Lesson Report:
## Title: From Ground Truth to Causation: Using Realism as a Diagnostic Checklist (Ukraine 2022 Case)
**Synopsis (2–3 sentences):**
This session marked the course’s pivot from *fact-finding/validation (“ground truth� reporting)* to *causal explanation*, with a focus on how political science frames and tests causation through hypotheses. Using the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine as the shared dependent variable, the class began operationalizing **realism** into a practical “diagnostic checklist� (security dilemma, balance of power shifts, windows of opportunity, geographic vulnerability) and started applying it to key events leading up to 2022.
—
## Attendance
**Absent students mentioned:** 0
**Notable note:** One student indicated they may miss classes next week due to visa/administrative logistics connected to a program (MANAS and travel).
—
## Topics Covered (Chronological, Detailed)
### 1) Course/Admin Opening: Paper Submission, Late Credit, and Source Requirements
– Instructor acknowledged low energy/illness but emphasized an “important turnâ€� in course content.
– **Situational report/paper status**
– Many papers submitted; **several still missing**.
– **Late submission window:** allowed **until Sunday night** for late credit.
– **After Sunday night:** submissions will no longer be accepted.
– **Sources/bibliography issue noticed while reviewing papers**
– Some papers listed article titles or institutions but **did not provide links or a usable bibliography**.
– Students who omitted sources were instructed to **email links/bibliography by Friday night** so grading can proceed.
– Acceptable formats:
– A page of links is acceptable.
– APA-style bibliography also acceptable.
– Key requirement: instructor must be able to locate and verify original sources.
—
### 2) Major Course Pivot: From “What Is Happening?� to “Why Is It Happening?�
– Instructor framed the first part of the semester as establishing **ground truth**:
– compiling facts from multiple sources and perspectives
– documenting methodology
– presenting findings analytically rather than as unquestionable conclusions
– New focus (Part 2 of semester): **causation**
– Defined causation as answering: **“Why did something happen?â€�**
– Pivot described explicitly: from **describing** events to **explaining** them.
—
### 3) Case + Theory for the Causation Unit
– **Primary case study introduced:** the **2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine**
– Students who already wrote on Ukraine would now do more in-depth work in class.
– **Primary theory introduced:** **Realism**
– Positioning realism as not merely historical/abstract theory, but a **diagnostic tool/checklist** for explanation.
—
### 4) Warm-Up Reflection: Recall the Core Precepts of Realism (No Googling)
– Students were asked to write **2–3 main precepts of realism** from memory (no Google/ChatGPT).
– Instructor took attendance informally by naming students present (no absences stated).
**Class contributions on realism (compiled from discussion):**
– **Anarchy in the international system**
– No higher authority above states; states cannot rely on guaranteed protection.
– States must be **self-sufficient** and prioritize security.
– **Zero-sum/dualistic competition framing**
– Gains by one actor imply losses to another; scarcity and finite resources.
– **Permanent competition**
– Rivalry and strategic competition are expected/normal.
– **State survival as the primary goal**
– States act to secure their survival (with variation across realist sub-schools on how—e.g., defensive vs. offensive approaches).
– Brief mention that different realist schools differ (e.g., expansionism/bandwagoning vs. more defensive logics).
—
### 5) Foundations of Causation in Political Science: Science, Hypotheses, and Prediction
– Instructor framed political science as aiming to behave like a **science**:
– grounding claims in **evidence**
– using **methodology** (qualitative and quantitative)
– striving for **neutrality** and bias reduction
– emphasizing the need to **test** claims
– Key unifying purpose of science (chemistry analogy used):
– science seeks **repeatable patterns** enabling **prediction**.
– Example analogies:
– Chemistry: A + B → C repeatedly.
– Engineering/airplanes: predictable physical principles enable flight.
– Political science goal in parallel:
– identify patterns of behavior under similar circumstances
– use patterns to **predict** future behavior
– Instructor acknowledged critique:
– political science may resemble “alchemyâ€� more than a hard science, but class will emphasize the scientific approach for causation.
—
### 6) Building a Causal Hypothesis: Variables (DV/IV) and the Ukraine DV
– Hypothesis structure introduced:
– Requires **Dependent Variable (DV)** and **Independent Variable(s) (IVs)**
– Controls mentioned as important but deferred (“starredâ€� for later).
– Definitions clarified:
– **DV = outcome/event to be explained**
– **IVs = potential causes influencing the DV**
– **Course DV selected for shared work:**
– DV: **Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022** (treated as an agreed outcome).
– Students reminded:
– Without theoretical grounding, “Why did Russia invade?â€� produces too many variables.
– Instead, the class will test a **realist explanation** and see whether it “holds upâ€� under scrutiny.
—
### 7) Operationalizing Realism: Turning Theory into a Checklist of Indicators
Instructor explicitly defined **operationalizing** as:
– converting broad theoretical concepts into **concrete questions/indicators** that can be asked of a case.
**Realist diagnostic checklist built in class (4 indicators):**
1) **Security dilemma**
– Concept discussed via Jervis (1970s) and “spiralâ€� dynamics.
– Arms buildup can be interpreted as threatening regardless of intent.
– **Operationalized class question:**
– *“Do defensive moves by one side look like offensive moves by another side?â€�*
2) **Shift in the balance of power**
– Balance of power described as a system state where powers check one another; no actor can conquer everything.
– Shifts are especially alarming when a rival is perceived to be expanding influence.
– Offensive realism referenced: states may seek security through expansion.
– **Operationalized class question:**
– *“Is one power entering (or threatening to enter) the backyard of another?â€�*
3) **Window of opportunity**
– Defined as conditions aligning temporarily to enable action, and the opportunity may not last.
– Can apply to achieving a goal *or* preventing an undesired future (preemption logic).
– **Operationalized implicitly as:**
– *“Are conditions temporarily favorable such that a state believes it must act now (to gain or prevent something)?â€�*
4) **Geographic vulnerability**
– Focus on whether contested territory has exploitable geographic weaknesses.
– **Operationalized class question:**
– *“Does the territory have major geographic weaknesses that make defense difficult?â€�*
—
### 8) Application Activity Setup: Partner Work and Constraints
– Goal stated: by end of class, produce a **prototype hypothesis**:
– DV (Ukraine invasion) + at least **1–2 IVs** grounded in the realist checklist.
– Students instructed to form partner groups:
– Preference: work with someone they hadn’t talked to much.
– **Constraint:** students who wrote their situational report on **Ukraine 2022** should **not** partner together (to diversify perspectives).
– Instructor assigned groups to overcome pairing difficulties (several pairings were named).
—
### 9) Ground Truth Refresh for Causal Testing: Build a Timeline (2014 → 2022)
– Before applying the security dilemma, groups were told to construct a basic **timeline of key events**:
– timeframe: **2014 to 2022** (Crimea included despite expanding scope).
– expectation: **5–6 major events**, not a month-by-month chronology.
– Purpose of the timeline:
– serve as a shared factual foundation (“ground truthâ€�) to support causal inference.
—
### 10) Guided Application: Security Dilemma + Euromaidan + Competing Narratives
– Instructor emphasized that applying the security dilemma requires first identifying what each side frames as “defensive.â€�
– Euromaidan discussion used to illustrate:
– how events can be interpreted differently
– how narratives may link internal events to external power competition
– Student contribution: described Euromaidan as protests sparked by Ukraine’s direction (EU vs Russia), leading to government change.
– Instructor steered discussion toward what a realist would prioritize:
– realism cares less about ideology as the main driver; ideology is treated as “background noise.â€�
– focus returns to **great power competition** and external influence claims.
– Russian narrative introduced (as commonly stated):
– Euromaidan framed as supported/engineered by the **U.S./CIA** to pull Ukraine from Russia’s sphere of influence.
—
### 11) Key Textual Evidence Introduced: 2008 Bucharest NATO Summit and MAP
– Instructor moved class to a concrete document to support realist security dilemma logic.
– Students examined (in class) NATO’s **2008 Bucharest Summit** declaration language.
– What NATO offered:
– a **Membership Action Plan (MAP)** / explicit statement that **Ukraine will become a NATO member** (promise of future membership).
– What NATO did **not** provide:
– no clear timeline (“whenâ€� unspecified)
– no immediate NATO membership protections (no Article 5 security guarantee)
– Instructor framed the realist interpretation:
– Ukraine/NATO may view military support as defensive.
– Russia may interpret NATO arming/support as offensive preparation / threat.
– Realist “trick questionâ€�: **who is correct doesn’t matter** under security dilemma logic.
**Security dilemma concept sharpened: indistinguishability**
– Core idea emphasized: states **cannot reliably distinguish intent** (defensive vs offensive motives).
– Rational response, per realism:
– assume worst-case intentions and respond accordingly.
—
### 12) Wrap-Up: Next Class, Reading Assignment, and Where the Lesson Will Resume
– Instructor stated: “This is where we’re picking upâ€� next time—continuing to use security dilemma logic and expanding to other checklist items.
– **Reading assigned (to be posted on e-course):**
– Stephen Walt, **“One World, Many Theoriesâ€�** (approx. 18 pages)
– If students can’t finish, instructor recommended at least reviewing **Walt’s comparative theory chart**.
– Schedule reminder:
– “See y’all on Thursday, not Wednesday.â€�
—
## Actionable Items (Outside-Class Follow-Ups, Organized by Urgency)
### Urgent (Deadlines within the week)
– **Paper submission deadline**
– Submit missing paper by **Sunday night** for late credit; after that, no submission accepted.
– **Missing sources/bibliography**
– Students who did not include usable source links/bibliography must **email links by Friday night**.
### High Priority (Before next class / to keep course progression on track)
– **Complete the reading**
– Read Stephen Walt, *“One World, Many Theoriesâ€�* (or at least study the comparison chart).
– **Prepare to continue causal application**
– Bring back/use the group timeline (2014–2022) as groundwork for applying the realist checklist and forming a DV/IV hypothesis in discussion.
### Student Support / Administrative Follow-Ups
– **Extension granted to one student**
– Extension approved until **March 6** (explicitly clarified as “6th of March,â€� not “26thâ€�).
– **Program/credit planning question (ICB requirements, arts credits, MANAS)**
– Student advised to consult **Professor Otsenger** about whether **non-ICB credits** can transfer (instructor unsure based on past experience).
– Student indicated potential absence next week due to visa/travel logistics; plan to coordinate online if needed.
Homework Instructions:
ASSIGNMENT #1: Submit your situational report paper (late-credit window)
[You will finalize and submit your situational report paper so the instructor can begin grading and so you receive credit, since the class is pivoting from “ground truth� fact-finding to causation and theory-testing.]
Instructions:
1. Confirm whether you have already submitted your paper. (The instructor noted: “Several people still have not submitted their papers.�)
2. If you have not submitted it yet, prepare your final version for submission.
3. Submit the paper no later than **Sunday night** to receive **late credit**. (The instructor stated: “You can do that until Sunday, Sunday night for late credit.�)
4. Do not wait past Sunday night: after that point, you will **not** be able to submit the paper at all. (The instructor stated: “Otherwise, you will not be able to submit that paper at all.�)
5. If you believe you need an exception beyond the class-wide late-credit window, you must ask the instructor directly (an individual extension was discussed with a student at the end of class).
ASSIGNMENT #2: Send missing sources/bibliography links (if you did not include them in your paper)
[You will provide the instructor with working links or a bibliography for any sources you used, because the assignment requires source transparency and the instructor needs to be able to locate and read your original articles in order to grade your work.]
Instructions:
1. Check your submitted (or soon-to-be-submitted) paper and verify whether you included usable source information.
– If you only listed article titles, organizations/institutions, or vague references without links/citations, you need to send your sources separately.
2. Create a sources document in one of the following acceptable formats (either is fine):
1) A simple page that contains “just a bunch of links to sources,� or
2) A full bibliography (e.g., APA-style), as long as it clearly allows the instructor to find the original items.
3. Make sure every link is complete and accessible (include full URLs).
4. Email the sources/links to the instructor **before Friday night**. (The instructor stated: “please email those to me before Friday night so that way I have the opportunity to grade them.�)
5. Use a clear subject line (e.g., “Sources for [Your Name] situational report�) and identify which paper/topic the sources correspond to.
ASSIGNMENT #3: Read Stephen Walt, “One World, Many Theories� (focus on comparing IR theories)
[You will read Walt’s overview of international relations theories to support our course shift from establishing “what is happening� (ground truth) to explaining “why it happened� (causation), and to prepare for applying realism (and other theories) as diagnostic checklists.]
Instructions:
1. Obtain the reading that the instructor will post: an approximately **18-page** piece by Stephen Walt titled **“One World, Many Theories.�** (The instructor said: “On e-course, I’m going to be posting a reading from Walt’s… called One World, Many Theories.�)
2. Read the article with the goal of understanding how different IR theories explain state behavior and conflict (this directly supports our in-class work operationalizing theory into questions/indicators).
3. If you cannot finish the full article, you must at minimum do the following:
1) Locate and carefully study **Walt’s chart** that “breaks down the different international relations theories and how they differ.�
2) Be prepared to use that chart as a reference in the next class discussion.
4. While reading, note (briefly) how realism is characterized compared to other theories, since we began building a realist “diagnostic checklist� in class (security dilemma, balance of power shifts, window of opportunity, geographic vulnerability).
5. Complete the reading before the next class meeting (the instructor closed with: “See y’all on Thursday… Yeah, just read Walt.�).