Group Project 1
Assignment documents--please email me with questions!
|
|
Basic steps:
1. Your group will be assigned one country: Japan, South Africa, Germany, the UK, France.
2. Each of you will take one angle of analysis: historical, legal/constitutional, economic, regional/international, social.
3. You will write an independent analysis to be turned in the day of the presentation.
4. Your group will create a Prezi presentation to show the class your work.
For Prezi presentations from past classes, click here!
(Coming soon, theme presentations from political theory at CUA.)
(Coming soon, theme presentations from political theory at CUA.)
Each group will choose a smaller issue, conflict, or theme pertaining to their country.
Then, each individual in the group will find sources (news articles primarily) to address that issue from their analysis angle.
Example: America and constitutionalism: whether or not to call a convention?
Then, each individual in the group will find sources (news articles primarily) to address that issue from their analysis angle.
Example: America and constitutionalism: whether or not to call a convention?
NOTE: THESE ARE NOT THE ONLY QUESTIONS, NOR ARE THEY THE ONLY ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS.
CONSIDER YOUR COUNTRY BEFORE CHOOSING QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS!
CONSIDER YOUR COUNTRY BEFORE CHOOSING QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS!
|
Potential questions/angles:
Starting point: calls for Balanced Budget Amendment, TX Governor Abbott calling for more comprehensive convention Historical: Has this happened before? If not, why? If so, why? Legal/Constitutional: Is this legal/constitutional? Economic: What will be the economic impact? Regional/International: What will other nations think? How might they react? Social: Who wants this? Why? What if they got what they wanted? |
Potential responses:
How widespread is the call? Is there precedent? What is the significance of this movement? -------------------------------------------- --In the U.S. case, not nationally, though certainly often on the state level. But, there have been attempts to make significant changes through amendments and conventions. Why has it failed in the past? Is anything different now? ----------------------------------------------There are clear constitutional procedures for amendments, but not for constitutional conventions, though the latter is allowed. We would have to start from scratch on the procedure. What do constitutional scholars say? ----------------------------------------------This is hard to say. There's speculation that new rules could improve the economy on the state/national level. But if it goes poorly, will it tank the economy? Which economic experts take which sides, and what does that say about the project? ----------------------------------------------It's not really relevant what they think, except if we change the rules on established treaties. OR --This directly affects the international community, and while they wouldn't have a say, it is relevant to listen to what others say. --It might also be worth considering how other established countries have handled constitutional change, as many of them have done this. ----------------------------------------------Why are the elites the ones championing this? Do we know how people generally think on this? --Look at constitutional veneration--will it be harmed? Is this a problem? --Who would be at the convention? What difference might that make? |