Frequently Asked Questions
What does “conflict analysis and resolution” mean? What’s the field about?
With the broadest brush, what we study is the nature and dynamics of social conflict. This means we look at the causes of conflict, the factors that make it escalate and de-escalate, and what can be done about it so that the damage from conflict is minimized and more productive social interactions can be fostered. We have people who study conflict in a range of forums stretching from school bullying and organizational conflict to violent international conflict.
We also train as interveners of various types, both internal (as one of the parties to conflict) and external (as a third party), and to fit the various ways of intervening into an ethical structure of understanding the interaction of intervener and parties in conflict such that benefit from intervention is maximized and potential harm is minimized.
Taken together, the analytical and the practice elements are intended to inform each other and to build upon one another so that we improve future understanding of the origins and nature of conflict, improve the methodology of practice and improve the communication between practice and theory.
How do ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) and conflict resolution fit with each other? What’s the difference?
ADR doesn’t define a field, it describes a skill-set that is variously described as being the “property” of conflict resolution or law. Which can lay claim is an entirely semantic argument—there is a lot of overlap, and both fields make use of ADR techniques. What it defines, simply, is the set of all problem-solving skills except for litigation. Mediation, arbitration and negotiation are probably the most recognizable.
What a study of conflict resolution as a field will give you (as opposed to simply getting a certification in a specific ADR method) is the ability to place those skills into a greater theoretical and social framework such that they can be used most appropriately and most effectively, that the process and results will be as sustainable as possible, and that as much as possible, an intervener “does no harm.”
This may or may not be useful or necessary depending on what you want to do with it—that’s entirely up to you.
Am I “tracked” within the program/how do I track myself within the program?
You will start in introductory classes that will give you a broad overview of theories of conflict and theories of intervention. After those, depending on your interests, you will be choosing classes that allow you to focus on increasingly specific areas of interest such that you can focus yourself academically and professionally.
This and the below question generally lead into one another…
I’m curious about the program, can you tell me about it? What are ICAR’s strengths and weaknesses?
The program's strengths and weaknesses... most of my answers come in the form of "double-edged." My perspective has been that in most things here, strength and weakness depends more on the student's fit than it does anything else, so I'll start from there. This is a very good program for someone who's able to take things and run with them on their own, who's more on the creative and entrepreneurial side. If you need things handed to you or very planned out, it'll drive you crazy. You will have the freedom here to tailor the program to your needs along several different metrics, better than you can at any other program I'm aware of, but there is little by way of a standard template to direct you.
There's as much advising to be had as you need, through several different avenues, but if you don't ask the questions it won't come to you. So that's the breakdown in the most meaningful sense I can give it--there are many programs that will give far more structured advising, structured class work, etc. than we do, but they are also imposing a framework that may or may not be well-suited to what you want to do. The other PhD programs are all housed within some other discipline, in which you can choose to do a concentration in conflict analysis and resolution--there are only three PhDs in CAR as a free-standing field of its own, and we're the only one that's old enough to have graduated anyone yet. It's along those lines that I'd make the choice of program--does the sense of things that I'm describing here match with you? If it does, you'll love it. If it doesn't, it'll drive you crazy. No harm no foul either way, it's just a question of fit.
The field in general is still very new—similar to where Sociology was in the 1960s, and still at a very pioneering stage. It's also very diffuse—lots of little niches to get into, lots of different interpretations of what constitutes “the field,” and various elements within it.
The strength of this program again is its flexibility, which matches with the field—the weakness, I suppose, is that it can also seem very diffuse. Not much direction or someone saying "this is how it is." There again—double-edged. We have a lot of people who love that, who hate it when people try to impose a structure that doesn't match with what they need given their interests, and who have resonated very much with the idea that this new field is theirs to help shape, and that what's needed right now is people who will help do that rather than people who will come in and learn the field as static information that they will then possess as an expert.
There is a very strong sense of encouragement to challenge information, to look at it critically, to take it where we think it needs to go, the relationships that faculty have with students and expect students to pursue are all very different here than they are anywhere else. But a lot of the experience that people gain here is because they pushed to get information from professors, made sure they got on their radar, got certifications where needed and experience in everything they could reach out for and didn't sit back and expect that the classroom was going to give them everything they needed.
If you're looking to work in this field in general, you'll want to build a thick skin along those lines regardless of where you go to school—if you're working with conflict, you're working with populations that are not, to say the least, in the gentlest frame of mind. Even if there isn't any carpet bombing going on, you will be dealing with fragility, with culture and identity, with social and organizational dynamics that can become conflictual, reified and prickly very quickly if not treated with respect. You will need to build trust before anyone lets you in, you will need to build legitimacy of your own (an ICAR degree goes a long way there, but all academic programs have a whiff of the suspect when someone's dealing with “real life”), and you'll have to make it on your own—there's not much institutional structure for what we do to carry us through after graduation, you'll have to build that in most places. Coming at ICAR with that in mind is good training for that.
What kind of practical experience will I get in the program?
There will only be some practice work in the classes themselves—there are so many different niches, practice-wise, that filling a whole class is usually difficult. You will get some experience in mediation and facilitation, though, and there are classes on specific types of practice that may or may not apply directly to your needs.
You can get as much practical experience added in to the program as you need for what you want to do, but again it will be on you to do a lot of that, to reach out for it and make it happen. Usually it’s best to do it this way so that you can tailor the experience to your own needs rather than sticking with a general overview. The offers are flying around all the time, many people get certified and get experience as mediators, we get constant requests for facilitators, moderators and the like, but nobody's going to bring one to you and say “sign up for this.”
There are a lot of conflict resolution programs out there—what is ICAR all about, what makes it unique?
All conflict resolution programs have some sort of a focus, or “flavor,” usually defined by the larger academic department in which they reside. American University’s program is within the international studies department, so unsurprisingly has an international relations bias. George Washington’s program is within the Elliot School of International Affairs, and carries that bias. ICAR is one of the very few that stands alone and isn’t housed within another department, so is more “pure” conflict resolution in some senses.
ICAR's focus is process, at the base of it. How do conflict dynamics work within social systems, how do various kinds of intervention work in different cases, what's necessary for a sustainable process--how does analysis and intervention fit into process as part of a process so that it isn't wasted or damaging--the mechanics of analysis and research, the ethics of intervention, the process-cycle of action and reflection, practice and theory.
ICAR is the first degree-granting program in the field—while there are a number of other very good programs out there, this is the longest-standing and best established.
Does ICAR focus on domestic or international conflict? Will I be out of place if I want to do domestic work?
The short answer is that ICAR focuses on both international and domestic conflict, and examples of both will be used in readings and class-work; there is often a perception of an international bias, but this isn’t strictly true.
The longer answer is that there is a bit of a false dichotomy between the domestic and the international; not to downplay the very real differences between an organizational conflict and an ethnic uprising, but an astute student will find that what seems to be “office politics” actually involves much larger issues of social structure, and that the dynamics of negotiating parties in an international conflict often break down to personal and small-group levels. Another way of saying this is that we can’t forget that culture and ethnicity—usually thought of in the international/large-scale camp—can in fact play vital roles within workplace conflict, and that it would be a grave mistake, when dealing with Israeli and Palestinian negotiators, to forget that they are also “just people” and subject to the same individual and group-level agreements, disagreements and foibles as any office management team. A good student and a good program will combine both levels into one course of study.
What kinds of requirements do I need to have before I get into the program? Do I need experience in the field already? I’ve never been around conflict, does this disqualify me?
In terms of requirements, there really are very few coming in. If you’re an international student you’ll have to have a passing score on the TOEFL. If you’re applying into the PhD program you have to have some background in stats, and you must meet a foreign language requirement before you can begin writing a dissertation (two languages, the second of which has to be passed at a “301” high-intermediate/beginning advanced level; if you’re a foreign student, the TOEFL exam counts as proof of a second language. No computer languages or sign language counts—the full requirements are going to be in the revised handbook).
Other than that, we have people from all kinds of different backgrounds and interests, everything from never-been-out-of-suburban-America to child soldiers, former insurgents and tribal negotiators. The field takes all kinds and all backgrounds have their place in it. Overwhelming odds are, even if you’ve lived in suburbia your whole life, you have experience with conflict—it may be family, it may be in work-related interactions, it may be social racism, any number of things. Conflict doesn’t just mean shots fired.
There isn't a core set of pre-requirements like you'd have in a psychology program or something like that. You'll get what you need here, and people are interested in seeing how you combine that with your particular background and further interests.
What does the admissions committee look for in an application, how do I make mine stronger?
The admissions committee will look to put together a “whole cohort.” There isn’t an arbitrary cut-off that one either makes or doesn’t. The whole cohort is designed to be a group that covers a wide spread of backgrounds and interests and will have an interesting conversation about the field.
The decision on your admission will be made because of the three letters of recommendation and the goals statement (and writing sample if it’s a PhD applicant). The letters should be from people who know you well and can give a detailed and sincere recommendation—a good, detailed letter from a neighbor of ten years will trump a form letter from a senator, in other words.
What they look for in an applicant—creativity, independence of thought, strength of character, a sense of purpose (not just “looking to get a degree”). Stress these things in the goals statement. “Why am I an interesting person, what am I interested in doing with this information, what do I want to help build, where does my creativity and purpose stem from, what led me to this field and why do I want to be a part of it?”
What are the odds of getting in?
The MS program is reasonably competitive, usually in the low 40-percent range, i.e. assume that all things being equal, you have roughly a 42, 43-percent chance of getting in. The PhD program is extremely competitive—about a ten percent admission rate.
Is the GRE required?
No—we don’t use it for two reasons: one, it was decided that it didn’t measure anything the admissions committee was interested in; two, we have so many international applicants that it constitutes an unfair bias if English isn’t your first language. You can take it and send in the score with your application—but nobody’s going to look at it.
Can I transfer from one degree to the other?
No—it’s a new application if you want to go from the MS to the PhD.
Is getting into the MS a way to get into the PhD, or is the non-degree program a way of getting into the MS?
No—there are ways in which either can be an advantage, but neither guarantees that you will be admitted to the next step. Being in the non-degree program could give you a recommendation letter from an ICAR professor, and will give you more detailed things to say about the field and your interest in it in a goals statement, both of which would be obvious advantages. However, and stress this, it will not privilege your application in any way—you will apply to the next step in the same pool of applicants and take your chances. There are people who go from one into the next—there are also people who make the attempt and are not admitted despite good academic records in the MS or non-degree.
What’s the job market like? What can I do with this degree? I’ve heard it’s a very narrow field…
Actually, the more we’ve looked into it, the more it’s revealed as a very, perhaps bewilderingly broad field. Again, as above, a two-edged answer—the good news is, you can go pretty much anywhere with it. The bad news is, you can go pretty much anywhere with it. Given how wide the range of places you could go is, it behooves you to start thinking very early about where you want to go, and tailoring your school and extracurricular work towards that. If you want to go into a development NGO, tailor your classes, papers, internship(s) and outside work towards that. If you want to go into government, the answer is the same but with a different set of classes, papers, internships, etc…
The field looks narrow if “the field” is defined as “anything that has the words ‘conflict resolution’ contained in the job title.” The trick is this—there are many different sectors that need what we do, but they all define it differently, using different terminology, so when looking and when pitching yourself, use the terminology they use. Jobs that deal with organizational conflict will usually be within human resources offices, for example. Development-oriented NGOs will need someone who understands conflict within “planning” positions. They may not use the words “conflict resolution” in the title, but look within the skills they need and you’ll find what you’re looking for.
We have alumni and students who are going into a very wide array of areas—government at all levels from local to federal (here and abroad), NGOs/non-profits, private sector, starting their own consulting businesses.
Success in the job market has usually pivoted on a combination of curricular and extracurricular work. The degree will take you a long way, but no degree will ever outshine a combination of degree and internship/work experience. Those students who have put in the work to do both have gone wherever they wanted to go.
