Since we only have one class meeting left and I'm still putting together my syllabus, I thought we should have a place online to ask/answer questions we may have about our respective syllabi. Here's a few of my own.
- I don't want to grade papers when they're handed in; I want the final portfolio of combined writing to be the majority of the final grade for my class. That being said, how do I penalize late papers when they themselves aren't receiving an individual grade?
- One practical question: what's the best way to keep track of grades? I may have a little problem making sense of grades when some of them are going to be percentages of larger percentages. Should I be using a spreadsheet template, or what?
Everyone else post their own questions so I don't look stupid.
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Ideas for Paper Assignments
Apparently Jamie didn’t bring a copy of his syllabus to class on Monday. What a jackass. He tried to pass off a handwritten version - some of you might remember his insistence on having students handwriting initially to get, what he called, “creative juices” flowing. Frankly, I question whether or not he is really equipped to instruct one of these classes.
I thought a third person observation of myself might be an interesting way to examine my own progress throughout the semester. After several drafts, I kept coming up with paragraphs like the first. So, instead I’ll go back to the first person self-importance that I’m used to.
Anyway, I’ve been considering different ways to structure my class. As I mentioned the other day, I’m thinking of at least one paper on American politics. My issue is that I don’t want to end up teaching a political science class, especially for students who might not find the political process as interesting as I do. However, I think with the coming election (including the Ohio primary in May), students may be showing more interest as next semester progresses.
The primary is set for May 4, and while in recent elections it seemed that the candidates had already been chosen early on, this year may be a little different (at least I hope so for the sake of democracy). Both the democratic and republican fields have a handful of interesting candidates. For example, Edwards may pick up southern states while Clinton and Obama split the coasts. Richardson could win out west, and that’s just the democrats. On the republican side, Huckabee could win Iowa, Romney New Hampshire, and Giuliani the more moderate strongholds in New York and so on. So, students may still have an interest in examining a candidate, his or her arguments, ect., throughout most of the semester. The only problem is that many of the old Super Tuesday states have moved their primaries up to February 5, with so many states voting, that both parties could decide by that point. I wonder if assigning the candidate paper first, before the 5th, would be wise so that many candidates are still in the thing. I also thought of ways to encourage students to look into third party candidates, not for voting, but as a way to expose students to the field of candidates outside of the two major parties. A paper on Michael Badnarik (the libertarian candidate in 2004) might be more interesting research than another paper on Hillary Clinton.
I was thinking that this kind of paper might spark some passionate debate among the students. Although next fall will probably provide even more of this during the general election. At the same time, I wouldn’t want so much angry debate that the classroom would reflect the kind of thing that goes on among cable news talking heads. This would run the risk of students becoming disinterested, and might unintentionally reinforce the apathy I would hope to combat.
I think that there is a lot of value in looking at presidential candidates, beyond policy issues. The way that a candidate structures his or her arguments, the rhetorical devices utilized (Brandon, that “utilized” is for you), the style of communication, and so on are all interesting facets of the campaigns, and can be directly connected to the class. For example, contrasting the candidacies of Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul might be interesting for students. One’s a classic liberal and the other a classic conservative; however both have come nearly full circle, meeting in a realm where seemingly no other candidates (Mike Gravel might be lurking around there too) have dared to enter. Both men are brutally honest, it seems, with strong convictions, and have developed a mutual respect, even going so far as suggesting one another as potential running mates. Examination of their campaigns, while very different, especially in terms of domestic policy agendas, in contrast with the “top-tier” candidates would be useful for students.
So, in the end, I am going to have the students study a particular candidate and write a paper on that candidate. My main issues with this assignment are when to assign it, so as to make sure that students maintain some level of interest, and in what way I should narrow the scope of the assignment. Should it be a sort of overview of a candidacy? Or, a more interesting (at least I think) argument for or against a particular candidate? Also, how might I encourage them to choose a third-party candidate? Should I assign candidates? Maybe provide a list of lesser known candidates from all political stripes (so as to not show any bias) and let them only choose from that pool? Any thoughts are welcome.
I thought a third person observation of myself might be an interesting way to examine my own progress throughout the semester. After several drafts, I kept coming up with paragraphs like the first. So, instead I’ll go back to the first person self-importance that I’m used to.
Anyway, I’ve been considering different ways to structure my class. As I mentioned the other day, I’m thinking of at least one paper on American politics. My issue is that I don’t want to end up teaching a political science class, especially for students who might not find the political process as interesting as I do. However, I think with the coming election (including the Ohio primary in May), students may be showing more interest as next semester progresses.
The primary is set for May 4, and while in recent elections it seemed that the candidates had already been chosen early on, this year may be a little different (at least I hope so for the sake of democracy). Both the democratic and republican fields have a handful of interesting candidates. For example, Edwards may pick up southern states while Clinton and Obama split the coasts. Richardson could win out west, and that’s just the democrats. On the republican side, Huckabee could win Iowa, Romney New Hampshire, and Giuliani the more moderate strongholds in New York and so on. So, students may still have an interest in examining a candidate, his or her arguments, ect., throughout most of the semester. The only problem is that many of the old Super Tuesday states have moved their primaries up to February 5, with so many states voting, that both parties could decide by that point. I wonder if assigning the candidate paper first, before the 5th, would be wise so that many candidates are still in the thing. I also thought of ways to encourage students to look into third party candidates, not for voting, but as a way to expose students to the field of candidates outside of the two major parties. A paper on Michael Badnarik (the libertarian candidate in 2004) might be more interesting research than another paper on Hillary Clinton.
I was thinking that this kind of paper might spark some passionate debate among the students. Although next fall will probably provide even more of this during the general election. At the same time, I wouldn’t want so much angry debate that the classroom would reflect the kind of thing that goes on among cable news talking heads. This would run the risk of students becoming disinterested, and might unintentionally reinforce the apathy I would hope to combat.
I think that there is a lot of value in looking at presidential candidates, beyond policy issues. The way that a candidate structures his or her arguments, the rhetorical devices utilized (Brandon, that “utilized” is for you), the style of communication, and so on are all interesting facets of the campaigns, and can be directly connected to the class. For example, contrasting the candidacies of Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul might be interesting for students. One’s a classic liberal and the other a classic conservative; however both have come nearly full circle, meeting in a realm where seemingly no other candidates (Mike Gravel might be lurking around there too) have dared to enter. Both men are brutally honest, it seems, with strong convictions, and have developed a mutual respect, even going so far as suggesting one another as potential running mates. Examination of their campaigns, while very different, especially in terms of domestic policy agendas, in contrast with the “top-tier” candidates would be useful for students.
So, in the end, I am going to have the students study a particular candidate and write a paper on that candidate. My main issues with this assignment are when to assign it, so as to make sure that students maintain some level of interest, and in what way I should narrow the scope of the assignment. Should it be a sort of overview of a candidacy? Or, a more interesting (at least I think) argument for or against a particular candidate? Also, how might I encourage them to choose a third-party candidate? Should I assign candidates? Maybe provide a list of lesser known candidates from all political stripes (so as to not show any bias) and let them only choose from that pool? Any thoughts are welcome.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)