Lesson Report:
**Title: Distinguishing Conditions from Policy Problems & Introducing Public Policy vs. Politics**
In this session of Public Policy Analysis, students deepened their ability to distinguish between general grievances, conditions, and policy problems, and practiced framing precise one‑sentence problem statements. The class also introduced the core concepts of *public policy* versus *politics* and began applying these distinctions to real-world issues via current news articles and a short reading activity.
—
## Attendance
**Number of students mentioned absent:** **5**
Absent students (as called on the roll):
– Ala
– Darina
– Aziret
– Khadijah
– Mukadas
Note: Ali was present but left during class (“was here and will hopefully be back�), so should be counted as present but possibly left early.
—
## Topics Covered (Chronological, with Detail)
### 1. Opening, Continuity, and Class Objective
– The instructor welcomed students back to Public Policy Analysis and noted that the session would continue directly from Tuesday’s lesson.
– **Stated objectives for the day:**
– Strengthen the distinction between:
– Grievance
– Condition
– Policy problem
– By the end of class, students should:
– Be able to distinguish a **condition** from a **policy problem**.
– Be able to write a **one-sentence problem statement** for a given policy problem (today’s work focused on conceptual groundwork for this).
—
### 2. Review: Grievances as the Starting Point
– The instructor reintroduced the concept of a **grievance** in public policy:
– **Grievance = a complaint** about some aspect of living conditions.
– Students were reminded that everyone has grievances about where they live, and that these grievances are the raw material out of which we later distinguish conditions vs. policy problems.
– **Concrete examples of grievances in Bishkek** (used as review from Tuesday):
1. **Traffic** – e.g., “It takes me two hours to get home from the AUCA� (or “from the CA�).
2. **Unreliable Wi‑Fi** – “My Wi‑Fi stops working; this is very annoying and harmful because my job needs the internet.�
3. **Heat in summer** – “Bishkek is too hot in the summertime; it feels like my skin is boiling walking down Prospekt Mira/Presbyteria.�
These were used as a shared reference set to classify which are conditions and which are policy problems.
—
### 3. Clarifying “Condition� vs. “Policy Problem�
The instructor deliberately moved away from purely technical wording and used simple language students could work with.
#### 3.1 What is a *Condition*?
– Students were prompted: “What does it mean if a grievance is a *condition* in this context?â€�
– Working definition (class language):
– A **condition** is:
– Something we **endure** as a society.
– Something we **generally do *not* consider anyone’s responsibility to fix.**
– Often described informally as “we **can’t fix it**â€� (at least not feasibly).
– Example from the three grievances:
– The instructor argued that **“Bishkek is too hot in summerâ€�** is a **condition**.
– Justification:
– Although “naturalâ€� doesn’t alone make something a condition (there are natural phenomena that are policy problems), in this case:
– Any feasible “solutionâ€� (e.g., giant mirrors, city-wide aerial AC systems) would be:
– Insanely expensive,
– Technically difficult to install,
– Extremely hard to maintain.
– As a classroom “society,â€� they agreed:
– It is **not reasonable** to expect any specific group (e.g., government) to fix high summer temperatures in Bishkek.
– Therefore, **being hot in summer** is treated as a **condition** we endure.
#### 3.2 What is a *Policy Problem*?
– If a condition is something to endure, **a policy problem is something to fix**.
– Working definition:
– A **policy problem** is:
– A grievance that **we as a society believe someone has the responsibility to solve**.
– Typically that “someoneâ€� is **the government**, but could be other institutions.
– From the initial set of grievances, the instructor classified:
– **Traffic taking two hours to get home** → **Policy problem**
– **Unreliable Wi‑Fi** → **Policy problem**
– Criteria emerging from the discussion:
1. **Serious, real harm**
– The issue must affect people’s lives in significant ways:
– Lost time, missed opportunities, stress, health impacts, economic loss, etc.
2. **Collective responsibility / solvability**
– Society believes that a collective actor (usually government) **can and should** address it.
– Often justified by the fact that:
– **Other places have solved similar issues** (“If others can, we canâ€�).
##### 3.2.1 Example: Traffic as Policy Problem
– Grievance: “It takes me two hours to get home from work/school.â€�
– Why a policy problem?
1. **Serious harm:**
– People lose hours daily sitting in traffic.
– Missed opportunities (being late to work, missing classes or appointments).
– Personal discomfort (sitting hungry, exhausted in traffic).
2. **Government responsibility & solvability:**
– Many cities worldwide had severe traffic and **managed to improve it**.
– Since other governments have:
– Widened roads,
– Built public transportation (metros, trams, BRT),
– Redesigned traffic flows,
Bishkek’s government is **plausibly responsible** for addressing similar problems.
– Example public policies that could address traffic:
– Widening roads.
– Building tramways / metros / other public transport lanes.
– Changing road/traffic management.
##### 3.2.2 Example: Unreliable Wi‑Fi as Policy Problem
– Grievance: “My Wi‑Fi keeps stopping.â€�
– Why a policy problem?
1. **Serious harm:**
– Many jobs and classes depend on internet connectivity (Zoom, email, remote work, etc.).
– Interferes with communication and access to services.
2. **Government responsibility & solvability:**
– In many countries, Wi‑Fi/internet is reliable **99% of the time**.
– Shows that this is technically solvable.
– Governments can:
– Regulate ISPs,
– Subsidize infrastructure,
– Set service standards.
– Sample policy actions (briefly mentioned):
– Subsidizing internet networks.
– Regulating providers or improving infrastructure.
**Key takeaway:** The same grievance could, in principle, be argued either way; what matters is **how convincingly students can argue** using these criteria.
—
### 4. Introducing Public Policy vs. Politics
This was framed as a central conceptual moment in the course.
#### 4.1 Definition of Public Policy
– Students were told explicitly, “This would be good to write down.â€�
– Core definition (underlined in class):
– **Public policy** is the **authoritative set of actions that governments or institutions take to solve policy problems.**
– In simpler terms:
– Public policy = **what government does** (formally and officially) **to try to fix policy problems.**
– Examples:
– Fixing and widening roads in Bishkek to reduce traffic.
– Subsidizing internet infrastructure to improve Wi‑Fi reliability.
– Laws or programs against domestic violence (later example).
#### 4.2 What is Politics?
– **Politics** was defined in relation to public policy:
– **Politics** is the **process by which we decide what is (and is not) a policy problem.**
– Politics includes:
– Public debates,
– Social movements,
– Media coverage,
– Citizen pressure on leaders,
– Shifts in social norms and values.
#### 4.3 Dynamic Relationship: Conditions Can Become Policy Problems
– The instructor cautioned against thinking “condition = permanently unfixable.â€�
– Key point:
– What we believe can be fixed *changes over time*.
– As values, knowledge, and technology change, **some conditions become policy problems.**
– **Politics is the process that moves issues from “conditionsâ€� into “policy problems.â€�**
—
### 5. Domestic Violence as a Case Study of Politics and Reclassification
– New, more serious grievance introduced: **domestic violence**.
– Students were asked:
– Is domestic violence a **condition** or a **policy problem**?
– Answer (in the contemporary context): **Policy problem.**
– Why it is a policy problem **today**:
1. **Serious harm:**
– Clear, extreme physical and psychological harm.
– Hospitalization, injuries, fatalities.
2. **Collective responsibility & solvability:**
– Other countries have **reduced domestic violence** via laws, shelters, and campaigns.
– Demonstrates that it is not just a private matter; it is **collectively addressable**.
#### 5.1 Historical Contrast (75 Years Ago)
– The instructor asked students to imagine asking people 75 years ago if domestic violence was a policy problem or a condition.
– Likely answer then:
– Many would have treated it as a **condition or private matter**:
– “What a husband does in his home is up to him.â€�
– Not seen as state business.
– What changed over time?
– **People’s mentality and actions**:
– Rising awareness,
– Feminist movements,
– Human rights norms,
– Media and later social media exposure of abuse.
– This was linked back to **politics**:
– **Politics** changed social attitudes and norms.
– That political process **redefined domestic violence as a policy problem** instead of a private condition.
#### 5.2 Public Policies to Address Domestic Violence
– Example policies mentioned:
– **Laws** punishing domestic violence more severely.
– **Public education campaigns**:
– School visits,
– Handouts,
– Messaging that domestic violence is unacceptable.
– This reinforced:
– **Public policy** = concrete actions (laws, programs).
– **Politics** = debates and mobilization that lead leaders to treat domestic violence as a policy problem.
—
### 6. Clarifying the Scope of “Policy� (Beyond Just Laws)
– A student asked whether “policyâ€� is simply a “public ruleâ€� or “law.â€�
– Instructor’s clarification:
– **Policy is broader than “law.â€�**
– It includes:
– Formal laws,
– Regulations,
– Programs,
– Official campaigns or initiatives.
– Common features:
– **Authoritative** (officially adopted by government or institution).
– Aim to **solve or address a policy problem**.
– Example:
– For domestic violence:
– **Law** = Criminal penalties for abusers.
– **Non-law policy** = Government-funded awareness campaigns in schools.
– Working definition refined:
– Policy = **any authoritative government action intended to address a policy problem**, not only statutes.
—
### 7. News Article Activity: Identifying Real‑World Policy Problems
After concept review, the class moved to an applied exercise.
#### 7.1 Instructions & Logistics
– Students were asked to:
– **Find a news article** (preferably not older than **six months**) that:
– Describes a **real-world policy problem** in Kyrgyzstan or in their home country.
– Be prepared to:
1. State the **headline** (or give an English translation if needed).
2. Explain **why the issue in the article is a policy problem rather than a condition**, using:
– Harm criterion,
– Belief in government/institutional responsibility (often supported by examples of other countries that have addressed similar problems).
– While students searched, the instructor took **attendance** by name (see above).
#### 7.2 Student Examples and Instructor Feedback
The instructor went around the room (both in full and “lightning round� mode toward the end), using each student’s example to reinforce the analytical framework.
For each example below, the pattern of reasoning was emphasized:
1. **Significant harm** (who is hurt, and how?)
2. **Belief in collective (often governmental) responsibility**, frequently supported by:
– “Other countries have solved this or made progress.â€�
**Examples discussed:**
1. **Traffic & Tramways (Bishkek) – Beta K**
– Problem:
– Severe traffic congestion; too many cars on the road.
– Proposed policy: building tramways with dedicated lanes for public transport.
– Why a policy problem:
1. Harms people by:
– Long commutes,
– Lost time, lost opportunities.
2. Many cities (e.g., Paris) have better traffic conditions due to:
– **Metros** and other transit solutions.
3. Implies Bishkek’s government can and should act similarly.
2. **Information Sovereignty / Freedom of Speech & Press – Samira**
– Problem:
– Restrictions on **freedom of the press and freedom of speech** in Central Asian countries (encouraged to pick one country specifically).
– Why a policy problem:
1. Harms individuals and society through suppressed expression and information.
2. Other countries have addressed this by:
– Constitutional protections,
– Legal safeguards for journalists,
– Reduced punishment for speech and media criticism.
– Instructor encouraged framing solutions in **positive actions** (what government *does*), not just “not punishing.â€�
3. **Shrinking Civic Space & Human Rights Institutions – Gharib Sultan**
– Problem:
– “Shrinking civic spaceâ€�: fewer safe spaces to express political opinions, increasing punishment for dissent.
– Why a policy problem:
1. Direct, measurable harm (imprisonment, fines, intimidation).
2. Other countries have expanded civic space through legal reforms and protections.
– Instructor helped clarify the term “civic spaceâ€� and emphasized the harm/responsibility criteria.
4. **Gender-Based & Domestic Violence in Kyrgyzstan – Adilya**
– Problem:
– Women facing domestic and sexual violence.
– Recent law signed by the President to enhance protection from family, sexual, and gender-based violence.
– Why a policy problem:
1. Serious harm to women’s safety and physical integrity.
2. Fails the state’s basic aim to ensure citizen safety.
3. Other countries (e.g., Finland, Scandinavia) have:
– Given more voice to women in policymaking,
– Implemented successful measures to reduce such violence.
– Instructor highlighted:
– Distinguishing between feelings of insecurity and **measurable harms** (injuries, hospitalizations).
– Importance of measurable indicators for policy analysis.
5. **Unemployment in Kyrgyzstan – Al‑Tanai**
– Problem:
– High unemployment and poverty risk.
– Article mentioned investment figures and job creation numbers.
– Why it can be argued as a policy problem:
1. Unemployment harms people’s livelihoods, income security, and well-being.
2. Many argue government has a responsibility to address it, since:
– Other countries have significantly reduced unemployment via policy.
– Instructor’s nuance:
– This is an example where **reasonable people can argue both ways** (policy problem vs. condition).
– Distinction depends heavily on argumentation and contextual evidence:
– Some may say Kyrgyzstan is too constrained (making it closer to a condition).
– Others will insist the government shares responsibility since comparable countries have improved.
– Emphasized that **politics** mediates these debates.
6. **Inequality in Higher Education Access & Quality – Jbek**
– Problem:
– Educational inequality:
– Rural students have worse access and quality than urban students.
– Financial and structural barriers in higher education.
– Why a policy problem:
1. Harms individuals’ life chances and national development.
2. Education often seen as a human right.
3. Other countries (e.g., Vietnam, South Korea) implemented reforms that:
– Expanded access,
– Improved quality,
– Boosted national development.
– Instructor underlined:
– Education inequality as a classic policy problem due to both rights-based and developmental harm.
7. **Targeting Journalists / Freedom of the Press – Sindat**
– Problem:
– Journalists being targeted, reduced freedom of press.
– Why a policy problem:
1. Harms those trying to inform the public; chills free expression.
2. Many countries have developed policies to protect journalists and press freedom.
– Reinforced same harm + collective responsibility structure.
8. **Opioid/Fentanyl Crisis in San Francisco – Abu Bakr**
– Problem:
– High levels of fentanyl use and overdoses; 52 accidental overdose deaths in November.
– Public health and safety impacts (disposable needles in public spaces, HIV/AIDS risks, visible drug use).
– Why a policy problem:
1. Extreme harm (death, disease, community degradation).
2. Governments elsewhere have experimented with:
– Decriminalization (e.g., Portugal),
– Law enforcement on suppliers,
– Rehabilitation and treatment policies.
– Instructor note:
– Showcases **complex policy design and comparative policy analysis**:
– Decriminalization vs. enforcement,
– Demographic and contextual differences (Portugal vs. US cities).
9. **Electricity Shortages – Erhan**
– Problem:
– Electricity scarcity/shortages in the country.
– Why a policy problem:
1. Harms daily life and economic activity (loss of power interrupts communications, appliances, business).
2. Other countries and the domestic government itself are already trying to solve it through energy policies.
– Instructor stressed:
– Need to explicitly state harm and then government responsibility, not just “it’s bad.â€�
10. **Electricity Shortages (continued) – Aydana**
– Similar reasoning to Erhan; emphasis on:
– Serious harms of blackouts,
– Feasibility of government-led solutions (energy infrastructure, regulation).
11. **Air Pollution in Bishkek – Mahabat**
– Problem:
– Air pollution levels in Bishkek and associated health consequences.
– Why a policy problem:
1. Measurable health harms (respiratory issues, hospitalizations, long-term diseases).
2. Other cities have reduced pollution via:
– Emissions regulation,
– Industrial controls,
– Transport policies.
– This will likely tie into later measurement exercises (linking pollution levels to health data).
12. **Inflation – Akhlai**
– Problem:
– Rising inflation and economic hardship; statistics cited from official sources.
– Why a policy problem:
1. Reduced purchasing power; difficulties affording essentials.
2. Other countries have successfully used monetary and fiscal policy to manage inflation.
– Instructor again used this example to emphasize:
– Harm + government responsibility + comparative evidence.
Throughout these, the instructor repeatedly underscored that:
– **Every policy problem begins as a grievance.**
– Categorization as condition vs. policy problem is **argument- and politics-dependent**, not purely technical.
—
### 8. Deeper Question: What if No Country Has Solved It Yet?
– A student asked:
– What if a problem causes huge harm but **no one has yet solved it**?
– Does that mean it **cannot** be a policy problem?
– Instructor’s response:
– For practice, the “other countries have solved itâ€� test is a helpful heuristic.
– However:
– A problem **can still be a policy problem even if nobody has solved it yet**, as long as:
– Society believes the government **has a responsibility to try**.
– Someone must be the **first** to find effective solutions.
– The broader answer for policy analysts:
– “We try, fail, iterate, and try again.â€�
– The **core requirement is societal belief in collective responsibility**, not proven global solutions.
—
### 9. Partner Activity: Reading & Precise Problem Formulation
In the final segment, students began a partner exercise focused on:
1. Extracting the **grievance** from a short reading.
2. Distinguishing whether it describes a **condition** or a **policy problem**.
3. Practicing **precise problem descriptions**, not vague labels.
#### 9.1 Logistics
– Link given (corrected during class):
– `tinyurl.com/PubPolW1L2` (earlier a shorter URL was given incorrectly).
– Students were asked to form pairs (or one group of three if needed).
– Task for each short reading:
1. Identify the **grievance**:
– What exactly happened?
– Who is affected?
2. Define the **problem** as precisely as possible.
– Avoid vague phrasing like “bad weatherâ€� or “traffic is bad.â€�
3. Decide if it is a **condition** or a **policy problem** and justify.
#### 9.2 Instructor Example: Traffic Rephrasing
– The instructor modelled how to improve from:
– **Weak**: “Traffic is bad.â€�
– To **stronger problem statements**:
– “There are too many cars on the road for the existing street capacity.â€�
– “Bishkek’s streets cannot accommodate the current number of cars.â€�
– Rationale:
– Vague adjectives (“badâ€�) are **not measurable**.
– More precise language enables eventual **quantitative measurement**:
– E.g., number of cars vs. road capacity,
– Average commute time, etc.
This was explicitly tied to future steps in the course:
– Precise definitions → measurable indicators → policy analysis.
#### 9.3 Reading #1: Microburst in California Wilderness – Classified as Condition
– The class briefly worked through **Reading #1** together:
– Scenario:
– A hiker in **Eagle Peak Wilderness, near Oak Ridge, California**, was seriously injured or killed by a **sudden microburst** (unforecasted, violent wind event).
– Students identified:
– **Specific grievance**:
– A hiker was struck by a sudden, unpredictable microburst while hiking.
– Classification:
– **Condition**, not a policy problem.
– Reasons:
1. Extremely **rare** event.
2. **Unpredictable** with current technology; cannot be forecast reliably.
3. It is unrealistic to hold the government **collectively responsible** for preventing such one‑off, unpredictable microbursts.
– This example was used to:
– Contrast with ongoing, systemic harms that governments can reasonably be expected to mitigate.
– Reinforce that **not every tragic event is a policy problem**; some remain conditions we endure.
#### 9.4 Plan to Continue
– Due to time, the class only fully processed the first reading together.
– The instructor indicated that:
– They would **continue with readings 2 and 3 on Tuesday**.
– A related **reading would be posted on eCourse** as homework.
—
### 10. Closing Logistics
– The instructor informed students:
– A **reading will be posted on eCourse**; students should:
– Join eCourse if they haven’t yet.
– **Read the assigned text before the next class**.
– The **syllabus is still being finalized**:
– Will be completed by **tomorrow night**.
– Then uploaded to eCourse.
– The course still needs a:
– **Telegram group**, which the instructor plans to create soon.
– Additional note:
– Some course infrastructure (Telegram, full eCourse setup) is still in progress.
—
## Actionable Items for the Instructor
### High Urgency (Before Next Class)
– **Post the promised reading on eCourse**
– Ensure it directly supports:
– Condition vs. policy problem,
– Public policy vs. politics,
– Possibly problem statement formulation.
– Explicitly mark it as **required before next session**.
– **Finalize and upload the syllabus to eCourse**
– Include:
– Course learning outcomes,
– Weekly topics (so the current material slots clearly into the overall plan),
– Assessment criteria (especially for problem statements and policy analyses),
– Reading schedule and participation expectations.
– Announce to students once it is uploaded.
– **Ensure all students can access the eCourse**
– Confirm the course shell is visible and enrollments are set up.
– Provide clear instructions next class for anyone not yet enrolled.
### Medium Urgency (Within the Next Week)
– **Create and share a Telegram (or other) class communication group**
– As mentioned in class, set up the group and share the link:
– For sharing links like `tinyurl.com/PubPolW1L2`,
– For logistical reminders (readings, deadlines).
– Consider pinning:
– Link to eCourse,
– Link(s) to readings and slides,
– Basic class expectations.
– **Plan continuation of the partner reading activity**
– Next session:
– Work through Readings 2 and 3 with the same steps:
– Identify grievance,
– Formulate precise problem description,
– Classify as condition vs. policy problem with justification.
– Consider having each pair present one example to reinforce skills.
– **Revisit and formalize “policy problemâ€� criteria**
– Summarize on a slide/handout:
– Grievance → Condition vs. Policy Problem decision tree:
– Serious harm?
– Societal belief in government/institutional responsibility?
– Evidence from other countries or plausible solvability?
– Place “politicsâ€� explicitly in that flow.
### Lower Urgency / Pedagogical Follow‑Ups
– **Follow up on students who did not present an article (if any)**
– For anyone who did not have time to share or was absent:
– Consider a short written assignment:
– Find an article and classify the issue as condition vs. policy problem using the two main criteria.
– This can be used as a quick formative assessment.
– **Clarify treatment of borderline cases (unemployment, inflation, etc.)**
– In a future class, explicitly discuss:
– How difficult or contested issues are classified,
– Role of **political ideology** and **economic constraints** in those debates.
– This will help students understand that:
– Policy analysis is not purely mechanical; it is deeply intertwined with politics.
– **Document attendance patterns**
– Note today’s absences (5 students) and Ali leaving early.
– Track if certain students are repeatedly absent to adjust support or communication.
These notes should position you to reconstruct today’s lesson plan and smoothly build on it in the next session, especially as you move toward teaching students to write rigorous, one‑sentence policy problem statements grounded in these distinctions.
Homework Instructions:
ASSIGNMENT #1: Reading on Conditions, Policy Problems, and Public Policy
You will complete a short reading that deepens your understanding of the key distinctions from today’s lesson—especially the difference between conditions and policy problems, and how public policy and politics relate to those concepts—so that you can more confidently identify and describe policy problems in preparation for next class.
Instructions:
1. Ensure you have access to the course’s online space
1. If you are already enrolled in the online space for this course, you can skip to Step 3.
2. If you are not yet enrolled, follow your usual university procedure to join the online space for “Public Policy Analysis� (the same place where you access course materials and announcements).
3. Confirm that you can see the materials for this week, including the newly posted reading for the upcoming class.
2. Locate the assigned reading
1. On the course site, navigate to the section for this week’s lessons (the continuation of our discussion of conditions vs. policy problems).
2. Find the reading that your instructor mentioned would be posted “for next class.�
3. Open the file or link and verify you can read it comfortably on your device (or download/print it if you prefer working offline).
3. Read with the core concepts from class in mind
As you read, actively connect the text to the examples and definitions from the lesson, such as:
– Grievances (e.g., “it takes me two hours to get home,â€� “my Wi‑Fi stops working,â€� “Bishkek is too hot in the summerâ€�).
– Conditions: issues we collectively agree no one has a realistic or reasonable responsibility to fix (e.g., the extreme heat example, or the rare microburst weather event).
– Policy problems: issues that (1) cause serious, measurable harm and (2) we believe some actor—usually government—has a collective responsibility to try to fix, often because similar problems have been addressed elsewhere (e.g., traffic congestion, unreliable internet, domestic violence, air pollution, unemployment, inflation).
– Public policy: “the authoritative set of actions that governments or institutions take to solve policy problems.â€�
– Politics: the process by which societies argue about and decide which grievances should be treated as policy problems rather than just conditions.
4. Annotate or take brief notes as you read
1. In the margins or in a separate notebook/document, note down:
– Any explicit or implicit grievances mentioned in the text.
– Which of those grievances the author(s) clearly present as policy problems (or as conditions).
– Any examples of government or institutional actions that fit the definition of public policy (authoritative actions aimed at solving a policy problem).
2. When the text describes a problem, try to rewrite it precisely, in the style we practiced in class:
– Move from vague phrasing like “traffic is badâ€� to more specific formulations such as “the streets in [city] cannot support the current number of cars, resulting in frequent multi‑hour commute times.â€�
– Focus on wording that could, in principle, be measured (e.g., commute times, number of hospitalizations, number of reported incidents, etc.).
5. Practice classifying at least two issues from the reading
For at least two of the grievances or issues mentioned in the reading:
1. Decide whether you think each one is best understood as a condition or as a policy problem.
2. For each, briefly justify your classification using the two criteria from class:
– Does it cause serious, tangible harm to people’s lives? How?
– Is there a reasonable argument that some public actor (usually government) has a collective responsibility to address it—perhaps because similar problems have been addressed elsewhere, or because people clearly expect action?
3. If you are unsure about one example, note that uncertainty; be ready to discuss why it might be debatable (as with our in-class discussion of unemployment).
6. Connect the reading to our in-class examples and activities
1. Think back to the in-class article exercise where you and classmates identified policy problems such as:
– Traffic congestion and transport infrastructure.
– Information sovereignty / freedom of speech and the press.
– Domestic and gender-based violence.
– Shrinking civic space and human rights.
– Education inequality.
– Electricity shortages.
– Air pollution.
– Inflation.
– The opioid/fentanyl crisis.
2. As you finish the reading, ask yourself:
– Which examples from class resemble the issues in the reading?
– How would you argue—using today’s vocabulary—that the reading’s main issue is a policy problem or a condition?
– What kinds of public policy responses (laws, programs, campaigns, infrastructure projects, subsidies, etc.) might follow from treating the issue as a policy problem?
7. Prepare to discuss the reading in the next class
1. Before the next session, make sure you can:
– State in one or two sentences what you think the main policy problem or main condition in the reading is.
– Explain, in a sentence, why you classify it as a policy problem or as a condition (using harm + collective responsibility language).
2. Bring your notes (digital or paper) to class so you can participate in discussion and use them as a starting point for writing more precise one-sentence problem statements, which is the skill we will continue practicing.