BACK to Interests Page

BACK to St. Olaf Courses

BACK to ES259 Spring 2003

You are expected to attend all sections of class, barring emergencies. Beyond attendance, you will be assessed on how well you contribute to class discussion and work. This includes commenting on and asking questions about the reading, and responding thoughtfully and respectfully to others in the class. All students are expected to participate regularly in class discussions and to keep up with the reading and other assignments. If you have concerns about this requirement, you need to see me within the first two weeks of class to discuss them.

Excellent participants will join class activities on a regular basis and in a thoughtful and attentive way. They are on time and have excellent attendance. They are prepared, having read the required materials ahead of time and having thought about them. They ask questions that encourage productive discussion of the materials and course themes. In discussion, they direct their comments to the whole class, listen attentively to the ideas of other students, and work with others in order to enhance the understanding of the class as a whole. They are open to constructive criticism, and assess whether they need to reconsider their ideas in light of it; they also defend their ideas with specific examples and clear explanations of their reasoning. When reading and commenting on other students’ work, excellent participants will be thoughtful, specific, and helpful. They recognize the importance of proofreading, but pay particular attention to the argument and strategies of the author. Exit cards are used to raise questions about the larger implications of the class discussion and materials, and demonstrate comprehension of major and minor themes raised in class that day. In brief, excellent participation means engaging with the materials and other students in a thoughtful and rigorous manner, and doing so consistently throughout the term.

Good participants usually join in class discussions, and are reasonably prepared for such discussions. They are on time and regularly attend class. They ask questions about materials that confuse them, and listen to their classmates’ ideas with respect. In discussion, they direct their comments to the whole class (but tend to focus more on the professor’s reactions), and respond to their classmates’ ideas, but often in a merely superficial way. When challenged, they defend their ideas, but not always effectively; they are open to constructive criticism, but don’t always incorporate it into their thinking. When responding of other students’ work, good participants are helpful and constructive; they point out some specific areas and offer some useful advice. They tend to be more concerned with “style,” “flow” and grammar than with assessing arguments. Exit cards reveal understanding of ideas raised in discussion, and the questions posed on them suggest that the student is trying to reach beyond simple understanding to consideration of larger implications. In brief, good participants make an honest effort to engage with the materials and other students, but tend to do so in a relatively simplistic way.

Weak participants only speak up occasionally, and usually only in response to direct questions. They may be late or regularly miss class. In discussion, their comments and questions suggest a lack of understanding or familiarity with the material. While they listen politely to other students’ comments, they do not engage with them, either because they are focused only on their own ideas or because they do not join the discussion. Their comments and questions are directed at the professor, rather than to the class as a whole. When responding to other students’ work, weak participants try to be helpful, but do not always know where to begin. Their comments tend to be general (“good,” “interesting”) rather than specific, and emphasize proofreading over argument. Exit cards capture the general essence of the class discussion, but may focus on minor points rather than major ones. Questions are usually brief and ask about facts rather than implications. In brief, weak participants give the impression of not engaging fully with either materials or other students, but are willing to contribute if pressed. NOTE: If you tend to be quiet in class even when interested and prepared, you run the risk of being put in this category. Exit cards can provide some compensation, but I encourage you to see me if this might be a concern; we’ll talk strategies and find other ways for you to demonstrate your active engagement with the materials.

Students who miss more than 10 classes, or do not participate at all or in a way that discourages learning or intimidates other students will not receive a passing grade for participation. Such students should seriously ask themselves whether this is the right course for them, as regular, respectful participation is essential to success in this course.

At the beginning of every week each of you will turn in a short paper in which the reading for that week is summarized and assessed. You may, if you wish, add a brief paragraph summarizing your personal reaction to the readings; this section will not be graded and doesn’t count toward the page total. Up to 3 reactions can be revised without penalty before the last day of class; the revised grade, if higher, will replace the original.

This summary is probably different than others you have done before. Unlike the standard summary common in high school, you are being asked to summarize the argument of each piece, not merely its content. This means identifying the main claim of the piece (also called the thesis, the main point, the central assertion, etc.), the types of evidence used to defend and explain that claim, and explaining how the evidence does (or does not) fulfill those roles.

Clearly noting the difference between claim and content is critical for the success of this assignment.
For example, note the following example; here are two simple arguments, both on the same topic:

The topic of both of these arguments is the same: the relative intelligence of cats and dogs. The claims are different: one claims that cats are smarter; the other claims that dogs are smarter. (Unlike topics, claims can be disputed.) The evidence is similar, but not identical: how well do these animals learn to do various activities? How well do they follow commands? What activities can they do?

Clues that you are talking about topics:

The author discusses cats…
The piece is about dogs…
These essays talk about the relative intelligence of cats and dogs…
The book covers the subject of animal intelligence…

Note that none of these things can be argued with -- they are simple statements of fact.

Clues that you are talking about claims:

The author says that cats are smarter than dogs…
The piece argues that dogs are smarter than cats…
The essay claims that the ability to learn tricks indicates intelligence…

Here, you have room to disagree with each statement.

Note that while the first two claims are main claims (the central claims for each piece) the third is a supporting or secondary claim.

Relative to the first two examples, you can easily see that the whole point of each argument is to persuade the reader that its main claim makes sense. Relative to the third example, on the other hand, the claim is part of the argument, not the point of it. A clue is that the evidence all supports the question of cats’ intelligence versus dogs’, but little or no evidence defends the claim about what the ability to learn tricks means.

NOTE: If you do not clearly identify the main claim as such, otherwise good reactions may be mistaken for weak ones!
If you receive a low grade on any of your reactions, you should see me as soon as possible so that we can identify the problem and develop strategies for correcting it.

Excellent reactions demonstrate thoughtful and thorough engagement with the materials. The summaries concisely yet thoroughly identify the main points of each argument, note secondary supporting points, and explain how the author(s) present and defend their ideas. The assessments critique the argument both as a whole and as the sum of its various parts. The assessments suggest awareness of the strategy behind arguments, and of their larger implications. Awareness of connections between and across readings is also apparent. Questions, if included, encourage further critique and assessment, and promote consideration of the larger implications of the material.

Good reactions respond to the readings and demonstrate a basic understanding of the material. Summaries focus on the main point(s) made by the readings and give a sense of the organization of the material. Assessments question the ideas and structure of the readings’ arguments, but in a superficial way. Questions direct attention to the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments, but don’t consider the larger implications. Some reaction papers may be of excellent quality in content, but are overly wordy; if you receive good comments but continually find yourself running over the page limit, you might try condensing your writing and eliminating run-on sentences. (The preceding offers a good example. Here’s a briefer, clearer version: Some otherwise excellent papers are too wordy. They receive good comments, but run over the page limit. If this describes your papers, try writing more concisely.)

Weak reactions make an effort to respond to the readings, but do not do it well. The summaries restate the contents of the readings in condensed form, rather than focusing on the arguments of the readings. Topics and claims are confused. Summaries may be rambling and confused. The assessments consist primarily of superficial statements like “it was easy to read” or “the author used too many big words.” Questions are clear and appropriate but simplistic.

Failing reactions give the impression of having been produced at the last minute. There is little or no attempt to assess the readings, and the summaries are vague and unhelpful.

Each of you will be responsible for directing a class discussion of the weekly reading as part of a small group. How you choose to do this is up to you, but you must choose a format that encourages discussion of and engagement with the themes and argument of the readings. (Successful formats have included small group discussions, skits, game shows, making poster boards, and similar activities.) You will need to create a handout which summarizes the argument of the reading in question (NOT the topic), offers an assessment of the material, links it to the weekly topic, and provides questions and topics for discussion. Be sure to make enough copies to for your classmates, yourself, and for me. You will turn this in instead of your weekly reaction for that week. GROUP WORK

Excellent presentations are clear, organized, and encourage participation. Such presentations demonstrate that the presenters are familiar with the material and have begun to think about its larger implications. Presenters ask questions that prompt discussion and deeper exploration of the material. Their outline clearly identifies the main ideas of the material and suggests additional secondary points. Presenters speak clearly, maintain eye contact with their audience, and share responsibility among themselves. They engage regularly with the class as a whole and as individuals. They may also incorporate visual aids or other techniques to encourage class participation; these are well-thought out and enhance the presentation. Class activities are well-organized, clearly explained, and helpful in understanding the materials. Presenters probably have thought about, planned, and practiced their roles several times before the class.

Good presentations are clear and organized and make an effort to encourage participation. These presentations suggest that the presenters are familiar with the material and understand its basic argument. The presenters ask questions that encourage audience participation, but do not encourage deeper exploration of the material. Their outline identifies the major points of the material. Presenters speak clearly, try to maintain eye contact (but do not do so consistently), and share responsibility among the members of the group. Visual or other aids may be used; however, their use is less well-thought-out. Class activities encourage participation and are reasonably clear in their intentions. Presenters probably have thought about their presentation and discussed their individual roles once or twice ahead of time.

Weak presentations are mostly clear and give a general overview of the material. Presenters may seem unfamiliar with parts of the material and appear to lack confidence in their knowledge of the material. Presenters fail to maintain regular eye contact or direct most or all of their presentation to the professor rather than the entire class. Some of the presenters may appear to be doing more work than the others. Weak outlines are brief and give only the most general sense of the material. The questions discourage discussion; presenters may ask mostly yes/no questions or questions that encourage simple answers or answers clearly favored by the presenters. Visual aids, if used, are more confusing than helpful. Class activities are confusing and not explained well. They may be entertaining without helping the class better understand the material. Presenters probably met briefly once before class to discuss general ideas and organization.

Failing presentations are disorganized and demonstrate a lack of familiarity with the material. Presenters are poorly prepared and give the impression of just going through the motions. The outline is the bare minimum and not all that useful. The questions are yes/no questions or create a hostile mood in the class. Class activities are disorganized and lack clear connections to the readings. Presenters ignore questions and do not act as a unified group. They give the impression of having met at the last minute to plan their presentation.

For this project, you (individually or as a small group) will do original research on a topic related to the preservation of wild places in the United States. You will develop a clear thesis on this topic and defend and explain it using secondary sources and primary sources. Consideration of the topic’s larger historical context and significance is essential. The course readings offer examples of different ways of constructing environmental arguments and suggest the larger stakes involved; you are encouraged to use them as models for organizing your thoughts and as sources for context and information. There should be a clear thesis for which the readings and the results of your research will serve as supporting and explanatory evidence. If you wish, you can incorporate personal narrative(s), but it must not interfere with your argument. Format is open, but the information contained should be the equivalent of that contained in a 15-20 page research paper.

GROUP (3-5 individuals) or INDIVIDUAL WORK
The advantages of group work include a sharing of responsibilities and ability to draw on a wider range of skills. The disadvantages include difficulties in scheduling, assigning responsibilities, and combining separate contributions into a unified whole. The advantages of working individually include flexibility and total control over the project. The disadvantages include heavier workload and being limited to your own abilities. I am happy to work with both groups and individuals to help you work out the difficulties and improve your chances for success.

In order for these project to be successful, we must begin working on them by the end of the third week of class. Be prepared to spend considerable time on this project throughout the semester.

We will be working through this project in stages to ensure that everyone stays on task and gets regular feedback throughout the process. Students will be assessing and critiquing each others’ work both in groups and in pairs. Before the final draft is submitted, students will submit a project proposal, then an annotated bibliography, then a synopsis of the project’s argument, then a working draft. At each stage we will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of various pieces of work, and share strategies for future success.

Excellent projects carefully interweave historical narrative with effective argument. They provide not only a clear and detailed portrait of a topic or issue and its history, but also build on that to make an argument of larger significance. In other words, specific examples are not only presented and analyzed for their own sake; they form the support for an argument about larger issues. Specific anecdotes are detailed and carefully chosen to present a particular point of view or illustrate a particular point. Course materials are used to place the specific examples in larger context and may be used to provide or enhance analytical frameworks. Regardless of format, the material is presented in a professional manner. Photographs are of high quality, web pages demonstrate careful, creative design, videos are focused, well-edited and without production errors, papers are well-organized and proofread, etc. Please see me for specific guidelines appropriate to your chosen format.

Good projects provide a clear look at the history of a topic or issue, and place it in a larger context. Course materials are used to help provide context, but not much in the way of analytical approaches. The larger argument of the project is somewhat unformed; while it is clear that the specific history has something to say about larger issues, the main point of the project isn’t as clearly spelled out as it may be in an excellent one. Specific anecdotes appear to have shared themes in common; some of these may be explicitly spelled out. Regardless of format, the completed project is tidy and thoughtful -- competent if not outstanding. Web pages work properly, photographs are appropriate and generally clear, videos are generally clear and effective without major errors, papers are competent and adequately proofread, etc. Please see me for specific guidelines appropriate to your chosen format.

Weak projects are mostly narratives without analysis. There is some effort to place the specific topic or issue into a larger historical context, but it is not a strong effort. Such projects seem more concerned with telling a story than making a point, but they tell their stories in a fairly clear way. They tend to be more general than detailed, and there isn’t a strong, clear theme tying all the parts together. There is heavy reliance on secondary sources to provide basic information; the voice of the student author is quiet or difficult to distinguish from that of the sources. Regardless of format, the impression given is that of an amateur project. Xeroxes or grainy scans are hard to read or pasted in haphazardly, videos are poorly taped and edited and sound or visual quality is uneven, papers are poorly proofread, web pages have bad colors and poorly designed links, etc. Please see me for specific guidelines appropriate to your chosen format.

Failing projects address the assignment in only the most cursory way. The project may give the impression of being just a random collection of material rather than a thoughtful reflection on the topic or issue. The examples are vague or have no clear point to make. Sometimes, a failing project may be clear and well-produced, but not address the assignment. The project may draw so heavily on secondary sources that it borders on or includes plagiarism. Regardless of format, the project looks messy and slapdash. Visual materials fit poorly, papers are not proofread, videos are of poor quality and badly edited, web pages are broken, etc. Please see me for specific guidelines appropriate to your chosen format.

The final exam will assess what you have learned as a result of taking this course. Part of it will assess your familiarity with the readings; part of it will test your comprehension of important themes and elements; and part of it will ask you to reflect at greater length on what you have learned in this course.

You must come visit me in my office at least twice during the term -- once during the first half before break, and once during the second. This meeting should last at least fifteen minutes. During this time we will discuss anything related to the course that interests or concerns you -- the purpose of the visit is for you to learn where my office is, see what an office visit is like, and get help or feedback on course materials and topics. It is also a chance for me to get to know each of you on an individual basis. If you cannot make my regular office hours, please be sure to schedule an appointment.

BACK to Interests Page

BACK to St. Olaf Courses

BACK to ES259 Spring 2003