POL S 204 A: Introduction to Comparative Politics

Summer 2026 Full-term
View in MyPlan View in Time Schedule
Meeting:
to be arranged
SLN:
12962
Section Type:
Lecture
ASYNCHRONOUS
Syllabus Description (from Canvas):

POL S 204 – Introduction to Comparative Politics

University of Washington | Summer 2026 Full-Term

 

Teaching staff

Instructor: Jana Foxe

Instructor pronouns: they/them

Instructor email: jfoxe@uw.edu 

Instructor Office Hours: Wednesdays, 10am-12pm

Location: Online via Zoom [LINK: https://washington.zoom.us/j/94733879571?jst=3]

**Note to students re. office hours**: if there are many students, you may end up in the waiting room. Please be patient and I will bring you onto the call as soon as I can.

The instructor reserves the right to adjust the syllabus, within reason, and with appropriate notice to students. 

Land acknowledgement – UW Seattle campus

I acknowledge that the University of Washington sits upon the homelands and waterways of the Duwamish, Suquamish and other Coast Salish peoples. I also acknowledge that words of solidarity require an immediate shift in material resources. Some considerations include the rematriation of Indigenous lands, the payment of land taxes to local tribes, and public support of tribal sovereignty and Indigenous self-determination.

 

Course description

Comparative Politics examines how political systems and institutions around the world are organized, how power is exercised, and what these differences mean for people’s everyday lives. The course centers on three foundational questions: (1) Who governs? (2) How do they govern? and (3) What are the consequences for the governed? Through comparative analysis of countries and policy issues across regions, students explore the development of the nation‑state; democratic and non‑democratic regimes; state institutions; electoral systems; identity politics; violence and conflict; development; and social movements. This fully asynchronous course emphasizes the applied, real‑world use of course concepts and analytical thinking. Students engage with contemporary cases, media, and institutional design questions to build practical skills in comparative political analysis. By the end of the course, students will be equipped to critically evaluate political systems and political debates, both in the United States and beyond.

 

Course objectives

In this course, students will:

  • Examine and discuss the uses of the ‘comparative method’ in political science
  • Identify core concepts in comparative politics
  • Evaluate and varying conceptions of political regimes and institutions
  • Appraise and defend institutional configurations
  • Formulate their own research or policy analysis project
  • Discuss how course concepts apply to current and recent historical political events
  • Apply comparative analysis to a topic of their choosing in an independent research project

 

Required Materials and Readings

Readings

I am happy to announce that students do not need to purchase any textbooks for this class, as all readings will be uploaded to Canvas. All readings assigned are mandatory, and should be read either before, or not long after, watching the lecture. Engagement with the readings is necessary for success in course assignments.

Current events

To remain good students, engaged citizens, and for success in this class, students should consume a regular diet of global news from reputable sources. While it is increasingly hard to find good news for free or at low-cost, students may consider sources such as The Guardian, The Washington Post, PBS/NPR, BBC, France24, DW, Al Jazeera English, Euronews, among others. There are also a wide variety of news podcasts that make staying updated a little easier, including the BBC Global News Podcast, Al Jazeera’s The Inside Story, and Reuters World News. The most important thing is to vary where you get your news from; you should read/watch/listen to news outlets based both in the U.S. and beyond. While social media can be an extremely beneficial and powerful tool for staying informed, I caution that it is important not to over-rely on short-form content, or any form of creative content using reporting that has not been independently verified.

Given that this course covers a broad global and historical scope, when students come across names, places, institutions, authors, etc. for whom they may not hold prior familiarity, they should conduct quick Google and/or Wikipedia searches for background information. I also encourage students to reflect on author positionality, thinking about the personal, professional and intellectual background of the author in relation to the content. Finally, I must emphasize that assigning work from a given author is not a form of endorsement of that author’s views by the instructor. I welcome reading suggestions from students for future iterations of the course.

Access and Accommodations

Disability Resources for Students (DRS) offers resources and coordinates reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities. If you have not yet established services through DRS, but have a temporary or permanent disability that requires accommodations (this can include but not limited to; mental health, attention-related, learning, vision, hearing, physical or health impacts), you are welcome to contact DRS at 206-543-8924, or uwdrs@uw.edu. See this website.

If you have not yet established services through DRS, but have a temporary health condition or permanent disability that requires accommodations (conditions include but not limited to; mental health, attention-related, learning, vision, hearing, physical or health impacts), contact DRS directly to set up an Access Plan as soon as possible. If you are unsure where to start, visit the DRS ‘Getting Started’ page. DRS facilitates the interactive process that establishes reasonable accommodations. Contact DRS at disability.uw.edu.

Accessibility is important to me, and while DRS accommodations are insightful in helping me ensure the needs of specific students are met, I also welcome student input on how to improve course accessibility more generally. Students should feel welcome to email me at jfoxe@uw.edu with feedback on how I can improve course accessibility.

 

Religious Accommodations Policy

Washington state law requires that UW develop a policy for accommodation of student absences or significant hardship due to reasons of faith or conscience, or for organized religious activities. The UW’s policy, including more information about how to request an accommodation, is available at Religious Accommodations Policy. Accommodations must be requested within the first two weeks of this course using the Religious Accommodations Request form.

Mental Health Resources 

The Counseling Center and Hall Health are excellent resources on campus that many UW students utilize. Students may get help with study skills, career decisions, substance abuse, relationship difficulties, anxiety, depression, or other concerns.

Any member of the UW community can call SafeCampus to anonymously discuss safety and well-being concerns for yourself or others. Caring, trained professionals will talk you through options and connect you with additional resources if you want them. In urgent or dangerous situations, call 911. They answer calls (206-685-7233) and emails (safecampus@uw.edu), Monday – Friday, 8 am – 5 pm excluding UW holidays. If you are calling after-hours, please see our after-hours resource guide.

Crisis Connections  provides immediate help to individuals, families, and friends of people in emotional crisis, dealing with addiction, or struggling to meet basic needs. Anyone in Washington State can receive support and resource referrals 24/7 through their crisis line at 866-4CRISIS (866-427-4747 or TTY 206-461-3219).

 

Technology Information

Technology Requirements

This is a fully online course; therefore, it requires a computer with Internet access and may require one or more of the following technologies:

  • Web browsers: Chrome, Safari, or Firefox are recommended for compatibility
  • Speakers, headset, or earbuds
  • Reliable broadband Internet connection (DSL or cable) to stream videos, download readings and upload/submit assignments

Computer and Digital Skills Needed

To succeed in this course, you will need to be comfortable:

  • Opening and navigating web browsers
  • Navigating the Canvas learning management system
  • Typing text into a text box
  • Creating, saving, selecting, and uploading documents 
  • Opening, reading, and sending email

 

Academic integrity

Cheating and plagiarism will not be tolerated under any circumstances. A suspected instance will be reported and disciplinary actions may ensue. For further detail about the University of Washington’s academic honesty policy, please refer to this website.

Guidelines on the use of generative Artificial Intelligence

I generally discourage the use of generative Artificial Intelligence tools in a classroom context. The new era of Artificial Intelligence poses serious ethical, environmental and economic challenges that students should factor in when considering whether and how to use it. However, I am a pragmatist who acknowledges that many students will likely use it regardless. Therefore, in this course, students are permitted to use AI-based tools (such as UW’s version of Copilot) as a study aid, but not to substitute original writing. The instructions for each assignment on Canvas will include information about whether and how you may use AI-based tools to complete the assignment. All sources, including AI tools, must be properly cited. Use of AI in ways that are inconsistent with the parameters above will be considered academic misconduct and subject to investigation.

Please note that AI results can be biased and inaccurate. It is your responsibility to ensure that the information you use from AI is accurate. Additionally, pay attention to the privacy of your data. Many AI tools will incorporate and use any content you share for model training, so be careful not to unintentionally share copyrighted materials (including class readings), original work, or personal information.

Learning how to thoughtfully and strategically use AI-based tools may help you develop your skills, refine your work, and prepare you for your future career. If you have any questions about citation or about what constitutes academic integrity in this course or at the University of Washington, please feel free to contact me to discuss your concerns.

 

***Requirements for students using AI Tools***

  • Students may use AI tools as a study and research aid, but students may not submit AI‑generated text as original writing for this course.
  • Any use of AI tools must be disclosed with prompt history in the assignment submission (see instructions for each Canvas assignment).

 

Anticipated AI questions and answers

Q: Why don’t you recommend AI?

  • I recommend limiting AI use only to cases where it is genuinely helpful, and not a substitute for your own work, or intellectual growth. Generative artificial intelligence tools and chatbots make mistakes very often. While Large Language Models (e.g. ChatGPT) improve constantly, they actually lack their own knowledge (hence ‘artificial’) and are not designed to be used as search engines. LLMs also don’t pull from academic sources, which is what we mostly rely on in the university context. Instead, LLMs respond to prompts with synthesized answers using resources scraped from various corners of the internet, which can lead to results that are biased, unreliable, unverified, or even fake (‘hallucinated’).
  • AI is not good at writing, and in college, we expect you to have written your own work. You cannot claim AI-generated writing as your own work, because it is not, and because AI is scraping from others’ work, may even be copying from other authors or creators. Additionally, AI writing is easily detectable by instructors who have extensive experience reading AI-generated reading, and working with AI tools in their own work.
  • The evidence is in! Over-reliance on LLMs for writing essays actually might hurt your brain’s cognitive function. A recent study found LLM users exhibit reduced neural connectivity, lower recall of one’s own writing, and decreased learning skills, compared to other groups.
  • Artificial intelligence tools require incredible amounts of computational power, meaning the demand for AI tools also requires a companies using them to consume a very large amount of electricity and water, and the rapid uptake of intelligence tools is driving demand for large data centers, which has led to strain on power grids, water shortages, and a continued reliance on fossil fuels.
  • AI has some useful applications in academia, and automation can make some tedious tasks easier, students should not use these tools as a substitute for the work that is necessary to become confident in your mastery of the course content.

Q: If I really want to use AI, which tool is the best one?

The only institutionally-approved AI-based tool is UW’s version of Copilot, which uses the GPT model from OpenAI. It integrates well with OneDrive, and has stronger data protection measures compared to non-approved tools. You can use other tools, but be aware of risks to your privacy and your intellectual property, as many platforms use your data for model training. Use AI mindfully and cautiously.

Q: How do I disclose use of generative AI in this class?

In each Canvas assignment, there is also an A.I. use disclosure section, where you will be prompted to declare whether you used AI and share prompt history.

Q: Will you say more about this in class?

Yes, in Week 1 I will dedicate a few minutes of lecture time to discussing the do’s and don’ts of AI, and I will give you some tips on smart, responsible AI usage that will hopefully be of use to all.

 

Course Schedule

**Please note that as this is an asynchronous class, I will split lectures up into shorter videos, so that one lecture may comprise multiple short videos. This is a measure intended to make lectures easier to digest, and easier to stream for students with lower internet bandwidth. You will need to pace your work in order to meet course deadlines comfortably.**

**ALL READINGS ARE AVAILABLE ON CANVAS**

Module 1: Who Governs? States and Regime Types

In this module, students will:

  • Define comparative politics and distinguish between comparative politics and similar subfields in political science
  • Describe the ‘comparative method’ and identify the value in comparing political outcomes and processes across country cases
  • Contrast and compare different theories of state formation
  • Examine and appraise varying definitions of democracy
  • Formulate their own definitions of democracy and autocracy
  • Classify electoral and legislative institution types
  • Analyze institutional configurations for political regimes

 

Week 1 – Introduction to Comparative Politics & the State

Concepts covered include: sovereignty; state; “bringing the state back in”, legitimacy, state capacity, failed state

Cases covered include: United Kingdom; Kosovo; Israel and Palestine

Assignments:

  • Week 1 survey
  • Week 1 discussion & response

 

Lecture 1, videos released Monday June 22: What Is Comparative Politics and Why Does It Matter?

  • Course overview, syllabus, expectations
  • Comparative Politics in Political Science

Readings due for Lecture 1:

  • Amelia Hoover Green, “How to Read Political Science: A Guide in Four Steps” (2013)
  • Pennings, P., Keman, H., & Kleinnijenhuis, J. (2006). The comparative approach: theory and method. In The comparative approach: Theory and method (2 ed., pp. 18-29). SAGE Publications Ltd, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781849209038.n3

Lecture 2, videos released Wednesday June 25: Sovereignty, States, and State Formation

Readings due for Lecture 2:

  • Charles Tilly, “War Making and State Making as Organized Crime,” in Bringing the State Back In (1985), pp. 169–191
  • Spruyt, Hendrik, 'War, Trade, and State Formation', in Carles Boix, and Susan C. Stokes (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Politics (2009; online edn, Oxford Academic, 2 Sept. 2009), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199566020.003.0009.

Optional:

 

Week 2 – Democratic Regimes

Concepts covered include: democracy; procedural v. substantive definitions of democracy; democratization; presidentialism vs. parliamentarism; unicameral legislatures; bicameral legislatures

Cases covered include: United States; United Kingdom; Brazil; Taiwan

Assignments:

  • Week 2 lecture response journal
  • Week 2 discussion & response

Lecture 1, videos released Monday June 29: What Is Democracy?

Readings due for Lecture 1:

  • Schmitter, P. C., & Karl, T. L. (1991). What Democracy Is. . . And Is Not. Journal of Democracy, 2(3), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1991.0033
  • Huntington, S. P. (1993). The third wave: Democratization in the late twentieth century. University of Oklahoma press. (pp. 3-30)
  • Dahl, R. A. (1994). A Democratic Dilemma: System Effectiveness versus Citizen Participation. Political Science Quarterly, 109(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.2307/2151659
  • Dahl, R. A. (2000). A Democratic Paradox? Political Science Quarterly, 115(1), 35–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/2658032

Lecture 2, videos released Wednesday July 1: Institutional Design in Democratic Systems (Executives and Legislatures)

Readings due for Lecture 2:

  • Linz, J. J. (1990). Presidents vs. Parliaments: The Virtues of Parliamentarism. Journal of Democracy, 1(4), 84–91. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1990.0059
  • Lijphart, A. (1991). Constitutional Choices for New Democracies. Journal of Democracy, 2(1), 72–84. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1991.0011
  • Shugart, M. S., & Mainwaring, S. (1997). Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America: Rethinking the Terms of the Debate. In S. Mainwaring & M. S. Shugart (Eds.), Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America (pp. 12–54). Cambridge University Press. Cambridge Core. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139174800.002

** MIDTERM ASSIGNMENT PROMPTS RELEASED AFTER LECTURE 2**

 

Week 3 – Electoral Systems & Party Systems  

Concepts covered include: proportional systems; majoritarian systems; district magnitude; two-party system, multi-party system; strategic voting; polarization; fragmentation  

Cases covered include: United Kingdom; Germany; Netherlands; Israel; Japan

Assignments:

  • Week 3 lecture response journal
  • Week 3 discussion & response

Lecture 1, videos released Monday July 6: Electoral Rules and Representation

Readings due for Lecture 1:

  • Herron, Erik S., Robert J. Pekkanen, and Matthew S. Shugart, 'Terminology and Basic Rules of Electoral Systems', in Erik S. Herron, Robert J. Pekkanen, and Matthew S. Shugart (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Systems, Oxford Handbooks (2018; online edn, Oxford Academic, 5 Apr. 2017), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190258658.013.49.
  • Gallagher, Michael, and Paul Mitchell, 'Dimensions of Variation in Electoral Systems', in Erik S. Herron, Robert J. Pekkanen, and Matthew S. Shugart (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Systems, Oxford Handbooks (2018; online edn, Oxford Academic, 5 Apr. 2017), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190258658.013.4
  • Bormann, N. C., & Golder, M. (2022). Democratic electoral systems around the world, 1946–2020. Electoral Studies, 78, 102487.

Lecture 2, videos released Wednesday July 8: Party Systems and Political Outcomes

Readings due for Lecture 2:

  • Moser, Robert G., Ethan Scheiner, and Heather Stoll, 'Social Diversity, Electoral Systems, and the Party System', in Erik S. Herron, Robert J. Pekkanen, and Matthew S. Shugart (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Systems, Oxford Handbooks (2018; online edn, Oxford Academic, 5 Apr. 2017), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190258658.013.28
  • Jacobs, Kristof, 'Electoral Systems in Context: The Netherlands', in Erik S. Herron, Robert J. Pekkanen, and Matthew S. Shugart (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Systems, Oxford Handbooks (2018; online edn, Oxford Academic, 5 Apr. 2017), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190258658.013.44.
  • Ferree, K. E. (2018). Electoral Systems in Context: South Africa. In K. E. Ferree, The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Systems (pp. 942–964). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190258658.013.38
  • Ziegfeld, Adam, 'Electoral Systems in Context: India', in Erik S. Herron, Robert J. Pekkanen, and Matthew S. Shugart (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Electoral Systems, Oxford Handbooks (2018; online edn, Oxford Academic, 5 Apr. 2017), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190258658.013.41.

 

Week 4 – Populism and Democratic Backsliding

*** MIDTERM DUE FRIDAY 11:59PM; NO LECTURE RESPONSE JOURNAL ***

Concepts covered include: populism; polarization; democratic erosion

Cases covered include: Hungary; Netherlands; Venezuela; U.S.

Assignments:

  • Midterm assignment
  • Week 4 discussion & response

Lecture 1, videos released Monday July 13: Populism and Anti-Establishment Politics

Readings due for Lecture 1:

  • Mudde, Cas. 2004. "The Populist Zeitgeist", Government and Opposition, 39(4): 541-563.
  • Vachudova, Milada Anna. 2021. Populism, Democracy, and Party System Change in Europe. Annual Review of Political Science 2021 24:1, 471-498
  • [Chapters 2 (Mbete) & 12 (Panizza & Stavrakakis)] in Ostiguy, P., Moffitt, B., & Panizza, F. (Eds.). (2021). Populism in global perspective : a performative and discursive approach. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db=nlabk&AN=2707810
  • Saalfeld, J. (2026). Identity Politics and Left-wing Populism. Government and Opposition, 61, e11. doi:10.1017/gov.2026.10034

Lecture 2, videos released Wednesday July 15: Democratic Erosion and Backsliding

Readings due for Lecture 2:

  • Bermeo, N. (2016). On Democratic Backsliding. Journal of Democracy, 27(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2016.0012
  • Susan D. Hyde, Democracy’s backsliding in the international environment. Science 369, 1192-1196 (2020). DOI:10.1126/science.abb2434
  • Benasaglio Berlucchi, A., & Kellam, M. (2023). Who’s to blame for democratic backsliding: populists, presidents or dominant executives? Democratization, 30(5), 815–835. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2023.2190582

 

Week 5 – Non-Democratic and Hybrid Regimes

Concepts covered include: authoritarianism; dictatorship; hybrid regimes; autocracy

Cases covered include: Russia; North Korea; Hungary; Venezuela

Assignments:

  • Week 5 lecture response journal
  • Week 5 discussion & response
  • Extra credit: Midterm Evaluation

Lecture 1, videos released Monday July 20: Authoritarianism and Hybrid Regimes

Readings due for Lecture 1:

  • Levitsky, S., & Way, L. A. (2002). Elections Without Democracy: The Rise of Competitive Authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 13(2), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2002.0026
  • Gessen (2016), “Autocracy: Rules for Survival” New York Review of Books article
  • Levitsky, S., & Way, L. (2020). The New Competitive Authoritarianism. Journal of Democracy, 31(1), 51–65. https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/745953
  • Corrales, J. (2026). Venezuela Needs Regime Change: The Narrow Path to a Democratic Transition. Foreign Affairs, 105(3), 143–153.

Lecture 2, videos released Wednesday July 22: Authoritarianism in Practice

Readings due for Lecture 2:

 

Module 2: Issues in Comparative Politics

In this module, students will:

  • Interpret the role of ethnicity and identity in comparative politics
  • Investigate theories of revolution and regime breakdown
  • Discuss the role of the state in causing or alleviating economic problems
  • Interpret how sociopolitical outcomes for different country cases and across issue areas

 

Week 6 – Ethnicity, Identity, and Migration

Concepts covered include: ethnic identity; modernization; consociationalism; ethnic democracy

Cases covered include: India; Israel; Northern Ireland

Assignments:

  • Week 6 lecture response journal
  • Week 6 discussion & response

Lecture 1, videos released Monday July 27: Ethnicity, Citizenship and Political Mobilization

Readings due for Lecture 1:

Lecture 2, videos released Wednesday July 29: Ethnicity, Migration and Interethnic Governance

Readings due for Lecture 2:

 

Week 7 – Conflict, Violence, and Regime Breakdown

** FINAL TOPIC DUE ON CANVAS FRIDAY 11:59PM **

Concepts covered include: civil war; rebellion; greed vs. grievance

Cases covered include: Sudan; South Africa; Northern Ireland; Iran; Syria

Assignments:

  • Week 7 lecture response journal
  • Week 7 discussion & response
  • Final topic proposal (50 words) due on Canvas Friday 11:59 PM

Lecture 1, videos released August 3: Civil Conflict and Ethnic Rebellion

Readings due for Lecture 1:

 

Lecture 2, videos released August 5: Corruption, Violence, and State Failure

Readings due for Lecture 2:

 

Week 8 – Poverty and Inequality

Concepts covered include: development; underdevelopment; inequality; welfare state; market economy; command economy  

Cases covered include: DR Congo; South Africa; Venezuela; Bangladesh

Assignments:

  • Week 8 lecture response journal
  • Week 8 discussion & response

Lecture 1, videos released Monday August 10: Development and the State

Readings due for Lecture 1:

Lecture 2, videos released Wednesday August 12: Inequality and Political Economy

Readings due for Lecture 2:

 

Week 9 – Revolutions, Social Movements, and Collective Action

*** FINAL DUE FRIDAY 11:59 PM; NO LECTURE RESPONSE JOURNAL ***

Concepts covered include: collective action; resource mobilization; advocacy networks; revolutionary threshold

Cases covered include: Arab Spring; Ukraine; Nepal; climate movement; far-right networks

Assignments:

  • Final assignment due Friday 11:59 PM
  • Week 9 discussion & response

Lecture 1, videos released Monday August 17: Revolutions and Mass Mobilization

Readings:

  • Tanter, R., & Midlarsky, M. (1967 [2017]). A theory of revolution. In Revolutionary Guerrilla Warfare (pp. 47-74). Routledge.
  • (Chapter 6 & 7) Tilly, Charles, and Sidney Tarrow. Contentious Politics, Oxford University Press, Incorporated, 2015. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/washington/detail.action?docID=2121281.

Lecture 2, videos released August 19: Contemporary Civic Engagement & Course Wrap-up

Readings :

  • Sander, T. H., & Putnam, R. D. (2010). Democracy's past and future: still bowling alone?-the post-9/11 split. Journal of Democracy, 21(1), 9-16.
  • Fisher, D. R., Azedi, A., Mead, M., & Jayko, W. C. (2025). What’s radical? Comparing how climate activists and the general public perceive social movement tactics. Environmental Research Letters, 20(11), 114061. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ae1520
  • Levitsky, S., Way, L. A., & Ziblatt, D. (2026). The Price of American Authoritarianism: What Can Reverse Democratic Decline? Foreign Affairs, 105(1), 30–43.
  • Optional:
  • Dean, J. (2024). From solidarity to self-promotion? Neoliberalism and left politics in the age of the social media influencer. Capital & Class, 48(4), 519–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/03098168231199907

**FINAL PROJECT DUE FRIDAY AUGUST 21 11:59 PM**

 

Course Assignments and Assessment

This course is delivered asynchronously, but performance is still evaluated weekly. Assignments are designed to support structured engagement with course materials, develop comparative political analysis skills, and allow a reasonable degree of flexibility for students with varied schedules.

 

Grading breakdown

  • Week 1 introduction survey: 5% (all completed surveys will receive full credit)
  • Weekly discussion/engagement posts: 20%
  • Lecture response journals: 20%
  • Midterm assignment: 25%
  • Final project: 30% (5% for topic submission + 25% for assignment)
  • Optional extra credit/bonus point opportunities:
    • Midterm course evaluation (Week 5, completion adds 1% to the midterm assignment’s grade)
    • Final course evaluation (Week 9, completion adds 1% to the final assignment’s grade)
    • Meme of the week (weekly, completion adds 5% to discussion/engagement grade for the corresponding week)

 

1.     Week 1 introduction survey (5% of total grade)

Because this is an asynchronous class, I have to find creative ways to get to know you, and learn more about your course needs. I have developed a low-stakes survey (it’s technically a Canvas ‘quiz’, but don’t worry, there are no wrong answers!) that will give you the chance to let me know about your expectations and interests for the course in a structured way.

 

2.     Weekly Discussion Posts (20% of total grade)

Students will complete weekly informal engagement posts in response to prompts posted on Canvas.

  • Each week, prompts will be provided related to the lectures, readings, or case studies.
  • Posts should demonstrate engagement with course concepts, readings, and empirical cases.
  • Students are free to write informally, without over-intellectualizing, but should still try to be coherent and reflect clear analytic thinking
  • While this is a more informal assignment, in order to be legible, writing must be coherent and grammatically correct, making appropriate use of punctuation and not relying on abbreviations.

Requirements

  • Length: 200-300 words
  • Due:

Initial submission: Fridays at 11:59 PM

Response to one other student: Sundays at 11:59pm

  • Format: Written response submitted via Canvas
  • Evaluation criteria include clarity of argument, use of comparative concepts, engagement with course materials, and analytical depth.

Engagement posts are designed to replace in-person discussion by encouraging regular, reflective, and comparative analysis throughout the term. You are graded not only on your own points, but your ability to engage professionally, competently and respectfully with your peers.

 

3. Lecture Response Journals (20% of total grade)

Starting in Week 2, students are asked to write what they’re thinking about in response to the instructor’s lectures. The instructor provides prompts which will have students highlight concepts or arguments they found interesting, and discuss how the lecture content made them think and feel about the subject matter. In responses, you may wish to relate the course content to your everyday life, your background or your positionality, and this level of reflectivity is highly encouraged. Prompts relate to the lecture content, meaning it is not possible to succeed in the assignment without watching the lecture.

Requirements

  • Length: 200-300 words
  • Due: Fridays at 11:59 PM (every week EXCEPT midterm week and finals week)
  • Format: Document upload submitted via Canvas
  • Evaluation criteria include clarity of language, engagement with concepts, evidence of having viewed the lecture, and reflective depth.
  • NO JOURNALS DURING MIDTERM OR FINALS WEEK! (yay!)

 

4. Midterm Assignment: (25% of total grade; choose 1 option)

At the midpoint of the term, students will complete one assignment. Students must choose one of the following options.

Midterm Assignment Requirements (all options)

  • Length: 1,800–2,200 words
  • Must demonstrate comparative reasoning
  • Must engage with course concepts and empirical evidence

Option A: Institutional Engineering Analysis

Response essay analyzing which legislative AND electoral system a country should adopt, and relevant implications. Prompt released in Week 2.

Option B: Narratives of Democratic Backsliding

Media analysis essay on democratic backsliding outside the United States. Prompt released in Week 2.

  

5. Final Project: Comparative Politics in Practice 

The final project allows students to apply comparative political analysis to a topic of interest.

Students may choose one of the following options.

 

Final Project Requirements (ALL OPTIONS)

The final project allows students to apply comparative political analysis to a topic of their choice. Students may choose one of the three submission format options (Option A, Option B or Option C).

  • Length:2,500 words (excluding bibliography)
  • Sources: Course readings, lecture content, and at least 3–4 external peer-reviewed academic sources or primary sources. Op-eds and blogs do not count.
  • Citation style: APA 7th Edition
  • Topic proposal:Due Week 7 (required but ungraded — see below)
  • Final submission:Due end of Week 10

Full instructions for each option will be released on Canvas in Week 1.

Topic Proposal (due Week 7)

Submit a 1–2 paragraph description of your chosen option, topic, and approach. Proposals are not graded but are required. They allow your instructor to give early feedback and ensure your topic is workable before you invest significant time.

 

Option A: Comparative Case Study

A structured research paper comparing two countries on a major theme from the course (e.g., democracy and authoritarianism, democratic backsliding, populism, inequality, electoral systems, or social movements).

  • Organized around a clearly articulated comparative research question
  • Case selection justification
  • Thematically structured comparison
  • Uses course frameworks to explain, not just describe

 

Option B: Policy or Advocacy Brief

A professional brief addressed to a specific policy-relevant audience (e.g., NGO, government agency, international organization) on a political problem connected to the course.

  • Identifies a clearly defined political problem and audience
  • Uses comparative evidence from at least two countries
  • Assesses 2–3 policy approaches with trade-offs
  • Ends with specific, actionable, evidence-based recommendations
  • Reputable NGO/policy institute reports (e.g., Freedom House, V-Dem, HRW) acceptable as supplementary sources

 

Option C: Media or Political Communication Analysis

An analysis of how a political issue or event is covered across two media outlets based in different countries, and what that reveals about each country's political system.

  • 3 articles per outlet (6 total), from outlets based in different countries
  • Analyzes framing: word choice, sourcing, emphasis, and context
  • Compares coverage across outlets with specific examples
  • Connects framing to the broader political system in each country using course concepts

Option C is a political analysis assignment, not a media criticism exercise.

 

6. OPTIONAL extra credit opportunities:

Meme of the Week! (adds 5% to weekly discussion/engagement grade)           

  • On Canvas, under Assignments, students can submit for each week a ‘Meme of the Week’. Students are invited to earn extra credit via submitting an internet meme related to the week’s course content. Students can channel the urge to doomscroll into course content.
    • What is a meme? For the purposes of this course, a meme is “unit of cultural information spread by imitation”. Consider an internet meme to be an artefact that transmits a humorous or otherwise provocative message, taking various semiotic forms, mostly combining text and photos, or short videos, e.g. TikToks or Instagram Reels.
    • The meme can be one that you make yourself, or a post you saw on the internet. However, if it is a post from the internet, you should be sure to screenshot and/or screen-record the post, in case it gets deleted before it can be seen on the instructor’s end.
    • If the submission is not your own, please credit the creator by linking the original post or naming the account it came from.
    • Extra special memes may get a shout-out the next week in lecture and an extra 2.5% bonus (can only be earned once per quarter).

 

Late work and requests for extensions

Late work is disruptive to your teaching team, and I must discourage late submissions. I must know when to expect your assignments. Allowing students to submit work late is also unfair to the students who were able to submit on time. It is also critical that you prepare yourself for the realities of the working world by communicating any issue to those expecting to read your work ahead of time, as a courtesy to those you work with. However, I understand that sometimes important things arise, and students sometimes need some grace and understanding. Therefore, I will award extensions only to students who contact me at least 12 hours before the deadline. (This means, if an assignment is due Friday at 11:59pm PT, I must have received a written message from you no later than Friday at 11:59am.) Students who submit late or fail to provide at least 12 hours’ notice prior to the submission deadline will still be subject to the late penalty. The late penalty is 10% of the assignment grade for up to 24 hours after the deadline has passed, and an additional 10% after 24 hours. Unless you have made an arrangement with me, I will not accept submissions more than 48 hours after the deadline, and students will not be permitted to upload assignments after 48 hours, meaning the student would score a zero (0%) on the assignment.

 

Late penalty example:

Let us assume that POL S 204 student, named “Student X” has an assignment is due Friday 11:59pm. Let us also assume that Student X would have hypothetically done well in the assignment, and would have scored 95% on the assignment with no penalty, had they submitted before the Friday 11:59pm deadline. But, Student X has something going on in their personal or professional life that would make timely submission challenging. Here, we discuss four possible scenarios that can happen to Student X.

  1. If Student X emails the instructor to inform them that they need more time, on Thursday evening at 11:45pm (approximately 24 hours before the deadline), then the instructor will respond and privately inform them of their new deadline. They meet this new deadline, meaning they will score 95%.
  2. If Student X submits this same assignment at 3:15pm on Saturday (about 15 hours after the deadline), the student would be penalized 10%, scoring 85%.
  3. If Student X submits this assignment at 1:05am on Sunday (about 25 hours after the deadline), then the student would be penalized 20%, scoring 75%.
  4. If Student X attempted to submit the assignment on Monday morning at 8:30am (about 56 hours after the deadline), then the student would find that the submission portal is closed as 48 hours have passed, and the student would automatically receive 0%.

Here, you will see that the outcome changes only based on the actions of Student X, rather than those of the instructor. Student X is wholly responsible for communicating any issues that affect timely submission. Where Student X notifies the instructor of their issue in accordance with course policies, they are not penalized. Where Student X fails to do this, they automatically receive late penalties regardless of the quality of their submission.

 

Grading Appeals:

Course level grade appeal: The policy regarding appealing grades is as follows. A student who has an issue with their grade (beyond a simple tabulation error) must do the following, in the following order:

  1. Wait 24 hours from receiving a graded assignment, carefully review answers, and grading comments.
  2. Provide a typed statement to the Instructor explaining why you believe the grade you received should be altered (why exactly more points should be given for a particular answer). This must be about the substance of your work, not the effort you put into it or this class.
  3. Bring the work and your written concerns to the Instructor’s office hours within one week of receiving the graded assignment for discussion. Anything beyond one week will not be considered.
  4. Instructor will reread the work, re-evaluate it if appropriate, and return to the student within 2 days.

 

Grading Scale

There are no specific target means, medians or averages for this course, and grading does not take place on a curve. The grading scale I will use is as follows: 

POL S 204 Grading Scale

UW Grade on 4.0 scale

UW Letter

100-point scale

4.0

A

95-100

3.9

A

94

3.9

A

93

3.8

A-

92

3.8

A-

91

3.7

A-

90

3.6

A-

89

3.5

A-

88

3.4

B+

87

3.3

B+

86

3.2

B+

85

3.1

B

84

3.0

B

83

2.9

B

82

2.8

B-

81

2.7

B-

80

2.6

B-

79

2.5

B-

78

2.4

C+

77

2.3

C+

76

2.2

C+

75

2.1

C

74

2.0*

C

73

1.9

C

72

1.8

C-

71

1.7

C-

70

1.6

C-

69

1.5

C-

68

1.4

D+

67

1.3

D+

66

1.2

D+

65

1.1

D

64

1

D

63

0.9

D

62

0.8

D-

61

0.7**

D-

60

<0.7

F

0-59

*For UW Political Science majors: a score of 2.0 or greater is required for introductory courses

**Minimum grade for academic credit       

 

Rubric for Discussion posts

POL S 204 Discussion Post Rubric

Component

Points

Excellent

Good

Satisfactory

Unsatisfactory

Initial Post

6 pts

(6) Analytical post that advances the discussion; clearly engages course concepts, readings, and/or cases; demonstrates understanding of how comparative concepts apply to real-world or course examples

(4–5) Meaningful contribution that reflects course content, but engagement with readings or empirical cases is uneven or underdeveloped

(2–3) Simplistic or descriptive contribution; may mention course concepts but does not apply or analyze them substantively; goes little beyond surface-level observation

(0–1) Little to no meaningful participation; off-topic, incoherent, or fails to engage with course materials

Peer Reply

4 pts

(4) Engages substantively with a peer's argument; adds a new point, asks a thoughtful question, or applies a course concept to extend the conversation

(3) Responds meaningfully but primarily agrees or restates without extending the discussion

(1–2) Minimal engagement (e.g., "Great point!"); no analytical or comparative contribution

(0) No reply submitted, or reply is off-topic, disrespectful, or incoherent

Meme of the Week (optional extra credit)

+0.5 pts

Meme is clearly related to the week's course content.

 

—

No credit awarded if meme is unrelated to course content

 

 

Catalog Description:
Political systems in a comparative framework. Traditional and contemporary approaches to the study of governments and societies in different countries. Course equivalent to: TPOL S 204. Offered: AWSpS.
Department Requirements Met:
Introductory Courses
GE Requirements Met:
Social Sciences (SSc)
Credits:
5.0
Status:
Active
Last updated:
June 29, 2026 - 1:52 pm