Course: Introduction to Political Science (POLS 1) · Silver Oak University (fictional sample) · Prof. Halloran
Module: Week 14 of 16 · Fall 2026 · in-person, two 75-minute sessions
Objectives covered: Objective 8 — explain the major theories of international relations — realism, liberalism, and constructivism — and the basics of the international system, international organizations and law, and global political economy, presenting competing theories and contested global questions evenhandedly.

This file holds two pieces: (A) the Module 14 Overview page ("Start Here") and (B) the Welcome Announcement that drips out when the module opens. Week 14 runs Mon Nov 30 – Sun Dec 6, meeting Tue Dec 1 and Thu Dec 3, with end-of-week work due Sunday, Dec 6, 11:59 p.m. Adjust the day-of-week and times to match your section.

(A) Module 14 Overview — Start Here

Welcome to Week 14: International Relations

This is your home base for the week. Read it first, then work the checklist below from top to bottom. Everything you need is linked inside the module.

Every institution we've studied so far — legislatures, executives, courts, constitutions — assumes a government sitting above the actors, able to make and enforce the rules. This week we leave that world behind. International relations (IR) is the study of politics between sovereign states, in a system with no world government above them at all. That single structural fact — anarchy, meaning no higher authority, not chaos — is why IR looks and feels different from every other subfield we've studied, and it sets up this week's three competing explanations for how states behave: realism, liberalism, and constructivism.

The week's big question

"If there's no government standing above sovereign states, what explains the patterns we actually see — conflict, cooperation, and everything in between — and which of the field's leading theories explains it best?"

By Friday you'll be able to define anarchy precisely (and not as chaos), name and compare all three IR paradigms fairly, explain how the U.N. and international law function without a world police force, and close-read the actual U.N. Charter the way a political scientist does.

By the end of this week, you can…

Use this as a checklist. If you can do all four out loud, you're ready for the quiz.

• [ ] Define anarchy as the absence of a world government (a structural fact) and distinguish it clearly from chaos, lawlessness, or constant war (a behavioral claim it does NOT make).
• [ ] State realism, liberalism, and constructivism each in its strongest form — who's associated with each, what each claims, and what its critics say — without picking a winner.
• [ ] Explain the U.N.'s basic structure (Security Council, General Assembly, ICJ) and why states mostly comply with international law despite no world sheriff.
• [ ] Close-read a real international document — the U.N. Charter's Articles 1–2 — the way political scientists do, and run it through all three IR lenses.

What's due this week, and when

Work these in order — each one gets you ready for the next.

Heads-up on the AI tools: you'll use a chatbot to draft and explain, and then you judge its work against the texts and the record. Chatbots routinely misattribute IR quotations and flatten the three paradigms into strawmen. Catching the model is the point — in the tutorial, the assignment, and the workshop.

Late policy reminder: 10% off per day late. If life happens, reach out before the deadline — I'd much rather hear from you early.

How to succeed this week

• Lead with the structural fact, not the drama. Anarchy just means "no world government" — a plain description, not a verdict on how violent the world is. Say it out loud until it stops sounding scary.
• Memorize one tiny hook. "No sheriff, not no rules." States operate without a higher enforcer, but that doesn't mean anything goes — institutions, reciprocity, and norms all still shape behavior.
• Read the Charter twice. Once for what it says about sovereign equality and force, once for how each paradigm would read it differently. The second read is where this week's political science happens.
• Treat the chatbot as a confident intern, not an oracle. It will hand you a garbled version of Wendt's article title, or attribute the Melian Dialogue's most famous line to "Thucydides' own view" instead of to the Athenian envoys as he rendered them. Your job all term is to check it against the source.
• Expect fairness, practice fairness. This course never tells you which IR paradigm is "right." When we hit realism vs. liberalism vs. constructivism — and we hit it hard this week — you'll get the strongest case for each, and you'll be asked to engage the one you find least persuasive on its own terms before you argue your own view.

You don't need any background in foreign policy for this week — just the willingness to ask, of every claim about how states behave, which paradigm is doing the explaining here, and what would the other two say instead? Come to class ready to argue about whether power, institutions, or shared ideas explain international politics best. See you Tuesday.

(B) Welcome Announcement — Module 14

Release setting: post on the module's start day (offset = 0 days), i.e., Mon Nov 30, 2026 — not before. If your platform won't preserve the scheduled date on import, post this as a draft labeled "Release: Mon Nov 30."

Subject: Welcome to International Relations — who's in charge when nobody's in charge? 🌐

Hi everyone, and welcome to Week 14!

Quick warm-up before we start: every institution we've studied this term — Congress, a parliament, a court, a constitution — sits inside a state, under a government that can make and enforce rules. This week we step outside all of that, to the level where there is no government above the players at all. Political scientists call that condition anarchy — and the very first thing to unlearn is that it means chaos. It doesn't. It just means no world sheriff.

This week — International Relations — we tackle the big question: If there's no government standing above sovereign states, what explains the patterns we see — conflict, cooperation, and everything in between? By Friday you'll know the field's three leading paradigms — realism, liberalism, and constructivism — each in its strongest form, you'll understand how the U.N. and international law function without a world police force, and you'll have closely read the actual U.N. Charter the way political scientists do.

Three things not to miss:
1. Lecture Tutorial 14 — work through anarchy, the security dilemma, and the three paradigms with one approved chatbot (Gemini, Claude, or ChatGPT) and submit the share link. You'll catch the model's mistakes, not just trust it. Due Sun Dec 6.
2. Political Analysis Workshop 14 (the U.N. Charter, Arts. 1–2), Quiz 14, Discussion 14, and Assignment 14 also close Sun Dec 6 — the workshop is the heart of the course, so start early.
3. Open the Start Here page first — it lays out everything in order with due dates.

One promise, right up front: realism, liberalism, and constructivism are all live, active research traditions studied seriously by working political scientists today — this course will never tell you which one is "correct." You'll get the strongest case for each, and your grade never depends on which paradigm you favor — only on your evidence and reasoning. By Friday, the next time you hear a claim about "how the world really works" internationally, you'll know exactly what to ask: which paradigm is doing the explaining — and what would the other two say?

Bring your curiosity (and one assumption about international politics you're willing to have challenged) to class on Tuesday.

See you soon,
Prof. Halloran