The discussions that are part of the learning part of the course are low-stakes

The discussions that are part of the learning part of the course are low-stakes writings. What it means is that you do not have to give the right answer to get the full points. The purpose of these assignments is to facilitate reflection, discussion, and respectful exchange of arguments on the topics we are discussing. When debating a topic, keep in mind that our purpose here is to learn the different views and understand the arguments that people make to support them. Our purpose is not to decide who is right. We can leave the question of who is right for another day.
For your convenience, I included the guidelines on how posts and replies are graded at the bottom. It may be a good idea to remind yourself of the expectations before delving into the discussion.
Discussion Topic for this Module:
You are asked to write two letters to fictional immigrants to the United States. In the first part of the letter, review the details of the claim by providing some fictional biographical details about their situation. Then, use Carens’ arguments to explain to them what you think are the relevant considerations related to their case, and, based on this description whether you think their request should be granted. Try to discuss different considerations in your letter – what would be the implications of admitting them, and what would be the implications if you don’t?
Remember, you have to choose only two letters out of the following three.
1. Write a letter to an irregular immigrant already present in the United States. Explain to them whether you think they should be granted amnesty given their situation. This immigrant has been in the United States for some substantive amount of time (you can choose what age they moved to the United States), did not engage in any major crime (but you can choose whether they have some minor criminal record and whether this is a relevant consideration), and have some ties to their community (decide which).
2. Write a letter to an individual from Afghanistan who is escaping the Taliban regime (you can check the International Rescue Committee for https://www.rescue.org/article/afghans-faced-year-…). You are not asked to assess their claim for refugee status from a legal perspective. The question is about whether they are entitled to relocate if they are fearing their own government (how credible this fear should be in your view) and whether they have any particular right to relocate to the United States?
3. Write a letter to an individual who just wants to live in the United States because they think that there are desirable professional or personal opportunities for them. This individual is not under duress to leave but believes their life would be better in the United States. This individual does not have any criminal background. They also never engaged in any terrorist behavior (or anything close to it). The individual is asking why the US should not allow more open and flexible immigration policies for individuals like them.
Then, write replies to the posts of two other students. Make sure to engage their letters. Did they consider all the relevant considerations? Do you agree with their assessment?
—————
How discussion posts are graded:
In general, the purpose of the discussion board is to facilitate discussion on the readings by way of comparing them and thinking through their applications. Keep in mind that most of the learning in this course takes part through the guided readings and the discussion (so it is not enough to listen to the short lecture I provide!).
The items that we read present complex arguments, so there is no single correct way to compare arguments or apply them. Nonetheless, there are more or less informed engagements with the readings. Keep in mind that your posts do not have to be conclusive. If you are not sure, explain why you are not sure. You don’t have to pick a side. You can also explain what you consider to be the strong arguments on each side.
Posts are expected to be 2 – 3 paragraphs long and to be based on the readings. (longer posts are accepted. I do not count words but look at the depth of the quality of the engagement; do not just write stuff to meet the length requirements; engage the question and the readings in a meaningful way). Replies are expected to be 1 -2 paragraphs long.
In some cases, it is possible to write an apparently coherent answer to the discussion question without mentioning (or doing) the reading at all. To be clear, this is not the right way to go about answering the discussion board. In general, posts that do not mention the readings directly or indirectly are expected to get 2-5 points out of the 10, based on the quality of the answer.
It is also possible to engage the readings in a superficial way, for example by quoting one sentence from the readings, by mentioning only one of the items when the question asks to compare two or more, or by writing posts that are very short or very general. These kinds of replies are expected to receive 5-8 points based on the quality of the post.
To get 9 or 10 points, posts have to answer the discussion prompt in a way that is meaningful and informed by the reading. It is important to emphasize that students can and should expect to get 10 points for their posts if they do the work. The posts are not expected to get everything accurate or to be masterpieces. It is okay to admit that some parts were difficult or that you are not sure that you got things right. Just share what you think you got. Once you submit your post, you can see what others have written and re-evaluate your own positions.