 All right, ladies and gentlemen, if you would please take your seats will begin our program. Welcome. Good afternoon to everyone who is just joining us faculty. We have a great program this afternoon. I wanted to draw your attention to the slide here with the panels. Just one moment. We have two successive panels we have one in Pringle and one in Spruance and for the remainder of the of the afternoon and tomorrow's program will also have two panels as well. So our afternoon panel is faculty development with our moderator Dr. Heidi Lane. And Dr. Heidi Lane is a professor of strategy and policy and the director of the Greater Middle East Research Study Group at the Naval War College. She is co editor of building rule of law and the Arab world and beyond, and is completing a book titled the counter terrorist state about counter terrorism policies and practices in the Middle East. Welcome Dr. Lane the floor is yours. Thank you. Before, first of all, thank you for coming. And welcome to the afternoon sessions. The first thing that I want to say is just a couple points of order, because I was actually not going to read your bios even though you kindly introduced me, because we want to make sure we have maximum amount of time for questions and answers. So in in so doing, we're going to the first person that's going to be presenting is Dr. Mary realm. After she speaks for about 25 minutes, we're going to take a moment and have Q amp a for about 10 to 15 then, and then we're going to proceed with professors Stokes and Curtis. Sorry, not Curtis bell, Professor bell. So we'll have two separate sections. I also want to emphasize for anybody who either wasn't here earlier, or who is rejoining that this is an open session that means it's unrestricted access to those who are watching from the inside. So I don't want to discourage you from introducing yourself with your with your name and affiliation but just so you know that is going out on the airwaves and can't be edited out of final version. And the last thing I'll do is remind everyone to use the microphone when you do ask the question and answer. Professor round begins for presentation, I want to say two things. One of them is that if you went to the morning sessions and you heard the provost speak and the Admiral this morning. There are so many things that are hopeful missions in the future that pertain to women peace and security and also by by extension to DEI. So for most of them are very, very difficult to implement. And the three panelists that you're going to hear this afternoon are people who are in the process of doing the hard work of implementing this stuff, and then reporting back on it. But really the rubber meets the road in my opinion, because there is really, there is almost no institution that likes to have change imposed or presented in a way that forces everyone to comply. And so, all of the human elements all of the procedural issues all of the bureaucratic mechanisms that need to be changed happen through the people that are presenting here. So I'm going to commend that work because it's very hard, and it's very often not appreciated in the way that it should be. So with that, let me turn it over to Professor realm. And you have the floor. Thank you. Right. Thank you. Thanks Dr Lane. So good afternoon. I see we have some distinguished guests in the audience admirals. Students and faculty. And thank you, Heidi for the opportunity and Dr amine for the opportunity to present some ideas on educational strategies for security studies on sexual assault and sexual harassment. I'm Mary Rahm a professor in the National Security Affairs Department here at the Naval War College. Before getting started. There's a disclaimer. All these ideas are mine alone and do not represent the Department of the sense or any other allied entities in DOD. So I need to put you in touch with where I'm speaking from today. It's right here in the public policy analysis program within the National Security Affairs Department. So it's very limited, but some of the ideas are also broad enough. I think that other folks may be able to use them. So how come this topic is important and relevant in today's national security studies program, because within this umbrella or assessments of ethical, legal and political implications of national security decision making. And in order to maintain program viability the application theories and techniques learned by the security sector professional must include current issues in the field. To this end the inclusion of material about sexual assault and sexual harassment becomes an imperative due to its applicability to the security sector culture. The role Congress plays in oversight of the military and the military's policy role as a steward of its people. What is the current situation that has led to a congressional intervention regarding sexual assault and sexual harassment. First is a military struggle to rectify the situation by process a ties in their efforts. These labors include laying out new institutional entities developing required training programs and policies and their creation of outputs based metrics. The role on the military side of DoD is proclaiming a zero tolerance policy, opening up call lines creating the primarily rules based sharp sexual assault response prevention program, establishing the sexual assault prevention and response office or Sappro for the oversight of policy and standards. So these are the current strategies and their ability to establish red lines, such programs get at the how to control and contain but do not address the why of what is a festering cultural problem. Legendary management guru Peter Drucker, after observing thousands of organizations in his lifetime, once stated that culture, no matter how defined is the singularly persistent influence in all organizations. This thought has been modified over the years to become culture each strategy for lunch. And it is in this essence, there's what is occurring relative to the military's addressing of these problems today. An effort was made to enculturate the idea that sexual harassment assault are not tolerable, but the sense of this 2012 2015 ad campaign across the services completely missed a mark for its bias toward the female role as victim and the male in charge of the female state. Added to this was that sexual assault and rape occur because of alcoholic consumption, and in general within the sphere of party or bar. The campaign brings to mind the late 1950s and early 1960s glamorized smoky world of advertising in the mad men TV drama series. Because the campaign met with resistance, it was pulled to be replaced by two video game training scenarios, the first showing service members watching a colleague getting too forward with a woman at a bar. The male voice over exclaims man that's all we need is to get put on lockdown again before getting up to intervene. In another scenario is a bar scene with loud music cold beer and what are described as hot girls with a narrator commentary of players of the video must choose certain behaviors. If the viewer fails to gain a female in the military gets raped in a barracks reports the assault and leaves the service. My forward exclamation what nonsense is this. So let's move on to the real world. In general, the oversight of the situation has been ongoing for nearly two decades, without gaining enough support to shift the thinking of how the military should be managing this egregious cultural phenomenon. In general, an organizational culture shift, which is required here nearly never occurs, unless there is a situation so intolerable that it wakes up and activates in today's vernacular. I am responsible. The flash point for congressional movement into bipartisan efforts to alleviate and not continue to placate the current this is cycle of internal legal and command processes and training came to a head with a brutally a PSC Vanessa again in April of 2020 on Fort Hood, and I put this video in here to remind you there's a really good Netflix series that actually goes through this entire process. It's a, it's a very good, very good series. Our data showed that one in 24 female service members and one in 100 male service members or 1% can expect to experience sexual trauma or assault at some point in their career. And in total that comes to an estimated 20,000 people each year in fiscal year 2021 these numbers were updated to 16% of male service members reporting sexual assault and 33% of female service members. In the US Navy 2021 reports cited 12% of male sailors reporting sexual assault and 28% of female sailors reporting the difficulties with changing a large bureaucratic culture are that the cycle of change invariably takes about to two generations. For a legislative centering of the military to put on the books and activated as well as shifts in the formalities of the organization organization, such as reporting mechanisms and command responsibilities and changes in overall demographics has already been formally pursued for almost 15 years. In this case, demographics specifically has been notable in driving change because over the past two decades, Congress has shifted in its demeanor relative to female representatives, which now hold 144 of 539 seats. This is from a monkey congressional women, such as Kirsten Gillibrand Democrat of New York, that the fight for the military justice improvement and increasing prevention act emerged Jackie spear Democrat California, along with Republican Michael Turner of Ohio, introduced a mass again act to remove sexual assault prosecution decisions from the chain of command. One of the complications with changing the culture of a massive military system or any other large bureaucratic system for that matter is that the change rarely comes from within its ranks. Now outside dynamic is nearly always required because of the generational belief quagmires of both Congress and the military which can impede change. Also complicating the rate of change is the time factor inherent to congressional processes. Senator Gillibrand has been working on lettuce legislation since the early 2000s. And while the military justice reform act is on the books, there is still work to be achieved regarding who legally represents victims during a court's Marshall, the role the command chain will play when a victim comes forward, and whether additional crime should be added to the list. So how do you teach one of the most significant military and security sector workplace reforms in American history, where she unit where units regarding the themes subject matter and issues inherent to sexual harassment and assault reside. As here at the war college the NSA department teaches graduate level security studies and emphasizes policy analysis as one of its two core realms, and the high degree to which themes of congressional oversight civilian military relationships and the roles of the White House, Secretary of Defense and the Department of Defense Joint Chiefs, having had direct ties to the issue studies fit very well with into into this programmatic system. But before embarking on the curriculum creation adventure a few do's and don'ts should be understood. There needs to be an alleviation of any misnomer or innuendo which categorizes males as key to the situation. Sexual assault and harassment are inclusive of the entire military culture care should be given as to where a case or discussion is placed and what should be the title. The use of only quantitative learning materials due to comfort with discussion behind numbers does not get at the importance of the elements of the cultural and socio emotional aspects of the problems associated with sexual harassment and assault. It's important to not attempt to treat the topic as a fad and jam it into existing studies to get it out there. This weakens its importance and the jamming approach is disingenuous and does not attach long term value to the topics inclusion and professional students know when they're being hustled rather than being taught. I will now address a few of these items in greater detail by using the current study module somewhat of the current study module and the FPA curriculum here. The first thing key is to professionalize the topic. So what might be required for for doing this in a curriculum time should be used to contemplate the differences between a sapper approach to the subject and a public policy approach to the subject. To finalize there are important building blocks that are necessary for creating a lasting curriculum and be creative with your curriculum tools. This is the 21st century videos testimony and film or a must have, especially in light of the currency and unfolding nature of the legislative situation surrounding sexual harassment and assault students very often want to gravitate toward tactical level sapper storytelling time. Students aid in understanding the military culture. However, faculty are not counselors, nor do they have direct knowledge of the events of the situations being described from the field. I would like to delve a bit deeper into curriculum materials placement of subject matter and pedagogy pedagogy next. The faculty need to know in order to teach a unit that highlights the legislation of sexual assault and harassment. The presentation in a policy realm should again not be a separate discussion that's first faculty are not experts in the field, nor should they be required to be and faculty are not advocates or interventionist. There are specific training modules and training personnel that address sapper definitions guidelines rules and regulations. These are some of the key building blocks for a policy level discussion. There right there you see the Congress and the military dyad. And then I'm going to go over some of these course buy in for a successful program roof fire support from the top down. As always check the current educational requirements being handed down from the Seattle's office, or other educational hierarchies at the institutional level as guides for insertion of equal resources feedback from the civilian and military professional student body. Once a curriculum rolls out. Since these are the individuals who are working in the realities of this cultural concern. Collaboration with knowledgeable personnel who have written and studied on this subject matter from outside the organization should be considered before putting a curriculum play in motion. The faculty become the integrator of the subject and discussion, rather than act as an advocate in an area with which they likely may not have an existential level of knowledge. Sexual harassment assault or culturally emotionally and physically based concerns content should hit three and not to amphitheaters. These are called a cultural congressional military triad. There is such a thing as cultural policy, and these policies may be a three types rule shifting culture shifting or a combination of both. In this instance a combination of rule shifting is found in the form of where the power and oversight of adjudicating sexual harassment and sexual assault cases will reside inside or outside the military chain of command. There's also cultural shifting, which is encountering new ways of doing things that challenge the basic belief structures currently embedded in the military. No policy discussion on sexual harassment assault should be without some form of information that addresses both the rule of law and culture. So this is a summary slide can go back and look at these later if you want to that's why I put those in there. And what I'd like to go into next or what are some of the questions that should be asked in a curriculum. So my experiences in the world of education have made me come to believe pedagogy. My methods of teaching are grounded in the question set proposed in syllabus so I think they're pretty important. And here are making sure this is the right slide. Here are some of the best questions out of the current syllabus which cover the Congress culture military triad and wrapped within these are the cultural aspect of shaping to why queries and what query, which primarily proves the role of Congress and change. So what could be made what could make some of this a little better. You know what's missing. Here are some potential questions that would expand discussion pastors beyond legislative function and process included our congressional mandates for intervention, asking about challenges between specific committees and identifying key legislators who are behind the new ideas, both those that support and those that do not support the situation. There are a number of specific policies directly applicable to sexual harassment and assault should also be included. And there are many of them, 10 of importance have rolled out between 2004 and 2019, and includes sec def directives panel reviews general task forces, defense advisory committees and investigative task forces. And also guide classroom pedagogy, and do the readings address the military cultural Congress triad and a meaningful way. These are, these are my personal opinions, they are not naval or college opinions these are my personal opinions as an instructor many years. The red just gets to bog down and functionality at the price of stepping away from the specific and unique nature of Senator Gillibrand's bipartisan legislation curriculum up to this point as addressed how Congress works. And also the Oxford handbook piece is redundant in many ways, with the exception of the excellent presentation of internal and external factors, which influence congressional action. The chapter from managing sex in the US military. I read the entire volume for a book review for the army war college is primarily only useful for its short for raise into some of the historical flash points over time. It also introduces us Navy tail hook scandal, which brings up another point there should be specific tides made to the US Navy. Within the illustrations and policies somewhere in the reading so that's a positive for that. So secondly, the chapter itself leans toward the supper jargon which I have kind of affinity against rather than policy jargon. And then there are some, of course, excellent readings. That mess well into this triad. And the correspondence records of the viewpoints of top military professionals are vital reading disease letters while politically drive, give a nod to the bleach structures of the upper echelons of the US military on sexual harassment and salt. And then somewhere in the middle is a reader. It's an excellent resource to have these with a curriculum so that students can adventure into, you know, further adventure into the subject matter when they have an interest and I found there's a very high interest in this subject. The question here is, you know, we have to look at are the, are the materials outdated, or the, or did the items chosen 10, almost always toward the functional and where are the cultural aspects of the issue should be considered. And I think is really imperative in in in creating curriculum is to know something about the. This isn't the only time in history that Congress has intervened to socially shift military culture. And I think it's important to know a few of these, and I put up this pictorial montage to hit a highlight a few of these to know that these also exist they're really good basis for discussion in the classroom. You know, to note that why Congress is intervening, they've done it before why do they, why are they doing it again. Okay. So there are many historical instances. And let me talk about a few of these. There are they come from the federal executive suite from key personal advisors to the president from Congress and from inside those at the top of the hierarchy. Which we call palace politics and there are a couple of individuals in the palace politics realm. Through history that have really changed culture the military. And then there's also some from the very top of the system out of the joint chiefs of staff. So beginning in 1776 the continental Congress led is legislative pensions disability medical and domicile for revolutionary war soldiers, forever changing their livability status. There's an enactment of President Abraham Lincoln's general pension law system insured, which, which insured past pensions were available for veterans into the end of the 20th century. And also a changing livability status issue. In the 1940s, Eleanor Roosevelt which I consider in the palace politics realm, considered the eyes and ears for the president served as a personal advocate and catalyst for ensuring women could serve in the military total cultural shift. This change forever the roles women were able to play and service in their country. President Truman required the leaders of the army to give permanent status to their female personnel through executive order 9981, which desegregated the military from internal to the military that's another really fascinating realm to know a little bit about when you're talking about this cultural change in the military is Admiral Elmo Zulmult Jr. Z grams 1164868 and 114 to improve the lives of sailors and these naval messages were sent directly to the fleet. He established a task force to review laws and policies and regulations that were inequitable and borrowed minorities from opportunities of promotion and retention. He looked at evolution of people programs and equal opportunity. So I have five minutes left so I'm going to zip through this. These are imperative videos to have. You absolutely need to have Senator Martha McSally he was preyed upon and right by a Syria superior officer. It's from inside the Congress and it links to the military itself. The other one that I think is really imperative today is to have. At least one. I don't want that to play one short video on Senator Gillibrand's discussions about about these roles. There's a third person. And this is my last comment. There's a third person that a lot of people don't know about but his tie is really connected to the concern issues now to Colonel Don Christensen he's USAF retired opened up a nonprofit and he was a council and military judge for sexual harassment assault for 23 years. He's become so concerned by the chronic problems with this that he's opened up a nonprofit and he deals with Congress so we got the military Congress. My final sentence. So history is shown that takes military leaders, military leaders, civilian government actors and the public at large to instigate cultural change in the military. So it's all belong in a national security sector educational program and the Justice Improvement Act will change the culture of the military responsibility, and it is the most staggering reach into the military structure that has occurred in modern history. So at the back of this, I open it now to questions in the back of those slide program there are a slew of documents that you can look at magazines, videos and so on, if you're interested. So are we good. Okay, good. Yeah, thank you. This is such a complex subject and we have about 10, 10 or so minutes to have some questions and comments from the audience. I would just like to kick it off with a general question that I don't you don't need to answer but I will throw out for everyone, which is when you're in the process of implementing these things into curriculum joint professional military education or otherwise. And you have these active debates going on in Congress and elsewhere, how, what, what is the record of not being always behind what the reality is, and how it's going to be generationally, conceptually, etc. And I throw that out, I guess, as a general question, you can answer it if we have time but I think, in general, that's something we we face, I think, across all agencies. And then we speak for the department and I, I honestly believe they do an incredible job in this area because for a couple of reasons, they continually hire fresh talent, which keeps us really current. And then those of us like me that have been around a while or voracious readers, and we're always tying in because it's what we're teaching we kind of know what's going on down in DC, you have to to be productive in class. In this instance, I think it, it, this system itself keeps it current. Okay, questions from the audience and comments, please raise your hand and Dave stone from strategy and policy department. So, I had a question. If you could specify a little more ways in which you can teach culture in that I get it's easy to find legislation and have students read about legislation. It's harder to find readings on culture and get students to talk about culture. What sorts of suggestions do you have for doing that. Thanks. So, what I can do, please email me, because I did a search created this because I thought this questions might come up and I'll send you my list, if that's okay. All right, good. I have a question regarding other partner nation context so from like a security cooperation standpoint, are there any resources that you've come across that you think would be especially applicable and other partners to maybe bypass some of the challenges we had, and establishing their own structures or policies. Okay, let me make sure I understand information on bypassing general issues in other cultures. So, things that resources that you've come across that you think would help us in interacting with partner nations and essentially establishing their own sexual assault and harassment prevention and response programs or training that could kind of encapsulate what we've learned as a military, and so that they can leapfrog over potentially some of the challenges that we've had. Right, so I think the person you actually need to get in touch with is Dr. Amin, because first of all, I see her shaking her head and I'm out of this now for about three years, but yes, I used to know a whole slew or list of items. So, Dr. Amin, can I encourage her to set, okay, good. I don't mean, I don't like passing the buck. I think I'm too dated. I'm going to add just one quick note to that because Dr. Rhombings brings up an important point and your question is so pertinent, and that is that I think one of the more important things that Americans are discovering when we're interacting with our partners and allies is that some of those partners and allies are ahead of us in this regard, and they have implemented right down to the foundation things that we haven't yet done, whether it's because our institutions are larger or whether it's because there's, you know, more interaction between government and military, but there are definitely examples and data. I think someone mentioned this morning the Israeli forces, they seem to survey everything, and for a long time have had data on this, and there are many other nations as well in my not extensive knowledge about it. I think we have definitely time for at least one more question. Hi everybody. My name is Dr. Montgomery McFate. I am on the faculty in the Center for Naval Warfare Studies and Analysis, which for those of you who don't know is right across the air bridge. So, I was just looking at the statistics on organizational cultural change and the Harvard Business Review. I don't know if you trust them as a source or not but if you do. The statistics are that you have to have 40% of the employees in an organization buying into a change for any change to occur, and you have to have 73% of the management. And I think the way you do that, the only way you can do that is not by teaching cultural change in some sense, but actually by hiring women. And to me, that's the heart of it. And I think at the War College, just to speak truth to power, we have been very successful at hiring women, recruiting women, but we have not been successful at retaining them. So I think we need to look at our own systems and processes in order to bring about the change that Dr. Rahm is talking about. So Dr. McFate, for those of you that don't know, is a phenomenal brain and cultural expert. So I think that's really great information. And I encourage you to, Dr. McFate, I'm not trying to put stuff on your desk, but she's really well worth chatting with if you're interested in locating some cultural materials. Thanks a lot. We have room for one more question, and we're a little ahead of time. So that's very good because we'll we'll go ahead and put that time into your presentations. Yes, please. So I have a comment rather than a question. So just in terms of lessons learned from other forces, I think it'll be interesting to look at the Australian force. For example, the Israeli force doesn't incorporate women into all tasks. So I think we need to look at it from total integration perspective. And I think it is with only total integration, the females get respect within the forces. And that's the start. Thank you. If others have questions as we move on, then I would encourage anyone to ask questions towards the end that pertain to any of the presentations, but we have sufficient time now we're going to move on. And I believe Professor Bell, you are up and please have the floor. Great, thank you. Admiral Dean's faculty students. Thank you so much for spending your time here today. It's really my honor to represent the entire maritime security and governance staff course team. This is a small but very hardworking and mission driven team over in our international programs department. I'm also happy to talk to a room of friendly faces I see many people who've been generous with their time as I've come around to ask for advice and sometimes harass for advice and building a new curriculum. And I hope that you can take some pride and see your contributions reflected in some of what I'll present today. We're also a new class so I suspect that many people in the room are not familiar with the maritime security and governance staff course or MSG SC. So I'd like to use that time to first introduce the course and then talk about the ways that we've been able to experiment with integrating women peace and security into our new curriculum. And I hope that's instructive for everyone. To those unfamiliar with the course. Our team has been charged with something that is pretty exceptional here at the Naval War College, because while most of the college's curriculum is designed around the needs of American officers and focused on joint war fighting. We've developed a brand new curriculum that is tailored for the most pressing maritime security interests of our international partners and allies. We believe that by building international capacity and applying staff course components to primary partner naval missions like IUU fishing and human trafficking is see we're strengthening international relationships and reinforcing our shared global commitment to a free and open global ocean. I think this is a critical function in a time when the world is being challenged by revisionist powers that are looking to undermine that vision of a free and open ocean. This year, which is our first year fully operational following a beta test in 2022. We expect 52 mid grade Naval and Coast Guard officers from 43 different nations, and that puts us at about the same size in terms of student throughput as the Naval Command College and the Naval Staff College for comparison. So our new course spans 21 weeks and includes about 500 student contact hours which is comparable to what our students in the 10 month program and many masters degree programs receive. Due to the diversity of Naval and Coast Guard services and mission sets around the world. Our course covers a combination of us Navy and Coast Guard functions, ranging from marine safety and port security through maritime terrorism piracy and counter counter trafficking operations. One of our faculty members likes to say we do maritime peacetime or stabilization operations. Another likes to say we do everything on the spectrum to the left of bang, I kind of like that version. So building a new curriculum with a small team is a daunting task. It's sometimes a stressful task, but we also really treasure this opportunity to tinker and experiment with curriculum design and assessment and ways that would be very difficult for a larger program with a more established long standing curriculum. We've embraced this opportunity. We appreciate that we get to iterate at a faster clip because it's a short course. And I think we've built a decent understanding of what works over a pretty short period of time. We also know that we have a lot of work to do, and I'm constantly seeking meeting so I can understand the best practices that you all have learned from other parts of the college. So expect me to come knocking if you haven't seen me before, as we continue to refine the class. We've been able to embrace our transition to outcomes based military education from the very beginning of our course design. So our program is built around the same joint learning areas that are required by the joint chiefs of any JP me one course. We've really tried to make our class a laboratory for building primary learning outcomes, assessing through direct and indirect methods, and driving the class through culminating capstone exercises and assignments. I understand that many of these transitions are underway across PME institutions and in other programs here at the college. And I expect that's why Dr me and graciously offered us to come and share our experiences since we are experimenting with this as well. So our classes built on the same typical foundations of lectures and seminars, but given the diverse international student body. We've also been able to integrate a lot of opportunities for students to climb to higher levels of Bloom's taxonomy within our curriculum. At nine different times throughout our course students are asked to critically apply course themes and assess their own national approaches to problems through student questionnaires see those pictured here. They brief their classmates on some aspect of their maritime threat environment where their maritime or military culture four times in these 21 weeks. And all of this reflection culminates in a three week workshop at the end of the course in which each student must draft a national maritime security strategy and then defend that strategy before a panel of their peers, the faculty and distinguished guests, including our CNO international fellows. Thank you for being here today. And last year our WPS chair Dr me as well. We also know that at least one student has already presented this draft strategy to high ranking officials in the Ministry of Defense. So we're very happy with that. Finally, our time with the classes allowed us to include about 100 hours of tabletop exercise in a fictitious world that we've created. So these experiential learning activities which I will call TTXs from here on out occur in afternoons across 12 weeks of our curriculum to reinforce our course messages. Over our course students will respond to oil spills, the war game responses to gray zone aggression from a neighboring countries fishing fleet. They'll organize a multinational task force to enforce UN sanctions encounter maritime weapons trafficking and other functions. Here's some photos from the classroom to show you what a typical afternoon might look like an MSG SC. So when we get students attention for this long, we have the pleasure of having them full time five days a week for as long as we want them. There are many, many ways we might consider promoting the women peace and security agenda. This has been the topic of many debates within our team. And I think it's fair to say that we've had a little fun experimenting with how to best drive critical thinking and assess learning about WPS through outcomes based education. So now that I've given you a basic understanding of our course, I want to spend the rest of my time talking about what our experimentation has taught us about bringing WPS into our classroom. The most important question for us is always, did we do a good job. Do we have any confidence that our group of officers is going home, more likely to use gendered perspectives and their work, and they were when they got here. We know that we can guarantee that we can expose students to these ideas, but how do we increase the chances that a gendered perspective becomes a part of their decision making toolkit over the long term. Here's our class from 2022 I'm happy to share that our class from 2023 both classes actually have women enrolled. So what did we do in 2022, we took an aggressive but pretty conventional approach. We invited guest lectures at the beginning and at the end of our course. We gave each of our guest lectures about an hour to talk to students about the importance of using a gendered perspective. We also invited a virtual speaker from Bangladesh to give a great case study on the importance of considering gender when responding to a maritime crisis like Rohingya migration and the Bay of Bengal. We gave explicit instruction to our students to consider gender and the tabletop exercise focused on a regular migration. We surveyed our students extensively and they told us we did a good job. They found the lectures to be informative and beneficial. They learned things. If we wanted to congratulate ourselves on a job well done. There's lots of evidence for us to do so with a great deal of confidence, but something happened at the end of our course that surprised us a bit. We did not give students explicit instruction to write gender into their maritime security strategies because we thought this is one way this is an outcome that we can measure. How many will do this after three to five hours of WPS instruction when not explicitly told that they must and we found that most of them didn't. So in the summer of 22 that made us wonder what can we do differently. What can we learn. We went back to the drawing board. So here's a hypothesis about what happened first plenty of research points to the strong effects of self serving biases like fundamental attribution error. And these biases might cause us to think that we do a pretty good job of considering gender as individuals. And that might lead students to the conclusion that WPS is included in the curriculum, mostly because others need to hear the message, or because this is a mandatory requirement that is on the outskirts of the core learning objectives. Well, this led us to think well if these things are true, then just like an implicit bias test that's meant to uncover subconscious bias is used at the beginning of a corporate training to reframe a conversation and reveal hidden biases. Maybe we can soften students initial positions and make them receptive to this mission by showing them that gender is something that they could have considered, but chose not to, rather than telling them that this is something that they could consider sometimes. We think a lecturer is in a much stronger position if they come into a room where the audience could have used a gendered lens to approach a problem, but already didn't do so. It gives us a concrete example, and it levels the playing field so that we have an illustration of room for growth. So this student experience of overlooking gender, if we can create that at the beginning, it may, and this is only a hypothesis to be tested, it may create a greater possibility that later messages about the importance of using gendered analysis and incorporating WPS perspectives will be internalized by the students. Okay, so what are we doing with the 2023 class. We tried something very different. Instead of exposing the students to the issue through guest speakers. Instead, we first introduced students to WPS through a tabletop exercise that was superficially about showing students the seven steps of the military decision making process. We did not tell students to consider gender, as they worked through this tabletop exercise, but in a maritime human smuggling scenario, we provided adequate background material on gender, and how that affects smuggling and trafficked persons and the disparate treatment of men women girls and boys by the perpetrators. I should mention Jeff say hi to everybody. There's there's Jeff Jeff did a great job of leaving lots of threads that we think good planning staff officers should have pulled to really explore. But we left the students to do it. Do you think they did it. No, no, but that's what we wanted. We didn't want the students to do it. That's what we expected. Because what that did is it created an opportunity for us in the debrief to say how might this have been different if you'd considered gendered aspects of this. Instead of providing them with a lecture and students thinking that maybe yeah we would have considered this in the scenario we think about this in our service. We can ask them in a debrief and in a positive and constructive way. But how might gender affect. Concepts in search and rescue operations and responses to migration like refalement places of safety asylum. So it created an opportunity that wouldn't have existed if we'd led with lectures. So as we near the end of our course this year, we are thinking about how much we want to lead with WPS as we go into the migration exercise or if we want to leave this is another opportunity for reflection. I think we're pretty happy with how this happened last time. And we're also considering whether we want to now require this in the maritime security strategy capstone. Okay, so what's next. I want to end on a point that might be a little bit provocative here. Courses like ours are meant to educate and instill critical thinking that is JLA number one. We want officers to think about these issues when they go home, but a large part of a course like ours is also showing students from around the world the applicability of military planning process so that they can go home and be effective staff officers. I think a problem we have is that we run into what I call a buzz saw of doctrine, because on this specific topic it's difficult to pair the messaging with best practices and military planning that can be found in our doctrine and in our planning resources. So when we teach risk analysis, we can provide examples and then follow that up by pointing students to the joint risk analysis methodology. And when we teach brainstorming and design thinking, we can point them toward the army design methodology. But while we preach a gendered lens and teach mission analysis, our core documents like JP five, the Navy planning process, any of the several workbooks that are used around the college to teach students mission analysis tools. They don't explicitly mention women and gender, at least I have not seen it. So what we're doing next our next step is to try to develop some simple heuristics so that our students can come up with a gender estimate as part of their mission analysis process and the next version of our course. So I say this with humility, we are still learning that's only a hypothesis. But I think this is low hanging fruit that would be foolish not to reach out and seize with that thank you for your time. And I'll welcome any questions in the Q amp a other question. Oh, actually, I will preface it by saying that at one time many years goes very involved in bringing women into combat and roles in the Navy that they did not previously have so I understand some of the issues but what my question is is, what are those gender differences and thinking in this model because I think of Margaret Thatcher and the Falklands war. And I'm not so sure she made decisions based on gender that would have been different than another Prime Minister. I think of Madeline Albright's advocacy in serving war. I have seen decisions that were somehow gendered. So someone needs to explain to me what the difference are at this level at the defense planning process or in decisions to go to war decisions not to go to war or help of war is operated. Thanks. Thank you very much for the question. I think that there are several examples I can give fear, especially in this area of the spectrum of operations, left of bank in short of conflict. But men are often the face of the global fisheries sector and I you fishing because they are primarily the ones out on the boat, but on the shore side of fishing it's primarily women working as fish mongers as processors selling at markets. So thinking about how fisheries enforcement policy is likely to have effects on shore. I think is an important part of the co a development process. I gave the example of migration, where a decision on what to do with migrants in distress has profound implications for the women and men. We can envision scenarios pretty easily where something might qualify a place might qualify as a place of safety, where migrants can be disembarked if they're men, but maybe not if they're women or girls, based on a human rights record and women's rights in that country. I think in the co analysis stage of thinking about actions, reactions, encounter actions. There's great value in thinking about how women might react. If we're not talking military to military, if there's no enemy course of action, but instead we're anticipating reactions from a civilian population that's trying to be helped in an HDR situation, or in a migrant operation. Those would be some examples sir where I think using a gendered approach to think separately about men and women can be very useful and the academic literature on gender analysis provides some great and simple heuristics for doing this. Thanks. Other questions, or comments. Okay, is that good. Hi, I'm new. That's why I don't have operate this. I just want to offer another example I mean I I'm, so I'm just Steve I'm an assistant professor in SA. The example I want to give is the gender dynamics of the Bush administration right I mean. Andy Rice was bullied out of the interagency process by two hyper masculine advisors right Cheney and Rumsfeld I don't think you can understand internal dynamics of that or many administrations without looking at gender. But my question was more about teaching and I love to hear anyone's thoughts on this. It's known in NSA we have usually one maybe two women students per class. And I've heard the idea floated about having some classes have a more concentrated set of women so maybe five out of 12 or 13 students, and then having some classes with zero. And I'm curious as to what you all think might the trade offs and benefits might be of, for lack of a better word distributing women students in a different way. I don't know that I'm the best answer that question because we have one section at a time, so we don't have any discretion over how to distribute students. I think having women in the classroom is important as instructors we have little to no control over that. But of course, bringing in guest speakers offering a lot of perspectives that are more representative than our student body might be is one thing that is in our control and we do strive to do that. I will just offer my, my comments that I think the distribution of women in the class is a good choice just like the distribution of services, the more perspectives you get in the classroom the better. If you were to pull everyone together who's like imagine a class of all army officers or all Marines or all women, you would just not get the luxury of shared perspectives. I follow up on that. I'm, I've had this conversation with a few people in my department and I understand those points completely. I think I'm kind of wondering though like who gets the benefit there the male students or the female students with multiple perspectives, because it seems like sometimes it's the female student being in there to provide the benefit for the men of those perspectives whereas a good teacher should be able to help provide those perspectives no matter what. I would, I would just say that from the perspective of someone who has kind of watched this over the years. 20 as of this year. You know, I think that would be something that you could survey. Maybe you could you probably ask students. How do you think this is working out. But when you do that you're also introducing other problems into the classroom that may or may not actually be there. We may be identifying gender as a problem, but we can't be sure without asking that every person in that classroom is hyper fixated on gender. So it can have I think the opposite effect of what WPS is intended to do and what I think DEI is intended to do, which is to hyper focus on something that maybe wasn't a problem in the first place, which is not to say that it's not noticeable, because it's certainly most certainly is noticeable from administrative processes all the way up to the people that are conducting, you know, moderating teams, when you when you notice on your, on your roster, that they've taken the small percentage of women and distributed them across evenly. So, I think it introduces as many problems as it solves. Moreover, when you have equity and also, you know, it's sort of related maybe to WPS but I think a little bit more to process and in DEI to, for example, dictate that women should be more involved in committee work. When you have X number of committees across the college and you might not have experienced this yes but you might you will. If you have a lower percentage of faculty that can sit on those committees, then you have also a burden that falls on female faculty to be on lots of committees. That can be very good, but it can also create disparity in workload. Again, the, what the benefit the net benefit or, or detriment to careers is, unless you track it you don't know it's anecdotal. So I think this is what I think this panel is doing wonderfully and I'm going to let Professor Stokes really bring us back home is to raise the problematics that exist in actually implementation phase. This is the hardest part. This is the part that will eat up, you know, lots of DoD dollars, but it is a part that should be very it should be edifying to everyone and hopefully result in something better as we go. Professor Stokes, please look forward. Good afternoon, everyone. I echo Curtis's comments. I'm really delighted to speak in front of the faculty and hopefully my perspective will offer some ideas about integration of WPS into the curriculum for your own, your own work and your colleges or here in your own departments. My name is Professor Jane Stokes. I am a professor over at the Joint Maritime Operations part of the College of Distance Education, a little bit about what I do I'm a co teacher for the Fleet seminar program. Fleet seminar program is your distance education version of the residence program so my course, JMO, similar to the residence side there's three core courses, our students go through two year program to obtain a master's degree, vice the resident program which is a 10 month program, essentially very similar to the resident program except spread out once a week where we have a seminar full of students usually mid grade officers, civilians, mostly naval officers, Marines Coast Guard, a lot of civilians from different capacities who largely are great influences, you know across across the Navy but really across the whole spectrum. The cool thing about it is the College of Distance Education at any particular time has approximately 2000 enrolled officers through it or enrollees, which really lends itself to have an incredible impact on the Navy itself right influencing that many officers isn't important so our, our college has a lot of naval influence at this level. So, the reason why that's important is because with one of the goals of the DOD in WPS implement implementation at the service level is PME integration. And that's what we sought to do and so I'm just offering my perspective of how we were successful in implementing and putting WPS material into our curriculum. And as I said before, hopefully that aids and anyone's attempt or interest in doing that as well. I believe that the ultimate importance is that this influence of getting these, these relatively young officers out there is going to enable them then to lead to the success in the lower levels of providing training to personnel and educating the force and really touch points that these, these officers have with really having them understand and integrate and operationalize WPS at all levels and this is critical for our I believe our strategy and what we seek to do. After all, if we believe that WPS really aids in war fighting, then these officers are the ones who are going to operationalize this and the inclusion of women in operations at this level helps aid us as Americans in being successful in war, or any operations related to war fighting. So with that, I just wanted to highlight some of the things doctor you mean talked about this morning and many of you may not have been there for but part of that WPS implementation is that inclusion of material into PME. And with that, just like, you know, all things we do at this college everything is nested. And so at the naval war college, the, the leadership has taken the DoD strategic framework and implementation plan and operationalized it so that it's inclusive in the strategy of the college to, and also the Secretary of the Navy in February of 2022 had also provided a memo directing that WPS be maintained across PME. So we have this direct linkage of nested strategies to include WPS material into the PME curriculum in the college. Part of the, the colleges lines of effort include these four pillars, I'm only going to talk about the first one which is that education pillar, and there's many ways the symposium being one that the college is implementing the WPS program. And the one I'm concerned with in my discussion is the PME integration, and how that works and so that's that first pillar right there. More specifically, this line of education in effort, or rather the line of effort in education is integration into curriculum. So having the syllabus incorporate WPS as a core topic, cross cutting themes, connecting different areas of study, focused readings, seminar discussions, case studies, all related to WPS are kind of what we started looking at when we looked at integrating the WPS into the curriculum. I know this is a very busy slide. The intent of this is to show what we did on a department level in order to start thinking about how we were going to put WPS material into it. Probably a lot of you use this process. This is the JPM me process of how many, many folks integrate any kind of topic into the curriculum. So you've got your op map your officer, your officer, professional education program that dictates what must what an officer must learn, right. That's our kind of Bible for JPM me. And of that comes to primary things your joint learning areas, and then your desired leader attributes right what does what does a officer look like what should they know. Those are mandatory things that need to go into that curriculum development. And that comes your program learning objectives, which we're all familiar with, which the college generates and that pulls from that, that joint chiefs of staff information, and that J7 information says okay now let's take a look at the college level and what we want to do, and that's updated yearly, and that includes, you know, competition continuum, themed about future and contemporary operational environments, organizational ethical concepts, and theory doctrine. So what you would expect comes from a PME Institute with with military officers right. And then individually that development of the course learning objectives, particularly for us, the JMO course learning objectives includes that critical thinking and naval theory, operational art concepts you may or may not have heard if you've taken our courses, and then those maritime operations and communication. And then finally that develops our curriculum and then our syllabus. So, as you can see from that kind of busy chart, there's a lot that we have to throw into that development there's not a lot of room for adding things to make it more complicated, then we've got the J7 information which pulls the, what we call the special areas of emphasis. So last year one of the special areas of emphasis was the competition continuum. Right, and, and several other things this year was deterrence in the 21st century data analytics artificial intelligence and global force management, all the PME institutes come together and they decide collectively, you know what are those themes that we want to emphasize that year, and that gets included to. So, how do you fit WPS when there's so much already there that it's very hard to move and have any wiggle room with creating anything. Yeah, fortunately a JMO my, my co teacher and I, Professor Adrian should gay, we had an opportunity to move our curriculum around a little bit because we were revising and updating it. So, with that we looked at how could we take our entire curriculum and, and make it more of a building block block approach. And so, in tandem with a resident JMO, we looked at how can we make this more streamlined so it makes better sense for the students to revise the whole curriculum. And one way we did that is by that, like I said that building block approach first looking at the theory. Naval theory, taking, taking our students through the beginning stages of World War two as a case study approach, going back to the beginning parts of that Pacific campaign and driving through some of the operations to then lead us to that joint operational process and then block three, which is our contemporary operations, which is on the competition continuum. I'm going to pause there because that's where we really had an opportunity to include WPS into it and what we had looked at is the contemporary operations to continue them really involved exactly what WPS is about, which is that, that, you know, competition short of war before and after, but also including warfare to right how do we, how do we understand warfare, and continue to do those things even if we're not exactly in war, right. And so a lot of that is that security, how do we maintain security, how do we do, you know, everything short of war, how do we prevent war. And so we nested the WPS strategy as a reading into our block block three there and had our students read it, and we had questions that we generated in a seminar discussion. And we put that in context with our section on state stability and fragility. So we were discussing how, at what makes a failed state when makes a fragile state, but also what makes a stable state and in that discussion, we discussed how women's perspectives and inclusion in operations might or might not have an effect using real world examples of fields and fragile states such as Yemen or Somalia, which drove some very interesting discussions. I think that what we had learned from doing it the first time and the feedback we got from our adjunct professors, one thing I feel to mention is, we don't just teach here at Newport, we have 50 other professors, Jbo professors who teach throughout the country. And that's how we teach so many students is there's seminars throughout the country so we got feedback from our adjunct professors to that gave us knowledge about how that was received by students. And, you know, some of the challenges and the feedback we received wasn't all positive was a lot of the students didn't feel as though we had gone in depth, they didn't really understand some of the strategy, it was too abstract. And as we all know as educators here. There's not a lot of stickiness and knowledge when you are just kind of explaining concepts to them that are abstract, the real tool to gaining knowledge and it being kind of sticking more through case studies and stories and all that and so what we plan to do next year is to put case studies in there and guide the students through activities that aren't specifically only directed at WPS but have WPS elements in them as well. And also to gain more materials such as articles or real life scenarios that incorporate WPS and then guide our students through discussions, which will live in it but not solely focused on WPS. Another nice thing about our nested approach to our syllabus too is that what we have found with the students is they pull concepts from earlier sections and continue to drive them through the whole the whole curriculum. And so that allows us to revisit those themes throughout our course. So maybe we have naval theory at the beginning, but later on, we're touching upon some of those concepts we learned earlier, and our students to have pulled some of the things they've learned from WPS, and have pulled them through where now we're teaching and doing an exercise, they're able to provide examples of where women's inclusion into operations might lead to success with the sort of battle plans that they're creating with their scenario. So that's our that's my thought with how our integration was so far initially successful but can go deeper too. I would offer that by way of feedback also incorporating WPS on a strategic level. I would envision if we raised it up. I could, I would look at the way that, for example the interwar years women had an impact during World War two on creating a strategic space for men to to go into warfare what did that do for the face of warfare, or and on the tactical side, having articles about gender advisors who are on the ground and their success in their operations that they do might be kind of an interesting article to pull for more tactical guided courses. There is a lot of information out there. However, I feel there's not enough material. And I, I would love to have more case studies and more articles that we could throw at the students to really guide them through that aren't singularly focused on WPS, but incorporate those real world scenarios that help further the students understanding of how to implement and incorporate WPS themes through through the coursework. And that is my presentation. That's all I have. Thank you.