Final answer:
Boundaries of human populations are not strictly defined by country borders due to historical, cultural, and social factors that allow populations to transcend these manmade lines. The legacy of colonialism and contemporary migration illustrate the complex nature of populations in relation to nation-state boundaries.
Step-by-step explanation:
Your classmate's assertion that the boundaries of human populations are at the borders of countries is not completely correct. While political boundaries often define the sovereign territories of nation-states, human populations do not necessarily align neatly with these borders. A person's sense of identity or belonging may be tied to a region, ethnicity, or culture that transcends manmade borders, resulting in populations that span multiple countries or are divided by national boundaries.
Moreover, the concept of nation-states and the borders that define them are sometimes a legacy of colonialism, where borders were drawn without regard to the historical or cultural territories of the indigenous populations. The international system has been significantly impacted by these arbitrarily drawn borders, leading to conflicts and debates about national identity and sovereignty, as seen in countries like Iraq, Sudan, and Nigeria.
Additionally, the movement of people due to various factors including economic migration, conflict, and environmental changes, further complicates the notion that populations are confined to countries. For example, in the United States, the topic of immigration and the crossing of national borders raises questions about the impact on a country's culture and economy, but also reflects the fluid nature of human populations.
ESRI-GEO Inquiry and other educational materials encourage exploring different types of boundaries and their implications, which help students understand that populations and their dynamics are more complex than often suggested by the political boundaries of nation-states.