Upload
jeffery-bishop
View
218
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Submission 3 Outcomes• Identify the issues associated with the controversy, the arguments made
by stakeholders, and the plans each side is making to ensure their position is the one enacted;
• Evaluate the argumentation of each position, including an analysis of logic and evidence;
• Evaluate each position from the perspective of moral reasoning, including an analysis of values, obligations, consequences, and normative principles;
How Many Experts
• Two total– 1 For Each Side
• You must include the contact information in your research file
• No anonymous interviews
Finding interviewees
• Ask your professors
• Check the internet
• Elected officials
• LBJ School/UT
• Interest groups in Town
Writing your questionnaire
• P 69-74 in Handbook• Ask About issues (3-5 questions)
• Ask About moral reasoning (consequences)
• Ask About your conclusion/solutionAsk each interviewee the same questions.
WRONG QUESTIONS!
• What do you know about the controversy?
• Where do you stand on the controversy? (This is too much in your face)
• Personal information, questions that put people in awkward situations.
Setting up the interviews
• Start now.
• Contact at least 3X as many people as you need.
• Be professional – these people are doing you a favor.
• Prepare to describe Capstone and your controversy quickly.
Setting Up the Interviews
• Have a phone where you can be reached or a message can be left.
• Ask for a time you can call back.
• Ask for referrals.
• Be persistent.
Be Safe
• Meet in a professional place
• Bring Back-up if necessary
• Stop the interview if you feel uncomfortable
Conducting the interview
• Be on time.
• Dress appropriately.
• Taping:– Pre-ask– Be prepared
• Take notes efficiently.
Conducting the Interview
• Listen.– You are a reporter, not a debater.
• Maintain control. – Keep the interview focused.
• Remain courteous and open-minded.
• Thank you note- you are representing future generations of St. Edward’s students.
Writing Up the Results of Interviews
• Do it as soon as possible
• You can always come back to it
• You will address this in your final oral presentation and paper
Write-up: The analysis
• “Feel” of the interviews
• Interviewees:– Knowledgeable?– Open-minded?– Demeanor?
• Did they change your mind on the issue?
Civic Engagement and the Mission Statement of SEU
• The University mission urges you to take action to solve problems
• You are required to take action supporting your position
Requirements
• Part of Your Final Oral Presentation
• It does not need to be particularly extensive or time consuming.
• It should be an action that connects your project with the problem
What you can do
• Attend a meeting of involved groups• Speak to a group• Attend a march• Circulate petitions• Volunteer• Write a letter- you must turn the letter and
stamped envelop into me so that I can mail it (verification)
What you cannot do
• Plan to take an action• Make a Donation- this
is too easy, and too effective
• Sign up for a Newsletter
• Anything else that does not consist of a concrete action
The Reality
• In politics, one person really cannot make a difference unless they are politically, socially, or economically important
• Grassroots is a euphemism for either “poor” or “unorganized”
• Money is the best form of political activity because it converts itself and it is identifiable
Understanding this…
• You should consider an activity that involves the greatest political impact
• Involves the least cost (direct, indirect, opportunity)
• Fulfills the requirements of the paper
Writing Up Civic Engagement
• This appears in your second presentation
• It appears in written form in the final submission– what you did– why– Expected Political Impact – how it impacted you,
others (reflection)
Part I: CRITICAL THINKING:Analysis of argumentation and Evidence
• Evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of each side’s body of argumentation– Each argument and related evidence– Evaluate the arguments presented in paper 2, not your
own!
• Think of each major argument as a question needed to answer– Will Keystone XL pipeline reduce the price of oil?– Will the Dream act reduce illegal immigration?
Part II: Moral Reasoning• Obligations (of each side)
• Values (held by each side)
• Consequences (potentially coming from position)
• Foundational normative principles (supporting case)– Other normative principles (supporting case)
Part III: Tentative Solution
• Your answer to the thesis question
• You must take a stand, i.e., answer the question– Note reservations, if you have any
• Support your position
Mechanics
• 6-8 pages long (estimate only)• Critical thinking = 3 pages• Moral reasoning = 3 pages• solution = 1 pages
• Full Works Cited (at least 25 total sources)
• Writing = as perfect as you can make it
• MLA format = as perfect as possible
MORAL REASONING
• A methodology to help people deal with moral dilemmas
• The Key to doing well on paper 3
Moral Reasoning and Paper 3
• Your paper has a value-laden problem
• Paper 3 uses moral reasoning to assess the moral components of each position
• Read 61-67 and 121-134 of the Handbook
Moral Reasoning Requirements for the Capstone Project
• For Each Side in Paper 3 you must identify analyze for the proponents and opponents– The Obligations inherent in the position– The Values underlying the position– The potential consequences of the position– The position in terms of the normative principles
and theories that support it
USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY
1. Study the details of the case
2. Identify the relevant criteria• Obligations• Values• Consequences
3. Identify the foundational values at play4. Determine courses of action
5. Choose the most morally responsible action
USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY
1. Study the details of the case– sometimes there are not enough details to satisfy
the three criteria. – Use creative thinking to speculate about possible
answers, depending on different imagined details.
USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY
Identify the relevant criteria• Here you should identify the obligations,
values and consequences. • Whom will they affect, in what way. • Consider which of the three is most
important in the given case. • Many times with public policy, you will find
the consequences to be the most important.
USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY
• Determine possible course of action- consider all the choices of action that are available.
• It is only in rare circumstances that an individual has just one course of action. – E.g. adopt, reject the policy
USING THE CRITERIA IN A SYSTEMATIC WAY
• Choose the action that is most morally responsible after reviewing the information above