Lesson Report:
# Presentation Prep and Korea Nuclear-Crisis Forecasting Exercise
This session had two main goals: first, to review expectations for next week’s student presentations, especially professional slide design, delivery, timing, and Q&A participation; second, to practice the course’s full analytical pipeline through a fast-paced forecasting exercise. Students applied situational reporting, hypothesis-driven diagnosis, and short-term forecasting to a hypothetical Korea security crisis involving a North Korean missile event and a South Korean threat to leave the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
—
## Attendance
– **Present (inferred from in-class grouping):** approximately **8 students** were present; the class was split into **two groups of four**.
– **Absent by name:** **none explicitly identified** in the transcript.
– **Note:** The roster has 14 students total, so several students were likely absent, but their names **cannot be determined confidently** from the transcript alone.
—
## Topics Covered
### 1) Opening agenda: presentation review + forecasting “war game”
– The instructor opened by reminding students that **presentations begin next week**.
– The day’s structure was laid out clearly:
– **Part 1:** quick review of what students must prepare and how presentations will be evaluated.
– **Part 2:** a “war game”/case simulation in which students would need to **research, analyze, and forecast quickly** using a new scenario.
### 2) Presentation etiquette review: common mistakes and professional expectations
– The instructor revisited advice from earlier in the week and asked students to recall the biggest presentation mistake.
– **Student responses (unnamed):**
– A student correctly identified the main “presentation sin” as **reading the PowerPoint**.
– Other students added that good slides should contain **key points**, **pictures and graphs**, and should avoid **too much stuff on the slide** and **too many decorations**.
– The instructor emphasized that students would lose many points if they:
– read directly from slides,
– read a script from a phone,
– or read from a sheet of paper.
– The instructor defined a strong, professional slide as:
– **clean**,
– **simple**,
– **easy to follow**,
– containing only a **small amount of text**,
– ideally no more than about **20–25 words on the whole slide**.
– He stressed that visuals are useful only when they are **directly relevant** to the argument being made.
#### Example used by the instructor
– The instructor gave an example from a **mock senior thesis defense**:
– a student had included a graphic on **how to create gasoline from crude oil**,
– but it never connected to the presentation’s terrorism topic,
– making the audience focus on the irrelevant image rather than the student’s actual point.
– Lesson drawn from the example:
– visuals must be **directly related to the case and the claim**,
– random stock images, abstract illustrations, or decorative graphics do not add value by themselves.
### 3) Presentation delivery and role-play expectations
– The instructor reminded students that the presentation is not supposed to be a static classroom talk; instead, they should imagine they are in a **professional setting** giving analysis to peers and decision-makers.
– Students were told to treat the assignment as if they were briefing:
– colleagues,
– a superior,
– or another professional audience.
– Delivery expectations included:
– **addressing the whole room**, not just the instructor,
– using **distributed eye contact**,
– speaking with clear **diction**,
– and **practicing beforehand**.
– The instructor specifically warned against staring only at him throughout the presentation, noting that:
– it is uncomfortable,
– and it also ignores the actual audience of classmates.
### 4) Presentation structure, timing, and participation rules
– The instructor reviewed the format for next week:
– **5 minutes** to present,
– followed by **5 minutes of Q&A**,
– for roughly **10 minutes per person total**.
– Because the speaking portion is short, students were told to be **strategic** about:
– what they include,
– what they leave out,
– and how they organize their points.
– The instructor also tied this to participation grades:
– students must **pay attention** to peers’ presentations,
– bring a **notebook**,
– take notes,
– and ask questions during presentations.
– He explicitly said that students who **do not ask questions** during Tuesday/Thursday presentations **will not receive full participation points**.
– Students were encouraged to ask substantive questions and “grill” presenters by:
– challenging weak reasoning,
– pointing out unsupported claims,
– and identifying logical jumps.
### 5) Transition to activity and group formation
– With no student questions on the presentation review, the instructor moved into the day’s activity.
– He attempted to organize the class into groups and, based on attendance, decided on:
– **two groups of four**.
– Students were assigned to “group 1” or “group 2” by counting off and were sent to opposite corners of the room.
### 6) Activity setup: applying the semester’s analytic pipeline
– The instructor framed the exercise as a full run-through of the process students have been practicing all semester:
1. **Situational report** — what are the facts on the ground?
2. **Diagnosis** — why is this happening?
3. **Forecast** — what happens next?
– Students were told their final output should identify:
– the current situation,
– an explanation of how it developed,
– and **two possible future outcomes**, with one judged **most likely** and one **less likely**.
### 7) Hypothetical crisis briefing: Korea security scenario
– The instructor introduced the case as taking place on **April 24, 2026**—effectively “tomorrow” relative to the class date—so students were meant to use **real-world facts up to the present day** as the background.
– The scenario involved **two linked developments**:
1. **North Korea (DPRK)** detonates/launches a missile over the **Sea of Japan** that is **capable of carrying nuclear weapons**.
– The instructor clarified that this was **not an actual nuclear detonation**.
– The missile was **nuclear-capable**, but **no nuclear warhead was aboard it**.
2. **South Korea** responds by **threatening to leave the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT)**.
– The instructor presented the world as entering a state of heightened instability and asked students to draft a quick report for a **think tank principal advising U.S. decision-makers**.
### 8) Instructor-led unpacking of the NPT and South Korea’s incentives
– Before sending students to research, the instructor paused to unpack the key treaty issue.
– **Student responses (unnamed):**
– One student described the NPT as a treaty to **contain the development of nuclear weapons**.
– Another identified its goal as helping prevent **nuclear war**.
– Another clarified that it seeks to stop **new countries from obtaining nuclear weapons**.
– One student added that more nuclear weapons create more **fear**.
– The instructor expanded on these answers, explaining that:
– the more states possess nuclear weapons, the greater the chance that one will eventually be used,
– irresponsible development or weak control raises the risk of theft or misuse,
– and the treaty aims to keep the number of nuclear-armed states as low as possible.
– He further clarified that the treaty does **not** force current nuclear states to disarm; rather, it mainly limits the spread of nuclear weapons to **additional states**.
– Turning to South Korea, the instructor asked why it would agree not to develop nuclear weapons even though North Korea is its principal threat.
– He explained the idea of the **U.S. nuclear umbrella**:
– by remaining within the treaty and under alliance protection,
– South Korea relies on U.S. deterrence instead of building its own arsenal.
### 9) Situational report phase: research and evidence gathering
– Students were given about **15 minutes** to prepare the first stage: the **situational report**.
– Instructions for this phase:
– divide work among group members,
– examine what has been happening in **North Korea** over roughly the past year,
– examine what has been happening in **South Korea** over roughly the past year,
– then combine the two streams into a common background narrative.
– The instructor emphasized that the situational report should use **real-world developments up to today** to explain how the hypothetical April 24 crisis could plausibly emerge.
### 10) Diagnosis phase: hypothesis-driven explanation
– After students had gathered background facts, the instructor moved them into the **“why”** stage.
– He asked groups to compare **two hypotheses** for why the crisis happened.
– Students were told to use the same framework practiced previously in class:
– develop two plausible explanations,
– support the stronger one,
– and try to reject or weaken the other.
– A student asked whether the class should create:
– one hypothesis for North Korea and one for South Korea,
– or one combined hypothesis for the chain of events.
– The instructor clarified that he wanted **one combined hypothesis structure** explaining the linked sequence:
– North Korea’s action,
– and South Korea’s response.
– Another student asked for a more concrete example, and the instructor confirmed that students should formulate a **real explanatory hypothesis**, not just a description.
– As groups worked, the instructor guided them toward thinking in terms of **realism** and **balance of power**, suggesting that a shift in the balance of power could explain the two events as sequential “dominoes.”
– He stopped short of giving away a full answer, but encouraged students to determine which hypothesis fit their evidence best.
### 11) Forecast phase: next three months / end of July
– The instructor then shifted the exercise from diagnosis to prediction.
– Forecast instructions:
– project **three months forward**,
– specifically to the **end of July**,
– identify **two plausible outcomes**,
– and defend why those are the most relevant outcomes to compare.
– One student asked to confirm the time horizon (“You said July?”), and the instructor confirmed.
– Students were also asked to justify:
– why they selected those two outcomes,
– and why another possible outcome was being omitted.
– During this portion, a student sought clarification about the missile event itself; the instructor restated that:
– the missile was **blown up over the sea**,
– it **could theoretically carry a nuclear weapon**,
– but the warhead in the scenario was **not nuclear**,
– and there was **no damage to Japan**.
### 12) Rapid group reporting: one-minute bottom-line-up-front presentations
– Because time was running short, the instructor asked each group to prepare a very short **BLUF-style** presentation.
– Each group was instructed to summarize:
– **why** the event happened,
– and **what would happen next**.
#### Group 1 report
– The first group’s speaker (unnamed) argued that the most likely outcome was the **continuation of the status quo**, with **military drills continuing**.
– Their reasoning centered on a cycle of **mutual escalation**:
– North and South Korea keep responding to one another,
– military exercises and missile activity reinforce that pattern,
– and South Korea’s relationship with the U.S. contributes to its confidence and willingness to escalate rhetorically.
– The exact probability cited in the transcript is unclear due to transcription quality, but the group presented this outcome as the **most likely**.
– Instructor feedback:
– the analysis was acceptable for the short time available,
– but students were reminded again **not to read from their screens** during real presentations.
#### Group 2 report
– The second group’s speaker (unnamed) connected the Korea scenario to the broader international environment, especially the **war in Iran**.
– Their argument suggested that:
– Pyongyang could interpret current conflicts as evidence that a state needs a **strong nuclear deterrent**,
– Iran’s experience and the limits of outside help may reinforce the logic of self-protection,
– and Russia/China’s behavior, along with the failure of U.S. nuclear negotiations, could shape North Korea’s calculation.
– The instructor praised this group specifically for tying the Korea case to **wider conflicts rather than treating it in isolation**, highlighting the value of seeing cases as embedded in the broader international system.
### 13) Closing logistics: slide submission, sign-ups, and posted instructions
– The instructor ended class with reminders about next week’s presentation preparation.
– He announced that:
– the **assignment upload page** would be posted on **eCourse that night**,
– and he would also post more detailed instructions, including clarification on the **title/slide requirements**.
– A student explained that they would be traveling to **Istanbul** over the weekend with only a backpack and asked whether the slide submission deadline could be moved to **Monday** rather than the weekend.
– In response, the instructor changed the deadline for the whole class to **Monday before 5:00 p.m.**, noting that this would still give him time to review slides before returning to work.
– The instructor also began building the presentation order for next week by asking who wanted to present on **Tuesday** versus **Thursday**.
#### Tentative Tuesday sign-up mentioned aloud
– **Azamat Baktybekov** — first Tuesday slot
– **Zoe Calmettes** — second Tuesday slot
– **Hermine Fontan** — third Tuesday slot
– **One additional student, name unclear in transcript** — likely a fourth Tuesday slot, but the name is **uncertain**
– Another student asked about presenting on Thursday due to another submission conflict; the instructor said he would **see if it could fit**.
—
## Student Tracker
– **Azamat Baktybekov** — volunteered for the **first Tuesday presentation slot**.
– **Zoe Calmettes** — volunteered for the **second Tuesday presentation slot**.
– **Hermine Fontan** — volunteered for the **third Tuesday presentation slot**.
– **Uncertain student (name unclear; one of the roster names cannot be matched confidently)** — appears to have volunteered for a **Tuesday presentation slot**.
– **Uncertain student** — requested a later slide deadline because of **weekend travel to Istanbul**, prompting the instructor to move the deadline to **Monday at 5:00 p.m.**
– **Uncertain student** — asked whether the instructor would post **detailed instructions about the title**, prompting confirmation that fuller directions would be uploaded to eCourse.
– **Multiple unidentified students** — contributed correct answers about presentation design (e.g., don’t read slides; use key points; avoid clutter/decorations), explained the purpose of the **NPT**, and asked clarifying questions about hypothesis structure, realism/balance-of-power logic, the July forecast horizon, and the exact terms of the missile scenario.
—
## Actionable Items
### Immediate / High Urgency
– **Presentations begin next week.**
– **PowerPoint slides are due Monday by 5:00 p.m.**
– Students must prepare a **5-minute presentation + 5-minute Q&A**.
– Students should **practice delivery** and avoid reading from slides/scripts.
– Students should keep slides **clean, simple, and directly relevant**.
### Before Presentation Days
– Bring a **notebook** and be ready to take notes during classmates’ presentations.
– Students must **ask questions** during peer presentations to receive full participation credit on Tuesday/Thursday.
– Prepare for the **role-play/professional briefing format**, not just a classroom talk.
### Instructor Follow-Up
– Post the **eCourse upload page**.
– Post **detailed presentation instructions**, including title/format clarification.
– Finalize the **Tuesday/Thursday sign-up sheet** and confirm ordering.
### Scheduling Notes
– Tentative Tuesday presenters named in class: **Azamat Baktybekov, Zoe Calmettes, Hermine Fontan, and one uncertain student**.
– One student requested possible **Thursday accommodation** because of another submission issue; instructor said he would check whether this could be arranged.
—
If you’d like, I can also convert this into a more compact instructor log format or a polished template you can reuse for future class reports.
Homework Instructions:
ASSIGNMENT #1: Prepare and submit your presentation PowerPoint
You will begin your presentations next week, so your main task is to finalize a professional 5-minute presentation and submit your PowerPoint before class. This assignment is meant to help you present your analysis clearly, professionally, and strategically, while showing that you can communicate your ideas to a decision-making audience rather than simply reading information off slides.
Instructions:
1. Prepare your presentation for next week.
– Your presentation should be designed to last 5 minutes.
– After your presentation, there will be 5 minutes of Q&A from both the instructor and your classmates, so you should be ready to answer questions about your analysis.
2. Build your PowerPoint so that it is clean, simple, and professional.
– Keep each slide focused on key points only.
– Use pictures and graphs only when they are directly related to the specific case and the point you are making.
– Avoid overcrowding your slides with text.
– As discussed in class, a strong slide should be easy to follow and should not contain more than about 20-25 words total on the slide.
– Avoid unnecessary decorations or visual clutter.
3. Make sure every visual element serves a clear purpose.
– Do not include random images, stock graphics, or unrelated diagrams.
– If you use a picture, chart, or graph, make sure it directly supports the argument or evidence you are presenting.
– Remember the example from class: visuals are only useful if they help distill and clarify the point you are trying to make.
4. Plan to speak from your knowledge, not by reading.
– Do not read your PowerPoint slides word-for-word.
– Do not read from a script on your phone or from a sheet of paper.
– The instructor explicitly identified reading from slides or a script as a major presentation mistake that will cost points.
– Your slides should support your speaking, not replace it.
5. Prepare for the role-play element of the presentation.
– You should imagine that you are presenting in a professional setting to peers and a decision maker.
– Address the room as an audience of professionals rather than treating the presentation like an informal classroom talk.
– Frame your tone, delivery, and organization accordingly.
6. Practice your delivery before presenting.
– Rehearse enough times that your presentation feels organized and polished.
– Practice so that you can stay within the 5-minute limit.
– Make sure your transitions are smooth and that you know what you want to say on each slide without relying on a script.
– As emphasized in class, it is usually obvious when a presentation has been practiced and when it has been improvised.
7. Use strong presentation etiquette during your preparation.
– Practice making eye contact with the whole room, not just the instructor.
– Work on clear speaking diction.
– Distribute your attention across the audience.
– Prepare to present confidently and professionally.
8. Submit your PowerPoint by the updated deadline.
– The instructor first mentioned submitting the PowerPoint over the weekend, but then changed the deadline for everyone.
– Your final PowerPoint must be submitted by Monday before 5:00 p.m.
– Use the assignment upload page that will be posted for the class.
9. Check for the posted assignment details and sign-up information.
– The instructor said the assignment upload page would be posted that night.
– Additional details, including title instructions, will also be posted there.
– A sign-up sheet will be used to determine who presents on Tuesday and who presents on Thursday, so make sure you check and confirm your presentation day if needed.
10. Come to class ready not only to present, but also to participate.
– On presentation days, bring a notebook and be ready to take notes on your classmates’ presentations.
– You are expected to ask questions during your peers’ Q&A sessions.
– The instructor stated that students who do not ask questions during presentations will not receive full participation points for those class days.