SPRING 2001 SYLLABUS: ENVIRONMENTALISM

STS 2400-01 Tues. 8:00-9:40 J-109

STS 2400-02 Thurs. 8:00-9:40 J-109

STS 2400-03 Thurs.10:00-11:40 J-109

Instructor: Julie Newell

Office: J-309 Drop box: take the first left past J-309, look on your left

Phone/Voice mail: 770-528-7481 Fax: 770-528-4949

email: jnewell@spsu.edu

Office Hours: M,W,F 9:00-9:50; T 10:00-11:50, by appointment, and
drop-ins welcome

My Web Page: http://www2.spsu.edu/cteacad/newell

Web CT Address: http://webct.usg.edu

PREREQUISITES: English 1101

REQUIRED COURSE MATERIALS:

Goldfarb, Theodore D. Clashing Views on Environmental Issues (8^th ed.)

Access to a web browser or time on campus to use the computers here—participation on the class web site is required. You must check WebCT at least every three days.

Access to a typewriter or a computer and word-processing software. Be sure that you proofread all of your work (don't rely on software) and check to see that your printer or typewriter is not in need of a new ribbon. All written work in this course must be typed.

COURSE PHILOSOPHY:

STS 2400 is an interdisciplinary course, designed to introduce you to some of the interrelationships--historical and contemporary--of science, technology and society. The depth of our dependence on complex technological systems, and the intensity of our emotional and financial investment in them, mean that such systems have wide social and cultural impact. The goal of the course is to get you to explore the broader implications of science and technology, and so of your major and, ultimately, of your chosen profession. Modern science and technology presents us with complex social, ethical, and moral choices. This course is designed to get you thinking about some of them.

To participate as a citizen in an increasingly scientific and technological world, you must be able to evaluate information, form your own understandings and opinions, express those opinions both orally and in writing, and defend them with appropriate evidence and example. In this course you will be encouraged to do all those things.

Writing will be used extensively in this course. Writing is a critical skill not only for expressing what you think and know, but also for developing your knowledge and understanding. Writing is a process and will be used in this course to help you figure out what you think, what you know, and what you don't know. Reading and writing are critical tools in this class.

COURSE GOALS:

Goal 1: You should be able to identify the ways in which science and technology are shaped by and help to shape society and culture.

Goal 2: You should be able to evaluate historical case studies and apply the knowledge gained from such case studies to evaluating contemporary issues.

Goal 3: You should be able to weigh evidence, construct arguments, evaluate arguments, and apply these skills to the debates concerning contemporary issues in science and technology.

Goal 4: You should be able to formulate and clearly express, both orally and in writing, your own position on contemporary issues in science and technology, supporting your position with evidence and example as well as logically consistent and fully developed argumentation.

ACHIEVING THE COURSE GOALS:

Goals 1 & 2: For most of you, much of the material in this course will be new. We will use reading, lecture, film, discussion, and group activities to explore examples--both historical and contemporary--and to develop the skills to identify and evaluate the choices, access limitations, risks, costs, responsibilities, and benefits associated with scientific and technological developments.

There is no substitute for coming to class prepared. You must do--and think about--the assigned reading and writing before you come to class. And you must be present on a regular basis.

Goals 3 & 4: Discussion, papers, and class debates will provide numerous opportunities to develop and practice these skills.

EXPECTED RESULTS:

At the end of the course you should be able to demonstrate:

• an ability to identify and evaluate competing views and the information supporting them.

• an ability to formulate your own opinions on complex issues and to communicate your views clearly in both written and oral formats, and to support your position with relevant evidence.

• an understanding of the ways in which science and technology have been shaped by, and have helped to shape, society and culture.

• an improved understanding of the scientific disciplines and technologies relevant to your major.

GRADING

Grading is an inherently subjective process. I don't count up mistakes, or deviations from some ideal Right Answer, and deduct points accordingly. Instead, I try to assess two things:

1. How broad, deep, and solid is your understanding of the material?

2. How effectively do you use that material in meeting the demands of the assignment?

I start from the assumption that work fulfilling the basic requirements of the assignment and showing a basic grasp of the material is “C” work. “D” work fails on one count or the other. “F” work fails on both counts, or catastrophically on one. “B” and “A” work rise above the minimal requirements and demonstrate mastery of the material. My grading (all done with numbers, not letters) is based on these definitions.

90% and up = A

80-89% = B

70-79% = C

60-69% = D

I make every effort to grade and return assignments promptly. Once an assignment is returned, please bring any clerical errors to my attention promptly. For questions of interpretation or other more complicated issues, I ask that you wait 24 hours and then please do come and discuss your concerns. The wait gives you time to think through what you want to ask or argue and be sure that you understand the feedback on your work.

Please retain copies of all your graded work. I will periodically supply you with a copy of your scores as they appear in my computer. It is your responsibility to bring any recording errors to my attention, and you will need your graded work as documentation.

The Grading Scale is as follows:

Maximum Points Possible:

60 points (~26%) Attendance

70 points (~30%) Reading Responses

10 points (~4%) Topic Approval Form for Paper #1

30 points (~13%) Position Paper #1: Major Related

30 points (~13%) Position Paper #2: Debate Paper

30 points (~13%) Class Debates and Debate Evaluations

220 total points possible (not including extra credit)

207-or more = A (89.5% and above)

184-206 = B (79.5-89.4%)

161-183 = C (69.5-79.4%)

138-160 = D (59.5-69.4%)

137 or below = F (below 59.5%)

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

Students with disabilities who believe they may need accommodations in this class are encouraged to contact the counselor working with disabilities at 770-528-7226 as soon as possible to better assure that such accommodations are implemented in a timely fashion.

DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR AND ACADEMIC DISHONESTY

In accord with the Academic Regulations of Southern Polytechnic State University, “A faculty member reserves the right to remove any student from his or her course if the student's behavior is of a disruptive nature or where there is evidence of academic dishonesty (SPSU Undergraduate Catalog 2000-2002, p. 59). Be sure you've read the section of the Student Life Regulations on Academic Dishonesty (SPSU Undergraduate Catalog 2000-2002, p. 72) and the section of the Academic Regulations on Disruptive Behavior and Academic Dishonesty (SPSU Undergraduate Catalog 2000-2002, pp. 59-60).

ATTENDANCE (12 class meetings @ 5 points each = 60 points)

Participation in the give-and-take of class is an important part of this course. I expect you to be in class--on time--and stay until the end of the period. I will take attendance. Coming late or leaving early will get you a partial absence, and three partial absences will count as an unexcused absence.

Every student will have 1 excused absence available to them for whatever reason Excused absences are intended to cover all those unavoidable little disasters in life. All additional absences will be unexcused. If you feel you have a truly exceptional documentable case for additional excused absences, please discuss it with me.

You will be responsible for all material covered in class (lecture, film, and activities) and all material covered in the assigned reading. Late essays or reading responses will be accepted only with documentation of emergency. Given the amount of advance notice you have for every assignment in this course, technology failure will almost never qualify as an “emergency.”

Weather philosophy in this class:

I listen to the weather and traffic reports each morning as I, too, drive in. When, in my judgement, there are conditions that would create serious delays in commuting, I reserve the right to issue a generally amnesty on partial absences for late arrivals. Get here if you can, when you can, safely. If you have a really special situation, a message on my voice mail and a timely visit to my office to go a long way toward convincing me.

You will find the Campus Policy on Hazardous Weather posted on my web site. It includes the list of television and radio stations to check for official campus closings. If campus is closed when we should be meeting, stick to the schedule and watch WebCT for updates from me.

WebCT

You are required to check the WebCT site at least every three days. Critical information and last-minute changes and notices may be posted there. You are responsible for checking to see if there are any messages on the bulletin board or in your WebCT email.

Your log-in name and password will initially be your first initial and full last name, all in lower case. Be sure you change your password. Also be sure to close the browser you are using when you finish working in WebCT.

The WebCT Site is set up to help you. It will provide you with the following anytime you have access to the internet:

• An e-mail connection to anybody in your class and to me
• One-stop shopping for information and resources for this class
• A discussion bulletin board open to the entire class so you can continue (or get a head-start on) the discussions we'll have in class.
• Reminders about critical announcements from class.
• A course calendar--all the critical info from class, info about related television programs and community events. And you can customize it--what you post nobody sees but you. Use it to keep info about the rest of your life, too!
• Random extra credit opportunities--not a lot, but enough to keep it interesting!

ANALYSIS TOOL (longer version available on WebCT)

Throughout the course, we will use the following questions to help us understand what is going on when scientific and technological choices are being made--and they are being made all the time. Whenever you read or write or listen or discuss in this class be thinking about the following:

• CHOICE--what choices are being made and who is doing the choosing

• ACCESS--how and why access to knowledge or technology is controlled and distributed

• RISK--what risks are involved and how they are defined, measured, and weighed; whether those at risk are involved in the decision making process

• COST--what costs (economic, environmental, social, etc.) are involved and how they are defined, measured, and weighed; whether those bearing the costs are involved in the decision making process

• RESPONSIBILITY--what issues of individual, professional, social, or governmental responsibility are involved

• BENEFITS-- what the benefits of the various options are; whether those gaining the benefits make the choices, bear the responsibility, accrue the costs, or take the risk; whether the benefits are widely or narrowly distributed

READING RESPONSES (7 @ 10 points each = 70 points)

For each reading assignment, you must bring to class TWO copies of your reading response. These are due at the beginning of the class meeting (see schedule on the last page of the syllabus for assignments / due dates; you will be assigned to do A OR B topics, not both).

A reading response must include the following sections—please use these headers in your write-up:

• Author and title and clear statement of the thesis for each of the two items in the reading.
• A paragraph evaluating the strongest evidence and arguments for thesis of each of the two items.
• A paragraph in which you clearly state your own position and provide evidence or examples to support your position.
• An annotated citation for a related article published since July 1, 2000. You must attach a copy of your article and clearly state HOW the article is related to your assigned reading.

IF you must be absent, you may submit your response for credit by email attachment. It must be sent BEFORE the beginning time of the class in which it was due.

TOPIC APPROVAL FOR FIRST POSITION PAPER

It is a requirement in all STS 2400 sections that one of your papers or your debate be related to your major. Your first position paper will meet this requirement. You must have a topic form completed and approved by me no later than the date specified on the course schedule. This form is available on WebCT. You will have until noon on February 14 to make any necessary additions or corrections.

Your topic must be related to your major and not already approved for another student in your section. It must be an environmental issue.

Your form will have to include the citations for five sources that you'll be able to use to write your position paper. It must also include the signature and qualifications of someone in your field with whom you have discussed your topic selection.

POSITION PAPERS

A position paper is just what its name suggests--a paper that provides a compact summary of your position on a particular issue. Your position paper may use any writing style (within reason) that you're comfortable with, but it must include the following:

• Your name
• A clear statement of the issue and the position you are taking.
• Three or four of the main arguments for your side. These should be clearly distinguished from one another. Make each one a separate paragraph or section, rather than blending them. Describe each one in enough detail to make your point clear, and provide supporting evidence or examples.
• Two or three arguments for the other side. Make each one a separate paragraph or section, rather than blending them. Describe each one in enough detail to make your point clear, and provide supporting evidence or examples.
• The biggest weakness in your side's case. It might be an argument for your side that you have little or no factual support for, an argument against your side that you don't have an effective response to, or a counter-example that you can't explain away. Identify it, and briefly explain why it's such a weakness.
• An annotated bibliography of at least 10 sources; no more than half may be on-line. Pay attention to the directions below for an annotated bibliography:

Your position papers must be typed or computer-printed. They should be 3-5 pages each, NOT including the bibliography.

You may (and should) discuss the content of your debate position paper with other members of your team, but the document you turn in must be your own work, written in your own words. Submission of another's work, represented as your own, constitutes Academic Dishonesty (see above).

GRADING FOR POSITION PAPERS

In grading your papers, I will look for the following things:

ASSIGNMENT & MECHANICS: Did fulfill the assignment you were given (all parts)? Was your work relatively free of errors in spelling, grammar, etc. Did you follow the directions? You MUST include complete citations. Web sources MUST include the http address and date of posting. Bibliographic entries MUST be annotated.

EVIDENCE: Did you support your statements with evidence from the readings / class / article? BE SURE all quotations and other borrowings are properly credited and use your own words whenever possible.

ANALYSIS: Depth of argument / critical thinking / original ideas / logic / synthesis

Paper #1 must be on your approved, major-related topic.

Paper #2 must take your team's debate position.

CLASS DEBATES

You will be required to participate in one in-class debate. You will be part of a team and may choose your date/topic on a first-come first-served basis. Any student who has not chosen a date/topic by midnight on 3/5/00 will be assigned a date/topic.

You will be asked to evaluate the oral presentations of your classmates--primarily for clarity and degree to which they increase your understanding of the topic. You will also be asked to evaluate your own team. The evaluation forms will be distributed in class and are all available on WebCT if you wish to see them in advance.

Debates will be graded as follows:
Debate Evaluation: 10 points (observing debates as non-participant)
Debate Participation: 10 points (class participation on your debate day)
Teamwork: 10 points (contribution to / participation in team)

TOTAL POINTS 30 points

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

The point of a standard bibliography is to give interested readers a list of the sources you used in preparing whatever project (book, paper, presentation) it's attached to. The entries in a standard bibliography should include enough information for the reader to actually find the sources you used.

An annotated bibliography goes a step further. It adds, to each entry, two or three brief sentences that critically evaluate the source. A critical evaluation should give your readers a sense of the work's contents and of its utility (or lack of utility) in understanding the subject. Be sure to see the examples on page 9.

My rule for evaluating a citation is as follows: does it provide enough information to allow the reader to return to the original source? If so, then the citation is complete. At a minimum, citations must contain the following PLUS an indication of exactly where specific information used in quotations comes from:

Article in a journal: Author (if identified), title of the article, title of the publication, volume and number (if given), date of publication, page(s) on which the article appears.

Article in a newspaper: Author (if identified), title of the article, title of the publication, date of publication, section(s) and page(s) on which the article appears.

Article in a book: Author, title of the article, editors of the book, title of the book, place of publication, publisher, date of publication, and pages on which the article appears.

Book: Author, Title, Place of Publication, Publisher, and date of publication.

Information from the internet: the http address and name of the web site, the date posted or last updated (if given), the date you accessed the material, the author (if given), and the title. (If you are using the web version of a journal or newspaper article, say so and use those formats as a guide for what you should include—but don't forget the http!)

Examples:

Benedict, Howard (AP). "Space Shuttle Explodes; 7 Crew Members Perish." The Capital Times (Madison, WI), 28 January 1996, section 1, p. 1 & 10. First AP-wire story on the disaster, including initial reactions from NASA officials, President Reagan, and others. Sketchy content reflects initial confusion about the cause of the explosion.

Federation of American Scientists Space Policy Project. “51-l: The Challenger Disaster.” http://www.fas.org/spp/51L.html. Updated 2/9/97. Accessed 5/24/99. Brief description of the disaster and its causes, focusing on technical rather than human factors. Includes links to the report of the Rogers Commission.

HoustonChronicle.Com. "Reagan's Remarks: January 28, 1986." www.chron.com/content/interactive/special/challenger/docs/reagan.html Accessed 5/24/99. Full text of President Ronald Reagan's televised address to the nation on the night of the disaster. Includes the ironic-in-retrospect comment that Challenger's crew "knew the risks they took."

Magnuson, Ed. “Fixing NASA.” Time, 9 June 1986, pp. 14-25. Comprehensive survey of opinions on NASA's post-Challenger future in the wake of the Rogers Commission report. Interviews include scientists, astronauts, NASA officials, critics.

McConnell, Malcolm. Challenger: A Major Malfunction. New York: Doubleday, 1987. Detailed, investigative-reporting-style analysis of the disaster, which it links to design compromises in the shuttle and political compromises by NASA leaders. Charges NASA officials with cynical, arrogant disregard of obvious safety problems

Vaughn, Diane. The Challenger Launch Decision. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Detailed, step-by-step sociological analysis of how and why the launch decision was made. Sees disaster as result of a NASA-wide culture that used successful launches to justify greater risks. Rejects “Evil Manager” theories of McConnell and others.

Washington Post Staff. Challengers: The Inspiring Life Stories of the Seven Brave Astronauts of Shuttle Mission 51-L. New York: Pocket Books, 1986. The subtitle says it all: Earnest, reverent biographies of the seven dead crew members. Ends with the explosion. Conclusion is all we-must-go-on rhetoric and no analysis.

SCHEDULE FOR SPRING 2001

ALL READING SHOULD BE DONE BEFORE THE CLASS FOR WHICH IT IS ASSIGNED. WHEN SOMETHING IS DUE, IT IS DUE IN CLASS (Or by the class start time if submitted by email.)

You must know whether your are a “Group A” reader or a “Group B” reader and do the appropriate assignment!