptions and “common knowledge”. We teach students to employ the sociological imagination and apply science to establish and communicate empirically-based facts. This seems particularly germane for budding Army officers who will enter, serve, and lead the nation in an era and society that questions the very meaning of truth and facts.

These ten teaching processes and learning outcomes reveal some of the values held by sociology as a discipline in higher education, and particularly at West Point. Certainly, many of these outcomes individually mesh with other disciplines ; however, collectively, they set the discipline of sociology apart from sister social sciences. Many sociology departments and professors have identified these values as essential elements of their curriculum. In many cases, these values undergird and shape academic goals, purpose statements, and visions of sociology and other academic departments in institutions of higher learning. Overarching Academic Goal of West Point Specific academic goals at the institutional level connect to the current sociology major and the honours programme at West Point. The overarching academic programme expects West Point graduates “to anticipate and to respond effectively to the uncertainties of a Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 7 changing technological, social, political, and economic world”.32 Given that James Henslin tells us that “Sociology is the scientific study of society and human behavior [to include] the impact that various forms of government have on people’s lives, the social consequences of production and distribution, culture, [and] the consequences of material goods, group structure, and belief systems”, we know certain relationships and patterns follow.33 For example, there is a clear and strong relationship between sociology and educating Army leaders. The relationship has not fully matured, but it is already rich, committed, valued, and evolving.34 How much more relevant could such a relationship be as during a time of war, upheaval, and persistent conflict ? The Sociology Curriculum and the Learning Model This section outlines and describes the learning model for cadet sociology majors at West Point. The structure of the model remains stable and serves to support the content, process, and structure of individual courses. A learning model defines the sociological education and training of cadets. The model emulates the Academy’s overall academic design. Cadets participate in a series of integrative experiences and classes that require mastery of increasingly difficult and relevant tasks that are necessary for the functional application of sociology and continued learning beyond graduation. Students begin their study of sociology with an introductory sociology course in order to ground their subsequent academic development both within and outside the discipline. Additionally, the introductory course inspires cadets to focus on and pursue a concentration within the discipline. From this base, cadets proceed concurrently down three academic paths :

(1) required sociology courses that provide a minimum core understanding within the discipline ; (2) elective sociology courses that facilitate specialization across the discipline; and (3) enrichment courses, offered outside the discipline, that aid in developing a sociological perspective by allowing cadets to pursue subfields of sociology and gain interdisciplinary insights of their own interest. Finally, some cadets take an advanced study course (thesis) in their senior (Firstie) year, which enables some students to accomplish greater depth on a single project. All sociology honours cadets produce a thesis that demonstrates a systematic and advanced undergraduate application of sociology to answer a research question of their choosing. All sociology majors integrate their sociological experiences in a senior-level course, Armed Forces & Society. Study in Depth By systematic design, the sociology major at West Point satisfies the Academy’s standards for the disciplinary depth component of the Academic Programme. Further, it is

32 Office of the Dean, 1998, 2002. 33 Henslin, 2012, p.4. 34 For a compelling argument in behalf of the utility of sociology in educating future army officers, see Efflandt & Reed, 2001, pp.82-89. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 8 moving towards successfully fulfilling the in-depth study features put forth by the American Sociological Association.35 Central Core of Method and Theory. The introductory sociology course is the beginning of cadets’ understanding of the discipline. Courses in methods and theory provide the critical foundation for understanding classic and contemporary sociological theories, as well as teaching cadets about sociological methods. Breadth of Knowledge. Sociology is a broad field, and cadets receive exposure to its breadth. Several courses that represent the major subfields of the discipline are required for all majors. Additionally, cadets may choose electives from a list that includes courses both within sociology, in the Department of Behavioral Sciences & Leadership at large, and from other departments at the Academy. These electives provide further depth and exposure to multiple perspectives. Increasing Sophistication. The courses of the sociology major sequence in such a way that cadets are expected to perform at increasingly higher levels of thinking and application as they proceed through the programme. They become more sophisticated, require deeper under- standing, and rely on synthesis and creativity in combining prior knowledge. Additionally, cadets progress from foundational courses, through theory and methods courses, and then to application courses. Cultural Component. Sociology examines issues of diversity and inclusiveness, and sociology majors learn about leading in a multicultural Army, nation, and world. Beginning with the introductory course, cadets gain foundational experiences, knowledge, and affects that help build cross-cultural competence. They learn about self-awareness, and other concepts including xenophobia, ethnocentrism, cultural relativism, and an array of concepts that help them understand what differentiates and also unites diverse people. In addition, cadets explore subcultures in U.S. society and global inequalities. Self-Awareness. With the micro-level approach, some of our courses encourage self- awareness. Self-awareness comes out of our courses and myriad leader development systems at the Academy. “The self-concept”, to quote Morris Rosenberg, “is the totality of an individual’s thoughts and feelings with reference to one self as an object”.36 In this case, cadets are challenged to examine social dimensions of their lives in time (history) and space (biography). Students use their sociological imaginations to confront, confirm, and change their own perceptions about private and public issues, as well as officership. As such, self- awareness is inextricably linked to the sociological imagination – students connect their biography and history and as a consequence connect and prepare for personal/ private troubles and public/ professional issues. They build skills to accurately reflect about the social dimensions

35 See McKinney et al., 2004. 36 Rosenberg, 1989, pp.34-44. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 9 of their selected profession, and to devise innovative ideas to improve their organization and world. Warrior Ethos. Cadets also acquire a warrior ethos during their tenure at the Academy and in their sociology courses. Their military training teaches them practical field techniques ranging from leading small teams to closing with enemy forces to patrolling to a variety of other common soldier skills. Their physical training hones their endurance, strength, and warrior spirit. The academic programme provides an intellectual and reflective component to cadets’ developing warrior ethos. Ultimately, their charter will encompass fighting and winning the nation’s wars and contingencies, which entails an ever-growing list of potential missions from traditional combat to humanitarian relief to peacekeeping. Oftentimes, graduates’ warrior ethos will help them succeed in combat to win the peace (conditions of peace and stability). Indeed, many of the major lessons learned in the on-going long war (post- 9/11) reveal Army officers’ increased need for a variety of sophisticated skills, ranging from combat warrior to peacekeeper-diplomat to armed social worker and numerous others.37 Teaching War in the Sociology Courses at West Point The sociology programme has no course that solely concentrates on the sociology of war. However, a handful of courses do include lessons about war. This section highlights the structure, content, and process of those courses, including some specific modules, lessons, and learning activities. Chart 1: Sociology Curriculum

The above chart lists the current required classes for sociology major cadets : eight core required sociology courses ; choose two of five electives (three of which are taught outside the sociology programme) ; and choose one cluster comprised of three courses from among 18 different sociological subfields (also taught outside the sociology programme). West Point calls these clusters or subfields complementary support courses. Sociology honours students take two additional courses, which is the two semester (6-credit) senior thesis course.

37 See Hajjar, 2014. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 10

Sociology Programme Curriculum at West Point : Army Sociology

PL372 : Marriage, Military Families, and Civilian Families PL372 is a junior level course serving as a required elective for sociology majors, and optional elective for other majors. There are no prerequisites for the course. Many non-majors take the course, oftentimes because they are engaged to marry soon after graduation. Typically, about half of the students in PL372 are sociology majors. The focus is on contemporary American families. The course also studies American military families, and military families from other countries to offer a global perspective. The st course uses Moelker et al.’s Military Families and War in the 21 Century : Comparative Perspectives (2015).38 The book is an excellent resource and has a number of empirical studies exploring nations involved in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The course approaches the study of marriages and families from a scientific perspective, based on scholarship and research. As a result, students learn about the actual state of marriages and families in the United States with an emphasis on race and ethnicity, and particularly in the military population. Although this course is not designed as a “How To” (have a successful marriage in the military) course, it certainly seems highly applicable to cadets who will not only negotiate with family issues personally, but who will also lead soldiers with families. The major feature of war addressed in the course is deployments. Individual or groups of cadets teach lessons based on the chapters from the Moelker et al. (2015) book. Many cadets invite guest speakers to bring the material to life. Given West Point has both many military spouses and service members with deployment experiences, students easily find relevant volunteers to guest speak in their classes. On some occasions these military family members bring their children to class. Some of the guest visitor classes become emotional as soldiers, spouses, and children re-live deployment memories. When the class studies the international military chapters, at times cadets invite foreign liaison officers and cadets stationed at West Point to join class. Recently, the course has had British, Brazilian, and Japanese officers and foreign cadets serve as guest speakers. For the term paper, the course offers cadets an opportunity to choose any topic of interest. Some select specific groups associated with deployments to war. For example, some cadets studied the impact of deployments on children and adolescents. Other papers have focused on dual military couples, and parts of those papers covered the impact of deployments and other forms of separation. About half of the cadets each semester choose to write an auto- ethnographic paper.

38 Moelker, Andres, Bowen & Manigart (eds.), 2015. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 11

PL384 : Sociological Theory is a traditional sociological theory course covering classical and contemporary theory in one semester. The cadets are exclusively sociology majors and most are sophomores, but some juniors are in the course due to unique course sequencing at the Academy. The novelty of the course involves a focus on applications of theory. Major theories from a generation are combined into a four- or five-lesson block or module. Two to three lessons are devoted to reviewing the main focal theorists. For the fourth lesson, cadets watch a film that very effectively illustrates the theories and concepts in that block. For example, Modern Times by Charlie Chaplin, is viewed in the block about classical conflict (Marxist) theory. For the fourth lesson, one or two cadets serve as discussants for the entire class, and they guide their peers in a conversation about how the theories and concepts emanate in the movie, as well as other sociological, professional, and personal insights. One module deals directly with war. In this block, cadets watch the film Dead Presidents that ties into rational choice theory and critical race theory, and explores decision- making in combat situations. Dead Presidents tells the story of a soldier returning to urban Detroit following service in the Vietnam War. The discussion of this film brings theory to life and also discusses the long-term impact of war on soldiers and veterans who are no longer on active duty. Cadets also watch starring Denzel Washington to cover Pitirim Sorokin (2010).39 This lesson illustrates revolution, starvation, and the breakdown of society in a post-apocalyptic world. The theories and lessons explored divulge many insights for students about the nature of peace and conflict, and the fabric that binds society together. In the discussion of the movie, the instructor helps illuminate the theoretical underpinnings during seminar-style discussions with students. PL384 is popular among sociologists around the world – it is a frequently downloaded 40 syllabus through TRAILS (Teaching Resources and Innovations Library of Sociology ) and the sociology programme has delivered two webinars on the course through the American Sociological Association. The popularity stems from making theory less “dry” for students by bringing theory to life via films. PL363 : Methods This is a traditional qualitative methods course for undergraduate sociology majors – but a relatively new course at West Point (first offered in the fall of 2015). This course provides an introduction to the theory and methods of qualitative research. Qualitative methods deal with words rather than numbers and include (non-)participant observations ;

39 See Sorokin, 1937 ; Horowitz, 2010. 40 Ender, 2012. This course is recognized as among the top 10 most downloaded resources on TRAILS for 2013. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 12

content analysis ; interviewing ; focus groups ; visual analysis ; and other techniques. Mostly sophomores and juniors take this course ; thus far, they have all been sociology majors (non- majors are invited to take the course, preferably after taking introductory sociology). Two features of the course allow students to study war. One is a military spouse/ partner interview and the other is a term paper proposal selected by some cadets who write about war-related themes. For example, one cadet recently proposed conducting interviews of same-sex military family couples with war deployment experience. Another cadet wrote a proposal about veterans’ lives after serving in war. All students in PL363 plan, conduct, and analyze data gathered from an interview with partners of service members who have deployed to a combat zone. The interview’s structure mirrors the five phases of the deployment cycle (an Interview Protocol is provided in the Course Guide with example listed in Appendix I). The goal of the interview is to collect data about the unique stressors and family coping dynamics related to a military deployment. Cadets find a military spouse at West Point who is comfortable discussing his or her experiences. Students conduct a face-to-face interview for 30-90 minutes. They assure the informant of confidentiality. Students tape record the interview and also take hand-written notes and then de-identify the interview data. Once they have completed the interview, students transcribe the recording and review their hand-written notes. They complete a 3-5 page paper write-up of the experience. They focus on process as well as content, and select some interesting facts from the different phases of the deployment to write a short narrative of the events as discussed by their subjects. Students compare and contrast their individual interview findings to some contemporary literature about the deployment cycle.41 Students also write a reflection about the experience by addressing the following themes : (1) How did the interview go (discuss strengths and weaknesses) ? ; (2) What codes can they come up with to analyze the interview (identify, define, and provide examples of three applicable codes) ? ; (3) What lessons about interviewing did they learn from this experience ? ; (4) Could this research have been done more effectively using another method (elaborate) ? ; (5) What were the ethical considerations in undertaking this research ? ; (6) What did the verbal and/or non-verbal body language of their interviewee convey ? ; and (7) How could they have made the informant more comfortable during the interview ? PL482 : Armed Forces & Society This course mainly concentrates on seniors in their final semester at the Academy, although occasionally students from other majors join the course. This course directly examines the military as a social institution, including both the internal organization and practices of the armed forces and the relationship between the military and other social

41 See Pincus, House, Christenson & Alder, 2001. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 13 institutions. To understand the military and its place in society, this course asks students to study and consider the historical forces that have shaped the present. The course delves into how war has impacted society and the military. Past and present policies receive attention, including controversial or contested cases (e.g., policies linked to sexual minorities as soldiers). The course’s primary focus is on the American military and its relationship to American society, but there is also some investigation and discussion of the armed forces of other societies. Numerous individual, peer-reviewed scholarly articles comprise the course varying for timeliness with subsequent classes.42 One significant feature of this course constitutes the study of the role of different minority groups’ entrance into the US military. The minorities principally explored include racial and ethnic groups, women, sexual minorities, and religious minorities. One theme emanating from the evolving and growing role of minorities in the military reveals how serving in the armed forces helps stigmatized groups vie for equal citizenship. This course enables students to discover how war becomes an important social force that helps the nation build greater inclusiveness among its diverse people. Serving in the military helps minority groups gain equality. Another feature of the course provides for the examination of different kinds of war ranging from traditional combat of a symmetrical nature with generally known and large- standing enemy forces, to contemporary asymmetrical conflicts with great ambiguity regarding foreign populations and shifting enemy elements. There is also a lesson on terrorism and contemporary forms of conflict. The pedagogy aims at preparing soon-to-be graduates for life as a commissioned officer and also for graduate school. The course places strong emphasis on seminar style learning with full class participation, significant freedom in selecting research projects, and an expectation that students bring to bear previous knowledge from earlier sociology courses. This is a culminating academic experience that also has immediate professional relevance given that graduates serve as Army officers. The topic of war – preparing, fighting, reflecting/ recovering, the politics associated with it, cross-cultural considerations, national strategy, cohesion, and myriad other salient subjects – entails an important part of PL482 Armed Forces & Society. PL488D : Cinematic Images of War and the Military Mainly sociology seniors take this course in their final semester at the Academy. This course teaches cadets how to analyze film, and provides another cumulative sociological experience that prepares them for graduate school and service as Army officers.43 It

42 Currently, two main books are adopted : Inclusion in the American Military : A Force for Diversity (Rohall, Ender & Matthews, 2017) and American Soldiers in Iraq (Ender, 2009). 43 See Ender, 2009. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 14

complements the other sociology courses nicely, especially PL384 : Sociological Theory

(which heavily applies cinematic analysis) and also PL482 : Armed Forces & Society (which also studies the military directly, and also usually takes place concurrently with PL488D in cadets’ final semester at the Academy). PL488D builds cadets’ creativity, analytical skills, ability to synthesize, communication skills, and other academic skills – all with an eye for useful Army officer insights. Dissecting how Hollywood portrays the military over time in movies provides a fruitful sociological reflection for how society views the armed forces. Fact-based documentaries and also fictitious, glorified, vilified, exaggerated, and other portrayals of the military and war provide rich fodder for sociological analysis and study. Watching films from different eras also helps students learn and appreciate history, and more completely comprehend changes over time. In addition to many journal articles, the course uses two main course books that provide a robust set of war and military movie analyses :

Projections of War : Hollywood, American Culture, and World War II (Doherty, 1999), and Guts & Glory: The Making of the American Military Image in Film (Suid, 2002). The exploration of cinematic images of war and the military enables cadets to directly investigate myriad relevant academic and professional insights. For example, the subdued role of women in films about war and the military in the 1950’s markedly differ from G.I. Jane (1997), which not only depicts a woman graduating from a challenging Special Forces school, but also shows the main character effectively leading a SEAL team in combat. Interestingly, G.I. Jane accurately predicted the success of Army women in the elite US Army Ranger School about two decades after its release. Students watch movies depicting the Civil War, the two major World Wars, Vietnam, post-9/11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and other conflicts and operations. Watching and analyzing these movies provides the class an opportunity to glean the nuances of different kinds of war, and the messages embedded in movies about a variety of relevant topics. Many pertinent questions enter class conversations, such as : Who should lead the nation’s military in times of war ? ; What defines the archetypical, heroic soldier (if such a prototype exists) ? ; Has that prototypical military leader changed over time ? ; How have war and the military empowered minority group soldiers to gain greater mainstream acceptance, equality, and citizen status (and what inequality or stigmatization remains) ? ; What is the nature of contemporary war (what’s similar to and different from past wars ?). These are but a handful of guiding questions students ponder and answer in PL488D, Cinematic Images of War and the Military. PL497/PL498 : Independent Study (Thesis Course) Some cadets embark on independent study or thesis projects, and some of these projects directly or indirectly look at the impact of war. For example, a recent sociology programme graduate, Ian McWilliams (2015), wrote a literary analysis of veterans’ portrayals of war. He sought to dissect and understand why many veterans’ reflections about their experiences in war simultaneously revealed a disgust and hatred for war, but also a yearning to Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 15 return to war. Many veterans, despite the traumas suffered in war, miss the deep connections and camaraderie shared with fellow soldiers during their military experiences – including intense combat situations. Other cadets have examined military families and conducted auto- about their international experiences (sometimes at foreign military academies and universities), and some of these studies indirectly addressed the topic of war. But on the whole, most cadets have studied a myriad of features of life in “Cadetland” – West Point. Thus, albeit infrequently, cadets who voluntarily choose to take an independent study (PL497 and/ or PL498) as part of their academic journey sometimes directly study the topic of war. Conclusion

The Twenty-First Century Sociology Programme in the BS&L Department at West Point teaches war in its courses, and certainly more than one would find in traditional, civilian undergraduate sociology programmes. The sociology programme helps the Academy to accomplish its mission, which includes helping to educate future Army officers about leading soldiers, including in times of war. The US and other nations are in the longest war in their histories, beginning in 2001 in Afghanistan, in Iraq from 2003 to 2011 – and also from 2017 to present. Further, on-going sabre rattling towards (and occasional military strikes against) Syria, Iran, North Korea, and other countries suggests graduates could deploy to a myriad of locales in the not-so-distant future. Many of the programme’s and department’s faculty have studied, written about, and experienced war. But despite these factors, the topic of war is not taught in West Point’s Sociology Programme as much as outsiders might expect. We think there are at least four overlapping reasons why this is the case. First, faculty interest does not and should not dictate programmatic focus. While this is the norm in graduate programmes, USMA is an undergraduate institution. Although the sociology faculty have researched war in depth – including empirical studies conducted directly in combat theatres – this is not the main thrust of the sociology programme. The programme aims to mirror more traditional sociology programmes across the US, even though it places more emphasis on military sociology than most other programmes due to institutional concerns and demands. The sociology programme at West Point applies a structured academic approach and plan that link individual lessons to course goals and objectives to the overall sociology programme outcomes, and further link those outcomes to the Department’s, Dean’s Directorate’s, and overarching Academy’s objectives, goals, and mission. This structured nature links to West Point’s status as an accredited institution of higher learning. Thus, there is not a lot of free space to develop courses devoted mainly to the sociology of war. Furthermore, high faculty turnover (all younger military faculty members, which constitute 50% of the sociology programme’s faculty, depart the Academy after 2-3 years) also contributes to a situation that organizationally discourages substantial innovation, boldness, and risk-taking.44

44 See Kelty & Bunten (eds.), forthcoming. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 16

Second, structure dictates content. The current social architectural conditions of the sociology programme cause limitations on the freedom to create courses. Faculty allocation currently provides the sociology programme with a small faculty size, with typically around four relatively full-time faculty members. Younger military faculty members (typically two of the programme’s four members) must also teach a core-required leadership course (outside the sociology programme) for a significant part of their teaching tenure. Although this is an important facet of how the sociology programme directly supports the leadership arm of BS&L and the Academy, this requirement coupled with a small sociology programme faculty makes standing up and teaching new sociology courses a privileged challenge. Third, cadet interest drives content. Many sociology major cadets at West Point do not have an interest in studying war and the military. Many have an intellectual curiosity much like their civilian peers. Indeed, studies have shown that cadets’ attitudes are more similar than dissimilar to their civilian peers.45 The academic arena is one of the few places cadets get a choice at the Academy in their four years – in this case, their academic major(s) and minor areas of study – and can “intellectually leave West Point”, or in the words of , transcend the boundaries of the total institution. Many find not studying the military preferable given the many other aspects of their lives that do focus on military training, leadership, strategy, and so forth. The total institution of West Point engulfs most aspects of cadets’ lives. Therefore, many cadets simply choose to study non-military topics during their academic journeys, and the sociology programme affords them this intellectual freedom. Finally, war is a subfield of military life. Many of our cadets who do study the military only indirectly study war. The programme is currently rich in faculty who study military sociology, particularly issues related to diversity and inclusion and families. So many sociology majors follow in the academic footsteps of their professors and pursue similar topics. For example, many recent sociology majors have examined the experiences of minority cadets (commonly looking at race, ethnicity, and gender) at the Academy. Given the substantial diversity of cadets in the sociology programme historically and in recent years, we anticipate students will continue to study topics of diversity and inclusion at the Academy and in the military well into the foreseeable future. Therefore, even those cadets who choose to study the military typically focus on their immediate surroundings which is conveniently and nimbly located in their time and space – “Cadetland” and not war. This article ends by looking to the future. First, growth leads to breadth. As the number of sociology programme majors grow (from 3 to 103 in 20 years), there has been ample room for new courses focusing directly on the sociology of war to develop. But we have avoided it based on cadet interest. Rather, we have opted to strengthen existing courses and offer new core and elective courses found at civilian schools. A handful of courses directly deal with war including lessons in Marriage and the Family ; Qualitative Research Methods ; Armed Forces

45 Ender, Rohall & Matthews, 2014. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 17

& Society ; Cinematic Images of War and the Military ; and on occasion in the independent study course. Numerous courses do not deal with war including Introductory Sociology ;

Criminology & Criminal Justice Studies ; and Social Inequality. There does seem to be an interest in the sociology programme developing new courses that some might label “boutique courses”, including Food & Society ; Sociology of Sport ; Black Studies ; Introduction to Contemporary Social Issues ; Music & Society, and others. In conjunction with other academic and military programmes at the Academy, sociology could create either a stand-alone course on the sociology of war, or a social science and war course. In the latter, we could partner with historians, psychologists, political scientists, cultural geographers, and other academics to produce a very interesting, inter-disciplinary, and timely course about war. Finally, given that other universities and academies around the world teach sociology, looking at international courses for greater cross-national perspectives about teaching war would glean further insights for consideration in West Point’s Sociology Programme. Indeed, West Point’s Sociology Programme’s networks with international scholarly partners provide all parties with insights about war and society, and other timely studies.

References

ABOWITZ, Deborah A., “Bringing the Sociological into the Discussion : Teaching the Sociology of Genocide and the Holocaust”, Teaching Sociology, vol.30, n°1, 2002, pp.26-38.

AHMAD, A., & A.S. WILKE, “Peace and War Themes in Social Science Periodicals : 1946 to Present”, Journal of Political & Military Sociology, vol.1, 1973, pp.39-56. BAUDRILLARD, Jean, The Spirit of Terrorism and Other Essays (trans. Chris Turner), London & New York, Verso, 2002. BOËNE, Bernard, “Social Science Research, War and the Military in the United States : An Outsider’s View of the Field’s Dominant National Tradition”, pp.149-254 in Gerhard Kümmel & Andreas D. Prüfert (eds.), Military Sociology : The Richness of a Discipline, Baden-Baden, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 2000. BOULDING, Elise M., Ted GOERTZEL, Joseph W. ELDER, Ruth Harriet JACOBS & Louis KRIESBERG,

“Teaching the Sociology of World Conflicts : A Review of the State of the Field”, The American Sociologist, vol.9, n°4, 1974, pp.187-193. BURGOS, Russell A., “Teaching the Iraq War”, Political Science & Politics, vol.41, n°1, 2008, pp.173-178. CAFORIO, Giuseppe, “Some Historical Notes”, pp.7-26 in Giuseppe Caforio (ed.), Handbook of the Sociology of the Military, New York, Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, 2003.

CORNELIUS, Debra, “Walking the Walk : Socializing Students to Social Activism”, Teaching Sociology, vol.26, n°3, 1998, pp.190-197. EFFLANDT, Scott & Brian REED, “Developing the Warrior-Scholar”, Military Review, vol.4, August 2001, pp.82-89. ENDER, Morten G. & Shihlung HUANG, “Revisiting Regional Traditions: An Emerging Sociology of the Great Plains”, The American Sociologist, vol.30, Spring 1999, pp.37-54.

ENDER, Morten G. & Ariel GIBSON, “Invisible Institution : The Military, War, and Peace in 1990s Introductory Sociology Textbooks”, Journal of Political & Military Sociology, vol.33, n°2, 2005, pp.49- 266. Available on-line at : http://www.pmsaronline.org/. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 18

ENDER, Morten G., Lynne WOERHLE & Ryan KELTY (eds.), Teaching the Sociology of Peace, War, and Military Institutions : A Curriculum Guide (4th edition), Washington, DC, American Sociological Association Teaching Resource Center, 2007 : http://trails.asanet.org/Pages/TDLContent.aspx. ENDER, Morten G., Ryan KELTY & Irving SMITH, “Sociology at West Point”, Armed Forces & Society, vol.35, n°1, 2008, pp.49-70. Available at : http://afs.sagepub.com/content/35/1/49.full.pdf+html. ENDER, Morten G., “Cinematic Images of War and the Military”, pp.210-215 in T.A. McElwee, B.W. Hall, th J. Liechty & J. Gerber (eds.), Peace, Justice, and Security Studies : A Curriculum Guide (7 edition), Boulder, CO, Lynne Rienner, 2009.

ENDER, Morten G., PL384 : Sociological Theory through Film, in Teaching Resources and Innovations Library of Sociology (TRAILS), American Sociological Association Teaching Resources Center, 2012. Available online at : http://trails.asanet.org/Pages/TDLContent.aspx. ENDER, Morten G., David E. ROHALL & Michael D. MATTHEWS, The Millennial Generation and National

Defense : Attitudes of Future Military and Civilian Leaders, Basingstoke & New York, Palgrave Pivot, 2014. nd ENDER, Morten G., “Military Sociology” (2 edition), in Janeen Baster (ed.), Oxford Bibliographies in Sociology, New York, Oxford University Press, 2016 : http://oxfordbibliographiesonline.com/. FORSYTHE, G.B. & B. KEITH, “The Evolving USMA Academic Curriculum : 1952-2002”, pp.370-389 in L. Betros (ed.), West Point : Two Centuries and Beyond, West Point, NY, United States Military Academy, 2004. FRIEDMAN, Norman L., “Teaching about the Holocaust”, Teaching Sociology, vol.12, n°4, 1985, pp.449- 461. HAJJAR, Remi M., “Emergent Postmodern US Military Culture”, Armed Forces & Society, vol.40, n°1, 2014, pp.119-145.

HANNON, James T. & Sam MARULLO, “Education for Survival : Using Films to Teach War as a Social Problem”, Teaching Sociology, vol.16, n°3, 1988, pp.245-255. HENSLIN, James, Sociology : A Down-to-Earth Approach, Boston, MA, Allyn & Bacon, 2012. HOMANS, George C., “The Small Warship”, American Sociological Review, vol.11, n°3, 1946, pp.294-300. HOROWITZ, Irving Louis, Man and Society in Calamity, New Brunswick, N.J, Transaction Publishers, reprint edition, 2010. HUNTINGTON, Samuel P., The Soldier and the State : The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1957. HYRON, Bertrand, US Veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan Wars, unpublished thesis, French Military Academy, Saint-Cyr, 2015.

JANOWITZ, Morris, The Professional Soldier : A Social and Political Portrait, Glencoe, Free Press, 1960. KELTY, Ryan & Bridget BUNTEN (eds.), Risk-Taking in Higher Education : The Importance of Negotiating Intellectual Challenge in the College Classroom, Lanham, MD, Rowman & Littlefield, forthcoming. KURTZ, Lester, “War and Peace on the Sociological Agenda”, pp.61-98 in Terence C. Halliday & Morris Janowitz (eds.), Sociology and its Publics : The Forms and Fates of Disciplinary Organization, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1992. LASSWELL, Harold D., “The Garrison State”, American Journal of Sociology, vol.46, 1941, pp.455-468.

LONG, Gary L., “A Sociology for Special Circumstances : Using the Vietnam War in the Classroom”, Teaching Sociology, vol.21, n°3, 1993, pp.259-270. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 19

MACDOUGALL, John, Morten ENDER & Helen M. RAISZ (eds.), Teaching the Sociology of Peace and War : A Curriculum Guide (2nd edition), Washington, DC, American Sociological Association Teaching Resources, 1998. Available on-line through : http://trails.asanet.org/Pages/TDLContent.aspx.

MACDOUGALL, John & Morten G. ENDER (eds.), Teaching the Sociology of Peace and War : A Curriculum Guide (3rd edition), Washington, DC, American Sociological Association Teaching Resources, 2003. Available on-line through : http://trails.asanet.org/Pages/TDLContent.aspx. MCKINNEY, Kathleen, Carla B. HOWERY, Kerry J. STRAND, Edward L. KAIN & Catherine White

BERHEIDE, Liberal Learning and the Sociology Major Updated : Meeting the Challenge of Teaching Sociology in the Twenty-First Century, Washington, DC, American Sociological Association, 2004.

MCWILLIAMS, Ian, Why Do Veterans Miss War ?, undergraduate thesis project presented at the 2015 Eastern Sociological Society (Military Mini-Conference). MILLS, C. Wright, The Power Elite, New York, Oxford University Press, 1956. MOELKER, René, Manon ANDRES, Gary BOWEN & Philippe MANIGART (eds.), Military Families and War in the 21st Century : Comparative Perspectives, London & New York, Routledge, 2015. MOSKOS, Charles C., The American Enlisted Man, New York, Russell Sage Foundation, 1970. NUSBAUMER, M.R., D. KELLEY & J.A. DIIORIO, “The Discovery of War as a Social Problem : Teaching as Sociological Practice”, Teaching Sociology, vol.17, 1989, pp.316-322. st OFFICE OF THE DEAN, Educating Army Leaders for the 21 Century, West Point, NY, United States Military Academy, 1998. OFFICE OF THE DEAN, Educating Future Army Officers for a Changing World : Operational Concept for the Academic Programme of the United States Military Academy, West Point, NY, United States Military Academy, 2002. PEINHAUPT, Marco, Comparing U.S. and Austrian Cadets toward Women in Combat, unpublished thesis, Wiener Neustadt, Austrian Military Academy, Austria, 2015.

PINCUS, S.H., R. HOUSE, J. CHRISTENSON & L.E. ALDER, “The Emotional Cycle of Deployment : A Military Family Perspective”, US Army Medical Department Journal, Apr./June 2001, pp.15-23.

REINWAND, Lukas, Dealing with Hybrid Organizational Logics : Lessons from the University of the Bundeswehr Munich and the United States Military Academy at West Point, unpublished Master’s Thesis, University of the Bundeswehr, Munich, 2015.

ROSENBERG, Morris, “Self-Concept Research : A Historical Overview”, Social Forces, vol.68, n°1, 1989, pp.34-44. SEGAL, David R. & Molly CLEVER, “The Sociology of War”, Oxford Bibliographies Online, 2013. Retrieved 30 August 2017 from : http://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/. SEGAL, Mady W., David R. SEGAL & John M. WATTENDORF, “The Sociology Programme in a Professional School Setting : The United States Military Academy”, Teaching Sociology, vol.18, n°2, 1990, pp.156-163. SHILS, Edward A. & Morris JANOWITZ, “Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht in World War II”, Public Opinion Quarterly, vol.12, 1948, pp.280-315. SIEBOLD, Guy, “Core Issues and Theory in Military Sociology”, Journal of Political & Military Sociology, vol.29, 2001, pp.140-159. SNOW, David A., “1998 PSA Presidential Address : The Value of Sociology”, Sociological Perspectives, vol.42, n°1, 1999, pp.1-22. SOETERS, Joseph, Sociology and Military Studies : Classical and Current Foundations, London, Taylor & Francis, 2018. Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 20

SOROKIN, Pitirim A., Social and Cultural Dynamics, New York, American Book Co., 1937. SPENCER, Herbert, The Principles of Sociology, II., New York, Appleton & Company, 1883.

STARR, Jerold M., “Teaching the Vietnam War : A Sociological Approach”, Teaching Sociology, vol.23, n°3, 1995, pp.241-251. STOUFFER, Samuel. A., A.A. LUMSDAINE, M.H. LUMSDAINE, R.M. WILLIAMS, Jr., I.L. SMITH, S.A.

STAR & L.S. COTTRELL, Jr., The American Soldier : Combat and its Aftermath (Vol.II), Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1949. WATSON, Cynthia, Military Education: A Reference Handbook, Westport, CT: Praeger Security International, 2007. WEBER, Max, The Theory of Social and Economic Organization, translated by A.M. Henderson & Talcott Parsons, Glencoe, IL, Free Press, 1947.

Appendix I Interview Protocol – Military Spouse

Location of Deployment ? When ? How long ? Where were you ?

Pre-Deployment: What was life like prior to being notified about the deployment? How long ago?

When did you find out about the deployment to the Middle East? How did that change life?

When did they deploy? How was that?

Early Deployment: Describe how things were during the first part of the deployment?

What were the major deployment problems? What were your major family problems? What worked well? How was communication? What did you use? What worked best? What didn’t work? What did you do? How were the support agencies? Family Assistance Center? Family Readiness Group? Schools/Childcare? Other on-post source? Off-post support? Others?

Mid-Deployment: How did the mid-deployment go? What were the major deployment problems? What were your major family problems? What worked well? How is communication? What do you use? What works best? What doesn’t work? Two week R&R?

Res Militaris, vol.9, n°1, Winter-Spring/ Hiver-Printemps 2019 21

Late Deployment: How did the mid-deployment go? What were the major deployment problems? What were your major family problems? What worked well? What was returning like?

Post-Deployment: How were things three months after the deployment? What were your major family problems? What worked well?

Other: How do you feel about it today? Could you do it again? Anything else you’d like to share?

Appendix II War-Related Sources Used in West Point Sociology Courses

Book of Eli, The, 2010 : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1037705/. Dead Presidents, 1995 : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0112819/. DOHERTY, Thomas, Projections of War: Hollywood, American Culture, and World War II, New York, Columbia University Press, 1999. ENDER, Morten G., American Soldiers in Iraq : McSoldiers or Innovative Professionals ?, London & New York, Routledge, 2009. G.I. Jane, 1997 : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0119173/. MCWILLIAMS, Ian, Why do Veterans Miss War ?, Senior Thesis Project conducted by 2015 Coates Award Winner/ Top Sociology Cadet for the Class of 2015. MOELKER, Rene, Manon ANDRES, Gary BOWEN, and Philippe MANIGART (eds.), Military Families and War in the 21st Century: Comparative Perspectives, London & New York, Routledge, 2015. PINCUS, Simon H., Robert HOUSE, Joseph CHRISTENSON & Lawrence E. ALDER, “The Emotional Cycle of Deployment : A Military Family Perspective”, US Army Medical Department Journal, Apr./June 2001, pp.15-23. ROHALL, David E., Morten G. ENDER, & Michael D. MATTHEWS (eds.), Inclusion in the U.S. Military : A Force for Diversity, Lanham, MD, Lexington Books, 2017.

SUID, Lawrence, Guts and Glory : The Making of the American Military Image in Film (revised and expanded edition), Lexington, KY, University of Kentucky Press, 2002.