Political science Public Policy Review Assignment

● A pilot experiment. I will be extremely lenient in giving credits.
● How long did you take to read the Roy article?
The Roy article
● Large-group
○ In March 1942, wherein Canada was the Japanese allowed by the federal
government to stay? Provide textual evidence.
■ Beyond 100 miles of the Pacific coast (p.255).
○ In September 1944? Provide textual evidence.
○ In May 1947? Provide textual evidence.
○ In May 1949? Provide textual evidence.
● Small-group
○ The Roy article tells a story of “BC’s MPs vs. local opinion.” Enumerate the
occurrences of BC’s MPs in the article. Provide textual evidence.
■ The 1945 federal election campaign (p.259).
○ What are we talking about by “local opinion”? Provide textual evidence.
■ Local print media such as the Vancouver Daily Province (p.261).
● Small-group
○ What were the major arguments against permitting the Japanese to return to the
BC Coast? Provide textual evidence.
○ What were the major arguments in favor of it? Provide textual evidence.
● Large-group
○ What types of primary sources did Roy use? Provide textual evidence.
■ Local print media such as the Vancouver Daily Province (p.261).
Assignment #2
● Review the Roy article.
● One three-sentence introductory paragraph. 80-120 words (strict!).
○ Sentence #1: Stage-setting. (Different from Assignment #1!)
■ Colonizers in Canada took a set of measures to assimilate First Nations
○ Sentence #2: Summarize Roy’s overarching argument, including the author’s full
name and the article’s full title. (Different from Assignment #1!)
■ Sarah Carter in “‘Complicated and Clouded’: Federal Administration of
Marriage and Divorce among the First Nations of Western Canada,
1887-1906” argues that …
○ Sentence #3: Your thesis statement.
■ In this paper, I will argue that Carter’s argument is compelling because
she successfully establishes A, B, and C. (Note: A, B, and C are the main
ideas of the three body paragraphs.)
● Three body paragraphs. 120-150 words each (strict!).
○ Topic sentence.
○ Supporting explanation(s).
Historical detail(s).
● One concluding paragraph. 60-100 words (strict!).
○ The first sentence should be a paraphrase of your thesis statement.
● 585-600 words (strict!).
○ Have a word count at the end of the paper in the following format:
(80 + 140 + 150 + 140 + 80 = 590 words)
● Others
○ No title page.
○ Title = Assignment #2
○ No bibliography/reference.
○ No name, only student number.
○ 12-point, Times New Roman, double space, 1-inch margins.
Next Week
● I will publicly mark a full draft.
○ I want a volunteer to send me your full draft by 11:59 am, Wednesday, July 1
(Pacific Time).
○ I will redact your name and mark it publicly. I cannot promise there will not be
any “harsh” comments.
○ You will get extra credit as well as detailed feedback.
○ After next week’s session, you will still have one chance to send me an updated
draft for feedback.
○ If I receive more than one draft by 11:59 am, Wednesday, I will use the earliest
one. No detailed feedback to other drafts before next week’s session, sorry.
● Peer review
○ You should have a full draft at hand by our next session.
○ For further arrangements, I will send you an email later.
● Each of you has one opportunity to send me an outline for feedback by 11:59 am,
Tuesday, June 30 (Pacific Time)