Ten percent of the grade for this class will come from a report that talks about the topics covered in weeks 13 through 14.
The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate your awareness of the themes we discussed.
Start your thinking with a quote from from an article about Norbert Wiener.
A good human life, according to Wiener, is one in which “great human values” are realized - one in which the creative and flexible information-processing potential of “the human sensorium” enables humans to reach their full promise in variety and possibility of action. Different people, of course, have various levels of talent and possibility, so one person's achievements will differ from another's. It is possible to lead a good human life in an indefinitely large number of ways: as a public servant or statesman, a teacher or scholar, a scientist or engineer, a musician, an artist, a tradesman, an artisan, and so on.
Wiener's view of the purpose of a human life leads him to adopt what he calls “great principles of justice” upon which a society should be built - principles that, in his view, would maximize a person's ability to flourish through variety and flexibility in human action
For this assignment, create the rough equivalent of a 2-5 page paper and place it in a the Sakai assignment space, [or the equivalent of a paper, if you wish. See below.] You may consult additional sources as you wish, but if you do, remember to include the citations in a bibliography at the end of your paper. Your paper will be evaluated according to your analysis of the decisions an individual would have had to have made in the situation described below.
This task should be done by your group and your group should turn in a single product that reflects the agreed position of your group.
To accomplish this task, you may submit a direct response in the Sakai assignments space with the rough equivalent of a 2-5 page paper.
Alternatively, you may attach (or place a link to) a document, a PowerPoint presentation, a Prezi presentation, or anything else that you choose to use to answer the questions in the Sakai assignments space.
|Points earned||What it means||A description of what it means|
|9.50 or better||Mastery in understanding the individual perspective in terms of identity, ethics, and loyalty at the highest level of attainment that can reasonably be expected||Well written with no grammatical errors, well-articulated discussion of the topic; it shows evidence of your having absorbed all of the key points of the individual module,|
|9.20 to 9.49||A totally acceptable performance demonstrating an adequate level of understanding the individual in terms of identity, ethics, and loyalty||An insightful discussion of the topic, with no grammatical errors. It is extremely good, but leaves the reader feeling that your understanding of the issues is perhaps a bit less than professionally sophisticated, in terms of depth of analysis.|
|8.70 to 9.19||Really good, but perhaps a bit shallower in terms of your understanding one or more of the contexts; you may have a few grammatical issues in your writing; you may not have used relevant examples to explain your points; you may not have fully addressed all the elements requested|
|8.30 to 8.69||Good, but perhaps a bit shallower in terms of your understanding several variants of the contexts; you may have several grammatical issues in your writing; you may not have used relevant examples to explain your points; you may not have fully addressed all the elements requested; you did not use terminology that we discussed in the module sessions|
|8.00 to 8.29||Good, but not as good as it could have been; you may not have fully addressed all the elements requested|
|7.60 to 7.99||A marginal performance.||OK, in terms of grasping the essentials, but not good in terms of articulating your understanding in a manner that is easy to read and appreciate|
|7.20 to 7.59||You seem to understand the essential points of the module, but you did not articulate your understanding well enough to do more than the minimum|
|7.00 to 7.19||It's time to start wondering if you missed something important, if you misunderstood the task, if you did not understand the key elements|
|6.60 to 6.99||This is a warning that you are not currently on the right path; you might need to have a discussion with the instructor about this performance|
|6.00 to 6.59||There are indications that you were present and that you sort of grasped what we had discussed, but missed the key points to such a degree that you really need to re-group and catch up|
|less than 6.00||For whatever reasons, an unacceptable performance||If it's unacceptable, it is unacceptable; it should be as obvious to you as it is to the instructor|
Copyright © R.E. Bergquist 2014- | Last Updated on | Powered by w3.css