Students in Upper School History Teacher Alexander Rolnick’s AP Comparative Politics and Government class assumed the roles of leaders to learn about the intricacies of negotiating trade agreements. They spent time preparing for a USMCA (the trade agreement that replaced NAFTA) renegotiation during class, with some students representing a variety of Mexican interests and one of those of the United States and the current administration. Rolnick explains, “Mexico is one of the six AP comparative case studies, so in the activity, the only American perspective was the Trump administration. All the other roles represent different Mexican interests to account for the fact that the point (content-wise) is to understand varying interest groups in Mexican politics and the benefits and drawbacks that NAFTA/USMCA has had on Mexico. Students investigated the way these groups influence the legitimacy of the Mexican government.”
Rolnick, with the help of AI, created 12 roles that were designed to showcase the breadth of interests of the various participants. He shared a packet of information with sources for students to read and better understand the layers involved in trade negotiations. Then, the students chose roles (some of them pairing up to represent the same role) and began preparing for the classroom summit. President Donald Trump of the United States and President Claudia Sheinbaum of Mexico led the discussion, and were joined by representatives of the Zapatista movement (indigenous peoples), the transportation lobby (which actually represented the interests of the powerful Sinaloa Cartel), academic researchers, labor rights, business federation, environmental NGOs, major economic interests, Mexican agribusiness, small farmers, and women’s rights.
The negotiations quickly got underway, and the representatives did a great job sharing the viewpoints of their positions while explaining how their proposals might benefit the goals of other groups. Natural coalitions began to form during the vibrant discussion.
“Roles are a hook that help students to look at the world from a different perspective and think critically from a point of view other than their own,” said Rolnick. “They also help students build confidence expressing their ideas, because everyone in the room knows that the ideas they are embodying aren’t necessarily their own. This helps students practice defending a point of view without the nerves that sometimes come from taking a personal stand, and ultimately builds their capacity to take a stand on issues they personally care about.”
Reagan Hamilton ’25 represented the labor unions in Mexico. She said the exercise prompted her to learn more about how labor organizations function conceptually, particularly in how they work to advocate for workers’ compensation and rights. “The individual I researched was Susana Prieto, a highly-regarded labor rights activist in the Mexican state. I found it incredibly interesting how she has been a target of political violence simply because she was outspoken about increasing the wages and working conditions of Mexican workers,” she said.
“The role I played, as a representative for an environmental NGO, was a role that I was passionate about as I am an advocate for policies that work to help the environment and thwart climate change,” said Claire Giokas ’25. “I did, however, research extensively about how the original NAFTA agreement and the newer NAFTA agreement have included (or not included) policies that would work to prevent climate change. I discovered that, unfortunately, neither agreement even mentions climate change nor includes any major steps to promote policies that would protect the environment.”
Some of the proposals floated by the student representatives included reducing trade barriers to support small and medium industries, protecting Zapatista and indigenous land, eliminating tariffs for climate mitigation industries, reducing CO2 emissions by reducing natural gas and oil production, and preventing gender-based discrimination in the workforce. None of these proposals were agreed upon by the negotiators. Instead, they came to a consensus on fair wages for Mexican workers and better working conditions over five years, expediting border crossings with pre-checks and a clearinghouse system with weighing stations (which was actually a cartel proposal intended to help them transport drugs across the border!), and the sharing of resources to fight drug cartels.
“The clash of ideas that results from different perspectives being embodied in the classroom allows students to critically consider how different ideas map on to the ones they are taking on, and to challenge or build on them in conversation,” said Rolnick. “Advocating for ideas from a perspective other than one’s own also helps students practice skills that will likely be required of them in life.”
“My favorite part was being able to have thoughtful conversations and debates with my classmates about several different issues, issues that the three countries’ leaders are discussing right now,” said Giokas. “The challenges I faced are challenges that I am sure are similar to the obstacles that real environmental NGOs face daily; many leaders see climate change as a non-priority.”
“My favorite part of the exercise was the debrief after, where we all spoke about how many, if not all, of the proposals were good,” shared Hamilton. “We did note, however, that there is unfortunately a difference between ‘good’ and ‘realistic’ in politics, particularly global politics.”