Week 11 Discussion — Plurality or Proportional? — Traditional alternative (no AI)

Instructors: publish this instead of the adaptive version if you prefer, and unpublish or delete the adaptive one.

Hook

The same ballots can fill a legislature in very different ways. This week showed you one real election in which 33.7 percent of the vote became 63.2 percent of the seats, and an illustrative table in which one rule gave a party half the seats and another gave it all of them.

Your discussion question — choose Option A or Option B; they carry the same weight and the same rubric, and you say which you picked.

Option A: A new democracy (an illustrative, made-up country) must choose how to elect its national legislature: first-past-the-post in single-member districts or proportional representation by party list. Take a position: which should it choose, and why? Use the 2024 UK general election (33.7 percent of the vote became 411 of 650 seats; 14.3 percent became 5 seats) to say what each rule tends to do, label which of your premises is empirical and which is normative, and state at full strength the strongest case for the system you reject.

Option B: A campus student senate (illustrative) with 8 seats must choose between electing one senator in each of 8 residence-hall districts by plurality and sharing all 8 seats among slates by the D'Hondt method. Take a position: which rule should it adopt, and why? Use the week's D'Hondt table (A 4, B 3, C 1, D 0) and its plurality contrast (A wins 8 of 8 on 48 percent of the votes) to say what each rule does, label which of your premises is empirical and which is normative, and state at full strength the strongest case for the rule you reject.

There is no single right answer. Thoughtful people defend first-past-the-post for its accountability and local members, and thoughtful people defend proportional representation for matching seats to votes; your job is to argue your side well and to state the other side fairly.

Expectations

Activity format: one initial post followed by two substantive peer replies. Plan on about 45 minutes across the two deadlines; your instructor sets both due dates in Canvas.

Your initial post — by the first due date (early in the module week):

• Say which option you chose.
• State your position in one clear sentence.
• For Option A, say what the 2024 UK figures show about how first-past-the-post turned votes into seats, and what they do not settle. For Option B, say what the D'Hondt table and the plurality contrast show.
• Give at least one reason, and label each premise you rely on as empirical or normative.
• State the strongest case for the other side, as its own defenders would put it, before you answer it.
• Use at least two of this week's terms (plurality, majority, political party, party system, electoral system, first-past-the-post, single-member district, majority-runoff, proportional representation, party list, electoral threshold, mixed-member proportional, D'Hondt method, quotient, Duverger's law, mechanical effect, psychological effect, percentage points, mandate) correctly, and keep Duverger's argument in your own words.
• Length: roughly 150–250 words if written. You may instead record your post as audio or video (about two minutes) and attach a transcript; both forms are scored by the same rubric.

Your replies — by the second due date (the end of the module week):

• Reply substantively to at least two classmates.
• A substantive reply does more than agree: check whether a poster kept a vote share apart from a seat share, test whether a premise labelled empirical could really be checked, or state the side the poster did not take at its strongest. "Nice point!" on its own does not count.

What a strong post looks like:

I chose Option A, and I argue the new country should use proportional representation. My empirical premise is that in the 2024 UK election, 14.3 percent of the vote won 5 seats under first-past-the-post. My normative premise is that a party backed by that many voters ought to hold more than a handful of seats. The strongest reply is accountability: under first-past-the-post one party usually governs alone, so voters know exactly whom to remove.

Notice how it takes a side, uses a pinned figure accurately, labels each premise by kind, and states the other side fairly before answering it. That is the bar.

Participation rubric

This discussion is worth 10 points. The three criteria below look at your initial post and your peer replies.

Post early if you can — the best threads happen when people have time to reply before the second due date.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com