Lesson Report:
Title
Applying the Regime Typology: Evidence-Based Country Scoring and Analytical Writing
In this session, students moved from abstract theory to application by using a 10-dimension regime checklist to evaluate real countries. Working in groups, they researched, scored, and justified each dimension with credible, recent evidence, and wrote analytical paragraphs that link claims to evidence through clear reasoning.
Attendance
– Students mentioned absent: 0
Topics Covered (chronological)
1) Announcements and Scheduling
– US ambassador talk: postponed; new date TBD.
– Recommended open lecture: next Thursday at 3:30 PM (immediately after class), in CH (room unspecified), with a diplomat named Akhmatov discussing the political elements of Chinggis Akhmatov’s writings.
– Instructor encouraged attendance at the Thursday lecture.
2) Quick Review: The Regime Checklist and Scoring Framework
– Objective: Determine regime type via a 10-point checklist, scoring each dimension from 1–10.
– Dimensions (cleaned list):
1. Media
2. The state
3. Political parties
4. Elections
5. Distribution of power
6. Constitution
7. Civil liberties
8. Interest groups
9. Economy
10. Military
– Scoring logic: 1 = most free/open; 10 = most controlled/restricted (with nuance allowed).
– Prior exercise reference: Students previously practiced scoring Egypt’s civil liberties and justifying the score.
3) Evidence Standards for Today’s Country Analysis
– Specificity over authority claims:
– Good: Concrete, verifiable examples (e.g., date, event, policy, court case, arrests/prosecutions).
– Not acceptable: “Because Human Rights Watch/Amnesty/Wikipedia/ChatGPT says so.â€�
– Credible sources:
– Use: Trusted news organizations, government publications, academic sources.
– Avoid/Do not cite: Social media posts, blogs, TikTok/Instagram content.
– Prohibited: Wikipedia; ChatGPT/Gemini/any LLM as a source (students must cite the underlying credible source).
– Recency requirement:
– Deliverable includes 10 paragraphs (one per dimension), each with at least one source.
– At least five of the total sources used must be published within the last six months.
4) Paragraph Structure: Argument–Evidence–Analysis (AEA)
– Argument (topic sentence):
– State the claim and the score succinctly (e.g., “Egypt’s civil liberties merit a 7/10â€�).
– Evidence:
– Summarize the specific event(s)/report(s)/policy(ies) from a credible source that bear directly on the score.
– Example discussed: Recent protest crackdowns leading to detentions/jailings as evidence of constrained civil liberties.
– Analysis (critical step often omitted by students):
– Explicitly connect how/why the cited evidence supports the assigned score.
– Explain the mechanisms (e.g., policing practices, legal constraints, censorship) that justify the numeric rating.
– Emphasis: A paragraph is incomplete without explaining the link between the evidence and the score.
5) Group Project Setup and Workflow
– Group formation:
– Count-off into three groups; intended groups of five, with one group ending up as a group of four.
– Seating: 1s by the window; 2s in the opposite corner; 3s in a third area.
– One student attempted to move but was asked to remain; groups finalized.
– Roles and division of labor:
– Nominate a group leader to compile work.
– Each student responsible for two dimensions (in the group of four, workload adjusted informally to still cover all 10).
– Process and timeline:
– Step 1: Decide who covers which dimensions.
– Step 2: Begin research; locate credible, specific, recent sources.
– Step 3: Assign scores 1–10 per dimension; write one AEA paragraph per dimension.
– Step 4 (last ~15 minutes): Group leader compiles all scores and paragraphs into a single document (e.g., Google Drive) including a simple score chart for all 10 dimensions; send to instructor by end of class.
– Check-in: Instructor planned a progress check around 3:00 PM.
– Clarifications during Q&A:
– Students can critique source credibility but must substantiate critiques and still present credible, alternative evidence.
– The instructor emphasized using published, attributable sources with identifiable authorship/date/publisher.
– One group’s country assignment appeared to be Germany (“Germany Todayâ€� noted repeatedly); other country assignments not clearly audible in the transcript.
Actionable Items
Immediate (end of class / next 24 hours)
– Verify receipt of each group’s submission:
– One compiled document per group with: (1) a 10-dimension score chart; (2) 10 AEA paragraphs; (3) source list with dates.
– Check compliance:
– At least five sources ≤6 months old across the set.
– No prohibited sources (Wikipedia, LLMs; social media/blogs).
– Evidence is specific and tied to the assigned dimension.
– Analysis component present in every paragraph.
Next class preparation
– Plan debrief:
– Cross-group comparison of scores and rationales; identify convergence/divergence and discuss why.
– Calibrate interpretations for ambiguous dimensions (e.g., “distribution of power,â€� “the stateâ€�) using concrete indicators.
– Showcase strong AEA examples; address common pitfalls (e.g., missing analysis, generic evidence).
– Prepare a shared template/slide:
– Side-by-side score tables by country; prompt targeted discussion questions per dimension.
Administrative / Scheduling
– Follow up on US ambassador talk:
– Obtain and share the rescheduled date/time/location once confirmed.
– Promote external lecture:
– Share official details (time 3:30 PM next Thursday; building CH; confirm room). Encourage attendance and note potential extra credit if applicable.
– Name verification:
– Confirm spelling and identity of the diplomat “Akhmatovâ€� and the author referenced as “Chinggis Akhmatovâ€� to avoid confusion in announcements.
Support and resources
– Provide/confirm:
– A short guide or checklist for evaluating source credibility and recency.
– A one-page AEA paragraph checklist for students to self-audit before submission.
– Optional exemplar paragraph (with citations) to model expectations.
Homework Instructions:
NO HOMEWORK
All tasks were assigned to be completed and submitted during class: you said “by the end of class today your group should have scores for each of these ten characteristics” and “in the last 15 minutes… the leader… will collect… and send it to me at the end,” as well as “by the time you’re leaving I should have your paragraphs,” indicating no out-of-class homework.