Lesson Report:
# **Lesson Report: Democratization, Ethnic Conflict, and Midterm Examination**
## **Synopsis**
This session covered two main components: a student presentation on democratization and ethnic conflict, followed by the administration of the midterm exam. The presentation explored the relationship between democratization and ethnic conflict, using case studies from Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and post-Soviet states to illustrate the role of weak institutions in fostering ethnic violence. The class then transitioned into midterm exam procedures, reviewing the structure and expectations of the test, which focused on the Catalan independence movement and its relationship to Ernest Gellner’s theories of nationalism.
—
## **Attendance**
– No specific absences were recorded in the transcription.
—
## **Topics Covered**
### **1. Student Presentation: Democratization and Ethnic Conflict**
– **Introduction & Research Overview**
– Presented by Imad, the presentation summarized research on democratization and ethnic conflict, specifically referencing works that discuss the unintended consequences of political transitions.
– Focused on how weak institutions can trigger ethnic tensions instead of fostering democratic stability.
– **Defining Key Terms**
– **Democratization:** Transition from an authoritarian regime to a democratic system, characterized by free elections, protection of civil liberties, and government accountability.
– **Ethnic Conflict:** Conflict between two or more ethnic groups over political power, resources, and rights, sometimes escalating into civil wars and violence.
– **Core Arguments from Literature**
– Democratization does not always lead to stability and can provoke ethnic tension in weak institutional settings.
– Transitional democracies often lack mechanisms to resolve ethnic disputes, leading to conflict.
– Historical grievances and political divisions tend to resurface during regime changes.
– **Case Studies**
– **Yugoslavia:** Economic collapse fueled ethnic nationalism, leading to ethnically motivated political dominance and eventual fragmentation.
– **Rwanda:** Democratic openings in the early 1990s intensified ethnic divisions, contributing to the 1994 genocide.
– **Post-Soviet States (Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia):** Weak post-USSR governance structures contributed to ethnic polarization and conflict.
– **Proposed Solutions to Mitigate Ethnic Conflict in Democratization**
– Strengthening democratic institutions to mediate ethnic tensions.
– Implementing power-sharing agreements.
– Promoting education to encourage unity.
– **Q&A Discussion on Sources**
– The instructor asked about differences between primary and secondary sources used in the presentation.
– Imad admitted that time constraints prevented in-depth comparison but noted the second source provided additional cases.
### **2. Midterm Exam Administration**
– **Exam Setup & Rules**
– Phones, electronic devices, and non-exam materials were collected to ensure a fair testing environment.
– Students were reminded of standard exam conduct: no talking, no looking at others’ work, no unauthorized materials. Infractions would result in immediate test cancellation.
– **Exam Structure & Case Study**
– **Primary Topic:** The Catalan Independence Movement.
– Students were given a two-page dossier with background information and an essay prompt.
– They were required to analyze Catalonia’s independence movement to either support or challenge Ernest Gellner’s modernist theory of nationalism.
– Essays had to provide structured arguments, incorporating Catalonia as the central case study while optionally including additional theories or case studies from class discussions.
– **Essay Requirements**
– 4-5 paragraph essay (introduction, body paragraphs, conclusion).
– Each paragraph must have at least five sentences.
– Name required on each sheet of paper.
– **Materials & Logistics**
– Students had to use their notebooks for writing paper if needed.
– A short discussion on missing materials occurred, with students sharing paper when necessary.
– **Exam Commencement**
– Once procedural questions were addressed, the exam began, with students working in silence for the remainder of class.
—
## **Actionable Items**
### **For Future Lessons**
– **Verify Understanding of Course Readings**
– Some students struggled to distinguish between different scholarly perspectives. Future sessions should reinforce comparative reading analysis.
– **Encourage Deeper Source Engagement**
– Imad noted he did not have enough time to analyze the secondary source thoroughly. Assigning smaller reading summaries before presentations might help prevent this issue.
### **For Grading & Review**
– **Evaluate Midterm Submissions**
– Assess students’ use of provided sources and their ability to construct a structured argument.
– Pay attention to whether students effectively incorporated class discussions and supplementary case studies.
### **For Administrative Follow-ups**
– **Monitor Exam Conduct**
– No reported issues, but it may be useful to review exam procedures before the final exam to prevent any misunderstandings.
– Ensure students have necessary materials (notebook paper) in future exams to avoid disruption.
—
This report provides an overview of the session, tracking both the instructional content and logistics. Let me know if any adjustments are needed for future reports.
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK. The lesson transcript primarily consists of a student presentation followed by the midterm exam. At no point does the professor assign any homework or provide any follow-up tasks beyond the exam itself.