Interview with Hannah Gleason
“I think the most important skill for students of international relations to have is the ability to critically analyze complex and nuanced situations and to be able to concisely articulate the significance of a particular event within the broader regional or international context.”
Firstly, would you please make a short introduction about your educational institution and the area of studies? What criteria were of most importance, when you were choosing an institution and why did you decide settle on Europe after all?
I just finished my masters at Sciences Po in Paris, where I studied International Security with concentrations in Russian and energy studies. My program was two years long, with the first, second and fourth semesters in Paris and the third semester an opportunity to complete either an internship, graduate thesis or study abroad program. When I was applying to graduate programs, I had already been out of university for almost four years and I wanted a course of study that focused on practical rather than theoretical international relations.
“Understanding the history that shapes contemporary political developments is key to IR.”
I also wanted a program that emphasized the importance of foreign language study, and Sciences Po fit both of these criteria. Sciences Po also offered a style of degree that meant I could pick a broader topic- International Security- while still narrowing my focus with regional and thematic concentrations. I knew I wanted to focus on Eastern European/Post-Soviet studies but most degrees with that title were too niche or only focused on culture and history rather than geo-politics and security. Although I was not committed to staying in Europe for my masters, I did feel more comfortable with the European system of education and, of course, was excited at the prospect of living in Paris for two years.
What, in your experience, is the most substantial difference between studying in the Sciences Po and in the Kyiv-Mohyla academy? How did the learning environment in each institution influence your motivation study?
I would say the main difference is the amount of emphasis placed on independent research and writing. I found I had many more writing assignments in Paris than I did in Kyiv, and many more presentations at NaUKMA than at Sciences Po. Another difference is that at Sciences Po, there are no fixed groups for classes- everyone takes different modules and studies with people from different degree programs. In Paris, classes range in size from 20–150, with slightly smaller groups for language study, whereas I was never in a class larger than twelve at NaUKMA. Even though I was in the Paris School of International Affairs, I studied with students from the law, economics, and journalism schools as well.
“Language study is also a key element.”
While I appreciate how this approach facilitates lively discussion and allowes students to get a multi-disciplinary perspective on many issues, I also like the idea of studying with the same small group because it can be a less inhibiting environment in which to debate controversial topics.
Are there any elements of the studying process that you would like each institution to borrow from one another? Did you experience any cultural shock during your transition from the European to Ukrainian system of higher education?
I’m not sure I experienced culture shock exactly, I had lived in Ukraine before and was already familiar with the education system. Taking classes in Ukrainian was challenging but very rewarding. The one surprising aspect of the semester was the “zalik,” it’s not a usual practice in the French or British education systems for professors to ask students summative questions about the course in person.
What courses did you take during your stay? Could you please share your impressions about their quality and usefulness, especially in the context of your studies of International Security?
Since I did not need to fulfill any specific course requirements for my semester abroad, I was lucky enough to be able to take courses from a variety of faculties. I took International Relations of East Asia, Politics in the Post-Soviet Space, Democratisation in Central and Eastern Europe, the Ethnogeography of the Jewish World, and European Union Institutions. I found it incredibly useful to learn about the domestic politics and history of Eastern European and Central Asian countries that are often overlooked in my courses at Sciences Po. I have studied Russian politics and foreign policy extensively but have had little exposure to the nuances of countries like Poland, Kazakhstan or Moldova. Understanding the history that shapes contemporary political developments is key to IR, but especially to untangling today’s complicated security questions- and in that sense the courses I took were a perfect complement to my studies in Paris.
“Nothing in this field of study exists in a vacuum.”
What, in your view, are the most significant soft and hard skills for a student in any field of International Relations to attain in the process of his or her studies? How successful are both institutions in this respect?
I think the most important skill for students of international relations to have is the ability to critically analyze complex and nuanced situations and to be able to concisely articulate the significance of a particular event within the broader regional or international context. Nothing in this field of study exists in a vacuum, and it is important to have the historical and cultural knowledge to connect the dots. In terms of hard skills, certain careers in this field (ie. global risks, open-source/intelligence, economics analyst) will require a high level of comfort with quantitative analysis.
At Sciences Po students in the International Affairs school are required to take modules in either quantitative tools or statistical analysis, although there is not much flexibility for students to go beyond the basics. In terms of other useful skills, I would say that being able to create an engaging, readable and professional PowerPoint presentation is a highly important and highly underrated skill.
As you may know, in the Kyiv-Mohyla academy the Master’s program in International Relations is still in the process of creation. What, in your belief, should be the necessary components of such degree and what pitfalls are there to avoid?
The courses I have found the most relevant are often the ones that look at real issues and explain how to tackle them. For instance, one of my modules at Sciences Po this semester was about humanitarian negotiation and for every seminar we were asked to read about a contemporary humanitarian crisis and then devise a plan for achieving our objective as if we were representing an international NGO; whether that meant thinking about how to organize a ceasefire between two warring groups or get food aid delivered through a war zone.
“I would say the most important skills to have in this field are flexibility, resourcefulness and the ability to critically interpret nuanced dynamics.”
Geo-political, historical and cultural knowledge is important as well but at least part of the degree should be centered around applying that knowledge in the real world. Language study is also a key element that I wish my own degree had allowed more time for.
How does knowledge, acquired during your studies in France and Ukraine, influence your professional development? What do you wish you’d known, when you took up your last job and what career prospects are there for the experts in any field of International studies?
International relations is such a broad field, with so many possible career paths: you could work for the government on security issues or become a foreign policy analyst. You could choose to go into international development or humanitarian action, both of which involve working out in the field. You could leverage your international studies to become a foreign correspondent and report from around the world. There are many opportunities in the private sector for political risk analysts, and positions in global marketing and communications for large corporations.
The thing about a career in international relations is that most of the time it involves moving to a different country and that is something for which it is difficult to be entirely prepared. My last job was working in international development at an internat in Ternopilska Oblast, and if I were to make a list of the things I wish I’d known, it would be extremely long. As is the case with many roles in development, I didn’t have many resources to work with, I had to build partnerships out of thin air and there were many times when projects would be delayed by a simple cultural misunderstanding. From that professional experience, I would say the most important skills to have in this field are flexibility, resourcefulness and the ability to critically interpret nuanced dynamics.
The last question is rather sentimental. Do you have a favorite memory from your stay in the NaUKMA and in Kyiv in general? If yes, would you please share it with our readers?
Of course! From NaUKMA I would say my favorite memory was when we role-played a tense diplomatic negotiation about the potential reunification of North and South Korea for IR in East Asia- my classmates turned out to be excellent actors! And Kyiv is a great city, I had a wonderful time exploring parks and cafes with friends. Especially confusing the baristas at Vagabond (a coffee shop popular with Kyiv-Mohyla Academy students, Ed. Note) every week with my continued failure to correctly pronounce the word “pechyvo”. Really though, I enjoyed my semester at NaUKMA, and I am so happy I had this opportunity to study with such a vibrant and motivated group of people!
Prepared by Anhelina Hrytsei
