At the turn of the last century, military analysts began to notice U.S. strategy selection seemed driven by casualty risk, with optimal strategies being those that yielded the fewest potential killed, wounded, and missing. In other words, the military yield of a strategy was subordinated to casualty considerations and these considerations appeared exaggerated, if not outlandish at the time. Have Iraq and Afghanistan moved us away from subordinating strategy to casualty worries or is this argument worth revisiting? This collection includes the views of Jeffrey Record, Karl P. Mueller, Charles K. Hyde, and Richard A. Lacquement, Jr. These pieces originally appeared in military publications of the U.S. governmentand mark the high tide of our national casualty phobia debate.

There is a weapon that looms large in the history of arms, one that has largely disappeared from memory: the warhammer. For over 300 years, across Asia, Europe, and even North Africa, the warhammer was the close-combat weapon of choice. The high-tech plate armor of the 14th and 15th Centuries stood absolutely no chance against it. The mass-produced plate armor of the 16th and 17th Centuries fared even worse against what is one of history's most successful weapon designs. Small, almost dainty in appearance, the warhammer lives on today in fantasy, in movies, and games in an imaginary giant, heavy, sledge hammer shape, a form that distorts its true history and its lethal meaning as a small, handy, post-medieval "wonder weapon." In this work, James Roth explores warhammer design, function, and variations of the weapon across cultures. Through discussion of 184 figures, he plots the outlines of a warhammer history and presents the argument that the persistence of this weapon on battlefields was tied to the historical duration of plate armor. Included is a chapter on fencing with warhammers and other chapters on the German Dolchstreitkolben and Polish and Ukrainian horseman's hammers. This is the most complete survey of the warhammer in print today. About the author: James Roth (a pseudonym) fenced competitively at the US regional levels. Ex-infantry, he is a trained bayonet fencer and is a former technical writer specializing in modern weapons systems.

* What should students be able to do and how should they be able to think as a result of study in a discipline?* What does learning in the disciplines look like at different developmental levels?* How does one go about designing such learning and assessment in the disciplines?* What institutional structures and processes can assist faculty to engage and teach their disciplines as frameworks for student learning?Creating ways to make a discipline come alive for those who are not experts even for students who may not take more than one or two courses in the disciplines they study requires rigorous thought about what really matters in a field and how to engage students in the practice of it.Faculty from Alverno College representing a range of liberal arts disciplines chemistry, economics, history, literature, mathematics and philosophy here reflect on what it has meant for them to approach their disciplines as frameworks for student learning. They present the intellectual biographies of their explorations, the insights they have gained and examples of the practices they have adopted.The authors all demonstrate how the ways of thinking they have identified as significant for their students in their respective disciplines have affected the way they design learning experiences and assessments. They show how they have shaped their teaching around the ways of thinking they want their students to develop within and across their disciplines; and what that means in terms of designing assessments that require students to demonstrate their thinking and understanding through application and use. This book will appeal to faculty interested in going beyond mere techniques to a more substantive analysis of how their view of their respective disciplines might change when seen through the lens of student learning. It will also serve the needs of graduate students; trainers of Tas; and anyone engaged in faculty development or interested in the scholarship of teaching."