Course Materials Final

!
Course'Materials'
Course Materials
HPSC X200: Scientific Reasoning (10058)

1.
2.
3.
4.
Syllabus
Assignment: Guidelines for Critical Reading
Midterm Exam
Final Exam
Course Materials
Scientific Reasoning, X200, Fall 2013

Instructor
Email
Office Hours
Textbook
Nick Zautra
nzautra@indiana.edu
Goodbody Hall, 009: Wednesday /Friday 11:15-12:15
Understanding Scientific Reasoning, 5th ed., by Ronald N. Giere
(Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2006). ISBN:015506326X
Grading
Weekly Assignments 25%

Attendance/Class Participation 20%
Class Presentation 20%
Midterm Exam 15%
Final Exam 20%
Science...is not like the onion in the often used analogy of stripping away layer after
layer to get at some core, central, fundamental truth. Rather it's like the magic well: no
matter how many buckets of water you remove, there's always another one to be had. It's
like the widening ripples of a pond, the even larger circumference in touch with more and
more of what's outside the circle, the unknown. This growing forefront is where science
occurs. - Stuart Firestein
Class Overview: Science plays an ever-increasing role in our society. As the public role of
science increases, and as new technologies that effect our lives are developed and implemented, it
becomes more and more important to understand scientific claims, and to know what questions to
ask to evaluate them critically. The objective of the course is to help you acquire cognitive skills
useful for understanding and evaluating scientific material as found in college textbooks and in a
wide variety of both popular and professional sources.
Class Structure: The class will be largely lecture/activity-style on the Monday and Wednesday
meetings and seminar-style on the Friday meetings.
Overall Grading System: Because the majority of the time and effort you will spend on this
class will take the form of weekly assignments, in-class activities, and participation during the
Friday meetings, your grade will be largely based on that effort, not simply on exams.
Weekly Assignments: On (most) Fridays, a short (about 300-400 words) homework assignment
will be due. The assignment should be an analysis and critique of the reasoning and conclusions
exhibited in a primary source by connecting the concepts from the recent textbook readings to the
weeks assigned primary-source reading, which will be loaded onto Oncourse.
Attendance/Class Participation: Classes will involve a great deal of participation. You are
expected to have read the assignments and be ready to discuss the material in depth. Attendance
will count toward the participation grade. Your overall grade for the course will be lowered by a
half letter grade for every unexcused absence you have beyond two permitted absences.
Class Presentation: At the beginning of the semester, you will sign up to co-lead one Friday
discussion section with one other student. You will prepare a brief (10-minute) presentation on
the assigned reading, then lead the class in an in-depth discussion on the assigned reading.
Midterm & Final Exams: The exams will cover topics and concepts introduced in the primary
textbook. Exams will be in the form of short-answer questions and short essays.
Course Materials
Monday/Wednesday Class Schedule

Ideally, readings for each week should be completed by the first class of that week, but it is only
necessary to prepare the first listed entry for Monday and the second entry for Wednesday.
Aug. 26-30
- Welcome, introduction to class (No readings)
- Stuart Firestein, Ignorance: How it Drives Science. (Oncourse)
Sept. 2-6
- Labor Day: No Class
- Ch. 1
Sept. 9-13
- Ch. 2.1- 2.2
- Ch. 2.3- 2.6
Sept. 16-20
- Ch. 2.7- 2.9
- Ch. 2.10- 2.12
Sept. 23-27
- Ch. 3.1- 3.3
- Ch. 3.4- 3.5
Sept. 30-Oct. 4
- Ch. 4
- Ch. 4, cont.
Oct. 7-11
- Statistics Introduction (No readings)
- Ch. 5.1- 5.3
Oct. 14-18
- Ch. 5.4- 5.7
- Ch. 5.8- 5.11
Oct. 21-25
- Midterm Review (No readings)
- MIDTERM : OCTOBER 23RD
Oct. 28-Nov.1
- Ch. 6.1- 6.2
- Ch. 6.3- 6.4
Nov. 4-8
- Ch. 6.5- 6.7
- Ch. 7.1- 7.2
Nov. 11-15
- Ch. 7.3- 7.5
- Ch. 8.1- 8.3
Nov. 18-22
- Ch. 8.4- 8.5
- Ch. 8.6- 8.9
Nov. 25 - 29
- Ch. 9.1- 9.7
- No Class November 27th Thanksgiving Break
Dec. 2-6
- Ch. 9.8-9.10
- Ch. 10.1- 10.2
Dec 9-13
- Ch. 10.3-10.4
- Final Exam Review: FINAL EXAM FRIDAY, DECEMBER 20TH 2:45PM-4:45PM
Course Materials
Friday Discussion Group Class Schedule

Friday readings and weekly assignments should be completed prior to the Friday meeting of each
week. Homework should be submitted online via Oncourse under Assignments.
August 30th Norwood Hanson, Observation, in Theories and Observation in

Science. No homework.
September 6th Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection in The DemonHaunted World. Homework: Select 5 types of fallacious arguments as presented in the
reading, and provide one original example of your own for each fallacy.
September 13th Charles Lyell, The Progress of Geology from Principles of Geology;
Stephen Jay Gould, False Premise, Good Science in The Flamingos Smile. Homework:
300-400 words on the methodology issues therein.
September 20th A. Pannekoek, The Discovery of Neptune, Centaurus, 3(1953), pp.
126-137. Homework: 300-400 words on the discovery of Neptune, with particular
emphasis on the concept of a scientific model.
September 27th Shuster and Lavoisier, Chapter 4: Different Theories, Different Facts:
'Oxygen' vs. 'Phlogiston' in 18th Century Chemistry in An Introduction to the History
and Social Studies of Science. Homework: 2 argument analysis exercises from pp. 47-57.
October 4th Martin Gardner, Chapter 10: Freud's Flawed Theory of Dreams in Did
Adam and Eve Have Navels? Debunking Pseudoscience, Carl Sagan, The Man in the
Moon and the Face on Mars in The Demon-Haunted World. Homework: 300-400 word
response.
October 11th Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Deadly Immunity, Gillian Woodford, Autism/MMR
link dealt fatal blow. Homework: Respond to the questions located at the beginning of the
readings in short essay form.
October 18th FALL BREAK: NO CLASS

October 25th Stephen Jay Gould, excerpts from The Mismeasure of Man. Homework: 300400 word response.
November 1st Phillip Kitcher, Believing Where We Cannot Prove, Stephen Jay
Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory." Homework: 300-400 word response.
November 8th Sir Ronald Fisher, Cigarettes, Cancer and Statistics, Parascandola, The
debate over smoking and lung cancer. Homework: 300-400 word response.
November 15th Regal, Rooney, and Wandas, Facilitated Communication: An

Experimental Evaluation. Homework: 300-400 word response.
November 22nd Donohue and Wolfers, Uses and Abuses of Empirical Evidence in the
Death Penalty Debate. Homework: 300-400 word response.
November 29th THANKSGIVING BREAK: NO CLASS
December 6th Sugarman and Sulmasy, Chapter 1: The Many Methods of Medical
Ethics. Homework: 300-400 word response.
December 13th Rouse and Arce: The Drug-Laden Balloon: U.S. Military Assistance and Coca
Productions in the Western Andes. Homework: 300-400 word response.
Course Materials
Academic Honesty: Group learning such as the creation of study groups is encouraged.
However, unless otherwise noted, all assignments must be written individually. For general
information, students can refer to the IU Code of Ethics at: http://www.dsa.indiana.edu/Code/
Statement for Students with Disabilities: The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that all
students with disabilities be guaranteed reasonable accommodations to ensure an environment
conducive to learning. Please contact the instructor as soon as possible with any questions or
concerns. Disability Services for Students can be found at: http://www.indiana.edu/~iubdss/
Course Materials
Scientific Reasoning
X200 Fall 2013
Nick Zautra

Guidelines
for doing philosophy
in this seminar

1. This seminar is fundamentally a group exploration and investigation of certain
issues. As a member of this small community, you are expected to participate
fully by listening actively and respectfully to the views of other members, by
facilitating the involvement of all members of the seminar, and by asking and
pursuing questions which interest you.

2. I recommend reading each assigned paper, fragment, or book three times:
first: Read generously. See what the general issues and central concerns
of the author(s) are.
second: Read sympathetically. Make sense of the writing, trying to
understand the motivations for each move, each conclusion.
third: Read critically. (But ONLY on this third reading!) Locate parts in the
discussion where assumptions are being made, and make them
explicit. Ask under what circumstances each assumption would be
a reasonable one. Develop your own view about each assumption
and conclusion in the piece, and about the significance of the
central concerns of the author. Ask whether the conclusions follow
from the premises.
If you can only read the paper twice, then follow guidelines for the second
and third readings.

3. Always be able to provide an articulate and sympathetic version of the
motivations and conclusions of a reading--one that the author would recognize
and accept.

Being able to provide such an interpretation of a reading is a prerequisite for
developing any and all interesting philosophical critiques of the authors views. If
you cant give an account of the authors views that he/she would accept as their
own, you are wasting everybodys time, especially your own.

-1-
Course Materials

X200: Midterm Exam

NAME:_______________________
October 23rd, 2013

There are 32 problems, and 65 points on this exam (plus 5 bonus points). Good luck!

1.
Underline or circle the term that completes the following sentences correctly.

(1 point each)

a. When reading an article, we first read [sympathatically / generously] in order to
see what the general issues and the central concerns of the author(s) are.

b. On our second reading of the same article, we read [sympathetically / generously]
in order to make sense of the writing, trying to understand the motivations for each
move, each conclusion.

c. On our third reading, we read [skeptically / critcally] in order to locate parts in the
discussion where assumptions are being made, and make them explicit. We ask under
what circumstances each assumption would be a reasonable one. We develop our own
view about each assumption and conclusion in the piece, and about the significance of
the central concerns of the author. We ask whether the conclusions follow the premises.

2.
During the peer review process, if an article does not meet significantly high scientific
standards on the first round of peer review, it may (1 point):

(a) be sent back with comments to the scientist who may then revise and resubmit the
article for further review.

(b) be rejected.

(c) be rejected, and resubmitted to another journal as-is without revision.

(d) be improperly accepted by the journal due to superficial peer review.

(e) all of the above.

3.
Science, in its totality, involves (1 point):

(a) observation, exploration, testing, communication, and application.

(b) a question, hypothesis, experiment, data, conclusions.

(c) a body of knowledge, and a process for building that knowledge.

(d) a & c

(e) b & c

1

3.

Course Materials
True or False? Write either True or False next to each statement (1 point each)
a. Scientific observations cannot be made directly with our own senses; they may be
only made indirectly through the use of models or other tools.

b. Experiments are not a necessary part of the scientific process.

c. Science cannot prove ideas; it can only disprove ideas.

d. If evidence supports a hypothesis, it is upgraded to a theory. If the theory then
garners even more support, it may be upgraded to a law.

e. Scientists' observations cannot directly tell them how things work (i.e., knowledge is
not "read off" nature, it is written).

4. Evaluating scientific material (1 point):

(a) is a matter of understanding the relevant models used in science.

(b) is a process of deciding whether given data provides evidence for regarding a
particular model as a tolerably good representation of some real world object or
processes.

(c) Requires the kinds of skills that are necessary to do research

(d) Requires studying a specific science subject, or all subjects, in depth
(e) B, C, & D

5. Check all that apply. (1 point)

Reasons for studying scientific reasoning include:

_____ The impact of scientific and technological developments on our day-to-

day lives is so great that no one can afford to be ignorant of these

developments

_____ Scientific information is increasingly important for functioning

effectively in both your professional and personal life.

_____ Assists in moral judgments, aesthetic judgments, and decisions about

applications of science

_____ Makes you a more literate and cultured person

6. Provide one example of a subject in science that relates to our intellectual interests (1 point)

2
Course Materials

7. Scientists use models in order to (1 point):
(a) Figure out how the world works.
(b) Focus on some particular aspect of the world.
(c) Consider observations and results from experiments.
(d) Convince and educate others about how their findings may fit how the world works.
(e) all of the above.

8. Provide one example of a Scale Model (1 point)

9. Provide one example of an Analog Model (1 point)

10. Provide one example of a Theoretical Model (1 point)

11. A theoretical hypothesis (1 point):
(a) is a statement about a relationship between a theoretical model and some aspect of the
world.
(b) is a claim, assertion, or conjecture
(c) is never true
(d) A & B
(e) all of the above

12. The four components of a scientific episode are (1 point):
(a) Real World, Data, Model, Prediction
(b) Real World, Data, Model, Experimental Setup
(c) Real World, Experimental Setup, Data, Predictions
(d) Real World, Model, Hypothesis, Theory
(e) Real World, Data, Hypothesis, Theory

3
Course Materials
13. Crucial experiments in science are (1 point):

(a) experimental setups that allows us to make a clear choice between two rival models
(b) designed with the presumption that both of the models provide an adequate fit
(c) considered impossible in science by some philosophers of science
(d) A & B
(e) A & C

14. Why should a model development report not be analyzed as a crucial experiment? (2
points)

15. What role do historical episdoes in science play? (1 point)

16. Historical Episodes (6 points): Out of the Five Primary Historical Episodes discussed in
your text and in class (1. The Discovery of DNA, 2. The Phases of Venus, 3. Isaac Newton
and Halleys Comet, 4. Darwin and Evolution, 5. Mendels Original Experiments), choose
one episode, and in five sentences or less describe: 1) Who were the historical actors? 2)
What were they up to?

4
Course Materials
18. As opposed to pseudoscience, marginal science (1 points):

(a) is some activity based on demarcation criteria used to distinguish it from genuine
science
(b) is genuine science
(c) leaves open the the possibility that similar inquires might one day move into the scientific
mainstream
(d) is some activity of which the data cited turn out to be false
19. What are the implications of calling something a science? (1 point):
(a) Whether a discipline counts as science determines what role, if any, it can legitimately
play in the school curriculum
(b) Says a lot on the amounts and kinds of funding it can or should receive
(c) Important practices turn on controversial claims of "scientific status
(d) all of the above
20. According to Poppers falsifiability thesis, Popper believes (1 point):
(a) a good theory is one that fits the data well
(b) scientists should seek confirming evidence for their theories
(c) scientists cannot prove ideas; they can only disprove ideas
(d) the notion of observation is strong in science
21. The main problem behind trying to devise a set of criteria that define what it is to be a
science is that said critera (1 point):
(a) cannot be falsified
(b) run the risk of failing to exclude reasonably clear cases of pseudoscience, or failing to
include reasonably clear cases of genuine science, or both
(c) are both descriptive and normative
(d) are not open to criticism
22. The general role of statistics in science is to (1 point):
(a) quantify the variability in scientific data
(b) allow scientists to make more accurate statements about their data
(c) provide a measure of proof that something is true
(d) A & B
23.
24.

Course Materials
Underline or circle the term that completes the following sentences correctly.
(1 point each)
a. [Randomization / Replication/Controls] allow(s) researchers to measure natural,
random, and systematic variablity in a similar system.
b. [Randomization / Replication/Controls] helps to manage bias in scientific
research by taking into account the potential influence of confound variables.
c. [Randomization / Replication/Controls] reproduce(s) experimental trials and
measurements.

Consider the following report of recent research and answer the following questions
about it (6 points).
A researcher developed a toothpaste that was mixed with the Chinese herbs
traditionally prescribed for colds. The toothpaste was tested clinically on 3,600
persons who had colds. The researcher reported that 63% of the subjects tested
reported marked improvement in their health.

(a) What conclusion does this result suggest?

(b) Is this conclusion a causal claim or a correlation? How do you know?

(d) What is the main flaw in this study?

25. What is meant by the term statistical significance? (2 points)

Course Materials
26. Statistics can be misused and misinterpeted in science due to (1 point):
(a) the wide variety of possible statistical tests
(b) the fact that statistics does not address systematic error that can be introduced into a
study either intentionally or accidentally
(c) the fact that many scientists appear to misunderstand fundamental concepts in statistics
(d) our own psychology
26. What is the most effective use of statistics in science? (1 point)
27. The four elements of a statistical study include (1 point):

(a) Real World, Data, Model, Prediction
(b) Real World Population, Sample, Model of the Population, Model of the Sample
(c) Real World, Sample, Model of the Population, Model of the Sample
(d) Real World Population, Sample, Model of the Population, Prediction
(e) Real World Population, Data, Model of the Population, Model of the Data
28. A proportion is (1 point):
(a) a statement of equality between two ratios
(b) a general property that may exhibit different forms
(c) a single variable with any number of possible values
(d) a relationship between two variables
29. Put the two following statements in the form of a correlational statement (2 points):
a. Research with the University of Cambridge found that Germans with last names
translating to emperor, king, and prince more often held managerial positions than
other Germanians.
b. Students at school with anti-bullying programs may actualy face an increased risk of
being bullied, a study has found.
7
Course Materials
30. The probability of a playing card being an Ace, given that it is among the Black cards, is
known as (1 point):
(a) expected probability
(b) sampling probability
(c) conditional probability
(d) statistical probability
31.
Underline or circle the term that completes the following sentences correctly. (1 point
each)
a. The larger the sample, the [less likely/more likely] you are to get the expected
frequency.
b. Moving from a small sample to a large sample, the probability of observing a relative
number of some variable near the actual ratio of some variable in the population
[increases/decreases].
c. Larger samples should be [better/worse] indicators of the actual proportions in
populations
32.
Course Materials
Read this description of a scientific episode, and perform the program for
evaluating theoretical hypotheses (10 points):
Michelson and Morleys experiment:

According to 19th century theories of light, light consisted of an electromagnetic wave which (it
was thought) must travel through an invisible ether; the ether was for the light waves what the
water is for ripples on a pond, a medium for waves to move through. It followed from this idea
that the speed of light on Earth should vary depending on how the Earth is moving through
the ether: light moving along the path of the Earths motion will be slowed down or sped up by
the ether wind, while light moving perpendicular to the Earths motion will not be affected.
At the end of the 19th century, Michelson and Morley tested the ether-hypothesis using a
device that compared the speeds of light in the two directions. They found that the speed of
light was the same in every direction, irrespective of the motion of the ether.
Course Materials
BONUS (5 points): In many of our discussion readings, the author(s) either directly or
indirectly comment on what they believe to be the correct conception of what science is,
and often, what science should be. Choose two of our discussion readings and compare the
author(s) conceptions of science. How are they similar? How are they different? Are these
conceptions of science still held today?
10
Course Materials
X200: Take Home Final Exam

In a 1000-1200 word essay, address the following:
1) What did you learn in this course in regard to scientific reasoning?
2) Which concepts/topics particularly interested you, and why?
3) How will you apply what you have learned about scientific reasoning to your academic,
professional, and personal life?
Your essay should demonstrate a significant understanding of and ability to apply the concepts
introduced in this course to novel situations. You need not attempt to cover every single concept/topic
of the course. You may choose to give a broad overview with your own interpretation of the topics we
have covered in class, or focus intently on one or two key topics and discuss them in detail. Your overall
grade for this take-home final (worth 20% of your final course grade) will be based on a combined score
according to two independent grading rubrics: an Integrative Science rubric, and a Writing rubric (see
attached).
In essence, this final-exam is aimed to test 1) your comprehension of scientific reasoning and your ability
to think critically and apply these concepts to new situations, and 2) your ability to communicate your
ideas clearly and proficiently.
Essays should be written in 12-point Times New Roman font, double-spaced.
Hard copies of essays are due in-class on Friday, December 13th, 2013 at 1:25pm.
Late essays will be penalized by one-letter grade for every day late. Essays turned in on Friday,
December 13th after 1:25PM will also be penalized one-letter grade (i.e. submit your paper on-time).
Course Materials
COGS Q240: Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science (17233)

1. Syllabus
Course Materials
COGS Q240 Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science

Spring 2014
(Subject to Revision)
Instructors
Ruth Eberle, Ph.D.
reberle@indiana.edu
Eigenmann Hall 801
856-5722
Office hours: TBA and by appointment
Nicholas Zautra
nzautra@indiana.edu
Office hours: TBA and by appointment
Times and Locations

MW 9:30 10:45AM Read Hall 2-120B (Section 17233)
F 12:20 1:10PM
Rose Avenue Hall B109 (Section 17234)
Subject Matter
Cognitive Science emerged almost 60 years ago from developments in philosophy, computer
science, psychology, and linguistics. Central to this emergence were new ideas about how minds
could be understood in computational terms: the computational theory of mind. The belief that
intelligence could be understood in terms of physical processing of symbolic representations
served to unite artificial intelligence and cognitive psychology under a common philosophical
framework, and it was believed that computers with human-level capacities would be rapidly
achieved. Progress in artificial intelligence, however, has been much slower than anticipated, and
developments in neuroscience, in artificial neural networks, and in dynamical and evolutionary
approaches to cognition and robotics, have caused some to question whether cognitive science
should remain committed to the computational theory of mind. In this course, students will learn
about the original promise of the computational theory, and how it provided an alternative to
earlier philosophical and scientific views about the relationship between mind and body. We will
go on to consider the debate about whether evolutionary, embodied, and dynamical systems
approaches to cognitive science amount to an overthrow of its traditional symbolicrepresentationalist core as well as providing a philosophical challenge to our deep-seated
conception of ourselves as human agents with rational beliefs.
Texts
Andy Clark's Mindware 2nd Edition, Oxford University Press (Bring to every class and
discussion period.)
Bring a copy of the current weeks primary source readings (see below) to every class and
discussion period.
Course Materials
Assignments and Grading
This course is designated Intensive Writing (IW). There are no scheduled examinations, but there
are responses to readings, in class assignments, and six formal pieces of writing required.
The writing assignments are tightly integrated with the main class content, so attendance at all
three meetings each week is important. Attendance will be taken.
70 % for the IW assignments, distributed as follows. (Due dates subject to change.)
IW-1, due Friday, 1/31, 10 %
IW-2, due Friday, 2/21, 15 %
IW-3 draft, due Friday, 3/14, 5 %
IW-3, due Friday, 3/28, 10 %
IW-4, due Friday, 4/18, 15 %
IW-5, due Friday, 5/9, 15 %
25 % for responses to readings, including in-class assignments which may not be announced in
advance.
5 % for attendance and participation in discussions during class time and discussion periods
All written work will be turned into Oncourse.
Readings
Week 1
January 13 What is (Philosophy of Cognitive
Science?
Week 2
January 20 Symbol Systems
Newell and Simon
Strong AI
Week 3
January 27 Searle
Chinese Room
Week 4
February 3 Mental Maps
Week 5
February 10
Folk Psychology
Mindware: Preface, Introduction, Appendix 1,

Chapter 1
Mindware: Section 2.1
Turing (1950) "Computing Machinery &
Intelligence
Newell & Simon (1975) "Computer science
as empirical enquiry: symbols and search"
Mindware: Chapter 2 Section 2.2
Searle (1980) "Minds, Brains, and
Programs"
Tolman (1948) "Cognitive maps in rats in
men"
Shepard & Metzler (1971) "Mental rotation
of three-dimensional objects"
Mindware: Chapter 3
Course Materials
Week 6
February 17
Week 7
February 24
Week 8
March 3
Beliefs
Uncertainty
Dennett (1981) "True believers"

Tversky & Kahneman "Judgment Under
Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases"
Dualism
Behaviorism
Functionalism
Descartes (1641) Meditations 1 and 2

Hume (1777) Enquiry sections 2 and 3 (skip
secs. 1, 4, and 5)
Dualism
Behaviorism
Functionalism
Chomsky (1959/1967) "Review of B.F.

Skinner's Verbal Behavior"
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article
on Functionalism (html)
Week 9
March 10
Connectionism
Mindware, Chapter 4
Ramsey, Stich, & Garon (1991)
"Connectionism, eliminativism, and the
future of folk psychology"
Week 10
March 24
Evolutionary Robotics
Harvey et al. (2005) "Evolutionary Robotics:

A new scientific tool for studying cognition"
Week 11
March 31
Embodied Cognition
Clark (1998) "Embodiment and the

Philosophy of Mind"
Week 12
April 7
Extended Mind
Clark, A. and D. J. Chalmers (1998) "The

Extended Mind"
Week 13
April 14
Dynamical Systems
Mindware, Chapter 7
Beer (2000) "Dynamical approaches to
cognitive science"
Week 14
April 21
Dynamical Systems
van Gelder (1995) "What might cognition be

if not computation?"
Week 15
April 28
Issues of Interest
Course Materials
Statement for Students with Disabilities

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal anti-discrimination statute that provides
comprehensive civil rights protection for persons with disabilities. Among other things, this
legislation requires that all students with disabilities be guaranteed a learning environment that
provides for reasonable accommodation of their disabilities. If you believe you have a disability
requiring an accommodation, please contact the IU Disability Services Office.
Statement about Academic Misconduct

University rules concerning academic misconduct will be rigorously enforced in this class. See
the IU Code of Ethics for details.
Course Materials
CLLC L210: Philosophy of Satire (17330)

1.
2.
3.
4.
Syllabus
Assignment: Critical Satirical Reviews
Resentment in Satire Activity Handout
Guest Speaker: Scott Dikkers from The Onion
Course Materials
Instructor: Nicholas Zautra

Room: Cravens Hall (ME) 008
Office: Collins Coffee House
Office Hours: 2:30PM-3:30PM MW, and by appointment
Email: nzautra@indiana.edu
Introduction/Premise: Satire is, in one sense, a literary form in which topical issues,
folly, or evil are scorned by means of ridicule and irony with the intent of shaming
individuals, and society, into improvement. This course examines the philosophical
dimensions of satire. We will study the history from which satire develops, its various
forms and how it works, and the creative processes by which satire is generated in
order to address satires key conceptual issues, including:
Why is satire special in comparison to other forms of literary criticism?

What components are necessary and sufficient for satire to function as it does?
Does satire have to be humorous?
Is there an appropriate level of satirical content, or can some satire go too far?
Why is satire received differently in different parts of the world?
We will address these questions and many of our own through reflective writing
assignments, philosophical discussions, outside viewings, and a creative final project.
Course Objective: By the end of the semester, students will be able to effectively
evaluate satire in the analytic tradition and generate their own satirical work.
Course Materials
Attendance/Class Participation Policy: Classes will involve a great deal of
participation. Thus, student participation and attendance is expected. You are expected
to have read the assignments and be ready to discuss the material in depth. Your
overall grade for the course will be lowered by a half letter grade for every unexcused
absence you have beyond three absences.
Plagiarism: The Indiana University Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and
Conduct (2005) indicates that students may be disciplined for several different kinds of
academic misconduct. In particular the code states: Plagiarism is defined as presenting
someone elses work, including the work of other students, as ones own. Any ideas or
materials taken from another source for either written or oral use must be fully
acknowledged, unless the information is common knowledge. What is considered
'common knowledge' may differ from course to course. a. A student must not adopt or
reproduce ideas, opinions, theories, formulas, graphics, or pictures of another person
without acknowledgment. b. A student must give credit to the originality of others and
acknowledge an indebtedness whenever: 1. Directly quoting another persons actual
words, whether oral or written; 2. Using another persons ideas, opinions, or theories; 3.
Paraphrasing the words, ideas, opinions, or theories of others, whether oral or written;
4. Borrowing facts, statistics, or illustrative material; or 5. Offering materials assembled
or collected by others in the form of projects or collections without acknowledgment."
(quoted from Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct, Part II, Student
Responsibilities, Academic Misconduct)
For the full IU policy on plagiarism: http://www.indiana.edu/~istd/definition.html
Not sure? Take this self-test: http://www.indiana.edu/~istd/
Assignments: This course will involve several different kinds of assignments. The
course goals of the these various assignments are to 1) reinforce your understanding of
the nature and function of satire, 2) engage your ability to think critically and creatively,
3) develop your skills of rational inquiry and analysis, 4) introduce you to analyzing,
discussing, and writing philosophical and ethical arguments under the analytic tradition,
and 5) teach you how to create your very own piece of satire.
1. Office Hours Visit: Your first assignment will be to schedule an initial 10-minute
visit with your course instructor. This visit, which will take place during the first
two weeks of class will be an informal conversation primarily designed to allow
one-on-one face time between you and the instructor, a sort of get-to-know-you.
This visit will also serve to let you know where office hours will be held, and to
allow you to ask any questions you have regarding the course.
2. Analytical Assignments: Beginning in the second week, a short analytical
assignment will be assigned at the end of class on Tuesdays and due on
Thursdays. Some weeks you will respond to specific questions and/or complete a
Course Materials
specific assignment. Other weeks you will have free-reign to respond as you
choose. Free-reign responses should not be merely be a synopsis. These
responses, instead, should reflect your own thoughts on the readings. These
responses do not have to be formerly crafted essays, but they should read
coherently. Such responses should always include an argument. What interests
you about the readings, and why? Where in the author's arguments are
assumptions being made? What areas of the readings do you not fully
understand? For further suggestions on how to approach the readings and these
responses, consult the Guidelines for Doing Philosophy (see attached).
3. Critical Satirical Reviews: To develop your skills of inquiry and analysis of
satire, you are required to attend/view/read three outside satirical works of your
choosing that will serve as the source of three 1-2 page critical satirical reviews.
In these reviews, you will analytically deconstruct the satirical work and identify:
1) Who is the satire directed toward (i.e. who is the satirical target)? 2) What is
the subtext? 3) What is the satirical argument, if any? 4) Was satire utilized
effectively? 5) How might this satirical work have been improved? These reviews
are expected to be more polished and less stream of consciousness than the
weekly analytical writing assignments, and are due on three Tuesdays
interspersed through the course.
4. Op-Ed Piece: To help you focus your thinking, develop your analytic writing, and
practice getting your unique point-of-view out there, you will write an 800-word
Opposite the Editorial Page on a topic of your choice. For this assignment, you
will utilize your knowledge of doing philosophy to construct a concise
philosophical argument surrounding a topic in the news you deem appropriate for
satire. Rather than satirizing the topic, however (youll get to do that with your
final project!), you will take a more direct approach in the form of a traditional OpEd piece. The Op-Ed process will include the submission of a rough draft, two
independent peer-reviews from your colleagues, and a final draft to be submitted
to your instructor as well as a real news outlet of your choice. Consult
http://www.theopedproject.org/ for general writing tips. On the day rough drafts
are due, you will bring in (3) printed copies of your paper: 1 copy to turn into your
instructor, and 2 copies to distribute to your peers for peer review. Your final
grade will take into account your incorporation of comments from your peers.
5. Peer Reviews: To develop your ability to evaluate analytic writing, you will be
responsible for reviewing two op-ed pieces of your classmates following the Peer
Review Guidelines (see attached). On the day rough drafts are due, you will
collect two op-eds. You will return the following week with the two student op-eds
and printed copies of your peer reviews to give to your classmates.
6. Final Creative Project: To put your newfound knowledge of satire along with
your ability to evaluate an argument in the analytic tradition to the test, you will
have the opportunity to create your own original satirical work. You will choose
Course Materials
among one or more of the various modes of satire that interests you (film,
theatrical performance, op-ed, collection of political cartoons, song, etc.) and the
specific target you wish to satirize. Your project will be situated in the context that
you have been commissioned by an outside entity to produce a satirical work that
will be made public for the purposes of entertainment and education. While you
may utilize the assistance of other students in your final project if need be (for a
theatrical performance, film, etc.) each student must create and turn in their own
final project this is not group work. You are encouraged to begin thinking about
this final creative project early on in the semester, and to write your ideas down
as they emerge. Three weeks before final projects are due, you will come to
class with 3 fleshed-out ideas you will workshop with your peers. Once you
have selected an idea for your final project, you will submit your idea and have it
approved by the instructor. You will present and turn in your final project during
an evening showcase scheduled at the end of the semester. I welcome your
creative approaches, and look forward to seeing what our class develops.
Points Breakdown of Assignments
Office Hours Visit
Analytical Assignments (10)
Critical Satirical Reviews (3)
Op-Ed Piece
Peer Reviews (2)
Final Project
25 Points
300 Points
150 Points
200 Points
50 Points
275 Points
1000 Points TOTAL
Required Texts
1. Vaughn, Lewis. Writing Philosophy: A Students Guide to Writing

Philosophy Essays.
http://www.amazon.com/Writing-Philosophy-Students-GuideEssays/dp/0195179560
2. Scott, James. Satire: From Horace to Yesterdays Comic Strips
http://www.amazon.com/Satire-Horace-Yesterdays-ComicStrips/dp/158049112X
3. Ogborn, Jane. Satire (Cambridge Contexts in Literature)
http://www.amazon.com/Satire-Cambridge-Contexts-LiteratureOgborn/dp/0521787912
4. The Book of Mormon Script Book: The Complete Book and Lyrics of the
Broadway Musical
Course Materials
http://www.amazon.com/The-Book-Mormon-ScriptComplete/dp/1557049939
5. Simpson, Paul. On the Discourse of Satire: Toward a Stylistic Model of

Satirical Humour. (Available online through IU One Search)
6. Dikkers, Scott. How To Write Funny: Your Serious, Step-By-Step
Blueprint For Creating Incredibly, Irresistibly, Successfully Hilarious
Writing
http://www.amazon.com/How-Write-Funny-Step-By-StepIrresistibly/dp/1499196121
Course Structure
The course is broken into four units for the purpose of focusing discussion and
building toward the successful completion of a creative final project:
Unit One introduces philosophy as an academic discipline and its method

of rational inquiry (argumentation).
Unit Two introduces satire, its basic component structure, its history, its
content in primary topics and communities, and its ethical, political,
psychological, and social effects.
Unit Three explores the creative process of generating satire to help you
develop your final creative projects.
Unit Four calls for the use of our newly acquired skillsets in philosophy
and satire to evaluate a contemporary humorologists developed theory
of satire as discursive practice.
Unit 1: (Brief) Introduction to Philosophy
Week 1
8/26: Introductions. Class Overview. In-class activity: What is Philosophy? and What
is Satire?
Homework: Read Chapter 1, How to Read Philosophy in Writing Philosophy: A
Students Guide to Writing Philosophy Essays (Oncourse)
8/28: Introduction to Philosophy. Discuss Chapter 1. Exercises in Reading Philosophy.
Schedule your Initial Office Visit with your instructor for next week
Homework: Read Chapter 7, Making Good Arguments (Oncourse)
Homework: Read Chapter 2, How to Read Arguments in Writing Philosophy: A
Students Guide to Writing Philosophy Essays (Oncourse)
Week 2
Course Materials
9/2: Discuss Chapter 7. Discuss Chapter 2. Practice reading and writing arguments.
Homework: Read Chapters 3 & 5 in Writing Philosophy: A Students Guide to
Writing Philosophy Essays
9/4: Discuss Chapters 3 & 5. Practice reading and writing arguments in op-eds.
Assignment One Due
Homework: Read Quintero, Introduction: Understanding Satire (Oncourse);
Read Chapters 1-2 in Satire: From Horace to Yesterdays Comic Strips
Unit 2: Introduction to Satire
Week 3
9/9: Discuss Quintero.
Homework: Read Chapters 1-2 in Satire: From Horace to Yesterdays Comic
Strips
9/11: Discuss Chapters 1-2. In-Class Exercises in Satirical Analysis
Analytic Assignment 2 Due
Homework: Read Chapter 3 in Satire: From Horace to Yesterdays Comic Strips
Week 4
9/16: Discuss Chapter 3. In-Class Exercises in Satirical Analysis
Week 5
First Critical Satirical Review Due
Homework: Read Chapters 1-2 in Satire (Cambridge Contexts in Literature)
9/25: Discuss Chapters 1 & 2. In-Class Exercises in Satirical Analysis
Homework: Read Chapter 3, pp. 31-61 in Satire (Cambridge Contexts in
Literature)
Week 6
Course Materials
9/30: Discuss Chapter 3, pp. 31-61. In-Class Exercises in Satirical Analysis
Op-Ed Rough Drafts Due
Homework: Read Chapter 3, pp. 62-97 in Satire (Cambridge Contexts in
Literature)
10/2: Discuss Chapter 3, pp.62-97. In-Class Exercises in Satirical Analysis
Op-Ed Peer Reviews Due
Homework: Read Chapters 4 & 5 in Satire (Cambridge Contexts in Literature)
Homework: Work on Peer Reviews
Week 7
10/7: Discuss Chapters 4 & 5. In-Class Exercises in Satirical Analysis
Homework: Work on Op-Ed Final Drafts
10/9: Watch Life of Brian.
Homework: Work on Op-Ed Final Drafts
Fall Break
Week 8
10/14: Finish watching Life of Brian. Discuss Life of Brian
Op-Ed Final Draft Due via Oncourse
Homework: Read The Book of Mormon
10/16: Discuss The Book of Mormon
Homework: Watch Exporting Raymond
o Public Screening of Exporting Raymond in Collins Screening Room on
Monday, 10/20 at 7:30PM.
Unit 3: How to Create Satire
Week 9
10/21: Discuss Exporting Raymond & the cultural dimensions of satire.
Homework: Read Chapters 1-3 in How To Write Funny: Your Serious, Step-ByStep Blueprint For Creating Incredibly, Irresistibly, Successfully Hilarious
Writing
10/23: Discuss Chapters 1-3.
Homework: Read Chapters 4-5 in How to Write Funny
Course Materials
Week 10
10/28: Discuss Chapters 4-5.
Second Critical Satirical Review Due
Homework: Read Chapter 6 in How to Write Funny
10/30: Discuss Chapter 6
Analytical Assignment 7 Due
Homework: Read Chapters 7 & 8 in How to Write Funny
Week 11
11/4: Discuss Chapters 7-8
Homework: Attend Scott Dikkers Public Lecture: Wednesday, November 5th,
7:30PM-9:30PM, Whittenberger Auditorium, Indiana Memorial Union.
11/6: Guest Lecture from Scott Dikkers of The Onion
Homework: Read one of the following articles available via Oncourse and come
prepared to teach the article to your peers:
o Is Fake News the Real News? The Significance of Stewart and Colbert
for Democratic Discourse, Politics, and Policy
o The Science of Satire: The Daily Show and The Colbert Report as
Sources of Public Attention to Science and the Environment
o Jon Stewart a Heretic? Surely You Jest: Political Participation and
Discussion Among Viewers of Late-Night Comedy Programming
o The Daily Show, Crossfire, and the Will to Truth
Unit 4: Conceptual Issues in Satire
Week 12
11/11: Discuss Political Satire Readings.
Homework: Read Chapter 1 in On the Discourse of Satire: Toward a Stylistic
Model of Satirical Humor
11/13: Discuss Chapter 1. Work on Creative Final Projects.
Course Materials
Week 13
Homework: Read Chapters 3 in On the Discourse of Satire: Toward a Stylistic
Homework: Read Chapters 4-5 in On the Discourse of Satire: Toward a Stylistic
Homework: Work on Creative Final Project
Week 14
12/2: Discuss Chapters 4-5. Work on Creative Final Projects.
Third Critical Satirical Review Due
Week 15
12/11: Discuss Chapter 8. Work on Creative Final Projects. Last day of class :(
Final Creative Projects Due at Evening Showcase
Satire Evening Showcase TBA
Course Materials
Critical Satirical Reviews
To develop your skills of inquiry and analysis of satire, you are required to
attend/view/read three outside satirical works of your choosing that will serve as
the source of three approximately 2-page double-spaced critical satirical reviews.
In these reviews, you will analytically deconstruct a satirical work or works of your
choosing that we have not covered in class, and respond to the following five
questions in your review:
1) Who/what is the satire directed toward (i.e. who/what is the satirical target)?
Why do you think this?
2) What is the subtext of the satire (i.e. what is the general argument or point)?
Why do you think this?
3) Can you identify any arguments, satirical (implicit) or direct (explicit), being
made? If so, what are they?
4) Was satire utilized effectively? In other words, was the satirical piece adequate
enough to accomplish its purpose of communicating subtext and/or humor? What
do you think? If you think the satire was weak, why? If you think the satire was
razor-sharp, why?
5) How might this satirical work have been improved? If you were the
author/producer, what would you have done differently, and why?
These reviews are expected to be more polished and less stream of
consciousness than the weekly analytical writing assignments, and are due on
three Tuesdays interspersed through the course. Come prepared to share a little
about the piece of satire you chose with the rest of the class.

Generating Ideas
for Satire
Learning Objective: You will learn one creative technique
drawing from resentments for developing satirical content
Resentment: a defensive response of anger, fear, or other negative
feelings toward others actions perceived to be in violation of social norms
Examples: resentments of social patterns that one shouldnt do (Seinfeldisms):
o The Slow Talker, The Fast Talker, The Close Talker, The Double-Dipper, The
Double Parker, The Re-gifter, The Anti-dentite, The Baldist, and the infamous
Soup Nazi.
Satirical headline: a joke in the form of a news headline based on a personal or

shared resentment using the voice of the Associated Press as a vehicle for humor
Man Who Enjoys Thing Informed He Is Wrong
o Resentment toward making normative judgments on personal taste
Area Man Passionate Defender Of What He Imagines Constitution To Be
o Resentment toward defending of a set of principles based on inadequate investigation
Wealthy Teen Nearly Experiences Consequence
o Resentment toward poor parenting by affluent families
Activity: In groups of 2-3, discuss your own resentments. Drawing from those
resentments, come up with 1-3 ideas for satirical headlines or Seinfeld characters.
Course Materials
Project Summary
Guest-Speaker Scott Dikkers
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of The Onion
Scott Dikkers will tell the tale of his beginnings in comedy
and getting The Onion started, and share funny stories
about how he struggled in the early years, and then
achieved great success. As a farm boy with no education,
he'll paint the picture of a starry-eyed kid who loved
reading Mad Magazine and dreamt of one day getting his
work published to improbably founding the world's first
humor website and heading up America's longest-surviving
humor publication. Dikkers will connect his experience to the college audience's
lives by pointing out how much more opportunity they have to start something
new like The Onion today, explaining that this is a magical time in their lives
when they can make just about anything happen for themselves.
Dikkers is The Onion's longest-serving editor-in-chief, and the godfather of its
unique comedic vision. In 2006 he created The Onion News Network, which has
spawned countless viral videos and three TV series. He's the best-selling author
ofThe Onion's first two original books, Our Dumb Century and Our Dumb World.
His work has won the Thurber Prize for American Humor, a Peabody, and over
30 Webby Awards.
Before starting The Onion, Dikkers wrote and drew the successful daily comic
strip "Jim's Journal." He has written and directed two feature films and performed
on Saturday Night Live. His eclectic life and rollercoaster career makes for a lot
of hard-won wisdom and outrageous stories about life on the fringes of the do-ityourself entertainment business that is sure to have students teary-eyed with
laughter.
Guest-Speaker Will:
(A.) Present a guest-speaker event titled The Funny Story Behind the Funny
Stories for Indiana University Bloomington students lasting approximately one
hour, with a question-and-answer/discussion period lasting up to an additional
hour (Event A); (B.) Address and join in discussion with Philosophy of Satire
class for one hour and fifteen minutes (Event B); (C.) Customize the program,
as needed, to fit the needs of this audience; (D.) Personally conduct this session.
Course Materials
COGS Q240: Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science (17109)

1. Syllabus
2. Reading notes
3. Assignment: Writing Tutorial Services Meeting
Course Materials
Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science

COGS Q240 | Spring 2015
Meeting Times
All meetings are in Rose Ave
Resident Hall (RA) B109
Main lectures, Mo-We 9:3010:45
Discussion section, Fr 12:201:10
Instructor
Nicholas Zautra
Department of History and
Philosophy of Science
Office hours: by appointment
Associate Instructor
Joseph Adams
Cognitive Science Program
Email: adamsjo@indiana.edu
Subject Matter
Cognitive Science emerged about 60 years ago from developments in philosophy,
computer science, psychology, and linguistics. Central to this emergence were new
ideas about how minds could be understood in computational terms: the computational
theory of mind. The belief that intelligence could be understood in terms of physical
processing of symbolic representations served to unite artificial intelligence and
cognitive psychology under a common philosophical framework, and it was believed
that computers with human-level capacities would be rapidly achieved. Progress in
artificial intelligence, however, has been much slower than anticipated, and
developments in neuroscience, in artificial neural networks, and in dynamical and
evolutionary approaches to cognition and robotics, have caused some to question
whether cognitive science should remain committed to the computational theory of
mind.
Course Description
In this course, students will learn about the original promise of the computational theory,
and how it provided an alternative to earlier philosophical and scientific views about the
Course Materials
relationship between mind and body. We will go on to consider the debate about
whether evolutionary, embodied, and dynamical systems approaches to cognitive
science amount to an overthrow of its traditional symbolic-representationalist core as
well as providing a philosophical challenge to our deep-seated conception of ourselves
as human agents with rational beliefs.
Course Objective
By the end of the course, students will be able to to evaluate and respond to
philosophical arguments in cognitive science.
Assignments and Grading
This course is designated Intensive Writing (IW), which according to the faculty
handbook means, students must be required to write at least 5,000 words (roughly
20 typed pages), not counting revisions (and excluding essay examinations and
informal writing, e.g., journals or brief response statements). Students must receive
periodic evaluations of their writing, and they must be required to redraft one or more
papers in light of the instructors criticism. Ordinarily students will write a series of
papers over the course of a semester, not one long term paper.
There are no scheduled examinations, but there are six formal pieces of writing
required, and these will be extensively workshopped during discussion sections.
Discussion sections may also be used to clarify and extend the discussion of course
concepts.
IW assignments, specified in greater detail below are due by midnight on the

dates specified in the table below. All must be submitted via Oncourse.
Acceptable formats are pdf, rtf, .doc, and .docx.
All submissions should be double-spaced, 1-inch margins, and font size 10-12
points. Include a word count with your document.
All sources must be cited in an acceptable format (APA preferred). Also, if you
are unsure about what counts as plagiarism, take this tutorial and self-test.
Late submissions will incur a grade penalty of 1 point per 24 hrs. The writing
assignments are tightly integrated with the main lecture content and the topics
may not be fully covered in the readings alone, so attendance at all three
meetings each week is important.
Occasional classroom activities or pop quizzes on readings may be used without
warning to determine attendance and participation.
70% for the IW assignments, distributed as follows:
Course Materials
IW-1, due 01/30, 5%
IW-2, due 02/20, 10%
IW-3, due 03/13, 10%
IW-4, due 04/10, 15%
IW-5, due 04/24, 10%
IW-6, due 05/08, 20%
20% for initial office hours visit, responses to readings, including in-class assignments
which may not be announced in advance.
5% for mandatory meetings with IUB Writing Tutorial Services
5% for participation in discussions during class lecture and discussion periods.
Texts
For the discussion sections, there is one short required textbook. It is Lewis Vaughns
Writing Philosophy: A Students Guide to Writing Philosophy Essays.
For the main lecture sections, there are roughly two required readings per week. The
schedule below references the required readings. All required readings will be made
freely available via Oncourse.
The schedule also contains references to a textbook that covers some of the course
material, and is recommended reading. It is Andy Clark's Mindware 2nd Edition,
Oxford Univ. Press.
Schedule
Date
Week 1
Topic
Readings
Assignment details
Course Intro
01/12
Philosophy,
Science, and the
Philosophy of
Science
movie shown in class
01/14
What is (Philosophy Paul Thagards SEP

of) Cognitive
article on Cognitive
Science?
Science
[Mindware Preface,
Chapter 1, Appendix 1]
Article available here:
IW requirements
and strategies
Bring questions
01/16
Vaughn, Chapter 1.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cognitivescience/
Week 2
01/19
MLK Day
No Class
Course Materials
01/21
Physical Symbols
System Hypothesis
Allen Newell & Herbert

Simon (1975)
Computer Science as
empirical enquiry:
symbols and search
[Mindware 2.1]
01/23
Brainstorm IW-1
Vaughn, Chapter 2.
CA's guide to writing
philosophy papers
01/26
Chinese Room
John Searle (1980)

Minds, Brains, and
Programs
[Mindware 2.2]
01/28
The Turing Test
Alan Turing (1950)

Computing Machinery
& Intelligence
Try out at least one of the Turing

Machine simulators linked at
Wikipedia and SEP.
01/30
Workshop IW-1
Vaughn, Chapter 3.
*IW-1 DUE*
Week 4
Dualism, or...?
Monty Python's argument clinic
Week 3
02/02
Rationalists and
Empiricists
Rene Descartes (1641)

Meditations 1 and 2
David Hume (1777)
Enquiry Concerning
Human Understanding
sections 2 and 3 (skip
sections 1, 4, and 5)
[Mindware 3]
02/04
Metaphors for Mind

I: Maps and Images
Edward Tolman (1948)

Cognitive maps in rats
in men
Roger Shepard &
Jacqueline Metzler
(1971) Mental rotation
of three-dimensional
objects
02/06
Knowing your
audience
Vaughn, Chapter 4
Week 5
Functionalism
Research age-appropriate vocabulary

lists/tools for 12 yr olds.
Course Materials
02/09
Functionalism
Janet Levins SEP entry

on Functionalism
02/11
More functionalism
review SEP article
02/13
IW-2 Analogy
Brainstorming
Vaughn, Chapter 5
Week 6
Rationalism v.
Empiricism Redux
02/16
Chomsky v. Skinner Noam Chomsky

(1959/1967) Review of
B.F. Skinners Verbal
Behavior
02/18
The Place of Folk

Psychology
Daniel Dennett (1981)

True believers
02/20
Workshop IW-2
Vaughn, Chapter 6
Week 7
Connectionism
02/23
Intro to
connectionism
Jim Garsons SEP entry

on Connectionism
[Mindware 4]
02/25
Eliminativism
William Ramsey,
Stephen Stich, &
Joseph Garon (1991)
Connectionism,
eliminativism, and the
future of folk
psychology
02/27
Workshop papers
Week 8
Bring your "2nd best" ideas
Levels of
Explanation
03/02
Marr's 3 levels
Marr (1980) selection

from Vision
03/04
Multiple Realization
Figdor (2010)
Neuroscience and the
*IW-2 DUE*
Course Materials
Multiple Realization of
Cognitive Functions
03/06
Week 9
Workshop papers
Vaughn, Chapter 7
Schedule appoint with IUB Writing

Tutorial Services
Evolution and Mind
03/09
Evolution and
Content
Ruth Millikan (1980)

Compare and Contrast
Dretske, Fodor, and
Millikan on
Teleosemantics
03/11
Robots
Inman Harvey et al.

(2005) Evolutionary
Robotics: A new
scientific tool for
studying cognition
[Mindware 6]
03/13
Workshop papers
Vaughn, Chapter 8
*IW-3 DUE*
Week 10
SPRING BREAK
SPRING BREAK
SPRING BREAK
Week 11
Embodied Cognition
03/23
More robots
Rodney Brooks (1991)

Intelligence without
representation
[Mindware 5,6]
03/25
Embodiment
Andy Clark (1998)

Embodiment and the
Philosophy of Mind
03/27
Brainstorm IW-4
Week 12
Dynamical Systems
03/30
Dynamical Systems
Schedule appoint with IUB Writing

Tutorial Services
Beer (2000) Dynamical

approaches to cognitive
Course Materials
science
[Mindware 7]
04/01
Dynamical
Philosophy
04/03
tba
Week 13
Timothy van Gelder

(1995) What might
cognition be if not
computation?
tba
Mind Beyond Body
04/06
Extended Mind
Andy Clark and David

Chalmers (1998) The
Extended Mind
[Mindware 8]
04/08
Enaction
Marek McGann, Hanne

De Jaegher, Ezequiel di
Paolo (2013) Enaction
and Psychology
[Mindware 9]
04/10
Workshop IW-4
*IW-4 DUE*
Week 14
Charting the
Revolution
04/13
Group Mind
Georg Theiner, Colin

Allen and Rob
Goldstone (2010)
Recognizing Group
Cognition
04/15
Philosophy of
Cognitive Science
vs. Philosophy of
Mind
Tony Chemero and

Michael Silberstein
(2008) After philosophy
of mind: replacing
scholasticism with
science
04/17
BRAINSTORM IW5
Week 15
The Conservative
View
Course Materials
04/20
The conservative
view
Rob Rupert (2013)

Memory, natural kinds,
and cognitive
extension
04/22
The conservative
view (continued)
Rupert (forthcoming)
Against group cognitive
states
04/24
Workshop IW-5
Week 16
Theories of
Theories of mind
*IW-5 DUE*
04/27
Theory-Theory vs.
Simulation Theory
Gallese and Goldman

(1998) Mirror Neurons
and the Simulation
Theory of MindReading
04/29
Animal Cognition
Call and Tomasello

(2008) Does the
Chimpanzee have a
theory of mind? 30
years later
05/01
Workshop IW-6
Bring paper drafts
Week 16
05//08
Finals Week
Last day of class
No classes
*IW-6 DUE*
Course Materials
IW Assignments
IW-1. Choose one of the "-isms" e.g., rationalism, dualism, or behaviorism -- that has
been discussed in lectures or readings, then (a) explain what it means and (b)
summarize the main arguments for and against it.
Due 01/30.
The audience for this paper is a friend or acquaintance who has not taken this
course. Do not be overly casual in your writing, but do focus on being clear,
concise, and accessible. Briefly explain any technical terms and avoid
unexplained jargon.
You are not expected to consult any sources beyond what we have covered in
class, but you are welcome to do so if you would like. Just make sure that you
cite any sources that you refer to in your writing.
A good secondary source for many of the topics we will cover this semester is
the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. For this paper, the most relevant
entries would be the SEP entry on dualism and behaviorism. You may also find
related items at the InPhO page for Cognitive Science.
If you do consult other sources, keep in mind that the terms "dualism",
"behaviorism", "functionalism", and "materialism", can mean different things to
people in different fields, even within philosophy and cognitive science. The kind
of dualism we have discussed is often referred to as Cartesian dualism, or mindbody dualism. The kind of behaviorism we've discussed is sometimes known as
methodological behaviorism, or, more generally, psychological behaviorism.
There is a distinct (but related) strand of behaviorism in philosophy, which was
prevalent around the same time as the psychological version. If you read the
appendix in Mindware, this is the sense in which "behaviorism" is used there.
Keep this in mind if you consult other sources, and stick to the kind of -ism that
we focused on in class.
Min. length: 600 words.
IW-2. Explain functionalism to a 6th grader. In doing so, be sure to address each of the
following:
1. What does functionalism claim about the nature of mental states?
2. How does the concept of the Turing machine relate to functionalism? In other
words, what role does the Turing machine play in the functionalist account of the
mind?
Course Materials
Due 02/20.
Cite all sources used, including any we read in class.
IW-3. The early part of the course has dealt with a related setof questions, including:
Can machines think (understand, be intelligent, etc.)?

If so, what kind of machine? If not, then why not?
How can we judge whether a machine is intelligent (capable of thought,
understanding, etc.) or not? That is, what kind of evidence would should we use?
The assignment for this essay is to pick two of the readings to compare and contrast,
focusing on questions like the ones given above. On points where the two sides
disagree, explain which side you find more convincing. Note: The bullet-pointed
questions above are just meant as a guide. Depending on which pair of papers you
choose, you might focus more on one or two of these questions and less on the
other(s). Or you may find that there are other relevant questions or issues to focus on.
The organization of this essay is more open ended than on previous assignments.
However you choose to organize it, though, remember to be clear in terms of your
introduction, paragraphing, and transitions.
Due 03/13.
Include at least one specific reference (with page number) from each of the two
papers.
Cite your sources using APA or MLA formatting.
IW-4. One of the themes in philosophy of cognitive science concerns the relationship
between folk (or commonsense) psychology and scientific psychology (which, for our
purposes, can be taken to include neuroscience, much of AI, and much of cognitive
science in general). One way to understand this debate is in terms of the mind-body
problem, which has been a recurring thread throughout the semester. What is the
relationship between the mental realm and the physical realm (or are they identical)?
Do mental states (e.g., beliefs, desires, and intentions) have "causal powers"? Why or
why not? Finally, what should be the relationship between folk psychology and
scientific psychology? Your assignment in this essay is to present your own argument
on some aspect of the folk psychology debate. That could mean addressing one of the
above questions, or it could mean focusing on another aspect of the recent material
(e.g.,the Dennett paper on the intentional stance, Ch.3 of Mindware, or even some
other relevant source, as long as you clear it first). Whatever the topic, make sure to
inlcude the following in your essay:
1. A clear, concise introductory paragraph that includes a statement of your thesis
and a brief overview of how you plan to support it
Course Materials
2. Two or three well-organized body paragraphs, each addressing a particular
aspect of your argument
3. A brief conclusion that revisits your thesis statement and (ideally) raises an
additional question or two for the reader to think about in light of your arguments.
Due 04/10
In contrast to the previous essays, you will need to formulate an argument of
your own rather than to explain or evaluate someone else's argument. However,
these tasks are not entirely unrelated, since one way to formulate a topic is to
take someone else's argument and look for ways to evaluate it, critique it, or
expand on it.
IW-5. Revision of earlier piece or draft of final piece. Choice must be pre-approved by
11/21.
Due 04/25.
Min. length 1200 words (does not count towards 5,000 word IW requirement).
IW-6. The assignment for the final paper is to write an argument-based (i.e., thesisbased) paper on a topic from the second half of the class, which means anything from
Week 9 onwards, including the following topics: evolutionary approaches to cognitive
science, embodied cognition, extended mind, dynamical systems approaches, etc.
(Any of the material from the Discussion sections of Mindware from Ch. 4-7 would be
fair game.)
You should have a discernible thesis that you back up with supporting arguments. For
example, you might pick something we've read or discussed that you disagree with and
want to argue against. Or you can pick something you agree with and argue for why you
think so-and-so is right. In either case, you would need to offer support for your
argument and also consider (and respond to) some potential counterarguments.
Due 05/08.
Writing Tutorial Services

For free help at any phase of the writing processfrom brainstorming to polishing the
final draftcall Writing Tutorial Services (WTS, pronounced wits) at 855-6738 for an
appointment. When you visit WTS, youll find a tutor who is a sympathetic and helpful
reader of your prose. To be assured of an appointment with the tutor who will know
most about your class, please call in advance. WTS, in the Information Commons on
the first floor of the Wells Library, is open Monday- Thursday 10:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
and Friday 10:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Walk-in tutorials are available when WTS has an
opening, but the appointment book often fills in advance. WTS tutors are also available
Course Materials
for walk-in tutorials (only) in the Academic Support Centers in Briscoe, Forest, and
Teter residence halls, open Sunday-Thursday 7:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal anti-discrimination statute that
provides comprehensive civil rights protection for persons with disabilities. Among
other things, this legislation requires that all students with disabilities be guaranteed a
learning environment that provides for reasonable accommodation of their disabilities.
If you believe you have a disability requiring an accommodation, please contact IU
Disability Services for Students.
Statement about Academic Misconduct
University rules concerning academic misconduct will be rigorously enforced in this
class. See Section G of the IU Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities and
Conduct for details.
Course Materials
Levels of Analysis
MARRS THREE LEVELS OF ANALYSIS

Top Level: Computational Theory
What is the goal of the computation, why is it appropriate, and
what is the strategy of logic by which it is carried out?
Center Level: Representation & Algorithm

How can this computational theory be implemented? In particular,
what is the representation for the input and output, and what is
the algorithm for the transformation
Bottom Level: Hardware Implementation

How can the representation and algorithm be realized physically?
An important note:
This process is Top-Down, unlike traditional Bottom-Up strategies. As such, it
allows for multiple realizability through most detail arising in the Algorithmic
Analysis and the relative insignificance of a processs physical realization.
Example: A Cash Register

What the cash register does and why.
How the cash register carries out its function.
The physical realization of the cash register.
Each of the three levels of description will have its place in the eventual understanding of
perceptual information processing, and of course they are logically and causally related. But an
important point to note is that since the three levels are only loosely related, some phenomena
may be explained at only one or two of them. This means, for example, that a correct explanation
of some psychological observation must be formulated at the appropriate level.
Trying to understand perception by studying only neurons is like trying to understand bird flight
by studying only feathers: It just cannot be done.
Course Materials
Dear Writing Tutorial Services,

As per a course requirement of COGS Q240, the student
_____________________________ is required to meet for fifty
minutes with a WTS tutor. The goals of having the student meet with
a WTS tutor are 1) to garner helpful feedback on a completed draft of
one of the students intensive writing assignments, and 2) to
familiarize them with the review process and the act of seeking help
through WTS (or some other outside entity) in order to improve their
writing ability.
By stamping this document, you acknowledge that:
You and the student met for the full tutoring session.
The student came prepared with a completed rough draft of
their intensive writing assignment as well as access to specific
instructions for the intensive writing assignment.
Aside from seeking help on a draft, the student asked for
general as well as specific guidance on how they can improve
their writing.
Stamped: _____________________________________
Date: __________________________________________
Course Materials
HPSC X100: Disordered Minds: The History and Philosophy of

Psychiatry (4509)

1. Syllabus
2. Midterm Exam Guide
Course Materials
HPSC X100: Disordered Minds: The History and Philosophy of Psychiatry

Fall 2015 Schedule and Syllabus
Meeting Time: MWF 11:15-12:05; Location: Sycamore Hall 002
Instructor
Nicholas Zautra
Department of History and Philosophy
of Science
Cognitive Science Program
Primary Contact
Nicholas Zautra
1011 E. Third Street
Goodbody 009
Bloomington, IN 47405
- Vincent van Gogh Corridor in the

asylum (1889)
Course Description:
This course surveys one of the most interesting developments in the history and
philosophy of science: the scientific practices involved in making human beings
an object of study. We examine the ways in which psychologists and
psychiatrists have investigated human nature, approaches to research they have
developed to that end, major controversies in the field, and basic philosophical
assumptions made in the sciences of human nature. We investigate the
development of psychiatric theory, treatment methods, and institutions. Finally,
we connect philosophical questions raised by mental disorder and our attempts
to understand/treat it to debates in philosophy such as the mind/body problem,
the concept of a person, and the possibility of knowledge.
Course Objective
By the end of the course, students should have a broad knowledge of the history,
philosophy, and major concepts in the philosophy of psychiatry, and be able to
come to their own well-reasoned personal opinions about the issues in question.
Course Materials

participation. Thus, student participation and attendance is expected. You are
expected to have read the assignments and be ready to discuss the material in
depth. Your overall grade for the course will be lowered by a half letter grade for
every unexcused absence you have beyond three absences.
Required Text:
Fulford, Bill, Tim Thornton, and George Graham. "Oxford textbook of
philosophy and psychiatry." (2006). (Available via IU Bookstore)
Assignments: This course will involve several different kinds of assignments.
The goals of these various assignments are to:
1. Acquaint you with various arguments, which have been presented in favor
of (or against) certain theories and approaches in psychiatry.
2. Examine the history of psychiatry, introducing you to debate about
interpretation of the historical process, focusing on important individuals
and movements and drawing attention to recurrent ideas and themes.
3. Expose you to conceptual analysis by relating historical conceptual
problems to modern problems in psychiatry, and by examining some key
concepts (such as mind, behavior, consciousness, theory,
explanation, mental illness, etc.)
4. Foster the development of your own abilities to present and evaluate
arguments.
Office Hours Visit
Homework Exercises
In-Class Presentation
Midterm Exam
Final Exam
25 Points
400 Points
175 Points
200 Points
200 Points
1000 Points TOTAL
Office Hours Visit (2.5%): Your first assignment will be to schedule an initial 10minute visit with your course instructor. This visit, which will take place during the
first two weeks of class will be an informal conversation primarily designed to
allow one-on-one face time between you and the instructor, a sort of get-toknow-you. This visit will also serve to let you know where office hours will be
held, and to allow you to ask any questions you have regarding the course.
Course Materials
Homework Exercises (40%): Several homework exercises will be assigned

throughout the duration of the course. Each homework exercise will typically
include reading a short excerpt, thinking about that reading, and then responding
to several questions. The exercises can be found in the required textbook.
Class Presentation (17.5%): At the beginning of the semester, you will sign up
to focus on a particular kind of case of mental illness, and gather information
about it. Then each student will give a brief (10-minute) presentation on that
particular kind of mental illness and the philosophical issues that arise. In
gathering information about your chosen illness, I especially want you to try to
find descriptions of what it is like to have the disorder; what goes through the
mind of the person with the disorder, how do they think about other people, how
do they live from day to day with the disorder? I encourage you to find memoirs,
novels, movies, documentaries, TV shows, blogs, newspaper articles, artwork,
poetry, music, and also clinical descriptions by mental health professionals, so
you get a variety of perspectives.
Midterm Exam (15%): The midterm exam will cover topics in the required text
from first part of the course (Parts I & 2).
Final Exam (25%): The final exam will cover topics in the required text from the
second part of the course (Parts III, IV, & V).
Course Structure:
This course aims to cover the large majority of the text and consists of five parts:
Part I: Core Concepts in Philosophy and Mental Health
What is a mental illness and how does it relate to disease?
Part II: A Philosophical History of Psychopathology
How have we come to recognize the variety and subtlety of
psychopathological concepts?
Part III: Philosophy of Science and Mental Health
What is the relationship between science and the experiencing subject?
Part IV: Values, Ethics, and Mental Health
What are the moral and legal issues that arise in psychiatry?
Part V: Philosophy of Mind and Mental Health
What is the role of rationality both in our understanding of minds and
mental states, and in the marking of the minds as different from other
aspects of the natural world?
Course Materials
Course Schedule:
Reading
Assignments, etc.
Assignments
Week 1: Introduction to the History and Philosophy and Psychiatry
Aug 24 Organization and Overview
Aug 26 How to Read Philosophy
Vaughn,
Chapter 1
Aug 28 How to Read Arguments
Vaughn,
Chapter 2
Week 2: Part I: Core Concepts in Philosophy and Mental Health
Aug 31 Philosophical Problems in
Chapters 2,
Mental Health and Practical pp. 4-13
Health
Sep 2 Philosophical Problems in
Chapter 2,
Chapter 2, Exercise 7
Mental Health and Practical pp. 14-21
Due
Health
Sep 4 Experiences Good and Bad: Chapter 3,
An Introduction to
pp. 33-46
Psychopathology,
Classification, and Diagnosis
for Philosophers
Week 3: Part I (Continued)
Sep 7 Labor Day
No Class
Sep 9 Philosophical Methods in
Chapter 3,
Mental Health and Practice
pp. 46-51;
Chapter 4,
pp. 61-73
Chapter 4,
pp. 73-83
Date
Topic
Week 4: Part I (Continued)

(continued)
(Continued)
Sep 18 In-class Presentations
Session One
Chapter 4,
pp. 61-73
Chapter 4,
pp. 73-83
Due
Course Materials
Week 5: Part II: A philosophical history of psychopathology

Sep 21 Philosophical outputs in
Chapter 6
mental health practice and
research
Sep 23 Philosophical outputs in
Chapter 6
mental health practice and
(continued) Due
research
Sep 25 A brief history of mental
Chapter 7
disorder
Week 6: Part II (Continued)
Sep 28 Karl Jaspers and General
Chapter 8
Psychopathology
Due
Sep 30 Phenomenology and
Chapter 9,
Psychopathology
pp. 181-191
Oct 2 Phenomenology and
Chapter 9,
Psychopathology
pp. 191-197
Week 7: Part II (Continued)
Oct 5 Phenomenology and
Chapter 9,
Psychopathology
pp. 197-208 Due
Oct 7 MIDTERM EXAM
Oct 9 Fall Break
No Class
Week 8: Part III: Philosophy of Science and Mental Health
Oct 12 Psychoanalysis: An
Chapter 11,
introduction to the
pp. 245-254
philosophy of science
Chapter 11,
introduction to the
pp. 254-271
Chapter 11, Chapter 11, Exercise 15
introduction to the
pp. 271-283 Due
Week 9: Part III (Continued)
Oct 19 Psychopathology and the
Chapter 12,
theory dependence of Data pp. 290-297
Chapter 12,
theory dependence of Data pp. 297-303
Chapter 12, Chapter 12, Exercise 5
theory dependence of Data pp. 303-313 Due
Week 10: Part III (Continued)
Oct 26 Diagnosis, Explanation, and Chapter 14,
Course Materials
Tacit Knowledge
pp. 386-391
Oct 28 Diagnosis, Explanation, and Chapter 14,
Tacit Knowledge
pp. 391-403
Oct 30 In-class Presentations
Due
Session Two
Week 11: Part IV: Values, Ethics, and Mental Health
Nov 2 Tools of the Trade: an
Chapter 17,
introduction to psychiatric
pp. 470-479
ethics
Nov 4 Tools of the Trade: an
Chapter 17,
introduction to psychiatric
pp. 479-492
ethics
Nov 6 From bioethics to valuesChapter 18,
based practice
pp. 499-509
Week 12: Part IV (Continued)
based practice
pp. 509-519
based practice
pp. 519-530
Chapter 20,
pp. 567Nov 13 Values in psychiatric
Chapter 20,
diagnosis
pp. 567-571
Week 13: Part IV (Continued)
Nov 16 Values in psychiatric
Chapter 20,
diagnosis
pp. 571-578
Nov 18 Values in psychiatric
Reich, W.
diagnosis
(1999).
Psychiatric
diagnosis as
an ethical
problem.
Nov 20 In-Class Presentations
Session Three
Due
Week 14: THANKSGIVING BREAK
Nov
No Class
No Class
No Class
22-29
Week 15: Part V: Philosophy of Mind and Mental Health
Nov 30 Mind, brain, and mental
Chapter 22,
illness: an introduction to the pp. 614-619
Course Materials
philosophy of mind
Dec 2 Mind, brain, and mental
illness: an introduction to the
philosophy of mind
Dec 4 Agency, Causation, and
Freedom
Week 16: Part V (Continued)
Dec 7 Agency, Causation, and
Freedom
Dec 9 Knowledge of other minds
Dec 11 Knowledge of other minds
Finals Week
Dec
Final Exam Review Session
14-18 TBA
Chapter 22,
pp. 619-624
Chapter 22, Exercises 4-6
Chapter 26,
pp. 718-727
Chapter 26,
pp. 727-734
Chapter 27,
pp. 739-750
Chapter 27,
pp. 750-756
FINAL EXAM
5:00-7:00 p.m., Wed.,
December 16
Emotional concerns: Discussing controversial issues connected with personal

experiences of mental illness and family dynamics can bring up powerful
emotions, especially for people with difficult or abusive experiences in their
past. So it is important that the classroom be a safe and supportive space for
everyone in it. If at any point during class you do experience overwhelming
emotions, then you are quite free to leave and take some time for
yourself. Please let me know either when you leave the classroom or afterwards.
Academic and Personal Problems. If you have problems that cause you to be
late with work or to miss a number of classes, please stay in communication by
phone, email, or by meeting with me in person. I will be willing to work with you
and sort out a way for you to still stay in the class and get a fair grade. If you
miss a number of classes or fail to hand in work on time but don't give me any
explanation then you risk failing the class.

Conduct (2005) indicate that students may be disciplined for several different
kinds of academic misconduct. In particular the code states: Plagiarism is defined
as presenting someone elses work, including the work of other students, as
ones own. Any ideas or materials taken from another source for either written or
oral use must be fully acknowledged, unless the information is common
knowledge. What is considered 'common knowledge' may differ from course to
Course Materials
course. a. A student must not adopt or reproduce ideas, opinions, theories,

formulas, graphics, or pictures of another person without acknowledgment. b. A
student must give credit to the originality of others and acknowledge an
indebtedness whenever: 1. Directly quoting another persons actual words,
whether oral or written; 2. Using another persons ideas, opinions, or theories; 3.
Paraphrasing the words, ideas, opinions, or theories of others, whether oral or
written; 4. Borrowing facts, statistics, or illustrative material; or 5. Offering
materials assembled or collected by others in the form of projects or collections
without acknowledgment." (quoted from Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities,
and Conduct, Part II, Student Responsibilities, Academic Misconduct)
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal anti-discrimination statute
that provides comprehensive civil rights protection for persons with disabilities.
Among other things, this legislation requires that all students with disabilities be
guaranteed a learning environment that provides for reasonable accommodation
of their disabilities. If you believe you have a disability requiring an
accommodation, please contact IU Disability Services for Students.
Course Materials
HPSC X100 Midterm Study Guide
The midterm exam covers Vaughn Chapters 1 & 2, and the textbook chapters 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8.
The exam will consist of (1) multiple choice/short answer questions (50%), (2) critical reading
questions (30%), and (3) one short essay question (20%).
(1) To prepare for multiple choice/short-answer portion of the exam, please familiarize yourself
with the following questions, any of which may be on the exam:
1. What is philosophy?
2. What is a philosophical problem?
3. What can philosophy help you do?
4. How should you read philosophy?
5. What are the components of an argument?
6. How do you evaluate an argument?
7. With what kinds of disorders is psychiatry particularly concerned?
8. What is covered by a psychiatric diagnostic formulation?
9. How does the subject matter of philosophy differ from that of science?
10. What broad areas or kinds of philosophy are there?
11. What concepts are at the interface between philosophy and psychiatry?
12. What is the significance of a conceptual map of mental disorders?
13. What are the four conceptually significant features of the conceptual map we identified?
14. What are the three ways in which mental disorders are generally more value-laden than
bodily disorders?
15. What was Szasz essential strategy? On, what, precisely, did he focus his arguments?
16. Why exactly did he argue against the medical model in psychiatry? What was he
concerned about?
17. What are the three structural elements or stages in Szaszs core argument?
18. What are the strengths and weaknesses of Szazs argument?
19. What is the historical link between Kendells arguments and those of Szasz?
20. From whose work and in what area of medicine (bodily or psychological) did Kendell
derive his arguments?
21. How does Kendells definition of bodily illness (or disease) differ from Szasz?
22. Identify three similarities between Kendell and Szaszs arguments
23. What conclusions can be drawn form the similarities and differences between their
arguments for the debate about mental illness?
24. What are the four main purposes of diagnosis in medicine?
25. What is the main difference between the diagnostic categories used in psychiatry and in
(most) areas of bodily medicine?
26. Give one positive and one negative interpretation of differences between diagnostic
categories in psychiatry and in bodily medicine
27. What are the main groups of psychological symptoms generally recognized in
psychiatry?
28. Is psychiatry concerned at all with bodily signs and symptoms?
29. What are the main categories of adult mental disorder?
30. What are the main steps in developing a differential diagnosis in psychiatry?
31. Are all distressing experiences matters for psychiatric diagnosis?
32. What are some of the main difficulties with defining everyday objects like bells?
33. How many kinds of definitions are important in health care? Give two examples.
34. How should you understand the maxim, first define your terms?
35. Does the ease of use of a term go with transparency of definition?
Course Materials
36. What are the implications for the stigmatizing of mental health compared with bodily
health, of the fact that the concept of mental illness is not only difficult to define (like the
concept of bodily illness) but also difficult to use (unlike the concept of bodily illness)?
37. How do the terms illness and disease differ in their everyday use?
38. How does Boorse develop this distinction into a more formal version of the medicalscientific model?
39. How does Anglo-American philosophy differ from Continental philosophy?
40. What are the three schools of Continental philosophy?
41. Is it good or bad practice to be concerned with apparently self-evident questions?
42. How should we understand that practical pay-off from philosophy?
43. How does the property of evaluative expressions (that they come to look like descriptive
expressions) help to explain the problem of mental illness?
44. What is the difference between the causal and logical relationship between illness and
disease?
45. Does disease define illness, or illness disease?
46. What are the features of the actual experience of illness?
47. How can an analysis of the experience of illness in terms of disturbance of agency be
connected with an analysis of disease in terms of disturbance of functioning?
48. How far back does the concept of mental illness go?
49. What is the historical relationship between medical-scientific and moral-humanistic
models?
50. What was Karl Jaspers work as a philosopher-psychiatrist a response to?
51. What is Karl Jaspers work similar to recent developments in the philosophy of
psychiatry?
(2) To prepare for the critical reading portion of the exam, please read (in the way in which you
have learned to read philosophy) and familiarize yourself with: Reading 4.1, 6.1, 7.1, 7.4, 7.7, 7.8.
During the exam, you will be presented two of the above extracts and answer questions related to
their content.
(3) To prepare for the short essay question, familiarize yourself with Vaughn, chapters 1 and 2.
You will be asked to give a brief argument of what you think in response to an open-ended
philosophical question:
Example questions:

Is antipsychiatry alive or dead today? Why or why not?

What does it mean to say there are not schizophrenics, but people with schizophrenia?
Can patients experiences with mental illness contribute to scientific progress, or are they
incommensurable?
The essay question will not be graded on whether your argument is correct, but in how well you
construct it (e.g. is it logically valid? Does the conclusion follow from the premises?). Examples of
how to write good arguments can be found in Vaughn chapters 1 and 2.
Course Materials
HPSC X100: Animal Research Ethics (5136)

1.
2.
3.
4.
Syllabus
Example Case Analysis
Assignment: Individual Presentation and Response Rubric
Assignment: Ethics Bowl Case Preparation
Course Materials
Animal Research Ethics HPS-X 100 Spring 2016

MWF, 12:20 PM - 1:10 PM, Sycamore 002
Instructor
Nicholas Zautra
History and Philosophy of Science
College of Arts and Sciences
Indiana University Bloomington
Primary Contact
Nicholas Zautra
1020 Kirkwood Ave.
Ballentine Hall
Course Description:
This course will explore historical, philosophical, and ethical dimensions of research
with nonhuman animals. We will describe and critically assess the rationale for and
limits of laboratory animal experimentation in biology, engineering, and biomedicine. We
will also explore the ethical issues raised by ecological field research involving wild
animals. Much of this discussion focuses on resolving philosophical and practical
conflicts between the suffering of non-human animals and the well-being of humans,
and between individualistic treatments of animal welfare and more holistic concerns
about the health of populations, species, and ecological systems. This course should be
of interest to undergraduate students in the life sciences and engineering who conduct
basic and/or applied research with nonhuman animals, students studying the history
and philosophy of science, ethics, policy, and law, as well as those students with a
general interest in our cultural, ethical, biological, and historical relationships with
nonhuman animals.
Course Objective
By the end of the course, students should have a broad foundational knowledge of the
history, philosophy, and major concepts in animal research ethics, and be able to come
to their own well-reasoned personal opinions about the issues in question.
Course Materials
Required Text:
1. Guerrini, Anita. Experimenting with humans and animals: from Galen to animal
rights. JHU Press, 2003.
2. Stanlick, Nancy A., and Michael J. Strawser. Asking Good Questions: Case
Studies in Ethics and Critical Thinking. Hackett Publishing, 2015.
Assignments: This course will involve several different kinds of assignments. The
goals for students in completing these assignments are the following:
1. To demonstrate an understanding of the ethical dimensions of animal research
and the impact of historical events that shaped its development.
2. To demonstrate knowledge of major ethical concepts and theories and use these
concepts and theories where applicable to examine and interpret interdisciplinary
cases raising significant ethical issues.
3. To apply creative problem-solving strategies.
4. To engage actively in ethical dialogues by critically discussing and evaluating
moral issues.
5. To articulate effectively, argue persuasively, and think critically about moral
judgments.
6. To demonstrate the ability to work towards a consensus in making ethical
decisions and show an appreciation of the challenges and complexities of
arriving at such decisions
7. To develop skills in research and written and verbal expression.
8. To take responsibility for and ownership of your own personal ethical
development.
Office Hours Visit
Homework Exercises
Midterm Exam
Ethics Bowl Case Study
Ethics Bowl Competition
25 Points
300 Points
200 Points
250 Points
250 Points
Course Materials
Office Hours Visit (2.5%): Your first assignment will be to schedule an initial 10-minute
visit with your course instructor. This visit, which will take place during the first two
weeks of class will be an informal conversation primarily designed to allow one-on-one
face time between you and the instructor, a sort of get-to-know-you. This visit will also
serve to let you know where office hours will be held, and to allow you to ask any
questions you have regarding the course.
Homework Exercises (30%): Several homework exercises will be assigned throughout
the duration of the course. Each homework exercise will typically include responding to
several questions related to the assigned readings.
Midterm Exam (20%): The midterm exam will cover topics in the required text from first
half of the course.
Ethics Bowl Case Preparation (25%): The readings, homework exercises, and
midterm exam are designed to prepare you for the final class project: an ethics bowl
competition.
An ethics bowl competition combines the excitement and fun of a competitive
tournament with an innovative approach to education in practical and professional
ethics for undergraduate students. Recognized widely by educators, ethics bowls have
received special commendation for excellence and innovation from the American
Philosophical Association, and received the 2006 American Philosophical
Association/Philosophy Documentation Centers 2006 prize for Excellence and
Innovation in Philosophy Programs. The format, rules, and procedures of an ethics bowl
all have been developed to model widely acknowledged best methods of reasoning in
practical and professional ethics.
In an ethics bowl, each team receives a set of cases which raise issues in practical and
professional ethics in advance of the competition and prepare an analysis of each case.
At the competition, a moderator poses questions, based on a case taken from that set,
to teams of students. Questions may concern ethical problems on wide ranging topics
such as the classroom (e.g. cheating or plagiarism), personal relationships (e.g. dating
or friendship), professional ethics (e.g. engineering, law, medicine), or social and
political ethics (e.g. free speech, gun control, etc.); questions for this course will focus
on animal experimentation. Judges may probe the teams for further justifications and
evaluates answers. Rating criteria are intelligibility, focus on ethically relevant
considerations, avoidance of ethical irrelevance, and deliberative thoughtfulness.
Your ethics bowl case preparations will be formal write-ups in response to particular
cases assigned to you and your team at the midpoint of the semester.
Ethics Bowl Competition (25%): Your ethics bowl competition will take place during
the final week of class. Your performance will be evaluated according to the 2015-2016
Intercollegiate Ethics Bowl Judges Guidelines.
Course Materials
Course Schedule:
Reading
Assignments, etc.
Assignments
Week 1: Introduction to the History and Philosophy and Psychiatry
Jan 11 Organization and Overview
Jan 13 Ethical Resources for
Ethical
Decision-Making
Resources
for DecisionMaking, 3-11
Jan 15 Ethical Resources for
Ethical
Decision-Making
Resources
for DecisionMaking, 1233
Week 2: History of Animal Experimentation
Jan 18 MLK Day
No Class
No Class
Jan 20 Experimentation and
Guirrini,
Philosophical Debate in Pre- Introduction,
modern Europe
Chapter 1
Jan 22 Animals, Machines, and
Guirrini,
Homework 1 Due
Morals
Chapter 2
Jan 25 Disrupting Gods Plan
Guirrini,
Chapter 3
Jan 27 Cruelty and Kindness
Guirrini,
Chapter 4
Jan 29 The Microbe Hunters
Guirrini,
Homework 2 Due
Chapter 5
Feb 1 Polio and Primates
Guirrini,
Chapter 6
Feb 3 Human Rights, Animal
Guirrini,
Rights, and the Conduct of
Conclusion
Science
Feb 5 Animal Models in Biomedical Lafollete,
Homework 3 Due
Experimentation
796-821
Week 5: Philosophical Foundations
Feb 8 All Animals are Created
Singer, 73Equal
86
Date
Topic
Course Materials
Feb 10 The Case for Animal Rights
Regan, 1925
Feb 12 Of Mice and Men: A Feminist Mackinnon, Homework 4 Due
Fragment on Animal Rights 263-273
Week 6: Animal Welfare, Environmental Ethics, and Political Theory
Feb 15 Animal Liberation: A
Calicott, 311Triangular Affair
338
Feb 17 Animal Liberation is an
Jamieson,
Environmental Ethic
197-212
Feb 19 Zoopolis: A Political Renewal Bailey, 1-12 Homework 5 Due
of Animal Rights Theories
Week 7: Animal Research Regulation: IACUC 101
Feb 22 Use of Animals in
Fuchs and
Biomedical Experimentation Macrina,
135-147
Feb 24 Ethical Themes of National
Orlans, 131Regulations Governing
146
Animal Experiments
Feb 26 Whats Ethics Got to Do With Kahn, 919Homework 6 Due
It? The Roles of Government 929
Regulation in ResearchAnimal Protection
Week 8: Animal Research Regulation: IACUC: Current Issues
Feb 29 The Interpretation and
Schupplie
Application of the Three Rs and Faser,
by Animal Ethics Committee 487-498
Members
Mar 2 Euthanasia; Alleviating Pain AVMA
Guest Speaker
and Distress in Non-Human Guidelines
Animals
for
Euthanasia
(skim); AALS
Mar 4 Drawing Lines
Rachels,
Homework 7 Due
162-174
Week 9: The Future of Animal Research
Mar 7 Genetically Modified
Savulescu,
Animals: Should there be
641-665
Limits to Engineering the
Animal Kingdom?
Mar 9 Expanding the Three Rs to
Schuppli et
Course Materials
Meet New Challenges in

al., 525-530
Humane Animal
Experimentation
Mar 11 MIDTERM EXAM
MIDTERM EXAM
Week 10: SPRING BREAK
Mar
No Class
No Class
No Class
13-20
Week 11: Theoretical and Logical Tools for Ethical Case Study
Mar 21 Introduction: From Good
Stanlick &
Questions to Questioning the Strawser, 1Good
41
Mar 23 Logic and Persuasion
Stanlick &
Strawser,
45-72
Mar 25 Theoretical and Logical
Review
Homework 8 Due
Tools in Practice
Stanlick &
Strawser
Chapters 1 &
2
Week 12: Cases and Concept Mapping
Mar 28 Conceptualizing Ethical
Stanlick &
Cases
Strawser,
77-95
Mar 30 Questioning Cases and
Stanlick &
Mapping Concepts
Strawser,
98-116
Apr 1 Concept Mapping Cases of Review
Homework 9 Due
Animal Experimentation
Stanlick &
Strawer,
Chapters 3 &
4
Week 13: Creative Case Analysis
Apr 4 Creative Case Analysis
Stanlick &
Strawser,
119-143
Apr 6 Applying Ethical Theories
Stanlick &
Strawser,
147-163
Apr 8 Conclusion: Answering
Stanlick &
Homework 10 Due
Questions and Solving
Strawser,
Course Materials
Problems
163-182
Week 14: Cases in Animal Research Ethics
Apr 11 Cases in Animal Research
Cases in
Ethics Bowl teams
Ethics
Animal
announced; Cases
Research
assigned to students
(Canvas)
Cases in
Animal
Research
(Canvas)
Cases in
(contd)
Animal
Research
(Canvas)
Week 15: Individual Presentations on Facts and Issues in Cases
Apr 18 Individual Presentations &
Replies
Replies
Replies
Week 16: Ethics Bowl Practice
Apr 25 Ethics Bowl Practice
Apr 27 Ethics Bowl Practice
Apr 29 Course-Wrap Up: What have
Last day of class; Ethics
we learned?
Bowl Case Study Due
Week 17: Finals Week
May 2- Ethics Bowl Competition
Ethical Bowl
6
Competition:
Wednesday, May 4th,
12:30-2:30PM
Emotional concerns: Discussing controversial issues connected with animal
research can bring up powerful emotions. So it is important that the classroom be
a safe and supportive space for everyone in it. If at any point during class you do
experience overwhelming emotions, then you are quite free to leave and take
some time for yourself. Please let me know either when you leave the classroom
or afterwards.
Course Materials
Academic and Personal Problems. If you have problems that cause you to be
late with work or to miss a number of classes, please stay in communication by
phone, email, or by meeting with me in person. I will be willing to work with you
and sort out a way for you to still stay in the class and get a fair grade. If you
miss a number of classes or fail to hand in work on time but don't give me any
explanation then you risk failing the class.


Conduct (2005) indicate that students may be disciplined for several different
kinds of academic misconduct. In particular the code states: Plagiarism is defined
as presenting someone elses work, including the work of other students, as
ones own. Any ideas or materials taken from another source for either written or
oral use must be fully acknowledged, unless the information is common
knowledge. What is considered 'common knowledge' may differ from course to
course. a. A student must not adopt or reproduce ideas, opinions, theories,
formulas, graphics, or pictures of another person without acknowledgment. b. A
student must give credit to the originality of others and acknowledge an
indebtedness whenever: 1. Directly quoting another persons actual words,
whether oral or written; 2. Using another persons ideas, opinions, or theories; 3.
Paraphrasing the words, ideas, opinions, or theories of others, whether oral or
written; 4. Borrowing facts, statistics, or illustrative material; or 5. Offering
materials assembled or collected by others in the form of projects or collections
without acknowledgment." (quoted from Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities,
and Conduct, Part II, Student Responsibilities, Academic Misconduct)
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a federal anti-discrimination statute
that provides comprehensive civil rights protection for persons with disabilities.
Among other things, this legislation requires that all students with disabilities be
guaranteed a learning environment that provides for reasonable accommodation
of their disabilities. If you believe you have a disability requiring an
accommodation, please contact IU Disability Services for Students.
Course Materials
Case 9: Patent Right$

Hepatitis C is a stealthy blood-borne disease, displaying no visible symptoms for years,
while insidiously destroying the liver over time. The Hepatitis C virus (HCV) causes
inflammation of the liver, and can lead to serious liver damage such as scarring (cirrhosis),
liver cancer, and liver failure. For about 80% of those infected, Hepatitis C becomes a
chronic condition. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
approximately 3.2 million people in the United States have chronic Hepatitis C; the World
Health Organization estimates that between 130 and 150 million people are currently
infected with chronic Hepatitis C worldwide. Unlike Hepatitis A and Hepatitis B, there is no
vaccine for Hepatitis C.

The traditional course of treatment for Hepatitis C lasts up to 48 weeks, with a drug
cocktail that includes interferon or ribavirin. From 10-50% of those treated with the
cocktail benefit. For some, the progression of the disease is slowed. For others, a cure is
effected, with HCV no longer detectable in the blood, due either to the drugs or
spontaneous viral clearance. Even those who benefit, however, almost universally suffer
debilitating side effects from interferon or ribavirin. Additionally, any liver damage
remains.

Created by Gilead Sciences, Inc., Sovaldi received a US Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) Priority Review and Breakthrough Therapy designation. This designation is granted
when a new drug demonstrates a significant improvement over other therapies in at least
one aspect of treatment outcomes. In this way, a promising drug can move more quickly to
market. Sovaldi evidenced several improvements over the standard treatment: reduction
of treatment time to twelve weeks, reduction or elimination of interferon for most patients,
and a cure rate of up to 90%. On December 6, 2013, the FDA approved Sovaldi for
treatment of chronic Hepatitis C.

Despite its efficacy, access to Sovaldi is limited by its price. It is most expensive in the U.S.
where drug companies determine the price for their products. At $1000.00 per pill, the
twelveweek course of treatment costs $84,000. Many insurers are unwilling to add
Sovaldi to their formularies because of the sheer number of those with Hepatitis C.
Express Scripts, the countrys largest pharmacy benefit manager, tried for a year to
negotiate with Gilead for discounts, but to no avail. Stating that Gileads price was too high.
Express Scripts no longer includes Sovaldi in its formulary, including instead a less
expensive drug from AbbVie that was recently approved by the FDA.

Gilead announced that it would allow pharmaceutical companies in 91 developing
countries to make low-cost versions of Sovaldi. Still, affordability remains an issue, even
when Gilead offers deep discounts. For example, although Gilead offered India a 99%
discount, the $840 cost of treatment exceeds Indias per capita annual income ($616 in
2012). In January 2015, Indias patent office denied patent protection to Sovaldi, stating
that the drug did not evidence an improvement over existing treatments. The decision
allows local pharmacists to make cheaper generic versions of the drug.

Course Materials
Some accuse Gilead of making a cost-prohibitive drug that sick people desperately need. Dr.
Andrew Hill of Liverpool University estimates that the cost of producing Sovaldi is
somewhere in the range of $68$136 per pill. Critics note that Solvadi brought Gilead
over $10 billion in its first year on the market. Others defend Gileads actions.
Pharmaceutical companies like Gilead create and bring new drugs to market. Research,
development, and clinical trials are expensive, and drug companies need to be able to profit
from their efforts. A 2013 study by Forbes places the cost at about $5 billion for each new
drug that comes to market, a cost that reflects the failure of 95% of experimental drugs for
reasons either of safety or effectiveness. Profits provide incentive for further research and
development. Companies have an obligation to provide return on their investment to
shareholders. Supporters of Gileads pricing policy point out that even at $84,000 for a
course of treatment, the cost savings compared with a lifetime of traditional treatment are
significant. Sovaldi costs significantly less than a liver transplant or treating
complications of liver failure.

Critics express a further concern. They worry that a black market will develop for Sovaldi,
both within individual countries and internationally, with people from countries where
Sovaldi costs more buying the drug from countries where the cost is less.

Course Materials
Case 9: Patent RightS Persuasive Case Analysis Outline

RELEVANT FACTS:

1. Total Hep C cases in the US: 3.2 million.
2. Sovaldi can cure Hep C in a large number of cases, while previous treatments had
much lower success rates. 90% success, compared to 10-50% for previous
treatments
3. It costs $1000 per pill. A twelve-week course of treatment costs $84,000. For all
3.2M people with Hep C, that comes to a total of $269B.
4. Previous treatment regimen took 48 weeks and cost $15-20K (VA Web site).
5. Drug companies need to recoup R&D costs (for both successful and unsuccessful
drugs); they need to remain profitable in order to stay in business so they can
continue to develop and manufacture drugs. (Thats the way our system is set up,
structurally: It works via a profit incentive, for good or for ill, no pun intended.)
6. We dont know what R&D costs actually are. Drug companies give big figures (e.g.,
$2.6B per drug that makes it to market). Others offer much lower estimates (e.g.,
around $55M per drug that makes it to market).
7. Insurance companies need to make profit too. Plus, its now mandated that we all
have insurance.
8. Drug patents last only seven years (rather than twenty); the rationale is that this
time period of exclusively advertising and selling a drug gives the companies the
necessary opportunity to recover their R&D costs and make profits so that they can
stay in business, keep developing other new drugs, keep manufacturing and selling
the ones they currently make, etc.
9. High medical costs in the US effectively subsidize lower costs for the same
drugs/treatments in other parts of the world.
10. Patent laws arent strongly protected overseas.

CENTRAL ETHICAL DIMENSIONS:

1. Is healthcare a right? Is everyone entitled to it, or is it like any other industry thats
regulated by factors like supply, demand, ability to pay, etc.?
2. To what extent are pharma companies and hospitals held responsible for those they
serve? I.e., is healthcare special in that providers have a different relationship to
those who use their services than providers of other services (e.g., car dealers, etc.)?
3. How many rights, and which ones, should a patent entail? Are patents ethically
justifiable?

MAIN ACTORS AND THE DECISIONS THEY HAVE TO MAKE:

1. Gilead (and other pharmaceutical companies): How to price the drug so that its
profitable while also ensuring that its accessible to patients who need it
2. US government: Whether to control prices in the pharmaceutical industry (and, if so,
how)
Course Materials
3. Insurance providers: Whether the cost of the drug warrants adding it to their
formularies
4. Patients with Hep C: What price theyre willing to pay/what theyre willing to
sacrifice to get the drug

ETHICAL FRAMEWORK:

Nussbaum, capability approach to justice

A brief summary, in step-by-step format:

1. First, the capability approach is a way of thinking about justice. It says that
justice consists of ensuring that people are able to achieve a certain measure of
well-being (also known as human flourishing). Specifically, it says that in order for
a state to be legitimate, it needs to be concerned with its citizens well-being. That
means, at minimum, it should remove structural barriers to such well-being,
wherever its possible to do so.
2. This well-being, then, is a matter of being free to pursue various capabilities that
are of central importance (because they're seen as being key to human
flourishing; theyre what make it possible for a person to have a good life).
3. Among those capabilities, for Nussbaum, is bodily health (because its seen as a
prerequisite to even the possibility of real human well-being).
4. If that's all so, then a just, or legitimate, political order will be one in which
structural impediments to bodily health will be removed or minimized as much
as possible.
5. So the state, on Nussbaum's view, has a moral duty (i.e., it must do this in order to
be a legitimate state) to ensure the accessibility of drugs that are necessary for
bodily well-being.
6. When were talking about structure, were talking about institutions (rather than
individuals).
7. The institutional structure of the US healthcare system: a hybrid of government
(both state and federal) and private (both for-profit, and nonprofit) institutions. It
includes things like access, pricing, etc.
8. So, where necessary, the state (i.e., the government) should regulate relevant
aspects of the behavior of private institutional actors (e.g., access and prices).

THE CENTRAL ETHICAL ISSUE: Is our current healthcare system, as an institutional
structure, justifiable according to a capability approach to justice? That is, can the system
we have now ensure the elimination of structural barriers to bodily health?

NO! (Why not?) The high price of drugs effectively makes lifesaving or dramatically life-
improving care inaccessible to large numbers of people in our society.

Course Materials
How do we fix it? Transition to single-payer system (i.e., government is the main insurer,
and it negotiates payment and prices on behalf of entire US population). What does this
look like?

Do for-profit drug companies stay in the picture? YES. Why? Because the profit
incentive is an effective (perhaps the most effective) motivator to keep innovating
and developing new drugs. We need that. So, theres still a place for for-profit drug
companies.
Patents also stay in the picture. How long does it take to recoup R&D costs
(including both drugs that make it to market and those that dont) and start turning
a profit? Right now, we dont know. Solution: government mandates more
transparency re: R&D costs, so that we can know those numbers. We keep the
patent period: set it at the amount of time that it takes to recoup costs (Gilead did
this with Sodaxil in its first year), plus another two years (to keep the profit
incentive in place, while still effectively speeding up the amount of time it takes for
the drugs to go generic so that their prices come down, thus balancing the
competing interests of profit and accessibility). We leave one exception to that
break-even plus two-year patent period; see below:
What about for-profit insurance companies? A LIMITED ROLE. The government
guarantees a basic level of healthcare. But private insurers could still offer so-called
Cadillac plans. While a drug is still under patent (i.e., break-even plus two years),
drug companies arent required to reach an agreement on price with the
government. Exception: Lifesaving or breakthrough (viz., for serious conditions)
drugs cant be protected in this way. So, if a drug manufacturer cant reach an
agreement with the government on a newly developed drug, and we decide that its
not a breakthrough drug, it goes under the Cadillac plans if the government and the
manufacturer cant reach a price agreement. Private insurers can decide on the basis
of cost effectiveness whether or not to include those drugs in the formularies for the
plans they offer.
Finally, is Sodaxil a lifasaving or breakthrough treatment? Yes, because its made
huge strides in combating Hep C. Its cut the treatment time down from 48 weeks to
12, and its increased the success rate from between 10 and 50 percent to over 80
percent. So, it wouldnt be eligible for exclusion from the single-payer formulary.
That means Gilead would be required to reach an agreement on price with the
federal government (negotiating on behalf of all 300M of us) in order to sell the drug
in the US at all.

How would this plan help?

First, the government as a single payer has a lot more leverage in negotiations than
a private insurer would, because its negotiation on behalf of 300M people rather
than on behalf of smaller pools. That leverage, plus the fact that costs can be
distributed over the larger number of people in the pool, means that drug costs
(even for a drug like Sodaxil) can be lowered. In the vast majority of cases, it
wouldnt be profitable for drug manufacturers to be inflexible on prices, because by
doing so theyd lose the business of the entire 300M person pool. So, even for a drug
Course Materials
like Sodaxil, itll probably be to Gileads benefit to reach an agreement with the
government on price (even though they wouldnt be legally required to do so).
How does this satisfy the demands of the capability approach to justice? The
government effectively ensures that the majority of the population get the drugs
they need in order to live their best. Perhaps no healthcare plan will ever be able to
100% meet Nussbaums standards, because the free market exists and the profit
incentive needs to be kept in place. But, this single payer system is the best way to
reach Nussbaums ideal: It removes the structural barrier of cost, and thats the
main thing were concerned about here.

OBJECTIONS TO THE PLAN (AND RESPONSES):

I. Healthcare isnt a right.
A. Its a commodity.
1. It entails costs, and responds to supply and demand. It should be treated like any
other commodity on the market.
2. Responses:
a. Treating healthcare as a commodity actually isnt the most efficient way to
treat it, even in strictly economic terms. Theres lots of overhead, lots of
redundancies in administrators, lots of red tape with trying to figure out
peoples benefits (e.g., which plans cover which procedures and drugs). All of
this would actually be greatly reduced by a single-payer system, making it
more efficient than just leaving healthcare to the whims of market forces.
b. Healthcare is a life-and-death concern, which makes it different from a true
commodities. Its a central human capability, according to Nussbaum; unlike
commodities, its a necessary condition for having a good life with some
measure of well-being or flourishing.
B. Saying that it is, misconstrues what rights are (the libertarian argument)
1. The argument: The only true rights are rights to freedom from the use of force
and coercion. But saying that healthcare is a right basically imposes force on
healthcare professionals, because it creates an obligation that they provide their
services (whereas they should be free to provide or not provide their services to
clients as they see fit).
2. Responses:
a. First, treating the sick is what doctors signed up for in the first place, so it
doesnt make sense to say that theyre being forced to do it. For that matter,
nobodys forced to become a doctor in the first place (unlike truly being a
slave: enslaved people dont get the choice of whether or not to be slaves).
Finally, doctors working in hospital settings and the like (i.e., anyone whos
not the owner-operator of his/her own practice) already get told by their
bosses (the hospital administrators, etc.) whom they have to treat. All were
doing is shifting that decision to a different set of administrators.
b. Besides, getting another person sick when you could have avoided doing so
(specifically, by being cured of the illness that you infected him/her with) is
tantamount to using force: Force is threatening or inflicting harm on another
person, and if we want to minimize the harm that people inflict on others, we
Course Materials
should prefer a generally healthier population. So, even the libertarian who
thinks that freedom from force is the only right, might want to see to it that
peoples health is provided for in the most effective and efficient manner
possible
II. A single-payer system eliminates the profit incentive.
A. But it does leave the profit system in place for drug companies. It doesnt eliminate
the profit incentive.
III. The Cadillac plans arent fair.
A. First, the single-payer system provides a basic level of healthcare for everyone (viz.,
a sufficient level to satisfy the justice demands of a capability approach). Whether
some people have extra coverage over and above that isnt really a justice question.
B. Besides, the Cadillac plans keep the profit incentive in place and preserve a role for
private insurers, ensuring that the transition to a single-payer system for the basic
level of healthcare doesnt leave thousands of insurance company employees
suddenly out of work.

Course Materials
Individual Oral Presentations

For non-group (i.e., individual student) oral presentations, which take approximately 10-
12 minutes per topic, an instructor will assign 4 presentations in a 50-minute class meeting
session. Using this approach, four different students are assigned four different cases for
which they will be required to develop and defend a position orally. Students can and
should prepare written versions of their positions and arguments, but ultimately they will
present them orally in class on the specified day. Each topic presentation of position and
argument is limited to 5-7 minutes. After a student presents her or his position on a case,
the instructor chooses (either randomly or by design, but in any case without prior
warning to the student) one student from the class to reply to the case presentation just
heard. The student assigned to reply has between 3 and 5 minutes to evaluate the case
presentation orally.

Since students will not know who will be assigned to reply to any one of the four cases for
presentation, ideally all students will have taken the opportunity to familiarize themselves
with the four cases, and will expect to be called on to reply to one of them. The student
tasked with replying to a case will, in this exercise, engage in the same sort of experience
found in actual ethics bowl competition (and in real life when one must reply to an issue or
attempt to solve a problem on the fly) when the position of the opposing team is unknown
to ones own team until the moment it is presented. Creative and critical thinking in these
conditions are heightened, and the ability to think quickly, clearly, carefully, and
analytically in timed conditions is exercised.

Course Materials
Individual Presenter Rubric:

Individual Commentator Rubric:

Course Materials
Ethical Bowl Case Preparation

Students will choose one of their three cases and write a more sustained and well-
polished paper containing a persuasive analysis of the case. These papers should
show significant reflections and development from commentary received in the
discussion groups, class discussions, and further research.

The students will submit a final draft of approximately 1,500-2,000 words, which
should be double-spaced, typed in 12 pt font, Times New Roman, with 1" margins,
and contain a minimum of five references.

Students papers should include the following parts:

Question: Identify and explain what you consider to be the single, central ethical
question posed by the case. You could start your paper by writing: The central
ethical question posed by this case is ?

Claim: Make a definite claim or proposal which serves to answer the central
question. (Signpost your argument: perhaps you could write I shall argue that the
best response to this question is because .)

Argument: This consists of an analysis of the key facts and an explanation of your
reasons/reasoning, evidence, objections and replies.

Your reasoning should include a discussion of a relevant ethical theory. You should
try to anticipate what could be the biggest objection to your argument, since you
wont have much space for more. Your reasoning and evidence should demonstrate
detailed research into the case.

Papers will be evaluated based on the following criteria with each criterion counting
equally:

Clarity and Intelligibility: Have you stated and defended your position with sound
logic which allows the readers clearly to understand your line of reasoning?

Ethical Relevance: Have you identified the relevant ethical theories and discussed
their pertinence to the case while avoiding ethically irrelevant digressions?
Consistency: Have you presented a unified argument and avoided contradictions
and inconsistencies?

Thoughtfulness and Creativity: Have multiple possibilities for dealing with your
case been considered? Have you specifically presented your position on the case
with both awareness and thoughtful consideration of different viewpoints, including
those which disagree with your position?
Course Materials
Preparation: Have you exhibited sufficient preparation and background research
to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the case being discussed? Structure:
Have you proofread your document and corrected errors in grammar, spelling,
punctuation, style, and format?

Course Materials
EDUC X152: The University Experience: Engagement, Critical

Thinking, and Problem Solving. Topic: the 1970s (5080)

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Syllabus
Ways of Thinking Notes
Student Progress: Midterm Report
Final Exam
Student Progress: Final Report
Course Materials
Everything Changed in the 1970s

Topic for EDUC-X152, Section 5080 of
The University Experience:
Engagement, Critical Thinking, and Problem Solving
MTWRF, 8:50 10:05 AM, Ballantine Hall (BH) 138
Instructor
Nicholas Zautra
History and Philosophy of Science
College of Arts and Sciences
Indiana University Bloomington
Primary Contact
Nicholas Zautra
1020 Kirkwood Ave.
Ballantine Hall 662
Website: http://www.nickzautra.com
Course Description:
The University Experience: Engagement, Critical Thinking, and Problem Solving is a
course designed to help new students acclimate to the IU Bloomington campus as they
learn to meet the academic demands of college. The topic for this version of X152 is
The 1970s. Students will be reading, analyzing, and interpreting a variety of texts all
related to this course topic. Through extended inquiry in a seminar environment,
students will learn the conventions of thinking, reading, and discussing at the college
level. A good deal of class time will be spent in discussion; therefore, daily participation
in class discussion will form a significant portion of the final grade. This course is
designed to enable X152 students to more readily engage the academic challenges
they will face in college level classes. In addition, students will also participate in other
aspects of college preparedness, such as university-appropriate study skills and time
management strategies.
Objectives
This course will familiarize you with the kinds of reading, thinking, and learning in which
you will be expected to engage in order to be successful throughout your college career
Course Materials
and beyond. As a team, we will train in these skills so that you will accomplish the
following goals:
1. We will work together to develop your critical reading and thinking skills so
that you will be able to interpret, analyze, and assess arguments from a
variety of perspectives.
2. We will develop your abilities to construct your own arguments and to take a
stand on important issues.
3. We will help you relate ideas and arguments from your classes and readings
to your own lives.
4. We will draw you toward thinking both about the big questions, the broader
ones that are suggested or implicated by what we cover, and at the same
time develop your ability to connect these questions with specific details and
evidence.
5. We will orient you to the college setting and its conventions and expectations.
You will get used to the demands that college places on students, the kinds of
work you will be expected to do, and the challenges of managing your time
effectively and productively.
You will leave this course with sharpened reading and reasoning skills that you can
apply to your work in any university department or program and in the world beyond.
Most importantly, while the specific topical focus of this course is the 1970s, we are
focused on developing skills that are transferrable: they can be effectively used to excel
in any course. At the same time, we believe that one cannot develop such skills
adequately in a vacuum, or through abstract exercises; rather, we must delve deeply
and specifically into a rich example to make that happen most effectively. Consequently,
the course is not only about refining a set of skills, nor is it primarily about absorbing the
particular topic weve chosenit must be about both.
Materials
Bach, Richard. Jonathan Livingston Seagull: The Complete Edition. New York: Scribner,
1970.
Graebner, William. Pattys Got a Gun: Patricia Hearts in 1970s America. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press, 2008.
Additional required materials, including articles, essays, book excerpts, and audio-visual
selections will be accessed through the classs Canvas site: http://canvas.iu.edu
Students will also need to purchase a three-ring binder (of at least 3 inches in width) to
store the course reading materials.
Course Materials
Evaluation
Activity/Assignment
Points Possible
Preparation and Active Participation (8 pts./day; 30 days)

6 Study Skills Assignments (30 pts. Each)
6 Reading Journal Entries (30 pts. Each)
Individual Conference 1
Individual Conference 2
4 Quizzes (60 pts. Each)
Final Exam
Total Points Possible:
240
180
180
30
30
240
100
1000
Grading Scale
Grade
A
AB+
B
BC+
Percent
93-100
90-92
87-89
83-86
80-82
77-79
Grade
C
CD+
D
DF
Percent
73-76
70-72
67-69
63-66
60-62
59 and below
Grading Criteria
A Excellent and Exemplary. Work or performance that goes beyond meritorious to the
extent of providing an example or model of excellence for others.
B Good/Meritorious. Work or performance that not only meets all requirements but
exceeds them, demonstrating depth, originality, and other marks of quality that give the
work distinction.
C Satisfactory. Work or performance that fully meets all requirements competently
and shows the ability to function as a college student.
D Marginal. Work or performance that either 1) fails to meet all requirements, though
what is done may be considered competent; 2) meets all requirements but not at a
basic level of competence; or 3) both of the above but not poor enough to be
considered failing.
F Failing. Work or performance that falls significantly short of requirements, basic
competence, or both. And this also includes, of course, work not done.
Course Materials
Expectations and Policies
Attendance
Daily attendance in all X152 class sessions and other activities is mandatory. The
failure to attend even one class is taken very seriously, and absences are reported each
day to the Athletics administration. There are no unexcused absences without penalty,
and the penalty is 50 points (5%) deducted from your final grade. To avoid losing
participation points and/or being marked absent, you must be in your seat on time and
you must be present for the entire class. However, attendance means more than simply
showing up; you must also be awake and focused on our course work: sleeping,
reading non-course materials, chatting with classmates, using cell
phones/tablets/computers, and general inattentiveness in class is equivalent to being
absent and will be recorded as such, and may result in your dismissal from the class.
Absences excused by the Athletics administration due to illness or family emergency
will be handled individually on a case-by-case basis.
Preparation and Participation
You will be graded every day as to your level of preparation. This includes coming to
class with a writing utensil, paper, and all course texts or other reading material (in hard
copy!) that we will be discussing that day. You must also have completed any
assignments due that day. By 8:50 a.m., your cell phones should be off; you should
have all of your assignments due and other materials needed for the day out and ready
to go; and you should be prepared to work.
You will be graded every day as to your level of participation. Some courses you take in
college will be based on lectures delivered by the instructor, who will not expect you to
engage in much classroom discussion. X152 is not one of those courses. X152 is the
opposite of that; it is discussion-driven, which means that to do well, you must 1) read
and digest all written material for each class; 2) actively view and/or listen to audiovisual excerpts and examples in preparation for each class; 3) thoughtfully analyze and
respond to this material through your assignments; and 4) actively engage in our daily
class discussions and activities by talking about your own ideas as well as listening to
those of others.
You will grade yourself on both your preparation and participation for each class using a
Participation Record. I will also assess your performance after collecting these records
at the end of every class.
Assignments
The majority of your assignments will include study skills assignments designed to
equip you with a range of tools for analyzing course materials, and reading journal
Course Materials
entries, which will call on you to further reflect in writing on broader questions that come
up in the course. Specific assignments and deadlines will be given in class.
Assignments due to Canvass discussion forums will need to be submitted by midnight
the night before the class in which they are due in order to give me time to read and
incorporate your responses into the days discussion. Written assignments will be
collected at the beginning of the class in which they are due. No late work is accepted.
All written assignments must be typed in 12-point Times New Roman font, doublespaced with 1-inch margins, printed using double-sided printing, and stapled. All
assignments must also include your name and date in the heading, along with a
centered title or description of the assignment below the heading.
Conduct and Ethics
First, because this is a discussion-driven course, debate and critique about opinions
and perspectives shared in class are especially encouraged. We all benefit when you
voice your thoughts and opinions, and it is important for our discussions that you speak
up when you disagree with me or with a classmate (evenand especiallyif you think
your opinion may not be a popular one!). Discussion will only get us somewhere,
however, if it is free of disrespect, abusive and insulting comments, and hostility. We are
all in this together and share a common purpose, and any behavior that derails our
goals will not be tolerated.
Second, the Indiana University Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct
(2005) indicates that students may be disciplined for several different kinds of academic
misconduct. These include cheating, fabrication, plagiarism, interference, and violation
of course rules. In particular, the code states the following with regard to plagiarism:
Plagiarism is defined as presenting someone elses work, including the work of other
students, as ones own. Any ideas or materials taken from another source for either
written or oral use must be fully acknowledged, unless the information is common
knowledge. What is considered common knowledge may differ from course to course.
a. A student must not adopt or reproduce ideas, opinions, theories, formulas,
graphics, or pictures of another person without acknowledgement.
b. A student must give credit to the originality of others and acknowledge an
indebtedness whenever:
a. Directly quoting another persons actual words, whether oral or written;
b. Using another persons ideas, opinions, or theories;
c. Paraphrasing the words, ideas, opinions, or theories of others, whether
oral or written;
d. Borrowing facts, statistics, or illustrative material; or
Course Materials
e. Offering materials assembled or collected by others in the form of projects
or collections without acknowledgment.1
You might further consult this tutorial on how to recognize and avoid plagiarism offered
by IUs Writing Tutorial Services (WTS):
www.indiana.edu/~wts/pamphlets/plagiarism.html
Communication
The easiest way to contact me outside of class or office hours is by e-mail. Please allow
up to 24 hours for a response. You must also check your e-mail and Canvas daily for
important announcements, which I will either email to you directly or deliver through
Canvas. Be sure to set your Notification Preferences in Canvas to ASAP for
everything. When communicating by e-mail, please observe professional e-mail
etiquette, and please be sure to always reply directly to my IU e-mail address
(nzautra@indiana.edu). Please do not hesitate to contact me at any point regarding
ideas, questions, or concerns that arise.
Daily Schedule
I will begin each class by recording attendance and returning your graded participation
trackers from the previous class. We will share news and discuss announcements
relevant to our class or the Department of Athletics and lay out the plan for the day
before we get to work. At the end of class you will be asked to evaluate your
contribution that day on your Participation Tracker and we will discuss homework due
the next day.
Week One: Introduction to College and the 1970s
Date
6/20
Class Topic & Activities

Introduction to the Course
Reading Due
None.
Assignment Due
Introduction to Each Other

What Makes a College Course
Different?
6/21
6/22
Reading, Analyzing,
Annotating, Interrogating Texts
Why Study History?
(and How to Study It?)
Canvas: The
Seventies as History
Canvas: Why Study
History? (pp. ix-xix)
Reading Reflection
1 Due by this class
Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct, Part II, Student Responsibilities,
Academic Misconduct, http://www.iu.edu/~code/code/responsibilities/academic/index.shtml.
Course Materials
meeting
Quiz 1
6/23
Individual Conferences
6/24
Individual Conferences
Canvas: Rolling Stone

Coverwall
Jonathan Livingston
Seagull Pt. 1 (1-37)
Jonathan Livingston
Study Skills
Assignment 1
Week Two: Ways of Thinking/The Politics of the 1970s

Date
6/27
Class Topic & Activities

Styles of Thinking
Reading Due
Jonathan Livingston
Assignment Due
6/28
Thinking with a Book
Study Skills
Assignment 2
6/29
The Vietnam War
Jonathan Livingston
Canvas: How LIFE
Magazine Covered the
Kent State Shootings
The Kent State Massacre

6/30
President Nixon and

Watergate
Canvas: The
Complexity of Being
Richard Nixon
Quiz 2
7/1
Economic Crises: Oil and

Class
Canvas: Turning a
scandal into a -gate
Canvas: Somethings
Happening to People
Like Me (pp. 1-19)
Reading Reflection
2 Due by this class
meeting
Week Three: Cultural Identity/Popular Culture in the 1970s

Date
7/4
7/5
Class Topic and Activities

NO CLASS
INDEPENDENCE DAY
Social Identity
Understanding Identity
Studies
7/6
The New Hollywood
7/7
Film and Social Commentary
Reading Due
Canvas: Radical
feminism reaches the
suburbs (pp. 62-65)
Listen: Marvin Gaye,
Whats Going On
Canvas: Knockin on
Heavens Door
Canvas: Baad
Assignment Due
Course Materials
Popular Culture as Research
Tool
7/8
Youth Culture
Bitches and Sassy

Supermommas, Race,
Gender, and Black
Action Fantasy.
Listen: Pink Floyds
Dark Side of the Moon
Study Skills
Assignment 3
Week Four: Popular Culture/Historical Narrative/Pattys Got a Gun

Date
7/11

Technology on the Rise
Reading
advertisements/images
7/12
Reading History
7/13
Narrative-as-Style
7/14
Thinking Through Sources
7/15
Quiz 3
Responding to Arguments
Reading Due
Canvas: How Apple
and IBM Marketed the
First Personal
Computers
Pattys Got a Gun pp.

1-28
29-56
Assignment Due
Reading Reflection
4 Due by this
meeting

57-87
Pattys Got a Gun, pp.
88-113
Study Skills
Assignment 4
Reading Due
117-142
143-161
Assignment Due
Week Five: Patty Hearst in Context

Date
7/18

The Self in 70s America
7/19
Victim/Survivor: Psychology
as Analysis
Understanding Theory as a
Tool
7/20
Looking to the Future
7/21
Quiz 4
Film: Network (1976)

162-180
Study Skills
Assignment 5
Course Materials
7/22
Film: Network (1976)
Film Reflection 5
Due by this meeting
Week Six: Drawing Conclusions

Date
7/25

Relational Thinking
7/26
The 70s Today:

Memory/Nostalgia
7/27
Transferring Skills to Other

Classrooms and Contexts /
Final Exam Review
7/28
Final Exam
Reading Due
Canvas: Making
Sense of the Me
Decade
Canvas: Punk, Pot,
and Promiscuity
Assignment Due
Reading Reflection
6 Due by this
meeting
Study Skills
Assignment 6
Bibliography of Course Readings

Bach, Richard. Jonathan Livingston Seagull: The Complete Edition. New York: Scribner,
1970.
Berman, Eliza. How LIFE Magazine Covered the Kent State Shootings. Time, May 4,
2015.
<http://time.com/3839195/life-magazine-kent-state/>
Biskind, Peter. Knockin on Heavens Door, in Easy Riders, Raging Bulls: How the
Sex-Drugs-and-Rock
N Roll Generation Saved Hollywood (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1999).
Breeden, David and Jami Carroll. Punk, Pot, and Promiscuity: Nostalgia and the ReCreation of the
1970s, Journal of American & Comparative Cultures 25, no. 1-2 (March 2002):
100-104.
Campbell, Alex. Turning a scandal into a -gate. BBC, May 11, 2013.
<http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22464422>
Carroll, Peter N. Preface: The Seventies as History, in It Seemed Like Nothing
Happened: America in the
1970s (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1990).
Cohn, Nik. Tribal Rites of the New Saturday Night, New York Magazine, June 7, 1976.
Course Materials
Available at:
<http://nymag.com/nightlife/features/45933/>
Conley, Dalton. Making Sense of the Me Decade. The Chronicle of Higher Education,
October 24,
2010, <http://chronicle.com/article/Making-Sense-of-the-Me/125028/>
Cowie, Jefferson R. Something Happening to People Like Me, in Stayin Alive: The
1970s and the Last
Days of the Working Class (New York: The New Press, 2010).
Graebner, William. Pattys Got a Gun: Patricia Hearts in 1970s America. Chicago: The
University of
Chicago Press, 2008.
Meyer, David S. Star Wars, Star Wars, and American Popular Culture. Journal of
Popular Culture 26, no.
2 (1992): 99-115.
Rolling Stone Coverwall. <http://www.rollingstone.com/coverwall/1970>
Sims, David. How Apple and IBM Marketed the First Personal Computers. The
Atlantic, June 17, 2015,
<http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2015/06/clear-the-kitchentable-how-appleand-ibm-marketed-the-first-personal-computers/396047/
Stearns, Peter N. Why Study History? American Historical Association (1998).
<https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-andarchives/archives/whystudy-history-(1998)>
Thomas, Evan. The Complexity of Being Richard Nixon. The Atlantic, June 15, 2015.
<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/the-complexity-of-beingrichardnixon/394547/>
Course Materials
Styles of Thinking
1. Convergent Thinking
This is the thinking that you do in order to understand the authors message, point of
view, and line of reasoning. Convergent thinking involves not only drawing information
directly from the text, but also reading between the lines and drawing inferences
information not explicitly stated but implied. Characteristics of good convergent thinking
include the ability to:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
perceive the structure of a book

understand details and relate them to the structure
summarize parts and all of the content according to this structure
identify key concepts the author is presenting
recognize authors point of view and arguments
analyze these arguments
2. Divergent Thinking
This is thinking that goes beyond the text. How can this reading be useful for you?
Additionally, no book is useful unless you relate what you understand to your own
knowledge and experience. By relating your understanding in this way, you build your
own structures of knowledge, which will be unique, just as you are unique.
Characteristics of good divergent thinking include the ability to:
a.
b.
c.
relate the content of the reading to your own experience and what you
know from other sources
evaluate the strength of the authors reasoning and arguments
speculate how arguments might play off of one another
3. Constructivist Thinking
With this kind of thinking you formulate your own sense of issues and your positions on
them. In other words, you build arguments you are willing to defend. These may agree
wholly with the authors arguments, partly with the authors arguments, or not at all with
the authors arguments.
A lot of students come to college as very good convergent thinkers, but they need to
develop their divergent and constructivist thinking. The latter kinds of thinking become
more important as you progress through your degree program. As you get involved in
your major, you will be expected to be an excellent divergent/constructivist thinker, but
Course Materials
you will also be expected to be a good convergent thinker, so you can clearly understand
the messages that others intend to convey.
Basic structure for presenting an argument (both the authors and your own):
Issue
Position
Support
Outcome
Course Materials
X152 Midterm Report: Summer 2016: Zautra
Grades in the course so far are based upon approximately 445/1000 total points or 45%.
They presently include:
Daily grades for preparation and participation
3 Study Skills assignments (writing assignments designed to use a range of tools
for interacting with and making sense of the readings.)
3 Reading Reflections (writing assignments designed to go beyond the reading
and connect what we cover with students own experiences and other knowledge)
Individual Conference grade
2 Quizzes
Assignments:
For daily grades for preparation and participation, students evaluate their own
performance by submitting a daily participation rubric at the end of each class, of which I
return to them with feedback during the break of the following class day. For the vast
majority of students, I have been impressed by the veracity of the students own
evaluations (e.g., those students who participate fully give themselves full points/close to
full points, while those students who may have shown up late/dont participate fully give
themselves half points). I think some students may be starting to be a bit more generous
toward themselves in terms of giving themselves full points when they did not fully
participate, and so my plan going forward will be to emphasize that the second half of the
course will require exemplary preparation and participation in order to maintain a high
participation grade.
Study Skills assignments have been either take-home written assignments that relate to
the readings, and/or in-class written activities that build on study skills discussed for that
week. Study Skills have essentially been graded based on completion, which accounts for
the boost in students grades. Going forward, I plan to emphasize that such assignments
will not be graded solely on completion, and that students will be challenged with these,
and other specific assignments to maintain their grades.
Reading reflection assignments are written responses to the readings that were designed
to give examples as to the kinds of discussion-type reflections they will be expected to
accomplish in their future college work. For these assignments, students have turned in
their responses via Canvas, as well as posted in online discussion boards. Students have
received individual as well as in-class feedback for their written assignments. Reading
reflection assignments have been graded based upon completion, which accounts for the
Course Materials
boost in students grades. Going forward, I plan to emphasize that such assignments will
not be graded solely on completion, and that students will be challenged with these, and
other specific assignments to maintain their grades.
Individual conferences were completed during the first two weeks of the class, and were
graded based on completion. Conferences amounted to 10-minute conversations between
the students and the instructor that served to promote a positive relationship between
teacher and student. Having the conferences take place in-class was good, but also a bit
distracting. For the second individual conferences, I will plan to meet with students
during their mandatory study tables.
Two quizzes have been given to students with the primary goals of 1) building critical
thinking skills, and 2) teaching students how to study for exams in a college environment.
For the second quiz, I managed to help a number of students prepare for the quiz during
the study tables the day before, as many of them had questions regarding how to best
prepare. Quiz 1 was graded based on accuracy, while Quiz 2, which was designed to be
more challenging and allow for more open-ended questions and answers, was graded
based more on effort. The next two quizzes will test students critical reading and
thinking skills as they read through the Patty Heart book, and will be graded primarily on
accuracy of responses.
Course Grades:
The average course grade is currently an A. This is due to the majority of assignments
being graded based on completion, as well as the successful preparation and participation
in class by almost all of the students. For the second half of the course, students will be
informed that to maintain their grades, and to earn an A, they will be expected to
participate fully and complete assignments in an exemplary fashion.
There is clearly a divide in certain students reading and writing abilities, as well as their
overall attitude toward school. These discrepancies are addressed in the individual
comments below.
Student 1: 99.3% (A+)
Student 1 is a competent student who is capable of participating in class, performing
high-level critical thinking, and is a skilled writer. I expect that he will continue to
perform at a high level in class. My chief concern is with his attitude toward homework
in conjunction with his obligations as a student athlete. One day, in class, upon my
suggestion that students could utilize their lunch time or down time to listen to an
album that was assigned for class, Student 1 responded rather despondently, come on,
man, its not like we have any downtime, you cant expect us to be able to do that
My goal for Student 1 is that he continues his active effort in class, as he is one of the
brightest students, but more so that he can find a way to engage with the material in a
Course Materials
way that he himself finds meaningful, and that he develops a positive attitude in regard to
balancing his requirements as a student athlete and his school work.
Student 2: 94.89% (A)
Student 2 is a student who brings a very positive and jovial attitude to the class. He sits in
the back, but is always smiling and willing to participate. Student 2 appears to be a bit
less skilled in his reading, writing, and critical thinking abilities, and could strongly
benefit from additional attention going forward. Indications of his academic abilities
come from his quizzes, as well as his attempt to humorously deflect from having to read
aloud during in-class activities.
My goal for Student 2 is that he continues with the same level of participation, and that
he begins to reflect on his abilities as a college student, turning toward ways in which he
can improve his reading, writing, and critical thinking to the best of his ability.
Student 3: 99.56% (A+)
Student 3 has brought an extremely positive attitude from day one, and overall seems
genuinely happy to be in the class. He is eager to participate and draw connections
between different topics and styles of thinking. I see Student 3 continuing his high level
of participation, and ultimately receiving an A to an A+.
My goal for Student 3 is to continue his current participation, with the goal of setting a
precedent for other students to follow.
Student 4: 93.56% (A)
Student 4 is a thoughtful student of average reading and writing ability whose level of
participation seems to come in waves. At the beginning of the course, Student 4 sat in the
back of class, falling asleep or on his iPad. He gave himself an honest rating of a 4 for
his participation, of which I told him that I appreciated his honest and to hang in there,
at which point he turned things around and began to participate actively the very next
day. The past week, Student 4 has dropped back to participating more sporadically. I
foresee Student 4 achieving a grade in the A/B range.
My goal for Student 4 is that he finds his way toward bringing the level of participation
and active inquiry I know he is capable of to a greater majority of the classes he attends.
Student 5: 83.11% (B)
Student 5 is a kind-hearted, well-mannered student with average to below average
reading, writing, and critical thinking ability. While Student 5 has demonstrated the
ability to participate in class, his initial work and performance on quizzes has been cause
for concern. He seems to lack motivation, and has shown signs of low self-confidence.
During a small-group session of which student class members were asked to discuss Part
Course Materials
4 of the Jonathan Livingston Seagull Book, when other classmates pressed him for that
they thought after they had shared their own opinions, Student 5 seemed resistant,
claiming what, its a book! Thats it. After this occurrence, Student 5 has asked
questions during study tables, and seems to be improving. My assumption is that Student
5 does not thinking very highly of himself in terms of his academic ability, and would
benefit from some further encouragement.
My goal for Student 5 is for him to continue to improve in his level of participation in the
course, as well as for him to build some confidence in his abilities to excel in a college
environment.
Student 6: 94.4% (A)
Student 6 is a thoughtful student who has a great capacity for convergent and divergent
thinking. Student 6 has a disability such that he is allotted additional time and a private,
quiet setting to complete homework and quizzes. He seems used to this arrangement, and
it seems to utilize it well. Despite the extra time, he has some difficulty articulating his
answers in writing, and thus his writing does not necessarily show his level of thinking of
which he has demonstrated during our one-on-one conversations.
My goal for Student 6 is that he can improve his writing ability as well as his
participation in class.
Student 7: 99.33% (A+)
Student 7 is a great student who is a very capable writer. Student 7 is currently taking
another course and appears very capable of balancing the demands of college athletics
with her scholastic career. Student 7 is a bit shy to speak up in class, but when prompted,
Student 7 has made poignant contributions to class. I expect Student 7 to do well during
the second half of the course.
My goal for Student 7 is that she increases her level of participation in class and serves as
a model for other students who need help with their writing.
Student 8: 97.78% (A+)
Student 8 is a passionate, well-mannered student who is eager to please and participate in
class. He actively participates, making the comment outwardly that he is eager for
participation points. He is proud of his Christian faith and often frames his viewpoints in
terms of his faith in God and what that provides him, which he does in a kind-hearted and
respectful manner. Im a bit perplexed as to how to approach this particular disposition
with this student, as I do not want to deter from his faith, but at the same time would like
him to think critically about certain aspects of the course when appropriate and for him to
recognize when invoking belief in God is not necessarily an appropriate response in
particular contexts. Overall, I see Student 8 doing very well in the course and continuing
his active level of participation.
Course Materials
My goal for Student 8 is that he continue to serve as a leader for the rest of the students in
terms of his level of participation, and that he begin to respond to questions in ways that
challenge his assumptions and current ways of thinking.
Student 9: 94.67% (A)
Student 9 is by far the quietest student in the class, and has even been caught sleeping.
Student 9s work has been adequate thus far, but more along the lines of average. Going
onto the second half of the semester, when grading and the pace of the course pick up, I
foresee Student 9 slipping below an A and into B territory.
My goal for Student 9 is that he more actively contribute and participate during class,
with the hope that he can find it in him to put in his best work and maintain the grade of
A.
Student 10: 95.56% (A)
Student 10 is a student very interested in excelling in the class. He sits in the front, and
asks questions discretely to the instructor when he doesn't know what to do. Student 10
has demonstrated a lack of some very basic concepts (e.g., during a quiz, he asked I
know this is a stupid question, but what decade are we in?). Student 10s heart is in the
right place, and I foresee him carrying over the same level of enthusiasm into the second
half of the course.
My goal for Student 10 is that he continues to actively participate, and begin to develop
his critical thinking and writing skills to the best of his ability.
Student 11: 100.2% (A+)
Student 11 is an intelligent student who knows how to succeed in a college course. Her
critical thinking and writing can be a bit lacking (e.g. she didnt think much of the
Jonathan Seagull Book and thought it was weird), but I trust that with time she can
develop her thinking, as she seems to learn quickly.
My goal is that Student 11 continues her same level of work from the beginning of the
course, and that she work a bit more toward developing her divergent and constructivist
styles of thinking.
Student 12: 98% (A+)
Student 12 is an above average student who adequately participates and completes
assignments. Student 12 has been very communicative with the instructor, and always on
time. Student 12 doesnt tend to exhibit a lot of emotion or passion toward the material,
but that also seems to be his demeanor toward most subjects. I foresee Student 12
continuing his trend as begin an adequate student.
Course Materials
My goal for Student 12 is that he continues his work ethics, and improves upon his
constructivist style of thinking.
Student 13: 98% (A)
Student 13 is a welcome presence in the course. He sits up front, actively participates,
and is eager to share what he has found interesting about the previous days readings.
Student 13 is the model student of the class, and I expect his ethic to continue in this
fashion.
My goal is that Student 13 continues to demonstrate the model student mentality, and
that he gains intellectual satisfaction from the second half of the course.
Student 14: 100.67%
Student 14 is the most experienced student in the course. She actively participates and
demonstrated the highest level of proficiency in her responses on Quiz 2. She actively
participates and is generally interested in the material. I expect that she will have no
trouble obtaining a grade of A in the course.
My goal for Student 14 is that she finds ways to challenge herself during the remainder of
the course to develop her critical thinking, reading, and writing skills in ways that go
beyond her current skillset.
Course Materials

X152: Final Exam

NAME:_______________________
July 28th, 2015

1.
What do nearly all contemporary references to the 1970s represent? (2 points)

(a) The socioeconomic hardships of that time.
(b) How historians wish the 1970s would have been.
(c) Nostalgia for the past.
(d) The 1960s.
(e) The Me Decade.

2.
Several key events took place at some point during the 1970s, except: (2 points)

(a) The Vietnam War
(b) The passing of the Equal Rights Amendment.
(c) The womens liberation movement.
(d) Congress passes Title IX of the Educational Amendment Act.
(e) Earth Day
(f) All events took place during the 1970s

3.
Twenty-Five years from now, when we celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the
seventies events, we will see the nineties, and the turn of the century_______
(2 points)

(a) The same.
(b) Differently.
(c) As the We Decade

4.
Why study history? (2 points)
(a) History provides identity
(b) Studying history is essential for good citizenship
(c) History helps us understand people and societies
(d) History contributes to moral understand
(f) A, B, C
(g) All of the above

5.

Course Materials
A student who studies history may develop many skills, including: (2 points)
(a) The ability to assess evidence
(b) Experience in assessing past examples of change
(c) The ability to understand a variety of foreign languages more quickly
(d) The knowledge of what really happened during a certain time period
(e) The ability to assess conflicting interpretations
(f) A,B, C, E
(g) A, B, D, E
(h) A,B, E
(i) All of the above

6. Parts of an Argument (Fill in the Blank): (2.5 points)

6a. The reader asks, What do you think? / You answer by making a __________________

6b. The reader asks, Why do you think that? / You answer by giving your ______________

6c. The reader asks, How do you know? You answer by citing your
_____________________

6d. The reader asks, What makes you think your reasoning is good? You answer by stating
the _____________________ you know to be true.

6e. The reader asks, What other claims could be made? You answer by offering an
_____________ and/or a ___________________

7. Parts of an Argument (Use Parts 6a-6e for matching). (2.5 points)

6a. _________ 1. Offers critical solutions to intellectual problems
6b. _________

2. Provides the logical basis for your reasoning
6c. _________

3. Provides your logical basis for making a claim
6d. _________

4. Recognies the alternative claims
6e. _________

5. The beliefs on which your reasoning depends

8. In learning how to read a text, we discussed five key points to take with you as you work.
Name three (3 points):

2
Course Materials
9. Jonathan Livingston Seagull Quotes: Next to each of the two quotes, write (1) what you
think the quote is saying, and (2) why you think it says this. Make sure to include a reason for
why you think what you think! (8 points)

Course Materials
10. Why did the U.S. fight a war in Vietnam? (3 points)

11. What was the Kent State Massacre? (2 points)

12.While President Richard Nixon is often remembered as a brooding, vengeful, and almost
cartoonish figure, the author of Being Nixon: A Man Divided describes Nixons personality as
much more complex.

12a. What are some of the more complex personality traits of Nixon? (2 points)

12b. How is it possible that have misremembered who Richard Nixon was? (Hint: Think
about the lunchroom fight, memory & nostalgia, or other aspects of how hsitory works) (3
points)

4
Course Materials
13. We should feel comfortable evaluating documentary films from two simulatenous
angles: aesthetic and evidentiary. Provide 2 aesthetic and 2 evidentiary questions you might
ask when evaluating a documentary. (4 points)

14. Read the following Pink Floyd song lyrics. Using the text, respond, with two to three
sentences each, in order to demonstrate the following styles of thinking on the next page. (12
points)

Pink Floyds Brain Damage:

The lunatic is on the grass
The lunatic is on the grass
Remembering games and daisy chains and laughs
Got to keep the loonies on the path
The lunatic is in the hall
The lunatics are in my hall
The paper holds their folded faces to the floor
And every day the paper boy brings more
And if the dam breaks open many years too soon
And if there is no room upon the hill
And if your head explodes with dark forbodings too
I'll see you on the dark side of the moon
The lunatic is in my head
The lunatic is in my head
You raise the blade, you make the change
You re-arrange me 'till I'm sane
You lock the door
And throw away the key
There's someone in my head but it's not me.
And if the cloud bursts, thunder in your ear
You shout and no one seems to hear
And if the band you're in starts playing different tunes
I'll see you on the dark side of the moon
5
Course Materials
15a. Convergent Thinking: This is the thinking that you do in order to understand the authors
message, point of view, and line of reasoning.

15b. Divergent Thinking: This is thinking that goes beyond the text.

15c. Constructivist Thinking: With this kind of thinking you formulate your own sense of issues
and your positions on them. In other words, you build arguments you are willing to defend.

Course Materials
16. A good discussion board post follows a three-part post. What are those three parts? (3
points)

17. What were the Consciousness-raising groups associated with the Womens Liberation
movement? What did people think of them back then? (3 points)

18. Advertising rhetoric often makes appeals to the logos (logical), pathos (emotional), and
ethos (Ethical). Evluate the following advertisement on the following page, and in several
senetenes, summarize and describe any such appeals you believe the advertisement to
making. (5 points)

Course Materials
Course Materials
18. Is television, as famously characterized in the film Network by the character Howard
Beale, hopelessly a vast wasteland? Do you believe television today is a medium that can
be used for social change (if not liberation)? (4 points)

19. What does the Me Decade mean to you? (3 points)

9
Course Materials
20. Argument Essay (30 points)

Respond to the following question with a brief six-sentence argument. Be sure to include the
following in your response:

a. What do you think? (one sentence)
b. Why do you think that? (one to three sentences)
c. How do you know? (one to three sentence)
d. What makes you think your reasoning is good? (one to three sentences)
e. What other claims could be made in opposition to yours (one to three
sentences), and how would you respond to those claims in defense of your
own? (one to three sentences)

Question: If the Patty Hearst kidnapping were to have taken place in 2016, how might we
view Patty? As a survivor? A victim? A hero? Or something else?

10
Course Materials
X152 Final Report: Summer 2016: Zautra
Grades in the course are based upon 1000 total points + 5 extra credit points (given out
prior to knowing that extra credit is not permitted). They include:
Daily grades for preparation and participation
6 Study Skills assignments (writing assignments designed to use a range of tools
for interacting with and making sense of the readings.)
6 Reading Reflections (writing assignments designed to go beyond the reading
and connect what we cover with students own experiences and other knowledge)
2 Individual Conference grade
4 Quizzes
1 Final Exam
Assignments:
For daily grades for preparation and participation, students evaluated their own
performance by submitting a daily participation rubric at the end of each class, of which I
returned to them with feedback during the break of the following class day. For the vast
majority of students, I was impressed by the veracity of the students own evaluations
(e.g., those students who participate fully give themselves full points/close to full points,
while those students who may have shown up late/dont participate fully give themselves
half points) and this has continued throughout the second half of the course. Some
students tended to rate themselves higher than what they perhaps actually achieved (e.g.
Tyler Natee gave himself 7/8 for participation with the justification that I wasnt active
in class). Overall, however, students were fairly accurate in their self-asssessments.
The majority of the students began the second half of the course strong in terms of
participation, but midway through Week 5 and toward the beginning of Week 6,
participation began to drop. I gave a pep-talk to the students on Tuesday, the third-to-last
day of the course that emphasized that, much like the last two minutes of the fourth
quarter of a game, you the last week of the course requires just as much if not more effort
to successfully complete and finish out strong. Many of the students responded to this
kind of encouragement, but not all.
Study Skills assignments have continued to be either take-home written assignments that
relate to the readings, and/or in-class written activities that build on study skills discussed
for that week. Study Skills assignments ended up being graded based essentially on
completion, which accounts for the boost in students grades.
Course Materials
Reading reflection assignments are written responses to the readings that were designed
to give examples as to the kinds of discussion-type reflections they will be expected to
accomplish in their future college work. For these assignments, students have turned in
their responses via Canvas, as well as posted in online discussion boards. Students have
received individual as well as in-class feedback for their written assignments. Reading
reflection assignments had been graded based upon completion, which accounts for the
boost in students grades. During the second half of the course, reflections were evaluated
more critically.
Individual conferences were completed during the first two weeks of the class and the
second to last week of class, and were graded based on completion. Conferences
amounted to 10-minute conversations between the students and the instructor that served
to promote a positive relationship between teacher and student. Having the conferences
take place in-class was good, but also a bit distracting. The second individual conferences
took place during students mandatory study tables, which allowed for a more flexible
class schedule in showing the 1970s film, Network in its entirety. Positive reports from
the second conferences included almost every student except for one noting a significant
difference between this course and their courses in high school, with the current course
requiring more critical thinking and students actually learning how to understand a
reading.
Four quizzes were given to students with the primary goals of 1) building critical thinking
skills, and 2) teaching students how to study for exams in a college environment. The
quizzes during the second half of the course in particular have been the best benchmark
in terms of testing student aptitude, with a distribution of scores across the grade
spectrum.
A final exam was given on the last day of class. For the final, students were given a
topical study guide of possible exam topics six days prior of which to guide their study. It
was suggested in a Canvas message that students begin studying earlier, and that they
allocate 15-30 minutes to every topic on the study guide for a total of 7-10 hours of study
time for the exam. To support this suggestion, the last study skills assignment had the
students make a daily study log that detailed 1) what they studied for the final that day, 2)
how they studied, and 3) what they planned to study the next day.
Individual Student Reports
Justin Berry: 97.75% (A+)
Justins final grade is an A+. Justin continued his active participation and critical insight
throughout the second half of the course, and was skilled at encouraging others to do so
as well. I was pleased with Justins level of involvement and his overall contribution to
the course. My only complaint, if any, is that I once again saw toward the end of the
course Justins resistance to certain activities at timesalmost child-like in nature, like
Course Materials
Aw, man, we have to do this?! Nevertheless, Justin finished out the semester strong
and I am confident in his abilities going forward.
Shaun Bonner: 84.85% (B)
Shauns final grade is a B. Shaun started the first half of the class fairly strong, and was
very active in the classroom debate held during week 4, but poor performance on the last
two quizzes and the final brought his grade down. I saw a bit less active participation
from Shaun toward the end of the class, and a tendency to joke around with his friend
Jonah a bit more than usual. But Shaun still turned in every assignment, paid attention
throughout, would actively participate during coordinated group activities, and when
called upon, offered thoughtful responses. He was a pleasure to have in class.
Khalil Bryant: 95.35% (A+)
Khalils final grade is an A. While Khalil continued his jovial attitude from the first half
of the course, I definitely noticed a sharp decrease in participation over the second half.
Khalil most days just seemed really, really tired. His quizzes and homework continued to
be exemplary, however, so that is why I think he deserves a final grade of A. Going
forward, however, I would hope that he will strive to maintain a high level of
participation throughout the duration of his courses, and would benefit
Kiante Enis: 88.9% (B+)
Kiantes final grade is a B+. Kiante is a quiet yet thoughtful student who has good days
and not so good days. On the good days, he is paying attention, listening, and contributes
when called upon. On the not so good days, hes nearly falling asleep or caught listening
to music on his ipad during class. Hes very transparent about his participation in his selfassessments, and I can see that he is trying. But in future courses, Kiante needs to
understand that hes going to have to show up more during class than he did in this
course.
Jerome Johnson: 83.95% (B)
Jeromes final grade is a B. Jeromes quiz scores improved significantly from the first
half of the course. Jerome was one of those students, however, who seemed to check
out around week 5, and he never really came back. When calling him, he was somewhat
resistant to participating, and overall seemed at times unhappy about being having to
participate. Going forward, I think Jerome would benefit from a mental game coach for
the classroom.
Taysir Mack: 90.8% (A-)
Taysirs final grade is an A. Taysir is a very communicative student that did a great job
asking for help when he needed and establishing a student-teacher relationship. While his
work on his quizzes was average to above average, his reading reflections and other
Course Materials
assignments were quite strong. He, like some of the other students who sat in the back
row (Jerome, Tyler, Kiante) struggled to stay awake/participate during class. He also has
the added difficulty of needing quite a bit of extra time to read and respond on quizzes
(but his responses and critical thinking are quite good). Overall, he was a pleasure to have
in class. I just hope he can improve his in-class participation.
Jessica Morford: 97.45% (A+)
Jessicas final grade is an A+. Jessica is a great student who actively participated and did
very well on homework and quizzes. She was a pleasure to have in class. She seems very
comfortable in organizing and scheduling her time (she was taking another course
concurrently with this one) and thus I am confident that she has a great chance of
succeeding in her future coursework.
Jonah Morris: 94.8% (A)
Jonahs final grade is an A. Jonah was perhaps the most active student in the course. He
excelled at asking questions, completing assignment, and overall helping to make the
class fun. His work was not always exemplary, and in fact, he often needed help. But his
efforts were strong throughout and he seemed to show up every day.
Tyler Natee: 86.95% (B)
Tylers final grade is a B. Tyler began the course fairly quiet, and ended it roughly the
same way. He completed all assignments, but really was reluctant to participate unless
called upon and would often put his head down. I think Tyler would benefit from a
mental game coach for increasing willing participation in the classroom.
Mackenzie Nworah: 91.3% (A-)
Mackenzies final grade is an A-. Overall, I think Mackenzie did well in the course. He
sat in the front, was active throughout, asked questions when he didnt understand, and
completed each and every assignment. His performance on quizzes and the final exam
were average, and he seems slightly behind other students in terms of general knowledge
and critical thinking. Mackenzies enthusiasm and dedication to the course is what earned
him an A-. I think he would benefit from tutoring for his reading and writing skills going
forward.
Grace Sensinig : 99.8% (A+)
Graces final grade is an A+. Grace is an intelligent student who knows how to succeed
in a college course. Grace finished course strong, and really demonstrated her critical
thinking abilities on the last two quizzes and the final. I am confident Grace will continue
her success in future college courses.
Ryan Smith: 92.8% (A-)
Course Materials
Ryans final grade is an A-. Ryan is an average student who adequately participates and
completes assignments. Ryan has been very communicative with the instructor, and
always on time. Ryan doesnt tend to exhibit a lot of emotion or passion toward the
material (and in fact found the second half of the course to be quite boring) but that also
seems to be his demeanor toward most subjects. I think Ryan could benefit from a
mental game coach going forward in terms of developing motivation for learning in
college courses.
Grayson Stover: 95.15% (A)
Graysons final grade is an A. Grayson was a very welcome presence in the course. He
sits up front, actively participates, and is eager to share what he has found interesting
about the previous days readings. His responses on readings, quizzes, and the final were
above average he would likely benefit from tutoring in more advanced courses.
Grayson is the model student of the class in terms of participation, and I expect his ethic
to continue in this fashion in his other courses.
Marley Tunnell: 100.1% (A+)
Marleys final grade is an A+. Marley is the most experienced student in the course. She
actively participated and demonstrated the highest level of proficiency in her responses
on all assignments, quizzes, and the final exam. Marley is a model student and I expect
her to have no problem succeeding in her courses going forward.
Course Materials
COLL P155: Public Oral Communication (12871; 12823)

1. Syllabus
Course Materials
1

P155 - Public Oral Communication - Fall 2016

Course Director:
Office:
Office Hours:

Course Coordinator:
Office:
Office Hours:
Phone:
Email:

Performance Lab Instructor
Office:
Office Hours:
Email:
John Arthos
Ballantine 416
TR 12:30-1:00, W 12:30-1:00
Cynthia D. Smith
Ballantine 437
T/Th 1:00-2:00, W 11:00-1:30 and by appointment
855-5307 (office and voice mail)
cds@indiana.edu
Nick Zautra
Ballantine Hall 661
T/TH 11:00AM-1200PM and by appointment
nzautra@indiana.edu
1. Required Course Materials:

The P155 Supplement is available at both bookstores, and should be purchased right after the
first day of lab. Assignments from the supplement start immediately. The supplement has a
red cover, and is titled COLL P155 Public Speaking.

You have two Canvas pages (or tabs) for this course, (1) your lab section page, and (2) the
lecture page.

The online eBook is housed in the Assignments page of your lab section.

2. What This Course Is (and Isnt). Public Oral Communication is one of the great foundational
courses in a liberal education. Grounded on the relationship between public performance and
critical reflection, it is an instruction in the power of the spoken word. By cultivating the liberal
competencies of speaking and listening in public venues, you will develop an attunement to
language in the constitution of community, in the formation of an ethical comportment, and in the
formation of civic and cultural identity.
As a required foundational undergraduate course in of one of the great liberal arts colleges,
P155 introduces you to the close inter-relation of theory and practice. It does not resemble the
more reductive versions of basic public speaking courses that you may be familiar with. It is not
Toastmasters. Although you will be rigorously trained in all the formal skills and techniques, oral
communication is not merely technique; it is a human art of the highest distinction. P155 is also not
training in strategic manipulation, but in how to use the spoken word for good. We will look closely
at why speech is capable of manipulating, deceiving and seducing, and how to spot, avoid and
combat these uses.

3. Learning Objectives: P155 is designed to fulfill the College of Arts and Sciences requirement in
public oral communication, and to address at a minimum the learning objectives outlined for the
Speaking and Listening competency in the Indiana Statewide Transfer General Education Core.
Students who successfully complete Public Oral Communication will:
learn how to construct and deliver a complex argument extemporaneously;
develop the ethical, rational, and passional competencies of speaking and listening;
develop techniques for reducing speech anxiety and becoming excellent audiences;
learn how to use the spoken word vividly, aptly, precisely, and movingly;
Course Materials
2
learn how speech genres serve as resources of invention;
learn how to form the spoken word out of and in response to the audience and the occasion;
distinguish between the instrumental skills of speech and its role in cultivating and our
deliberative wisdom, our membership in community, and our humanity;
cultivate the reciprocity of the theory and practice in public address;
begin to cultivate a dialogic ethos of discursive community;
discover the power of speech to motivate, clarify, inspire, draw adherents, correct
misunderstandings, advance a cause, exercise tact, speak truth to power, expose fallacies
and presumptions, and work through problems collectively.

4. Modes of Instruction
A. Lectures. The video lecture is posted Wednesday afternoon by around 2pm on Kaltura:
Media Gallery which is a link on the left-hand menu in your Canvas lecture tab for this course.
If you dont see the left-hand menu, click on the three little lines in the top left hand corner of
the page to reveal it. Once you click on the lecture video you want, wait for the video to load. It
can take up to 40 seconds. Its critical that you watch all of the 50-minute lecture from
beginning to end, and you must view it before attending your R (Thursday) or F (Friday)
Performance Lab. It is imperative that you watch lectures before your R/F labs. The lectures
organize what takes place everywhere else in the course, and you will quickly get lost if you
dont watch them on time.

B. Performance Labs. This course recognizes the imperative of speaking responsively before
a live audience, requiring all students to deliver all speeches in a classroom setting and finding
appropriate words to address to the specific audience you are facing. An audience provides a
speaker with immediate feedback and it also presents a diverse group of individuals whom a
speaker must address together. When speaking to a live audience, practiced speakers can tell
immediately how members of the audience are reacting and can adjust their delivery, style,
and content accordingly. There are two 50-minute performance labs per week (except for
Labor Day and Fall Break).
Lab Themes. Some labs are organized by disciplinary themes (areas of academic study).
These themes were listed on the Registration page under the section descriptions when you
enrolled in P155.

5. Methods of Assessment
A. Formal Speeches: There are four major performance assignments in this course:
1. Speech of Introduction: This speech introduces you and your classmates to each other
as members of a public community.
2. Sympathetic Perspectives Speech: This speech asks you to occupy sympathetically
conflicting positions on a contemporary public controversy.
3. Invitational Speech: This speech invites your audience to consider moving some ways
toward a new viewpoint by showing how it is for a common good.
4. Transformational Speech: This speech asks you to attempt to break through
entrenched audience views and values with a transformative act of imaginative
discourse.

B. eBook. The textbook for this course is provided online; it is a customized interactive eBook
created by Dr. Arthos that links to Canvas on your Assignments page. Instead of traditional
textbook chapters the eBook has mini-units--short lessons that take between 4590 minutes to
complete. Each mini-unit contains Activities and Quizpoppers that you complete for points that
Course Materials
3
go directly into your Canvas Gradebook. There is at least one mini-unit assignment before each
lab section, and you must complete the unit prior to class in which it is due. All mini-units will be
available until the end of the semester, but you can only earn points up to the class period
deadline they are due. This is to make sure you dont get behind in your homework. Homework
cannot be made up after the deadline. Were strict about this.

C. Lecture Quizlets/Test. Five times over the course of the semester you will take a quizlet or
test on the content of the lectures. This is to insure that you are diligently watching the lectures
from beginning to end each week.

D. Blog Points. Every mini-unit you study in the eBook (on average 2 mini-units per week)
ends with a short blog writing assignment, which you post to your own public blog site. Three
times over the course of the semester your section instructor will assess your blogs for points.

E. Participation. Because P155 is a performance course in which you are building community
with your peers, active participation is central to your learning. In addition to the 70 points
directly assessed to your participation, you are expected to be an active ethical participant in
the course, because this is how you and your fellow students will get the most from the course.
Your Performance Lab Instructor will explain to you how participation points will be awarded
in your section of the course. Please read their policy sheet (at the end of this syllabus J).

Speeches and Outlines POINTS SUBTOTAL

Introducing Your Partner Speech
10

Sympathetic Perspectives Speech

Initial Outline
20

Final Outline
20

Peer Feedback Forms (2 @ 5 points each)
10*

Performance
90

Video self reflection
5

Invitational Rhetoric Speech

Initial Outline
20

Final Outline
20

10

Performance
100

Video self reflection
5

Transformational Speech

Initial Outline
20

Final Outline
20

10

Performance
110

Video Self Reflection
5
Participation (discretion of section instructor)
70
Lecture and eBook POINTS SUBTOTAL
eBook Quizpoppers and Activities Points (approx. 10 pts per unit x 21)
204
eBook Blog Assignments (18 blogs x 10 points each)
180
4 Regular Lecture Quizlets (@ 10 points each)
40
Final Lecture Test
31
TOTAL COURSE POINTS

545

455

1000
Course Materials
4
10. Grading Policies: All grading is done by your performance lab instructor. So, questions about
grades go to your lab instructor. In this college course the grade of A is awarded for truly
outstanding work, B for very good work, C for meeting the assignment, D for falling short in some
way. For more details, please refer to the Criteria for Evaluating Speeches in the Public Oral
Communication Textbook Supplement.

Grade Scale %
93-100 = A
90-92 = A-
87-89 = B+
83-86 = B
80-83 = B-
77-79 = C+
73-76 = C
70-72 = C-
67-69 = D+
63-66 = D
60-62 = D-
59 and below = F

Grades are NOT rounded at semesters end, and there is no extra credit in P155.

7. Contacts: Your Performance Lab Instructor will be grading all of your work in this course, so she
or he is your source of information about grading and course assignments. Note her or his e-mail
address and when she or he holds office hours (remember that you do not need an appointment to
visit an instructor during office hours). Dr. Smith is the Course Coordinator, training and overseeing
the instructors. Professor Arthos is the Course Director, delivering the Wednesday Lectures and
working with the Course Coordinator to administer the course; (jarthos@indiana.edu). Please
observe these distinctions when you reach out for assistance.

11. Attendance Policies: Because so much of what you learn in this course takes place in your
experiences and encounters in the lab with your fellow students, you cannot miss or be late to
classes. Your learning is in direct proportion to how much you give to these daily experiences. Not
only do you lose out, but your peers are harmed when you do not support the activities and
community-building that goes on from day to day. As the old saying goes, Half of success in life is
showing up.

Attendance during the speeches of others is an essential part of your coursework. Your role is not
merely to speak to others, but to listen, to be a supportive audience, and you are graded as much on
your contribution to the project of community that this class is as your developing skills in eloquence.
You must not only be physically present on these days, but very much present in your role as an
audience to the speaker. Instructors will be particularly careful to assess attendance points for anyone
who regularly misses speech days on which they are not performing.

Therefore we enforce a strict absence policy. Points subtracted for absence, lateness, and early
departure are not punishments they are simply a numerical assessment of what youve put into
and gotten out of the course. (If you miss a lot of classes, youve missed out on a lot that you cant
make up any other way.) Heres the policy: You may miss a total of two Performance Labs sessions
without point losses. You should save these two for sickness or emergencies, and try never to use
them. Each and every absence on non-speech days beyond these two (regardless of the reason) will
drop 10 points from your grade. On days when members of the class are presenting speeches, this
doubles to 20 points. Your instructor will also explain point losses for late-to-class or early
departures in the Policy Sheet.

For example, lets say that youve been absent 5 times, which means that 3 of these absences will count
against your grade. Lets also say that one of these 3 absences was on a speech day. Your point loss
would be: 10 - 10 - 20 = 45. Your instructor subtracts these points from your course total.
Course Materials
5

Because you miss a lot by missing class, this has to be reflected in the assessment of what youve
learned. This is why we do not differentiate between excused and unexcused absences, so when
youve missed a class there is no need to bring in doctors notes or other forms of documentation.
Due to IU policy there are two exceptions: absences for religious holidays or for active participation
in (not spectatorship of) official IU sanctioned events and inter-collegiate athletics. If you wish your
absences for religious observances to be excused, you must complete the request for religious
observance form and give it to your Performance Labs Instructor by the second week of class. The
form can be found here: <www.indiana.edu/~vpfaa/docs/religious_observances/request-for-
accomodation-religious-observances.doc>. If you want absences related to your participation on an
IU inter-collegiate athletic team to be excused, you must provide your instructor with an official
scheduling letter, highlighting the events that will require you to miss class.

12. General Late Assignments Policy: Late assignments are not accepted. Whether or not you are
present in class, any and all assignments must be turned in at the beginning of the period on the day
that they are due. There are no make-ups, and there is no extra credit. Only something as
serious as hospitalization warrants exception, and this is the rarest of circumstances. In such an
event it is your responsibility to contact your Lab Instructor about such an extreme circumstance
right away. In all other cases, the point losses are automatic; these are not punishments, but a
numerical assessment of what youre getting out of a performance-based course. If you do
experience what you think is an extreme circumstance, please check with your performance lab
instructor.

13. Missing Speech Day: There is no right to make up a missed speech. The only day you are
guaranteed to be able to deliver your speech is on your assigned speech day. Reasonable
adjustments will be made only for extreme circumstances (e.g., hospitalization). If you do not
deliver your speech on your assigned speech date, you will receive a score of zero for that speech.
Think of a speech day like an exam day. Like job interviews, court dates, and your wedding day, test
and speech days are sacrosanct. If you do experience what you think is an extreme circumstance,
please check with your performance lab instructor.

Course Materials
6
Fall 2016 Schedule of Readings and Assignments

On Wednesdays, students should attend the live lecture or view the recorded lecture depending on
the section in which they are registered. This schedule is subject to change; please see Canvas for
notices regarding changes in assignments. Weekly lectures should be watched before the 2nd lab of
each week. Mini-units in the eBook are always due at the start of class the lab session after they are
assigned.

Week
Date
M 8/22
T 8/23
W 8/24
R 8/25
F 8/26
Lecture (grey) & Labs (white)
Readings / Assignment
(Precise time due in Canvas)
-Review syllabus & Policy Sheet

-Interview partner interview
-Instructions for Speech #1
-Start a Blog Account

-Mini-Unit 1: A Great Power Loosed
Lecture/Talk: Public SpeakingWatch Wednesday afternoon or evening

-Micro-Unit 2: Transmission
-Speech #1 performed
-Watch Outline Demo Video

M 8/29
T- 8/30
W 8/31
R 9/1
F 9/2
-Speech #1 continues.
-Using the Public Issue Checklist
-Using the Research Database

Lecture/Talk: From Claim to Speech

-Discuss Topics in Database
-How to share blog comment
-Mini-Unit 3: Inherency
-Mini-Unit 4: Stasis

- speech#2 claim on Canvas

-Mini-unit 5: Q&A
M 9/5
T 9/6
LABOR DAY OBSERVED

NO P155 labs held either Monday or Tuesday
W 9/7

Lecture/Talk: Audience
R 9/8
F 9/9
- IntroSpeech#1 feedback returned

Watch Outline2Extemp Video
-Mini-unit 6: Composite Audience

- draft outline (Sp#2)
-LECTURE QUIZLET #1
M 9/12
T 9/13
-Peer Review of Initial Outline in

class (bring a printed copy)-
-Mini-unit 7: Transitions
-Watch Outline2Extemp Video
-Record & share outline extemp
- blog URL to instructor

W 9/14
Lecture/Talk: Speech Delivery

R 9/15
F 9/16
-Practice transitions
- Mini-unit 8: Form & Function
M 9/19
T 9/20
Speech #2: SYMPATHETIC PERSP.

[more prep or performances begin]
-Mini-unit 9: Gesture
- Final Outlines are Due on the Day
of Your Speech
W 9/21
R 9/22
Lecture/Talk: Rhetorical Situation

speech performance day
-Mini-unit 10: Voice
Course Materials
7

F 9/23

Week
Date
Lecture & Practicums
M 9/26
T 9/27
W 9/28
-Micro-Unit 11: Rhet. Sit.
Lecture/Talk: Organization/Invitational Speech

- Speech #3 Claim
Organizing (Intros & Conclusions)
-Mini-Unit 12: Right Fit

-Lecture Quizlet #2
R 9/29
F 9/30
M 10/3
T 10/4
Organizing (Transitions)
-Mini-Unit 13: Warrant

-Mini-Unit 14: Evidentiary S.P.
-Mini-Unit 15: Topical S.P.
Lecture/Talk: Argumentation I
W 10/5
R 10/6
F 10/7
FALL BREAK NO LABS
M 10/10
T 10/11
W 10/12
R 10/13
F 10/14
-Discuss Invitational Speech

-Mini-Unit 16: Argument Types
assignment.

Lecture/Talk: Argumentation 2, Style
- draft outline (Sp#3).
Practice for Invitational speeches
-Mini-Unit 17: Example, Analogy
M 10/17
T 10/18

class (bring a printed copy)
Lecture/Talk: Style

W 10/19
R 10/20
F 10/21
Practice for Invitational speeches
M 10/24
T 10/25
Speech #3: INVITATIONAL SPEECH

[more prep or performances begin]
W 10/26
R 10/27
F 10/28
Lecture: Symbolic Action

-Mini-Unit 18: Ideology

-Mini-Unit 19: Hegemony

10

11

-Final Outlines are due on the day

of speech
LECTURE QUIZLET #3

M 10/31
T 11/1
W 11/2
R 11/3
F 11/4
-Mini-Unit 20: Transformational
Lecture: Identification Speech E.G.
Course Materials
8

Week
Date
12
M 11/7
T 11/8
W 11/9
13
R 11/10
F 11/11
M 11/14
T 11/15
W 11/16
R 11/17
F 11/18
Lecture & Practicums

Evidence & Support
- #4 Speech Claim on Canvas
Lecture/Talk: Transformation Speech II E.G.

prep for speeches
- draft outline (Sp#4).

class (bring a printed copy)

Lecture: Transformational Speech III E.G.

Speech #4: IDENTIFICATION

~ THANKSGIVING BREAK NOV. 21 25 ~
14
M 11/28
T 11/29
W 11/30
R 12/1
F 12/2
-Lecture Quizlet #4
-Mini-Unit 23 Schemas
Lecture: Course Review

15
M 12/5
T 12/6
W 12/7
R 12/8
F 12/9
Professor Arthos holds Office Hours: NO LECTURE


16
Finals Week
FINAL LECTURE TEST

This final test will be administered through the testing tool in Canvas.

14. eBook Technology. The eBook software is very stable, but if you run into any problems, try
these things first: (a) refresh your screen, (b) change browsers (Chrome, Safari, etc.), (c) restart
computer. The helpdesk also has some instructions on the eBook and can help. Let your lab
instructor know immediately if you run into a technical problem. You can also consult these help
resources: The IU Knowledge Base article, technical info for COLL P155 at IUB found at kb.iu.edu,
the ITHELP line 812-855-6789, and ithelplive.iu.edu

14. Recording Permissions
Your instructor will probably ask you to sign a permissions form so that we may show clips from
student lab work to other students as illustrations. We never show these clips as examples of bad
performances, only good.

15. Civil, Respectful Discourse: This is an active class characterized by a great deal of discussion,
often of controversial subjects. At all times, a supportive classroom climate of mutual respect for all
people is expected. Even if people vigorously disagree with one another, they can and must do so
with civility and respect. Any behavior that is disrespectful to others or has the potential to damage
the learning environment of our class will not be tolerated.
Course Materials
9

16. Academic Integrity & Plagiarism: All graded work in this course must represent your own,
personal, inventive endeavor. All references to ideas that are not your own invention must be
clearly cited, whether they are direct quotations, paraphrases, or in your own words. If you have
any doubt about whether things you are planning to do constitute academic dishonesty, contact
your Performance Lab Instructor immediately. All Public Oral Communication instructors
aggressively monitor possible academic misconduct, and the penalties are grave, all the way up to
expulsion from the course. If you want to know what plagiarism looks like, here is what has now
become the most famous recent example, classified as clone plagiarism [online hotlink goes to
article about running Melania Trumps recent speech through plagiarism softwareresults not
good]. A clear case of significant clone plagiarism has a likely punishment of course failure. All
students are expected to uphold the IU Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities, and Conduct. In
addition, all students are expected to be familiar with the material on Academic Misconduct in the
Public Oral Communication Textbook Supplement and to read, sign, and turn in to your Performance
Lab Instructor the Public Oral Communication Academic Honesty Contract during the first two
weeks of class.

SPECIAL NOTE: Do not use the Canvas messaging system to contact all P155 students for
any purpose without the express consent of Dr. Arthos or Dr. Smith. Note taking and sharing
services, paid or unpaid, violate the IU Code of Student Rights, Responsibilities and Conduct--
this is true for the producers of such notes and for students who use them. If you have an
announcement, please talk to your lab instructor and make that announcement in person to your
lab class. Thanks!

17. University Sexual Harassment Policy:
Please consult the university policy against sexual harassment
at http://enrollmentbulletin.indiana.edu/pages/harass.php?Term=2

18. Semester Incompletes: A grade of I is granted only in rare circumstances, typically in
response to unusually severe and documentable hardships over which you had no control (for
example, the death of a family member necessitating many absences, or a serious illness or physical
injury late in the semester). Your Performance Lab Instructor cannot assign a grade of incomplete
without the final approval of the Course Coordinator or Course Director.

19. Special Circumstances: If any student requires assistance or academic accommodations for a
disability, please contact your instructor after class, during her or his office hours, or by individual
appointment. You must have established your eligibility for disability support services through the
Office of Disability Services for Students <studentaffairs.iub.edu/dss>. There is a direct link on
Canvas. Every attempt will be made to accommodate qualified students with disabilities (e.g.
mental health, learning, chronic health, physical, hearing, vision, neurological, etc.). Note that DSS
services are confidential, may take time to put into place, and are not retroactive. Captions and
alternate media for print materials may take three or more weeks to get produced. Please contact
Disability Services for Students at http://disabilityservices.indiana.edu or 812-855-7578 as soon as
possible if accommodations are needed. The office is located on the third floor, west tower, of the
Wells Library (Room W302). Walk-ins are welcome 8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday. You can
also locate a variety of campus resources for students and visitors who need assistance
at http://www.iu.edu/~ada/index.shtml.

Course Materials
10
20. Grade Dispute Policy: If you dont understand the reason you received a specific grade on any
assignment, be sure you take the time to talk with your instructor. Often even a brief conversation
can clear things up. If you believe a grade should be reconsidered, review your instructors
comments and follow these instructions:
1. Wait at least 24 hours, but no more than 1 week, after receiving the grade to contact your
instructor regarding the grade.
2. Your reasons for receiving another grade (which you must specify) must be written in a
memo to your instructor (2 page maximum).
3. Your account should specify why you believe your speech falls into the grade category
you say it does, according to the Criteria for Evaluating Speeches in your P155
Supplement.
4. The original evaluation and all assignment materials must be included with your account.
If these procedures are not followed, your instructor is not obligated to respond to your request for
a reconsideration of your grade. In any case, there is no guarantee that a reconsideration of your
work will yield a higher grade. Be sure to keep all your student work until the semester concludes.

21. Appeals Procedure. For almost all questions in P155, your lab section instructor is the person
to talk to. If you have questions about your lab section beyond a single assignment grade, we have
developed the following protocol. Having a standard protocol protects everyone, including you. So,
if you have questions about your section beyond a single grade, you must
(1.) first request a meeting with your section instructor outside of class time and address it
with her or him. This meeting should be held during office hours or at another appointed
time, but not in a conversation before or after class with other students present.
(2.) If you cannot work something out during this meeting with your lab instructor, the next
step is to meet with the Course Coordinator, Dr. Cynthia Smith. Dr. Smith cannot
entertain queries until the previous step is concluded.
(3.) If you cannot resolve the matter at that level, the next step is the Course Director, Dr.
Arthos. Dr. Arthos cannot meet with you until you have met with the Dr. Smith.

22. Use of Canvas Course Email: In recent semesters students have been increasingly annoyed by
peers spamming them with advertising for events and services. Although it is technically possible to
use Canvas to email all students in all sections, you should not use the Canvas messaging system in
this way. Note taking and sharing services, paid or unpaid, violate the IU Code of Student Rights,
Responsibilities and Conduct. This is true for the producers of such notes and for students who use
them. If you have an announcement, please talk to your lab instructor and make that announcement
in person to your lab class.

23. Canvas and E-Mail: This course makes extensive use of the IU Canvas system. Note that most
students will use two Canvas sites related to the course: a site associated with the Lecture and a site
associated with the Performance Lab. The Lecture Canvas page is either COLL P155 13925 or COLL
P155 31240. The Performance Lab sections are listed on the registrar page and posted to your
Canvas tabs. Students are expected to log in to all of these Canvas sites frequently to receive news
and updates. It also is your responsibility to be sure that your grade points are recorded accurately
in the Canvas gradebook.

It is the policy of the course that if a message has been posted to Canvas, or sent to the students IU
e-mail address, then the Course Director, Course Coordinator, and the Performance Lab instructors
can assume that students have read the message. Note also that Public Oral Communication
instructors will not accept assignments sent as e-mail attachments unless the instructor has
explicitly stated otherwise.
Course Materials
11
P155: Public Oral Communication (Section 12871)

Fall 2016
Sycamore Hall 037
MF 10:10-11:00
Instructor:
Office Location:
Office Hours:
E-Mail:
Nick Zautra
Ballantine Hall 661
Tuesdays and Thursdays, 11:00-12:00 and by appointment
nzautra@indiana.edu
Welcome to Public Oral Communication! This workshop meets on Mondays and Fridays and
supplements the lectures administered by Professor John Arthos, which you will attend every
Wednesday. The goal of this workshop is to help students develop and fine tune critical public
speaking skills that will be utilized throughout their academic and professional career. Moreover,
through various in-class activities, readings, lectures, and speech assignments, students should
leave this class with a greater understanding of key contemporary public issues and should be
able to engage with relative ease in civil and informed discussions surrounding these issues.

Participation Points (100/1,000 points for the course)
20 points: Speech Questions (In order to get full points, students must ask questions on their
assigned days that directly engage the content of other students speeches.)
20 points: Source Exercise (In order to familiarize students with the IUB library
resources and help them prepare for the Public Issue Speech, this assignment
requires that the student locate one article on a public issue, bring it to class, and
give a 1-2 minute extemp speech that succinctly summarizes the significance of the
issue and the differing viewpoints surrounding the issue. Due date: 9/9)
15 points: In-class Activities (Students will be asked to give impromptu speeches and to
participate in small-group activities throughout the semester. You must be present
on the day of the activity and complete it in order to receive points. Points will be
awarded on an all-or-nothing basis.)
25 points: Overall Participation and Professionalism (Students are expected to actively
participate by being prepared for class, contributing to classroom discussions and
activities, asking questions on speech day, and treating everyone in the room with
respect.)
This section is required to attend Wednesdays lectures. For every absence,
students will be penalized one point from their overall grade.
20 points: Outside Speaker Review (Students will attend in person or watch a speech on
American Rhetoric.com or on Ted.com and write up a 1-2 page response that evaluates
the speechs rhetorical effectiveness, focusing on key terms and concepts from the
textbook, lectures, and workshops. Due date: 12/9)
In-class Behavior
Course Materials
12
It is expected that you will come to class prepared to discuss assigned material and that you will
act in a courteous and responsible manner while in class. Behavior that disrupts the learning
environment will not be tolerated. Such disruptive behavior includes, but is not limited to, textmessaging, cellular phone interruptions, talking during a fellow students speech, sleeping, using
approved technology for non-class related purposes, doing crossword puzzles, etc. Students who
engage in disruptive behavior will receive no points for participation that day and may be asked
to leave the classroom.
Note on Speech Outlines
The Public Issue Speech, Invitational Rhetoric Speech, and Rhetoric of Identification Speech
require the student to compose a typed outline. The outline is due on two occasions: once for inclass peer review and instructor feedback, and the second time in its final form on speech day.
No late outlines will be accepted. If the final outline is not submitted to the instructor in hard
copy form on the speech day, the student will NOT be allowed to present that day. No speeches
will be given without outlines.
Additional Notes
If you are struggling with any aspect of the course, please consult your instructor as soon
as possible.
If your observance of a religious holiday interferes with any scheduled class activity,
please discuss this with the instructor at the beginning of the semester.

Course Materials Final

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Course Materials Final

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

!

HPSC X200: Scientific Reasoning (10058)

Scientific Reasoning, X200, Fall 2013

Weekly Assignments 25%

Monday/Wednesday Class Schedule

Friday Discussion Group Class Schedule

August 30th Norwood Hanson, Observation, in Theories and Observation in

October 18th FALL BREAK: NO CLASS

November 15th Regal, Rooney, and Wandas, Facilitated Communication: An

13. Crucial experiments in science are (1 point):

18. As opposed to pseudoscience, marginal science (1 points):

27. The four elements of a statistical study include (1 point):

Michelson and Morleys experiment:

X200: Take Home Final Exam

COGS Q240: Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science (17233)

COGS Q240 Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science

Times and Locations

Rose Avenue Hall B109 (Section 17234)

Mindware: Preface, Introduction, Appendix 1,

Dennett (1981) "True believers"

Descartes (1641) Meditations 1 and 2

Chomsky (1959/1967) "Review of B.F.

Harvey et al. (2005) "Evolutionary Robotics:

Clark (1998) "Embodiment and the

Clark, A. and D. J. Chalmers (1998) "The

van Gelder (1995) "What might cognition be

Statement for Students with Disabilities

Statement about Academic Misconduct

CLLC L210: Philosophy of Satire (17330)

Instructor: Nicholas Zautra

Why is satire special in comparison to other forms of literary criticism?

1. Vaughn, Lewis. Writing Philosophy: A Students Guide to Writing

5. Simpson, Paul. On the Discourse of Satire: Toward a Stylistic Model of

Unit One introduces philosophy as an academic discipline and its method

Satirical headline: a joke in the form of a news headline based on a personal or

Wealthy Teen Nearly Experiences Consequence

o Resentment toward poor parenting by affluent families

COGS Q240: Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science (17109)

Philosophical Foundations of Cognitive Science

IW assignments, specified in greater detail below are due by midnight on the

70% for the IW assignments, distributed as follows:

movie shown in class

What is (Philosophy Paul Thagards SEP

Article available here:

Allen Newell & Herbert

John Searle (1980)

The Turing Test

Alan Turing (1950)

Try out at least one of the Turing

Monty Python's argument clinic

Rene Descartes (1641)

Metaphors for Mind

Edward Tolman (1948)

Research age-appropriate vocabulary

Janet Levins SEP entry

review SEP article

Chomsky v. Skinner Noam Chomsky

The Place of Folk

Daniel Dennett (1981)

Jim Garsons SEP entry

Bring your "2nd best" ideas

Marr (1980) selection

Schedule appoint with IUB Writing

Evolution and Mind