Week 1 Discussion — Private Trouble or Public Issue? — Traditional alternative (no AI)

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

Hook

A problem can feel like yours alone and still be shared by thousands of people at the same moment. This week you learned to see that double view, which Mills called the sociological imagination, and to look at one situation through three different lenses.

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: Pick a real problem you or someone you know has faced (a cut shift, a rent increase, a long commute, a hard search for child care, a class that filled before you could register). Is it a personal trouble, a public issue, or both? Use the sociological imagination to explain your reasoning: what pattern across many people would you look for, and what would change your mind?

Option B: Pick a situation from your own campus, workplace, team, or neighborhood (a dress code, a group chat's unwritten rules, a new parking fee, a shift schedule). Run it through all three perspectives, one at a time, and name the level of analysis each works at. Which lens shows you the most about this situation, and what does each of the other two catch that it misses?

There is no single right answer here. A rent increase, a parking fee, or a group chat's rules can each be argued well in more than one direction, and the three lenses are complementary rather than rivals. Pick one you actually care about, and tell us the story.

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.

AI use: this version of the discussion uses no chatbot. Write your post and your replies from your own reasoning, in your own words.

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

• Say which option you chose.
• For Option A, name the problem, say whether it is a personal trouble, a public issue, or both, and name the pattern across many people you would look for; for Option B, give one sentence from each perspective and name each one's level.
• Use at least two of this week's terms (sociological imagination, personal trouble, public issue, macro level, micro level, structural functionalism, conflict theory, symbolic interactionism) correctly.
• Give your judgment, with a reason: why it is a trouble, an issue, or both, or which lens shows the most and why.
• 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: offer a perspective the poster did not use, name a pattern across many people that would test their claim, or point out where a level of analysis slipped. "Nice point!" on its own does not count.

What a strong post looks like:

I chose Option A. Last spring my hours at a grocery store were cut, and at first I blamed myself. Then I noticed coworkers at other stores in the same chain had their hours cut the same month. My own lost hours were a personal trouble, but cuts across a whole chain point to a public issue rooted in how the work is scheduled. To test that, I would look at whether hours fell for many workers at once, not only for me.

Notice how it names the problem, uses both of Mills's terms correctly, names a pattern across many people, and says what would test the claim. 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