Week 1 Discussion — What Is Your Time Really Worth? — Traditional alternative (no AI)

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

Hook

A concert ticket priced at 60 dollars really costs 120 dollars once you count the 4 hours of pay at 15 dollars an hour that you give up to go. This week you learned that every choice has an opportunity cost, that a production possibilities frontier draws a whole community's trade-offs, and that a positive claim (what is) is different from a normative claim (what ought to be).

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: Think of a real trade-off in your own life between paid work hours and something else you value, such as a fuller course load, caring for family, training for a sport, or rest. Should you count the forgone pay as part of the cost? Take a position on how you would price that choice by its opportunity cost, separate at least one positive claim (something evidence could check) from your normative judgment (what you think you ought to do), use one example, and state the strongest case for the other side as fairly as its best defender would.

Option B: A community has enough money and volunteers for only one of two projects this year: longer evening hours at its public library or a new youth sports program. Should it treat the choice as a trade-off along a frontier, with each project's opportunity cost on the table? Take a position on which project it should choose, separate at least one positive claim (something evidence could check) from your normative judgment (which project matters more), use one example, and state the strongest case for the other side as fairly as its best defender would.

There is no single right answer here. Thoughtful people choose differently on both options, because they weigh the same trade-offs with different values, and the course takes no side on either one. Pick the option you care about, and make your case.

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.
• For Option A, say how you would price a trade-off between paid hours and something else you value; for Option B, say which project the community should choose and what the other project's opportunity cost is. Use one example either way.
• Give at least one reason, and state the strongest case for the other side as its best defender would.
• Label at least one positive claim and one normative judgment in your post, and use at least two of this week's terms (opportunity cost, trade-off, production possibilities frontier, positive statement, normative statement) correctly.
• End with one plain sentence that states your position.
• 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.
• Write from your own reasoning, in your own words. If you draw on your own life, leave out names and identifying details, and round or skip any pay figure you would rather keep private.

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: name an alternative the classmate left out of the opportunity cost, point out a claim labelled positive that rests on values (or the reverse), or state a stronger version of the side the poster argued against. "Nice point!" on its own does not count.

What a strong post looks like:

I chose Option A. When I picture taking one more course instead of a weekend shift, the real cost is the course fee plus the pay I give up, not the fee alone. A positive claim: dropping the shift lowers my monthly earnings, which my pay stubs could confirm. My normative judgment: finishing my program sooner is worth that pay to me. The other side is strong: the pay covers rent now, and a slower path keeps me out of debt. I concede that the trade-off depends on my budget, but I still hold my view for now. In one plain sentence: I count the forgone pay, and I still choose the course because I value finishing sooner.

Notice how it counts the forgone pay, labels a positive claim and a normative judgment, states the other side at full strength, and ends in one plain sentence. 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