Stanford Report: The First Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama, spoke at SCPKU today and said study abroad allows students to realize that countries all have a stake in each other's success.  Following her remarks, she held a conversation with students on the Stanford campu via SCPKU's Highly Immersive Classroom. Read more.

Introduction and Contribution

Since coming to power in 2002, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and his Justice and Development Party (AKP) have significantly undermined Turkish democracy. This has most visibly involved police repression, systematic prosecutions of the AKP’s critics, and partisan control and censorship of the media. Although opposition persisted in parliament, municipalities, campuses, and professional associations, the playing field is rigged against the AKP’s opponents.

Yet these visible forms of repression are only part of a broader process of Turkey’s autocratization. In “The Capture of Turkey’s Universities Under the AKP,” Ayça Alemdaroğlu shows how the regime has, through a host of less spectacular but durable mechanisms, used its control over higher education to turn universities into channels for distributing opportunity, disciplining dissent, and cultivating loyal staff and students. These mechanisms — including baseless investigations and dismissals of academics, online citizen reporting against faculty, and patronage around university jobs — have weakened academic life and transformed Turkish higher education into a key instrument of the AKP’s governing project.

Importantly, Turkey’s democratic erosion has accelerated in tandem with the massive, rapid growth in colleges and student enrollment. For Alemdaroğlu, this should temper any assumption that higher education is automatically a space of democratic resistance. Universities can produce critique, organization, and dissent, but the higher education system can also facilitate authoritarian consolidation through appointments, disciplinary procedures, funding, surveillance, and patronage. Comparable processes to subordinate universities have unfolded in India, China, and Russia. Instructors may publish or teach critical material while students may organize against the state, but autocrats can hedge against these risks by capturing the university system writ large. In the United States, where universities have become central to “culture wars,” Alemdaroğlu’s article serves as a cautionary tale about how quickly institutional autonomy can erode, especially in the absence of protections against executive encroachment.

The Growth of Turkish Higher Education

The AKP did not eviscerate higher education in one fell swoop but did so incrementally, building on the efforts of its predecessors. For example, after the 1980 coup d'état, Turkey’s military government centralized key aspects of university appointments, which the Erdoğan regime has expanded. In addition, the country’s 1980s neoliberal turn refashioned universities as instruments of profit and efficiency rather than spaces of academic freedom. Since the AKP attained power, higher education has grown at an unprecedented scale: there were 76 universities with 1.7 million enrolled students in 2002, compared to 206 universities and 8 million students in 2020. This has afforded the regime vast new terrain on which to exercise control.

Unsurprisingly, such rapid growth has increased quantity at the expense of quality. From a political standpoint, however, this is not especially costly for the AKP. For example, meager investments in research capacity have served to weaken the independence of academics and their ability to criticize the regime. Meanwhile, university hiring processes reflect the preferences of AKP loyalists, thus expanding the scope of co-optation. These are not unintended consequences but core features of a system geared toward patronage.

University expansion has helped the AKP widen its reach across social groups and economic sectors. Lucrative construction projects, public-sector jobs, faculty appointments and access to scarce resources have become channels through which the party awards supporters and cultivates loyalty.  In other words, higher education has served as a means of patronage, ideological inculcation and political control. The government framed expansion as a democratizing challenge to secular urban privilege and as part of a project to cultivate a more conservative, religiously grounded youth.

Waves of Capture

Alemdaroğlu periodizes the AKP’s higher education agenda into three waves that illustrate the shift from episodic intervention to routinized control. The first wave, which began soon after the AKP came to power, was not immediately visible to international observers as part of a broader authoritarian turn. Though it was clear to those targeted. For example, a 2005 penal code criminalized the “denigration of Turkishness,” which state prosecutors used to target faculty in literature and journalism, particularly those who had published on the Armenian genocide and the systematic mistreatment of Kurds.

By contrast, the second wave, beginning after the failed 2016 Turkish coup d'état attempt, was much more dramatic. The AKP government presented the coup attempt, which it attributed to the Gülen movement, as a national emergency requiring sweeping state action. Faculty and employees were dismissed and suspended en masse, while Gülen-affiliated universities were shuttered and had their assets frozen. In addition, investigations were conducted against those who signed a 2016 “Academics for Peace” document, which called for an end to state violence against Kurds. Turkey’s Constitutional Court found the investigations illegal in 2019, but by which time many academics had already lost their positions, passports, income, and professional standing.

The final, ongoing wave has “shifted toward a permanent institutional model, moving control and coercion into the everyday governance of the university.” Faculty are routinely disciplined for “verbally disrespectful speech” or conduct incompatible with “public morality and decency,” while AKP loyalists are appointed to senior academic posts by direct presidential decree. In addition, online citizen reporting through the state’s communication system has created another channel for targeting faculty. Although the rise from 130,000 applications in 2006 to 6 million in 2020 reflects the system as a whole, it shows how citizen complaints became part of everyday state monitoring, including at universities.

Ultimately, the Turkey case shows how democracy erodes through both dramatic ruptures and quiet, cumulative transformations. Alemdaroğlu emphasizes that the degraded condition of Turkish higher education does not merely reflect AKP’s autocratization but has actively enabled it.

*Brief prepared by Adam Fefer.

On March 27, 2026, 16 undergraduate students in Japan joined 50 graduate students in Norway for a virtual exchange focused on local sustainability challenges. The session was part of the SPICE Social Entrepreneurship course offered at Eikei University of Hiroshima (Eikei) and co-organized with the Faculty of Technology, Art and Design at the Oslo Metropolitan University (OsloMet). 

The exchange served as the culminating activity of a course that SPICE has offered at Eikei since 2022, made possible in large part by the vision of Hiroshima’s former Governor Hidehiko Yuzaki. The course guides students through community engagement, local sustainability challenges, and problem-solving using design thinking methods. This year, students tackled topics including rural transportation, migrant worker conditions, seniors' access to AI, and cybersecurity. What distinguished this iteration was the opportunity for students to test their ideas with an international audience whose academic background differed significantly from their own. 

To create that opportunity, SPICE partnered with OsloMet’s master’s program in Applied Computer and Information Technology. Though the two programs differ in size, location, and disciplinary focus – one rooted in liberal arts, the other in STEM – they share a common goal: helping students explore complex social problems through interdisciplinary and cross-cultural collaboration. To prepare for the virtual session, Eikei students created short video presentations introducing the sustainability challenges they had identified in Hiroshima. OsloMet students then reframed those challenges in their own local content and developed technical solutions in response. During the live session, students from both sides met in breakout discussions facilitated by Eikei student assistants, where Oslo teams proposed solutions and Hiroshima teams asked questions and explored implementation. 

For Eikei students, the most significant learning emerged from the reflective activities that followed. Students’ responses centered on two pillars the SPICE course had set from the beginning: intercultural competence and interdisciplinary thinking.

Eikei students reflecting on Japan-Norway student exchange | Photo Credit: SPICE

On the intercultural side, the exchange made clear how deeply local context shapes the way problems are understood and solved. A group working on AI and senior citizens, for instance, found that differing attitudes toward aging in Japan and Norway influenced both how the problem was defined and which solutions seemed viable. One student wrote: 

"The most memorable moment was when the very first prototype shown — from Group 9 — was an AI-generated image of a pizza with wheels, with an elderly person smiling next to it. I felt that our perspectives on social welfare and the public good were fundamentally different. Our conception of government's mission is something close to protecting the vulnerable. Their view, by contrast, were rooted in a focus on individual flourishing and self-actualization. It really took me by surprise."

Another student recalled a similarly unexpected moment:

“I received a lot of basic questions about everyday life in Japan — things like 'Isn't it normal for people in Japanese suburbs to ride electric scooters?' or 'How much do elderly people in Japan actually use smartphones?' I had expected questions about complex solutions, but I realized that even things I take for granted carry invisible assumptions and biases. In a cross-cultural setting, you have to align on the basics before you can go deeper."

These moments pushed students to examine their own assumptions and recognize how context shapes both problems and solutions. 

The interdisciplinary dimension was equally revealing. Eikei students admired how their Norwegian peers translated broad social concerns into concrete, technically grounded proposals. At the same time, the exchange helped them see the value of their own liberal arts education. One student reflected:

“Since the Oslo students each specialize in one field, it seemed like every group felt compelled to apply that expertise — which meant their solutions often ended up looking similar. We, on the other hand, are trained to approach problems from multiple disciplines and to include not just what’s immediately feasible but also future possibilities. Seeing that difference made so concrete was what left the strongest impression.”

Rather than viewing technical expertise as inherently superior, Eikei students came to see stakeholder engagement and contextual sensitivity as equally essential for addressing complex challenges, and concluded that effective solutions require both. This shift in perspective reflects a central aim of STEAM education: integrating a human-centered perspective into the traditional STEM framework (link to a related article). 

This experience reinforced the value of designing courses that connect students across institutions, disciplines, and cultures. The impact, it turns out, extended beyond the participants themselves. One of the Eikei student assistants who helped facilitate the session also reflected on what the experience meant to her (link). Many Eikei students expressed a desire for more sustained collaboration with their Norwegian peers, suggesting that future iterations of such a course could benefit from extending the exchange beyond a single session. More time and more exchanges would create greater space for mutual understanding and deeper engagement with complex "wicked" social problems.

Eikei students in SPICE Social Entrepreneurship course | Photo Credit: SPICE

Acknowledgement: I am deeply grateful to Professor Tulpesh Patel at OsloMet for making this partnership both possible and genuinely rewarding. Since we began working together in August 2025, it has been a true collaboration, the one built on regular conversation, mutual trust, and a shared belief in the value of human-centered, context-sensitive learning, an approach that lies at the heart of STEAM education. Working with Professor Patel has been a personal reminder of why cross-cultural and interdisciplinary collaboration matters. 

SPICE's course on Social Entrepreneurship with Eikei University of Hiroshima is one of SPICE’s local student programs in Japan.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

What does it take to get ahead when college admission rules change? Who has the resources to anticipate risks and adapt, and who is left responding after opportunities have already slipped away?

These questions lie at the heart of Ruo-Fan Liu’s research. As APARC's Taiwan Program postdoctoral fellow 2024-2026 – the first scholar to serve in this role since the program’s launch two years ago – Liu examines how young people navigate educational transitions in Taiwan's college admissions landscape, which has shifted from an exam-centered system to holistic screening in recruiting elites. Her work shows that inequality is not simply a matter of who succeeds or fails, but of who can mobilize support early enough to stay ahead of unexpected challenges.

We spoke with Liu about her work and fellowship experience at APARC. The following interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Get APARC fellowship announcements and scholars' insights delivered to your inbox >

Could you describe your research briefly?

My dissertation examines how young people navigate contingency in college admissions: what kinds of support they seek, how they mobilize resources, and how these processes shape postsecondary transitions. I situate this puzzle in Taiwan, where the state has implemented admissions reforms intended to level the playing field, including holistic admissions, school-based nominations, and test-optional and dossier-based application routes. Although these reforms open new opportunities, they also introduce different forms of uncertainty into students' college pathways.

As a sociologist, I care deeply about how people exercise agency under different forms of constraint and opportunity. In asking why class reproduction persists amid contingency and uncertainty, I find that middle-class students preserve class privilege not because they avoid setbacks or always get what they want, but because they anticipate risks early and coordinate familial and school support before risks become failures. I call this process “anticipatory coordination.” By contrast, working-class students are more often reactive mobilizers, seeking help after problems have already crystallized into adverse outcomes. This temporal dimension – who can act early enough to get ahead – shapes who can get around unexpected hurdles.

I use a wide range of methods, but ethnography remains my favorite method. Talking with people, reading social cues, and capturing unspoken assumptions are the moments I have found most meaningful in the research process.

What challenges have you encountered in researching this topic?

One of the major challenges I have encountered is the scarcity of Taiwan-based cases published in general sociology journals. Sociology remains highly U.S.-centered and theoretically demanding, which makes publication difficult, especially during peer review.

As a Taiwan-focused researcher, I am still learning how to make the case for the broader significance of this work in different publication outlets: how to frame Taiwan’s relevance, address concerns about generalizability, and explain empirical evidence in depth without creating unnecessary confusion.

That is why I cherish APARC and FSI as my institutional home at Stanford, where faculty members and mentors value international work and underrepresented cases and support researchers throughout the process.

Tell us about your work at the Stanford Next Asia Policy Lab (SNAPL).
 
At SNAPL, I co-led a project with Professor Gi-Wook Shin that examines how migrant scholars and transnational elites institutionalize cross-border exchange, negotiate with state officials and other key brokers, and produce knowledge across multiple languages.

Since 2024, our team has collected network, interview, archival, and organizational data, working with two postdoctoral fellows and two research assistants. The project has generated several papers in progress. In the first paper, we find that migrant scholars play crucial intermediary roles in facilitating cross-border exchange, a mechanism we call the “transnational pipeline,” which extends beyond individuals’ sporadic efforts. In the second paper, we turn our teamwork into a methodological technique for studying transnational elites.

We are currently comparing Taiwan’s and Korea’s funding infrastructures and developing a comparative model that contrasts “state sponsorship” and “state capitalism” to explain how states extend their power beyond national borders.

How has your time at APARC supported your research and professional development?

Stanford has helped me become a more collaborative scholar.

My first cultural shock was Stanford’s lab culture, where scholars often do not work alone but make decisions together as a team. I also learned how closely people back each other up. In many moments when I needed help or had to step away from a project briefly, someone was there to take over and support the work.

I learned from this culture and have applied it to my own team-leading skills in other collaborative projects. I learned how to divide labor across different team compositions, recognize collaborators’ strengths and weaknesses as scholars, support a team, secure funding for future research, and resolve tensions across different writing styles.

What advice would you give to prospective APARC postdoctoral scholars?
 
Many young scholars spend a lot of time chasing trends. The current job market exacerbates this dynamic, because there are fewer available positions. Trendy research can be valuable, but it may become outdated by the time scholars enter the job market.

I am not saying we should ignore research trends. Rather, I believe an academic journey should be your own path: developing the skills you want to invest in, cultivating the networks you are part of, and taking time to work through the puzzle you cannot let go of. In short, take your time to develop your expertise, fields, and intellectual craft.

At the same time, be strategic about your time as you approach graduation. Manage reviewing commitments, submission timelines, writing schedules, and publication timing carefully so that you have more tools when you begin a faculty position. And enjoy this transition, because once you are on the tenure track, the clock starts ticking again, and you may no longer have the same freedom you had as a doctoral candidate.

To put it simply: take your time during graduate training, be a strategic planner about timing when you are on the market, and protect your time once you become a junior faculty member.

What’s next for you?
 
I will join National Chengchi University, a leading research-intensive university in Taipei, Taiwan, as an assistant professor of sociology.

I will continue collaborating with APARC and SNAPL at Stanford while also bringing my three international research collaborations to NCCU: First-Generation Students in the United States, Organizational Change and College Admissions Under Changing Ranking Systems, and Stanford’s Transnational Project. I hope to involve my future students in these projects so that they can gain valuable experience in collaborative research.

I am excited to apply for my own grants, teach courses in the sociology of education, and cultivate a new generation of Taiwanese scholars. Please stay tuned to my personal website, and feel free to reach out if you are interested in any of these research themes.

This article was written by Dr. Bert Bower, Curriculum Developer for the SPICE Latin America Project and later Founder and CEO of Teachers’ Curriculum Institute, the nation’s preeminent provider of K–12 experiential social studies materials. This is the fifth of several articles—focusing on the 50-year history of SPICE—that will be posted this year. In its early years, SPICE comprised several separate area-focused projects.

Congratulations to SPICE on 50 years of providing the nation’s schools with the most global-minded, engaging curriculum ever created. I had the pleasure of working as a curriculum developer with SPICE for 12 years, from 1976 to 1998. It was for me, as it has been for countless other educators, a truly life-changing experience.

At age 19, I transferred to Stanford and soon found myself attached to the Latin America Project of SPICE. Dr. David Grossman, Founding Director of SPICE, encouraged me to create a curriculum unit centered around a village in highland Guatemala where I had served as an Amigos de las Americas volunteer. David guided me in creating my first piece of curriculum and then encouraged me to present it at the California Council for the Social Studies. It proved to be wildly popular.

I soon discovered that teachers were hungry for materials that engaged their students and challenged them to take a global perspective. That was exactly what SPICE offered. Working with Dr. Grossman and the SPICE staff, I learned to create curriculum unlike anything offered by other companies or organizations. SPICE staff created lessons that taught students to write in Chinese, to simulate entering and interacting with others in a global village, and to travel down the Nile River. I was amazed at how lessons like these delighted and challenged students.

My years with SPICE taught me to embrace innovation in everything I developed. Imagine teaching the conquest of Mexico from multiple perspectives. Or using in-person interviews with villagers in a small Mexican town to drive home a heartfelt lesson on the hows and whys of out-migration. Or teaching about Latin America by analyzing and “stepping into” modern art from throughout the region. These lessons were as impactful in the classroom as they were exciting to teach.

Really, the most important thing I learned from Dr. Grossman and the SPICE staff was a true joie de vivre when it came to curriculum development. We had so much fun creating curriculum. Staff meetings were always insightful and filled with laughter. Close friendships were the norm at our workshops. Deep learning and global enlightenment were the celebrated outcomes of our work.

This sense of learning, wonderment, and lively esprit de corps has stayed with me ever since I left SPICE—and, as a result, has touched tens of thousands of others. Happy Birthday, SPICE!

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

For Pita Limjaroenrat, Thailand’s liberal icon and “almost prime minister,” the experience of being banned from politics following his decisive 2023 general election win has only strengthened the calling to fight for democracy in his country.

Thailand’s distinctive power structure – an entrenched alliance among the monarchy, the military, and economic monopolies – has repeatedly undermined and dismantled democratic forces’ attempts to challenge the dominance of unelected institutions. “This is a systematic issue that if I don't stand up for, then it's going to happen to my daughter's generation and my granddaughter's generation,” Pita says.

Joining APARC Director Kiyoteru Tsutsui on the latest episode of the APARC Briefing video series, Pita reflects on his journey, shares lessons in leadership and resilience, and discusses the forward-looking vision that continues to define his commitment to contribute to the conversation on Thailand’s future.

The APARC Briefing interview followed a fireside chat with Pita, Thailand at a Crossroads, hosted by APARC’s Southeast Asia Program, where he examined Thai politics and Southeast Asian regional dynamics.

Sign up for APARC newsletters to receive expert analysis and insights from our scholars and guests >

The People’s Mandate

In May 2023, Pita led the Move Forward Party (MFP) to win the most seats in Thailand’s general election on a platform of progressive reform. He was poised to lead the country, but a court injunction and parliamentary maneuvering halted his path to the prime ministership. In August 2024, the Thai Constitutional Court disbanded the MFP and banned Pita from politics for ten years. He may still face a lifetime ban. Rather than retreating, however, Pita has reframed his political setback as a summons to a larger mission.

To compartmentalize, find purpose in adversity, and manage anxiety, Pita proactively maps out worst-case scenarios, he revealed. “Once I have that down on paper, I stop worrying,” he said. Having anticipated the possibility of being blocked from power, the event, when it happened, was not a personal shock but the activation of a pre-analyzed outcome. This mindset allows him to see his ban from office as a reversible obstacle in a long-term struggle, citing the comebacks of leaders like Brazil’s President Lula da Silva. 

Politics is a ball that could turn either way, Pita believes. “If there's enough mandate, if there's enough calling from the people that they want me to govern and they want me to run again, whatever legal procedure that is done to me can be reversed. A pathway to power is always there as long as you still have that fire in you and people give you the mandate,” he argues.

Image

The Art of the Middle Way

Pita’s leadership philosophy is rooted in a life spent bridging divides. Describing himself as a “jack of all trades,” he recalled how, as a child, he moved easily between being a bookworm and taking on leadership roles in school and basketball. He traces this identity back to his upbringing, which included a middle-class childhood in Bangkok, formative years at an all-boys school in rural New Zealand, and an education and professional experiences in both the public and private sectors, with degrees earned from Harvard’s Kennedy School and MIT’s Sloan School of Management.

“That became who I am,” he stated, outlining his unique proposition to Thai voters. “Someone who understands international markets and rural areas. Someone who's middle class, who understands people who are well off and people who are struggling [...] Someone who understands both the private side and public side because he prepared himself that way.”

This dual expertise, he argued, is crucial for effective governance. He noted the fundamental difference in objectives between the two sectors. “The goal of public service is service. The goal of the private sector is profitability,” he said. “Just because you're a successful businessman doesn't make you a successful politician.”

He recounted how his political calling was ignited in the wake of the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, when, as a management consultant, he worked on a tourism recovery strategy for Thailand. The intellectual challenge of balancing complex public needs, like national energy security, sparked a passion that private-sector work couldn't match.

From Campaign to Campus

Now a Senior Democracy Fellow at Harvard Kennedy School, Pita channels his experiences into mentoring a new generation of leaders. He teaches a class on running for public office in developing countries, hosts workshops, and holds “private office hours” for students committed to entering public service, helping them craft their first campaign strategies. It is a way of “turning reality into a textbook” for others.

He also remains a keen observer of global affairs, characterizing the current U.S.-China relationship as a “managed rivalry” or “competitive coexistence,” where deep distrust is checked by the understanding that a full-fledged decoupling would be “economic suicide” for both sides. He sees Southeast Asia as a central and crucial bloc of “swing states” that must leverage its position to determine its own future without being forced to choose sides in the competition between the world’s two greatest powers.

When asked for his message to young people, Pita’s advice is a blend of passion and pragmatism. “Always follow your heart, but take your brain with you,” he urged. For those with aspirations to tackle the world’s crises and pressing social challenges, he stressed the importance of pairing that fire with a concrete plan.

“It's up to you whether you find your North Star, improve your skills to have a plan to get there,” he concluded.

Pita clearly articulates what he wants: a more just and democratic Thailand. Even from outside the halls of political power, he is methodically working on his plan to get there. “I can wait for my time, and I will come back stronger, more vigorous, more capable, and more relevant.”

Eikei University of Hiroshima (EUH) is a liberal arts institution dedicated to fostering solutions- and impact-driven leaders who create social value in today’s world. Its goal is to cultivate practical skills for solving real-world issues through active learning, international perspectives, and interdisciplinary education. SPICE’s Social Entrepreneurship course, developed and taught by Dr. Mariko Yang-Yoshihara, is an intensive program that reflects the university’s objectives by helping students recognize and address social issues through a human-centred approach. Having taken the course twice, first as a student and later as a student assistant, I gained valuable skills, perspectives, and knowledge from both experiences.

The key learnings acquired this year placed greater emphasis on interdisciplinary exchange, sharing, and combining perspectives on social issues. The course instituted an exchange between liberal arts students at EUH and STEM students at Oslo Metropolitan University (Oslomet) in Norway. The EUH students identified human-centred social issues related to technology-based themes found within Hiroshima and shared with the Oslomet students, and the Oslomet students provided solutions or prototypes in response to these problems, with a discussion exchange that was held online toward the conclusion of the course.  

I found this exchange to be very interesting and engaging, even with my role as a student assistant in this course. The difference in perspectives between liberal arts students and STEM students was quite evident during this discussion, especially through the concepts and factors emphasized in the assigned theme by both groups of students. Due to vast differences in class sizes, we, the Eikei students, were required to review multiple prototypes submitted by the Oslomet student groups. Initially, all of the prototypes provided for my group’s theme seemed similar, but my perspective significantly changed after communicating and discussing with the Oslomet student groups during the online exchange. Their overview of prototypes shared similarities from an external point of view, but their features, emphasis, and priorities were quite different. This differentiation only became evident during the interactive session through the exchange of viewpoints between students from both universities.

A cultural comparison between the two universities was also a key observation. The exchange of participants’ views on the feasibility of said prototypes within Norwegian and Japanese societies was intriguing to observe through a thorough comparison of social aspects in both countries, particularly governmental assistance, hierarchical structures, and the focus of the prototype. This further highlighted the contrasts in the same target demographics across both countries, leading to the realization that the same prototype may not have the same impact on both societies. 

Another important note was the difference in priority and emphasis between the assigned theme and problem statement for the liberal arts students and the STEM students. There was a clear distinction in focus areas between the two universities. The EUH students solely prioritized the human-centred aspect of the provided theme, while the Oslomet students, on the other hand, targeted the technological aspect. It was quite intriguing to witness STEM students and liberal arts students trying to understand each other’s perspectives on the same situation.

Interestingly, rather than observing two major groups of students taking part in this course, I noticed three different groups. The first group is the Norwegian students who had never been to Japan, who viewed the problem statement based in Hiroshima from an external perspective. The second group consists of native Japanese students currently living in Hiroshima who viewed the problem statement from an internal perspective. The third group was international students (non-Japanese students studying at Eikei, including myself) who are also currently living in Hiroshima but viewed the problem statement from a pseudo internal-external perspective. All three groups had differing opinions and thought processes, which led to a significantly interactive and dynamic session. I was able to perceive the importance of having people with differing experiences and cultures participate in a discussion, as it progressively leads to a more adaptable and inclusive long-term approach towards achieving a common objective.

Additionally, my experiences in this course resonated with my own experience as the president of the international student organization club at our university. Oftentimes, while having meetings with Academic Affairs and International Affairs at our university regarding new initiatives, changes, or plans, I always aim to gather various opinions and concerns of my international peers, representing their needs and concerns as well. These concerns or opinions are quite varied, since the international student community has students who come from different regions of the world, resulting in a wide range of perspectives. When these varied concerns are addressed, it encourages developing solutions that aim at supporting a diverse community.

Chhavvi Anilkumar reflects on her experience in the course, Social Entrepreneurship | Photo courtesy of Chhavvi Anilkumar

This course has given me important insights and perspectives that I am sure will continue to shape my views in the short- as well as the long-term future. As a person interested in diversity and multiculturalism, this course’s experience considerably strengthened my understanding of how social structures and different experiences shape the perspectives of an individual. I believe this insight will assist me in interacting with a diverse range of people in a more inclusive manner, especially when creating solutions or strategies that can cater to various demographic groups.

Facilitating such interactive sessions, observing, and understanding the differences between the given prototypes reinforces more than just the value of collaborating with individuals coming from other backgrounds. Including different groups to participate in a situation or problem with their differing perspectives and skills increases the potential of having an adaptable solution idea that could further positively impact more than just the targeted audience. Hence, courses such as Social Entrepreneurship play a significant role in encouraging and fostering collaborative initiatives and approaches that lead to developing unique, adaptable, and successful solutions.

SPICE's course on Social Entrepreneurship with Eikei University of Hiroshima is one of SPICE’s local student programs in Japan.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.

For some of us, the challenge was navigating a career transition. for others, it was getting back into the rhythm of school — and let's just say Chonira's Economics course did not make that learning curve a gentle one.

I had some of these questions too and many others. And as I looked around at my amazing set of classmates, one key question came to mind : who did I want to be during this chapter of my life?

As our first quarter kicked into full steam, we began developing solutions quickly.

Our solution to surviving Chonira's rigorous Economics homework was to build our own little supply chain in the basement of Green Library, where finishing a problem would move you to the next table until you made it through the assignment. Conversely, we learned that to survive Alain’s class… ask Gaby. RJ discovered he could substitute the company of his wiener dogs with his cohort, and became the regular host of our after-class lunches at Arbuckle. That's really where we started to bond.

We all started to laugh more, with Funmbi's infectious laugh becoming something of a soundtrack to our class experience. We took trips to Sausalito and Napa Valley. We celebrated each other's wins, especially in athletics — whether it was Ella's incredible mountain biking treks or Yukiko finishing a 10K all the way in Japan. My title as the baby of the cohort was quickly overtaken by actual babies — Chris's — followed by Christian's, and now we have one more MIP baby on the way. We made time for each other, whether it be Ran's occasional tea gatherings, Humzah’s SF professional happy hour, or Santiago who made it his mission to include us all in the various traditions at the GSB.

Of course, it wasn't all laughs, things did get intense. McFaul dinners were always entertaining — partly for the great food, and partly because you knew the spiciest part of our political conversations would soon appear on McFaul's Substack. A heated race for International Policy Student Association President ended in a military coup, resulting in a dictatorship that lasted until approximately April 2026 — when Haolie's manifesto was finally taken down from the MIP common space. And I'm fairly certain Shin-Haeng and Elena are still debating who received the shiniest wedding ring by the end of the program.

But through all of it we grew together, and the passion and full presence of my cohort gave me an answer to my own question about who I needed to be here.

It was through Kylie, a phenomenal writer who spent her days challenging the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, who also found her outlet by merging her love of filmmaking with nuclear activism. It was Tennyson, who balanced helping to educate he next generation of political science students with scriptwriting and dramatic arts. It was Malou — learning two languages, and serving as an awarded resident advisor — who still found time to take salsa classes, which, for the record, she did not need. It was Shin-Haeng, the diplomat who could tell you everything about everyone in this cohort, who almost never missed a class unless it was to slip out for golf lessons.

It was Sophia, who by guiding her capstone team through Ukraine, letting the resilience and spirit of her people speak for itself all while exploring local municipal bond financing. It was Amit, whose studies in economics gave us a lifeline in our first quarter, also showing no mercy to his classmates on the pickleball court. And it was Humzah — a natural convener— hosting events that bridged our program with the School of Business, a task that made sense for him because that man could sell you on anything.

Through these examples and many others, people brought their full selves to the table. And what that taught me was that no matter who I wanted to become or where I wanted to go, I didn't have to lose myself in the process. It inspired me to think differently, to take the less obvious path, to lean into the unfamiliar.

And now, as we approach the end of our program, we can see how far that openness has taken us.

In classic Stanford fashion, the curious and endearing Cosima channeled her love of geopolitics and public service into founding a startup. Luke is now a Second Lieutenant — a remarkable achievement that is only slightly overshadowed by completing the Bay to Breakers 12K two years in a row. We have colleagues who have published research, attended conferences, and made a real impact, and folks like Funmibi who can do all of that and still find the time to immediately post it on social media.

And last but not least, our community has only grown — from dual-degree students like Ashraf whose summer highlight included working with investment bankers, to the meet-cutes and the marriages of Humzah, Khalifa, Shin-Haeng, and Elena, whose partners have become honorary members of our graduating class.

And so, we arrive at the final phase: implementation.

These two years have not been all sunshine and rainbows. Uncertainties around visa situations continue to affect some of us even as we walk across this stage. Sudden policy changes left contracts unfulfilled, causing real disruption to our plans and our lives. And across the world, things have not been much smoother. We have been confronted with war, genocide, even geoeconomic fragmentation.

For many of us, this may not have been the world we expected to step back into. But if there is something I want to leave with our cohort — and I promise it is the most earnest piece of advice I can offer — it's this: keep doing what you're doing.

Don’t let the weight of the world we are entering stop you from showing up as your full self. The work you do may sometimes feel thankless — but each of you are planting seeds. And the most powerful thing about this cohort is that none of the seeds we plant look the same. From the diplomat on her way to an unforeseen country in Latin America, the political activist trying out tech startup scene, and even to the Special Forces Officer who is already road-tripping to his next posting — these turns from the expected path are not distractions from your impact, they are your impact. They are what makes your contribution to this world yours and no one else's.
 

So, despite how uncertain things may feel, I want to ask each of you to hold onto what made you, you. Continue to bring your unique lens to every room you enter. Think differently. Ask the uncomfortable question. Take the less-traveled path. And continue to shine — not because the world will always reward you for it, but because that light is yours to give.

As I conclude my capstone presentation, I want to take a moment to thank my family and friends for supporting me every step of the way. To my mother, who sat by my side after long days of work to help teach me how to multiply, thank you for your patience and your love. To my father, who after long days as a mechanic still made sure to dress me in my Sunday best every week— thank you for your dedication and your sacrifice. To my grandmother, whose stories of Cuba first sparked my curiosity about the world beyond my own — thank you for planting that seed.

And to this cohort — for every laugh shared, every piece of advice given, every memory made — thank you.

Please join me in congratulating the Stanford MIP graduating class of 2026.

Introduction to Issues in International Security is a collaboration between the Center for International Security and Cooperation (CISAC) and the Stanford Program on International and Cross-Cultural Education (SPICE). Five CISAC scholars are featured in accessible video lectures that aim to introduce high school students to issues in international security and increase awareness of career opportunities available in the field. These scholars are Dr. Kevin Bustamante, Professor Martha Crenshaw, the Honorable Rose Gottemoeller, Professor Norman Naimark, and Dr. Megan Palmer. Free discussion guides, developed by Irene Bryant and Greg Francis of SPICE, are available for each of the lectures in this series.

For the fifth year since 2022, Dr. Ignacio Ornelas Rodriguez introduced the lectures and lessons in the discussion guides to high school students. This year the students were from Los Gatos, San Jose, Salinas, and Watsonville. The course culminated in a symposium on May 21, 2026 that was organized by Sabrina Ishimatsu. Three student groups had the opportunity to present their research projects to CISAC scholars, Dr. Harold Trinkunas, Dr. Kevin Bustamante, and Dr. Xunchao Zhang. 

The students’ research projects focused on the following topics: 

• What is Race?
• Biosecurity
• Analyzing Terrorist Incidents and Terrorism and Counterterrorism
   

The scholars provided extremely useful feedback on the students’ research projects and asked thought-provoking questions. Students from the 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 cohorts have commented on how the course taught by Ornelas Rodriguez and the feedback and questions from the CISAC scholars have helped them not only gain knowledge about international security but also to prepare for college. 

During this year’s symposium, the students were also very fortunate to listen to words of encouragement from Harvard undergraduate Alexandra Arguello and Stanford undergraduate Brianna Jimenez, 2022 and 2025 alumni, respectively, of the course taught by Ornelas Rodriguez. They also offered the following reflections for this article: 

Dr. Ornelas’s class helped prepare me for Harvard by giving me an early foundation in international security, global affairs, and the kind of critical analysis that college-level academia demands. The course taught me to engage complex issues with intellectual curiosity, connect global events to lived experiences, and ask stronger research questions. At Harvard, that preparation allowed me to approach courses in international law, comparative politics, global education, and Latin American studies with greater confidence and purpose. In many ways, the class was my first serious introduction to the academic interests that continue to shape my studies and my goal of becoming an attorney working with international populations.—Alexandra Arguello

Dr. Ornelas’s class prepared me as a first-generation student for the academic rigor and fast-paced environment at Stanford by giving me the opportunity to learn about complex topics, develop potential solutions, and explore research-based questions. Through this experience, I gained fundamental skills and knowledge that continues to help me succeed both academically and personally. As a future physician, this class provided me with critical insight on how international security impacts health, access, and care. The class has greatly impacted my journey at Stanford, and my purpose as I pursue higher education.—Brianna Jimenez

Ornelas Rodriguez closed the symposium by extending his praise for the 2026 cohort which exceeded his expectations and commended them for adding his class to their already busy academic lives.

To stay informed of SPICE news, join our email list and follow us on Facebook, X, and Instagram.