Online Class

Joint Operations Paper and TDQ

Objective. The objectives of this assignment are for you display both an understanding and ability to critically think about joint operations, and interact with your classmates to foster student-centered learning. This will be accomplished through your analysis of a joint operation presented in a formal paper, followed by a class discussion in which your analysis is considered by the class.

Deliverables. The following are required to successfully complete this assignment.

1. Due Wed of Week 2 (2200 CST). Draft and submit a 1200 (+/- 50) word paper based on the website provided that answers the question assigned by your instructor. The assignment must be submitted through SafeAssign via the link provided in Blackboard on the Lesson 2 Joint Operations page. The paper must:

· include a Cover Page, Abstract, the Paper, & Endnotes as a single file – a paper template that describes each of these sections is located here.

· answer the question.

· display critical thinking through analysis and logical argument.

· display accurate understanding of joint topics.

· be well written throughout – grammar, organization, presentation.

· comply with all Abstract requirements located here.

2. Due Wed of Week 2 (2200 CST). Submit a copy of your paper’s abstract into the Joint Operations TDQ for your group. This constitutes your Initial Post for the TDQ, and will form the basis for class discussion.

3. Due Thu-Sat of Week 2. Participate in your group’s area of the Joint Operations TDQ. Requirements are as follows:

· Initial post – the posted abstract constitutes your initial post.

· Follow on posts – respond to three (minimum) of your classmates within your group per the instructions located in the TDQ. These posts must be serious and comprehensive.

Assessment. This assignment will be assessed in two parts and one grade will be assigned via the ASCS TDQ/paper rubric.

1. The Paper accounts for 75% of the grade.

2. TDQ participation accounts for 25% of the grade.

Paper and Formatting Return to Assignment Overview

Requirements: The paper must be submitted according to the AU Style Guide, and in accordance with the parameters below. The paper must:

· be a 1200 (+/- 50) word paper – does not include Cover Page, Abstract, or Endnotes.

· comply with the AU Style Guide regarding formatting, citations, page numbering, etc.

· include a Cover Page, Paper, & Endnotes.

· have 1-inch margins on all sides.

· be in Times New Roman 12pt font for all text except Endnotes which may be 10pt.

· be double-spaced except for Endnotes (See AU Style Guide).

· be submitted according to the following naming convention:

· “Last NameFirst Initial_AJW_Paper”

· example – SmithR_AJW_Paper

· include file name right justified in header

Importantly, specific formatting instructions for such things as Endnotes, illustrations and figures are too detailed to include here. Referencing the AU Style Guide is required, it is linked here and specific sections by heading are listed below.

· Endnotes - pages 139 – 161.

Abstract Return to Assignment Overview

Requirements: The abstract is an important part of the paper and the threaded discussion portions of this assignment. To be effective it must:

· be 200 words (+/- 50 words).

· be submitted into the TDQ with the following naming convention – Last Name-“Assignment” Abstract.

· Example – Doe-Joint Operations Paper-Abstract

· fully overview your paper – motivation, method of analysis, findings or results and any implications or conclusions.

· be well written.

· comply with all administrative requirements.

Description: Abstracts are self-contained descriptions of larger works, and in this case, the larger work is your paper. Importantly, the abstract is not a review or analysis of the paper but a description of it. There are three broad types of abstracts:

· Critical – presents information from a larger work and evaluates it.

· Descriptive – describes information in a larger work with no judgments.

· Informative – explains information in a larger work and includes results, conclusions and recommendations.

For this assignment an Informative Abstract is the most appropriate form to use since the intent is to inform your classmates and foster discussion in the TDQ. To assist, here are several areas that your abstract should address:

· Motivation or Problem – establish why your paper is important and worthy of being read.

· Method of Analysis – explain the approach you took to fully analyze the topic.

· Findings or Results – describe what was learned through your analysis.

· Implications or Conclusions – provide any implications or conclusions that resulted from your analysis.

The following examples are provided to help frame the scope of this assignment.

1. Abstract for the PRISM 3, no. 3 (June 2012) article, “Silver Bullet or Time Suck? Revisiting the Role of Interagency Coordination in Complex Operations” by Andrea Barbara Baumann.

Integrated or whole-of-government approaches have come to be considered best practice in complex operations by a variety of multilateral organizations and governments. Recent efforts have largely focused on the seamless integration of civilian and military efforts in the theatre of operations. In the contemporary budgetary and political climate, however, the tools and processes that have been introduced over the past decade to facilitate the integration of defense, diplomacy and development have to be revisited. The challenge is to design a flexible institutional framework that allows agencies to cooperate effectively if and where needed, while at the same time allowing them to prioritize scarce resources in accordance with distinctly different core mandates and working methods. The article assesses the contribution made by two recent institutional mechanisms – Provincial Reconstruction Teams and the Office of the Coordinator for Reconstruction and Stabilization – to interagency coordination in stability operations and argues for a more selective approach. Institutionally, a new approach should invest in networks and people instead of advocating large-scale bureaucratic reorganization. Conceptually, it needs to account for the inevitability of friction among agencies within a comprehensive approach and more explicitly recognize tradeoffs arising from in joint structures. Organizations should strive to build on the experience of a generation of staff who experienced both the costs and benefits of coordination first-hand in order to devise a smart and selective model for future missions.

2. Abstract for the RAND report, “Predicting Suicide Attacks Integrating Spatial, Temporal, and Social Features of Terrorist Attack Targets” by Walter L. Perry, Claude Berrebi, Ryan Andrew Brown, John Hollywood, Amber Jaycocks, Parisa Roshan, Thomas Sullivan, Lisa Miyashiro.

The Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) set out to develop ways to predict what determines the targets of suicide attacks. While the ultimate goal is to create a list of areas at risk for the U.S. environment, the first phase of development employed a data set from Israel. Initially, NRL focused on spatial attributes, creating its own risk index, but realized that this focus on the where ignored the broader social context, the why. The lab asked RAND to test, as a proof of principle, the ability of sociocultural, political, economic, and demographic factors to enhance the predictive ability of NRL's methodology. Again using Israel as a sample, RAND created a database that coded for these factors, and then conducted both quantitative and qualitative analyses with an eye to determining what puts a given area at greater risk. The quantitative analysis established that these factors are related to the odds of attack within specific neighborhoods and that the relationships held even when controlling for geospatial factors, so they seem to confer risk for reasons beyond their association with geospatial features of neighborhoods. The specifics of the research are limited to the preferences of Palestinian suicide bombers in Israel; however, the methods used to assess target preferences in Israel could be transferred to the United States or other countries. Any results, if proven to be robust, could be used to develop recommendations for heightened public awareness in certain areas.

Rubric Return to Assignment Overview