CEP
461: Ethics and Identity
Winter
2005
Mark Purcell
448E Gould | mpurcell@u.washington.edu | 206-543-8754
Office Hours: by appointment
Class meeting time
and place: MW 8:30-10:20, Gould 114
Introduction
There are two main goals in this course. The first goal is to help you develop critical literacy in a range of ethical debates. This means critically understanding the various arguments surrounding the debates. The second goal is to help you gain experience developing, articulating, and defending your personal ethics as a member of a larger community.
Course Goals
§ Develop critical literacy in key ethical ideas and arguments.
§ Gain experience negotiating those ideas and arguments together with others.
§ Improve personal communication, reading, writing, and analytical skills in a variety of contexts.
§ Form a viable and sustainable learning community among ourselves.
In CEP, students have significant responsibilities, and the success of the course ultimately depends upon how well they are met. To this end, your first responsibility is to one another and to one another’s education. In this class, and in this major, you and your classmates will generate knowledge through discussion. In order for the class to be successful, you must be an active participant in both teaching and learning. In class, each of you will participate by contributing, discussing, listening, and analyzing the material, while outside of class, each of you will participate by reading the material, carefully completing the assignments, and otherwise ensuring that you are well prepared for class.
Students are also responsible for the following, more specific tasks:
1. Contribute to each day’s discussion and work, and understand, reflect on, and form your own views on the issues studied.
2. Complete all assignments in a timely manner while ensuring that products are of a high standard.
3. Help sustain a CEP community of learners, be responsible to your peers and to yourself, and when appropriate, provide constructive feedback on peer work.
4. Contribute to the ongoing management of the class by helping to organize class structure, discussions, and assignments.
5. Write a narrative evaluation of your performance and progress in the course at the quarter’s end and meet with your instructor to discuss it.
Students must also meet the CEP attendance requirements as outlined in the CEP Plum Manual. Attendance will be taken at all scheduled meeting times. Part of this means arriving on time.
Instructor
Responsibilities
I play several vital roles in the class and can be relied upon to provide the following:
i. A safe and effective learning context: My first job is to develop the learning context for the course. In this case that means guiding our collective construction of the course. While students play a big role in determining the form and content of the class, I will also use my experience to play a leading role in shaping its direction.
Setting the context also means that ultimately I will insure that the learning environment is a safe, respectful, and productive environment for all of us. As a community, the class should maintain these standards by regulating itself, but if a student continues to feel that these standards are not being met then he or she should speak to me so that we can find ways to resolve the problem.
ii. Timely feedback, advice, and instruction on course assignments and other course requirements: Students should expect me to provide timely and considered feedback on all course assignments and projects. I will also be available to answer questions, provide advice and information, and otherwise aid students in their learning.
iii. Assigning final credit for the course: I will be responsible for assigning final course credit and determining whether or not a student has met the course requirements to pass. As part of the final assessment process, I will provide a permanent written evaluation of each student’s performance and progress for the quarter in the form of a “narrative transcript”, and meet with each student to discuss his or her performance (otherwise known as the “exit interview”).
Assessment
Your final assessment in this course will be based on your performance on the following:
|
Item |
Percent |
Date Due |
|
Participation |
25 |
Every class and outside class |
|
Reading/question assignments |
20 |
Each discussion class |
|
Ethical autobiography |
15 |
Outside class, Week 2 |
|
February 16—Wednesday, Week 7 March 2—Wednesday, Week 9 March 15—Tuesday, Exam Week |
||
|
Presentation of essay argument |
10 |
February 23—Wednesday Week 8 |
Academic
honesty
The University takes the offenses of cheating and plagiarism very seriously, and so do I. Cheating is taking advantage of the work of others. Plagiarism is representing the work of others as your own, without giving appropriate credit. If you are unsure what is OK or not OK, make sure to ask me!
|
Week 1 |
|
|
Monday, January 3 |
Introduction Class Design Charrette I |
|
Wednesday, January 5 |
Class Design Charrette II |
|
Week 2: |
|
|
Monday, January 10 |
Readings: Chapters 1 & 2 of Singer Assignment: R/Q assignment #1 due |
|
Wednesday, January 12 |
Readings: Chapters 35 & 37 of Singer Assignment: R/Q assignment #2 due |
|
Week 3: |
|
|
Monday, January 17 |
No Class: MLK Day |
|
Wednesday, January 19 |
Readings: Chapters 39 & 38 of Singer Assignment: R/Q assignment #3 due |
|
Week 4: |
|
|
Monday, January 24 |
Readings: Class decides Assignment: R/Q assignment #4 due |
|
Wednesday, January 26 |
Readings: Chapters 4, 5, & 6 of Singer Assignment: R/Q assignment #5 due |
|
Week 5: |
|
|
Monday, January 31 |
Readings: Class decides Assignment: R/Q assignment #6 due |
|
Wednesday, February 2 |
Readings: Chapters 7, 8, & 9 of Singer Assignment: R/Q assignment #7 due |
|
Week 6: |
|
|
Monday, February 7 |
Readings: Class decides |
|
Wednesday, February 9 |
Readings: Chapters 13 and 14 of Singer Assignment: R/Q assignment #9 due |
|
Week 7: |
|
|
Monday, February 14 |
Readings: Class decides Assignment: R/Q assignment #10 due |
|
Wednesday, February 16 |
Readings: Chapters 16 and 17 of Singer |
|
Week 8: |
|
|
Monday, February 21 |
|
|
Wednesday, February 23 |
|
|
Week 9: |
|
|
Monday, February 28 |
Readings: Chapters 19 and 20 of Singer |
|
Wednesday, March 2 |
Readings: Class decides Assignment: R/Q assignment #13 due and Essay #2
due |
|
Week 10: |
|
|
Monday, March 7 |
Readings: Chapter 22 of Singer Assignment: R/Q assignment #14 due |
|
Wednesday, March 9 |
Readings: Option Assignment: R/Q assignment #15 due |
Exam
Week
|
|
|
Tuesday, March 15 |
Essay #3 due |
Reading/Question Assignments
CEP 461
Winter 2005
Overview
For
each discussion, you will prepare yourself by reading the reading and by
preparing a written reading/question assignment.
The
reading assignment component provides you with an opportunity to develop
your critical understanding of a particular reading. Depending on the reading, we can use one or more kinds of
assignment:
The particular circumstances can vary for each reading, and the reading component is meant to be flexible so it can adapt to the reading at hand. I think we should always try to do “understanding,” but feel free to think of new assignments that can illuminate a given reading particularly well.
The question component of these assignments prepares you to discuss the reading. It should distill your reading experience into a discussion question that solicits the responses of the group, drawing others into a collective dialogue on the readings.
There will be 15 reading/question sets. The question assignments are worth 20% of your course grade. Each reading/question assignment will be graded on a scale of 0 (lowest) to 2 (highest). The question sets should be entirely your own work. This is not a collaborative assignment.
Good
Discussion Questions
Good discussion questions are “open-ended.” They have a complex answer and/or a range of possible answers. They are usually not “closed-ended,” meaning that there is a particular, discrete answer. More importantly, good discussion questions are genuine. That means you have not already made up your mind what the answer is. For example if you ask, “Is the U.S. right to attack Iraq without U.N. backing?” and you really have not made up your mind if the U.S. is right or not, your question is genuine. You are really asking. If, on the other hand, you ask, “Bush can’t really believe it is right to attack Iraq without U.N. support, can he?” you have made up your mind that it is wrong to attack. You are really telling, not asking. For the purposes of these discussion questions, ask, don’t tell.
Good, genuine questions can be descriptive. These ask about what actually is happening in the reading or in the world. Examples: “Does the author mean to say…?” or “Do you think power or money is more important to Saddam?” Good, genuine questions can also be normative. Normative questions ask what should be going on in the readings or in the world. For example, the question above about whether the U.S. is right to attack is normative. Normative questions open up the issue of values, of what people think the world should be like. You can ask either descriptive or normative questions in your question sets.
Format
In order to make reading these a little easier for me, some standardization helps.
The reading/question assignment should be typed and you should try to fit it onto one page. Make sure your name is on the page.
Label each component, as in:
Johnson’s piece applies to euthanasia…
Is deontology a good way…
Questions for a particular set of reading are due the day we discuss the readings. See the syllabus for specific dates.
Ethical
Autobiography
CEP 461
Winter 2005
Concept
There
are several reasons why we are engaging in this exercise. The first is to make public within the class
something of your ethical history so we all have a shared set of concrete
ethical issues to use in our discussions.
Second, they will help us understand each other better—particularly the
personal histories that may lie behind a certain set of ethical values. Third, they are an opportunity for you to
think explicitly about your ethical values, as a benchmark to developing those
values over the course of the quarter.
Content
The
content of these is public within the class.
That means you should discuss whatever elements of your autobiography
you are comfortable sharing with others in the class. You can discuss big decisions you have made, or relatively less
momentous ones. The idea is to talk
about those decisions in a way that reveals your personal ethical values. As you think about a given decision you have
faced, ask yourself 1) what values did I use to make that decision? Did I prioritize certain values over
others? How so? 2) Why did I prioritize the values I
did? Where did I get that set of
priorities?
We
are trying to get at both what values we hold dear and why we hold those values
dear.
Procedure
We
will meet outside of class in the second week on Tuesday and Thursday evening,
where we will present these both in writing and orally. Make sure to bring 8 written copies. Also, make sure to have a coherent oral
presentation ready to go.
For
the written portion, the number of pages is open, but make sure you provide us
enough material to give us a coherent and informative account. We need to know enough to use your case
productively and fairly in our class discussions. For the oral part, we have budgeted about 30 minutes, which
should mostly consist of you telling your story, but which can also include
interjections and questions from the rest of us.
In
the 10th week we will revisit your autobiographies to discover how
they have been informed or changed by what we have learned in class.
Presentations
CEP 461
Winter 2005
Concept
The
presentations are designed to do two things: 1) give you practice making a
formal presentation of an argument, and 2) offer an opportunity to receive
feedback on your argument for the second and third essays.
Content
The
presentation should articulate the argument you will make in your second and
third essays (in which you argue your own point of view on an ethical
question). This argument should not be
in draft form, or in the formulation stages.
It should be as fully formed as you can make it. That way, the feedback you receive will be
ideas you have not yet thought of, suggestions to push you farther than you
were able to go by yourself. That is
when feedback is most useful.
Procedure
You
will give your presentation on February 23, Wednesday of Week 8. Since we have 7 presentations and 110
minutes, you will have a slot of about 15 minutes each. You should probably shoot for 10 minutes of
talking, so you have time for feedback in class (feedback can also happen
outside of class). The feedback can be
about the effectiveness of the presentation, but it should also address the
substantive argument.
Participation
CEP 461
Winter 2005
Participation makes up 25% of your course grade. It is important. And there is no way around participating. As the syllabus lays out, each of you has a responsibility to others in the class to share your ideas and insights. The way this happens is by you speaking during class. If you do not actively listen and share your questions and ideas with everyone, they can’t benefit from what you have to offer. Each of you has important questions and ideas to share that we can all learn from. Therefore, since you all have something important to contribute, you all have a responsibility to contribute it.
You will be graded on participation class-by-class. Effective participation is not measured by amount. If you consistently share your ideas and questions and concerns in an honest effort to explore the material in the spirit of intellectual curiosity, you will receive a good grade for participation.
So, the strategy for participation is this: do not hesitate to share your thoughts. Do not think that they have to be fully formed and 100% defensible before you offer them. Do not think that they have to be brilliant or dazzling. Do not think you should remain quiet because you have different ideas about a topic than most others in the class (that’s when we need you most). And, most importantly, do not think that you have to know before you speak. Honest questions and true struggles within yourself that you have not yet resolved are the best way to contribute.
Remember also that listening is as important as talking. Asking genuine questions (for which you have not already decided on an answer) is a good way to listen. If you ask a question that you do not already have an answer for, you will genuinely want to hear what your classmates have to say. The worst thing for discussion is a series of unrelated monologues. What we are shooting for are true dialogues in which you engage the comments and questions of others rather than following them up with unrelated comments and questions. Be curious about what others have to say.
I understand that oral participation in class is a struggle for some. I am willing to explore any and all ways to help you participate. If you feel uncomfortable with speaking in class, for whatever reason, you should come see or e-mail me so we can think of ways to make it more comfortable. I stand ready to help you find ways to speak, but the responsibility for participating is yours.
One last issue that differs in this class is that because we are a relatively small group, part of your participation duties involve a collective management of the class. We must all take an added responsibility to design the course, prepare materials, select readings, get logistics like photocopying done, prepare discussion leadership ideas, etc. So be aware of this element of participation.
Essays
CEP 461
The idea of the essays is to have you articulate an argument on a particular ethical dilemma or debate. The essay will have three iterations. The first iteration will make the case for the point of view opposite from your own. The second iteration will make the case for your own point of view. The class will then offer critical feedback on the second essay, and you will revise it to produce the third iteration. Each essay is worth 10% of your grade (the essays together are worth 30% of your grade).
The idea of these essays is both to develop your ability to write persuasively and to help you bring together theory and practice in the course. In making your argument, you will need to apply the ideas from the readings to the specific ethical case you are arguing. It is not enough to argue that Eugene Young’s deontological perspective is wrong, you must also marshal an alternative perspective to support your argument.
The essays should be typed, double-spaced, 1” margins, 12-point font. They should be 5-7 pages long. The pages should be numbered.
Discussion
Techniques CEP 461 Winter 2005
These
are just some basic structures we can draw on to organize our discussions. We have no formal leadership process, but as
we collectively plan discussions, this is a useful resource.
Whole group—everyone engages in
discussion together at one time. This
is good because you can get a greater range of ideas and opinions with a larger
group. Large groups are sometimes
tricky to manage well though, so having a good set of stimulating questions is
important so you can shape the discussion to move in insightful directions that
you have thought out beforehand. Large-group
can also be a more intimidating setting in which to speak.
Small-group discussion—the class is broken up into
small groups to discuss. They can have
the same topic to discuss, or they can have different topics. In jigsaw,
the groups each discuss different aspects of a larger topic, and then they
rejoin into a whole group to see how each group’s issues/conclusions fit
together.
Inverse pyramid (invented by students
leaders in Geography 301, Fall 2002)—a version of jigsaw where the class starts
out in eight small groups and each uses their discussion questions to come up
with what they think is the most thought-provoking question. The groups then pair off, and the groups in
each pair exchange their question with each other. Each group then discusses alone the new question they have been
given. Then, the paired groups come
together to discuss their responses to the two questions. These paired groups then formulate one
question they want to ask the whole class.
Then the class comes back together to explore the joint questions of each
paired group.
Rotate (invented by student
leaders in Geography 301, Spring 2001)—each leader develops questions on a
particular sub-topic of the day’s topic. The class is divided up into small
groups so that there are the same number of small groups as there are
discussion leaders. Then, the leaders
move in shifts from group to group so that each leader has a chance to lead
each group. That way, each group gets a
chance to discuss each aspect of the day’s topic. At the end, you can bring the group back into whole-group to
share insights.
Four-square—the leaders set aside four
corners labeled “agree,” “tend to agree,” “tend to disagree,” and
“disagree.” They then make a statement,
for example: “nationalism is a good thing.”
Then each person in the class goes to the corner they decide best
describes their reaction to the statement.
The group in each corner discusses for a while why they
agree/disagree/etc. with the statement.
The class then goes back into large group to engage in debate over the
issue. At the end, the leaders ask if
anyone would like to change corners.
Those that do are asked to share why their position changed during the
debate.
Brainstorming—the leaders ask the class
to come up with ideas about a given topic (say, “reasons why you oppose the war
in Iraq” and “reasons why you support the war in Iraq”). The product of that brainstorming (usually
written on the board) can then serve as the basis for discussion, or it can be
a way to sum up a discussion. This is a classic planning method commonly used
in community planning sessions. It can be expanded in many different directions.
Fishbowl—here one small-group
engages in discussion and the rest of the class observes their discussion. Different small-groups can rotate into the
fishbowl—they can discuss different topics or the same topic.
Role-playing—is a general technique that
can be applied to any of the above methods.
A person or group is given a role to play (rather than playing
themselves), which gives them a certain point of view to argue from. This is particularly helpful when there is
an issue you think most people (when playing themselves) will agree on; you can
have people play roles that are in opposition to the common opinion.
Each of these can be used in combination, or alone. Don’t be afraid to invent new techniques as well. In the past, when leaders have tried new things, it has been successful and has helped keep discussion fresh.