AI Partners available for today's work
Remember: every AI use gets documented. → AI Documentation Template

What today is about

The unit pivots today. From "how water works" to "who decides who gets it."

Two big concepts land first. Water scarcity isn't one thing; it's two. Physical scarcity = not enough water in the system (Aral Sea, Cape Town's "Day Zero", parts of Yemen). Economic scarcity = water exists but the institutional / infrastructural capacity to deliver it doesn't (much of sub-Saharan Africa, slum settlements in megacities). Chennai's 2019 near-Day-Zero was both: depleted aquifers (physical) plus collapsed institutional response (economic). Most real disputes layer the two.

Then the four water-rights frameworks. They allocate the same physical water differently:

  • Riparian rights: whoever owns the bank owns the use. Long history in English / Indian / common-law systems.
  • Prior appropriation: first to use, first to claim. Dominant in the US West. "Use it or lose it" creates perverse incentives.
  • Public trust doctrine: water is common heritage, government holds it in trust for citizens including future generations.
  • Common-pool resource theory: Elinor Ostrom's Nobel work showing communal management often outperforms private or state ownership. Local irrigation associations as the classic example.

Each framework gives different stakeholders different claims. Today is also assignment kickoff: the Water Stakeholders Map + Position Paper is assigned, the 8 cases released, the two-tier choice explained. From this block forward, every U5 activity feeds your Position Paper.

Before you start the work

Start with the Read: the assessment brief you will work from. The Watch and the Interact sit around it.

Placeholder
Watch (~8 min)
TBD: four water-rights frameworks compared side-by-side. Each gets one allocation example: riparian (Cauvery delta), prior appropriation (Colorado River), public trust (Mono Lake, California), common-pool (a successful irrigation association). The point: the same water allocates differently depending on the framework you pick.
Read (~12 min)
The Water Stakeholders Map + Position Paper assignment handout: 8-case roster, GRASPS frame, Stakeholder Map 7-field template, Position Paper 4-part structure, 4 scoring gates. Read it today; you'll reference it for the rest of the unit.
Placeholder
Interact (~12 min)
TBD: whole-class water-rights framework sort. Project 6-8 Cauvery-dispute claims one at a time (e.g., "delta farmers' century-old wells should be protected"). For each: which of the four frameworks most supports this claim? Sticky-note vote + 60-sec discuss. The point: which framework you start from biases which stakeholders win.

Today's work: choose one path

All four paths end with a top-3 case candidates list + a preliminary stakeholder-perspective leaning. The path you pick is about how you want to consider the options.

Learning Intention: I have chosen my case and my stakeholder, I can articulate why my stakeholder's perspective is worth representing, and I have identified what about my stakeholder I might find hardest to defend.
A
Walk all 8 case cards + jot top-3 (default)
Read all 8 case cards in the assessment handout. For each, write one sentence on why it's interesting to YOU specifically. Then pick a top 3 + sketch a preliminary stakeholder perspective for your #1.
Solo · Default
B
Source-test your top choice (stretch)
If you already have a strong sense of your top case, source-test it: in 25 minutes, find one government source, one news source, and one NGO source about a contested claim in that case. Quick-OPVL each. If the source set is thin or all sides agree (unlikely on a real water dispute), reconsider.
Solo · Stretch
C
Peer-discuss with overlapping interest (choice)
Find a partner with overlapping interest in 1-2 cases. Discuss what each of you would do differently with the same case + different stakeholders. Useful for clarifying YOUR angle without duplicating someone else's.
Pairs · Choice
D
Stretch-vs-default decision support (practice)
The hard pedagogical pick: do you take a stakeholder perspective that isn't your own default (stretch, stronger T/T outcome), or stick with your default sympathy (safer)? Come to the peer-help table for a 5-minute think-aloud. Either choice is allowed; the rubric reflects the choice.
Solo · Practice

Open your Class Notebook and type today's entry header as Heading 2:

A: Mar 15 | U5 B5 | Water Scarcity and Water RightsB: Mar 16 | U5 B5 | Water Scarcity and Water Rights

What you're submitting today

Top-3 cases + preliminary stakeholder lean for #1. Block 7 is where you lock; today you arrive with candidates.

Top-3 cases + stakeholder lean for #1

Three cases ranked. For #1: two sentences. Sentence one: which stakeholder perspective you're leaning toward (specific: "a Tamil Nadu Cauvery delta rice farmer" not "farmers"). Sentence two: what about that stakeholder you might find hardest to defend. The second sentence is the honest one. The whole assessment is built around perspective-taking; if everything about your stakeholder feels easy, you're probably defaulting to your own view in disguise.

Submit via Google Classroom →

Rubric link: Today launches the T/T thread for the Position Paper. T/T 7-8 requires "argues from stakeholder's view using evidence they would cite, not student's own." Today's stakeholder lean + hardest-to-defend self-flag is the first move toward that bar. See the rubric.

One question before you leave

Three to five minutes. Your answer is saved to your reflection journal, where you can read back everything you have written this year.

Use this to clarify your top choice before Block 6's deep-dive day.

Today's reflection is in Google Classroom, under Reflection Journal.

Link posted in August

Sign in with your school account. Your teacher can see what you write here.