William Perry claimed (and his claims have been substantiated by subsequent research) that college students (but others, too) "journey" through 9 "positions" with respect to intellectual (and moral) development. These stages can be characterized in terms of the student's attitude towards knowledge. The 9 positions, grouped into 4 categories, are:

  1. Dualism/Received Knowledge:
    There are right/wrong answers, engraved on Golden Tablets in the sky, known to Authorities.
    1. Basic Duality:
      All problems are solvable;
      Therefore, the student's task is to learn the Right Solutions
    2. Full Dualism:
      Some Authorities (literature, philosophy) disagree;
      others (science, math) agree.
      Therefore, there are Right Solutions, but some teachers' views of the Tablets are obscured.
      Therefore, student's task is to learn the Right Solutions and ignore the others!
  2. Multiplicity/Subjective Knowledge:
    There are conflicting answers;
    therefore, students must trust their "inner voices", not external Authority.
    1. Early Multiplicity:
      There are 2 kinds of problems:
      • those whose solutions we know
      • those whose solutions we don't know yet (thus, a kind of dualism).
        Student's task is to learn how to find the Right Solutions.
    2. Late Multiplicity:
      Most problems are of the second kind;
      therefore, everyone has a right to their own opinion; or
      some problems are unsolvable;
      therefore, it doesn't matter which (if any) solution you choose.

Student's task is to shoot the bull.
(Most freshman are at this position, which is a kind of relativism)

At this point, some students become alienated, and either retreat to an earlier ("safer") position ("I think I'll study math, not literature, because there are clear answers and not as much uncertainty") or else escape (drop out) ("I can't stand college; all they want is right answers" or else "I can't stand college; no one gives you the right answers".)

  1. Relativism/Procedural Knowledge:
    There are disciplinary reasoning methods:
    Connected knowledge: empathetic (why do you believe X?; what does this poem say to me?)
    vs. Separated knowledge: "objective analysis" (what techniques can I use to analyze this poem?)
    1. Contextual Relativism:
      All proposed solutions are supported by reasons;
      i.e., must be viewed in context & relative to support.
      Some solutions are better than others, depending on context.
      Student's task is to learn to evaluate solutions.
    2. "Pre-Commitment":
      Student sees the necessity of:
      • making choices
      • committing to a solution
  1. Commitment/Constructed Knowledge:
    Integration of knowledge learned from others with personal experience and reflection.
    1. Commitment:
      Student makes a commitment.
    2. Challenges to Commitment:
      Student experiences implications of commitment.
      Student explores issues of responsibility.
    3. "Post-Commitment":
      Student realizes commitment is an ongoing, unfolding, evolving activity

The journey is sometimes repeated; and one can be at different stages at the same time with respect to different subjects.

From  http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/perry.positions.html 

 

Journal #1 Prompts

Discussion Questions from  http://us.penguingroup.com/static/rguides/us/kite_runner.html

1.      The novel begins with Amir's memory of peering down an alley, looking for Hassan who is kite running for him. As Amir peers into the alley, he witnesses a tragedy. The novel ends with Amir kite running for Hassan's son, Sohrab, as he begins a new life with Amir in America. Why do you think the author chooses to frame the novel with these scenes? Refer to the following passage: "Afghans like to say: Life goes on, unmindful of beginning, end...crisis or catharsis, moving forward like a slow, dusty caravan of kochis [nomads]." How is this significant to the framing of the novel?

2. The strong underlying force of this novel is the relationship between Amir and Hassan. Discuss their friendship. Why is Amir afraid to be Hassan's true friend? Why does Amir constantly test Hassan's loyalty? Why does he resent Hassan? After the kite running tournament, why does Amir no longer want to be Hassan's friend?

3. Early in Amir and Hassan's friendship, they often visit a pomegranate tree where they spend hours reading and playing. "One summer day, I used one of Ali's kitchen knives to carve our names on it: 'Amir and Hassan, the sultans of Kabul.' Those words made it formal: the tree was ours." In a letter to Amir later in the story, Hassan mentions that "the tree hasn't borne fruit in years." Discuss the significance of this tree.

4. We begin to understand early in the novel that Amir is constantly vying for Baba's attention and often feels like an outsider in his father's life, as seen in the following passage: "He'd close the door, leave me to wonder why it was always grown-ups time with him. I'd sit by the door, knees drawn to my chest. Sometimes I sat there for an hour, sometimes two, listening to their laughter, their chatter." Discuss Amir's relationship with Baba.

5. After Amir wins the kite running tournament, his relationship with Baba undergoes significant change. However, while they form a bond of friendship, Amir is still unhappy. What causes this unhappiness and how has Baba contributed to Amir's state of mind? Eventually, the relationship between the two returns to the way it was before the tournament, and Amir laments "we actually deceived ourselves into thinking that a toy made of tissue paper, glue, and bamboo could somehow close the chasm between us." Discuss the significance of this passage.

6. As Amir remembers an Afghan celebration in which a sheep must be sacrificed, he talks about seeing the sheep's eyes moments before its death. "I don't know why I watch this yearly ritual in our backyard; my nightmares persist long after the bloodstains on the grass have faded. But I always watch, I watch because of that look of acceptance in the animal's eyes. Absurdly, I imagine the animal understands. I imagine the animal sees that its imminent demise is for a higher purpose." Why do you think Amir recalls this memory when he witnesses Hassan's tragedy in the alleyway? Amir recollects the memory again toward the end of the novel when he sees Sohrab in the home of the Taliban. Discuss the image in the context of the novel.

7. America acts as a place for Amir to bury his memories and a place for Baba to mourn his. In America, there are "homes that made Baba's house in Wazir Akbar Khan look like a servant's hut." What is ironic about this statement? What is the function of irony in this novel?

8. What is the significance of the irony in the first story that Amir writes? After hearing Amir's story, Hassan asks, "Why did the man kill his wife? In fact, why did he ever have to feel sad to shed tears? Couldn't he have just smelled an onion?" How is his reaction to the story a metaphor for Amir's life? How does this story epitomize the difference in character between Hassan and Amir?

9. Why is Baba disappointed by Amir's decision to become a writer? During their argument about his career path, Amir thinks to himself: "I would stand my ground, I decided. I didn't want to sacrifice for Baba anymore. The last time I had done that, I had damned myself." What has Amir sacrificed for Baba? How has Amir "damned himself"?

10. Compare and contrast the relationships of Soraya and Amir and their fathers. How have their upbringings contributed to these relationships?

11. Discuss how the ever-changing politics of Afghanistan affect each of the characters in the novel.

12. On Amir's trip back to Afghanistan, he stays at the home of his driver, Farid. Upon leaving he remarks: "Earlier that morning, when I was certain no one was looking, I did something I had done twenty-six years earlier: I planted a fistful of crumpled money under the mattress." Why is this moment so important in Amir's journey?

13. Throughout the story, Baba worries because Amir never stands up for himself. When does this change?

14. Amir's confrontation with Assef in Wazir Akar Khan marks an important turning point in the novel. Why does the author have Amir, Assef, and Sohrab all come together in this way? What is this the significance of the scar that Amir develops as a result of the confrontation? Why is it important in Amir's journey toward forgiveness and acceptance?

15. While in the hospital in Peshawar, Amir has a dream in which he sees his father wrestling a bear: "They role over a patch of grass, man and beast...they fall to the ground with a loud thud and Baba is sitting on the bear's chest, his fingers digging in its snout. He looks up at me, and I see. He's me. I am wrestling the bear." Why is this dream so important at this point in the story? What does this dream finally help Amir realize?

16. Amir and Hassan have a favorite story. Does the story have the same meaning for both men? Why does Hassan name his son after one of the characters in the story?

17. Baba and Amir know that they are very different people. Often it disappoints both of them that Amir is not the son that Baba has hoped for. When Amir finds out that Baba has lied to him about Hassan, he realizes that "as it turned out, Baba and I were more alike than I'd never known." How does this make Amir feel about his father? How is this both a negative and positive realization?

18. When Amir and Baba move to the States their relationship changes, and Amir begins to view his father as a more complex man. Discuss the changes in their relationship. Do you see the changes in Baba as tragic or positive?

19. Discuss the difference between Baba and Ali and between Amir and Hassan. Are Baba's and Amir's betrayals and similarities in their relationships of their servants (if you consider Baba's act a betrayal) similar or different? Do you think that such betrayals are inevitable in the master/servant relationship, or do you feel that they are due to flaws in Baba's and Amir's characters, or are they the outcome of circumstances and characters?

 

Journal 2 Prompt

For journal two, read the last half of The Kite Runner.  Write your journal  on the subject of whether the U.S. should continue military intervention in Afghanistan or not.  Use the Case Study  Multiple Perspectives exercise on CT-18 B in the Quick Coach Guide to Critical Thinking as the template for the assignment.  Include your personal view point, an opposing view point, and one other view point similar to, yet different than, either yours or the opposing viewpoint.   

 

WEEK 4

Group Work (Part 1)

1. Formulate an argument regarding the war in Afghanistan based on what we might infer is Hosseini's point of view in The Kite Runner.

2. List examples from The Kite Runner that could be used as support for this argument.

2. What could a counter argument (or rebuttal) be?  What would the evidence for this argument be?

4. What seems to be the stronger argument? Why?

 

Group Work (Part 2)

1. Read each group members' journal #2. 

2. When finished, discuss the range of perspectives in the group.  Note the personal points of views, the opposite points of view, and the "third" perspectives.

3. Be prepared to give the class an overview of the kinds of material your group covered.

 

Eng/Phil 13                            Essay 1                  Mumford

 

The topic of the first essay is Afghanistan and whether or not continued military intervention is the best action to take.   You must formulate a clear position and give us the context for your point of view.  You must use examples primarily from The Kite Runner.  You must also use at least two other academically acceptable sources (as discussed in class).  Once again, this essay is literary persuasion so the examples you use to develop your position must be primarily culled from the novel.  The paper is to be at least 1100 words long.  Please print out the word count and attach at the end of the essay.  The essay is to be in MLA format, double spaced, with twelve point font.  This essay will be taken in-class.  We will spend two hours taking the test.  You may use your notes, book, and articles.  You will need large blue books, enough to accommodate your essay and handwriting.   

 

Journal 3 (For 9/22)
For next Monday, read Section C and D in Quick Coach and Chapter One in The Middle East Opposing Viewpoints. For your assigned article 1-4, identify 1) the main claim and type of claim and 2) the main reasons provided and what the reasons appeal to (logic, ethos, and/or pathos). 3) Then, reflect on the warrants that an audience might have about the issue in your article. 4) Finally, reflect on whether the argument uses deductive or inductive reasoning and why. (500 word minimum. Put count on the page.)
 

CLASS ACTIVITY 9/22:

DEBATE STRUCTURE

   The stater . This person will be primarily responsible for stating the position taken by the group. He or she will bring up, point by point, the issues inherent in each part of the argument. A prepared written outline may be quite helpful, but direct reading of a prepared statement will not be appropriate. A conversational presentation of the position in the stater's own words will be much more acceptable. The stater will also be responsible for watching the flow of the arguments. At the end, the stater will summarize, recap, and state which of the points made can be salvaged to ultimately support the team's position.

   The prover . The prover will be responsible for citing relevant research to back up any of the statements given by the stater. He or she must have intimate knowledge of the empirical content of the positions taken and should understand the research supporting the side chosen. The prover can do well by looking up outside sources in order to strengthen the stater's arguments. He or she can support points by using survey data gathered in class or outside. Any effort (short of murder) is legitimate for generating support for a position. However, the prover will be "attacked" at some length by the opposition--so he or she had better be able to back up his or her supporting data. It should be empirical and responsible.

   The attacker . The attacker will be responsible for probing the opposite team for weaknesses in their arguments. He or she may question data, disprove, counter, and use any rational method to discredit the opposition's position or data. An appreciation for research design and data analysis may help the attacker. It is also strongly suggested that the attacker be very familiar with the articles and materials being used by the opposing team. Unless role-playing is extremely good, personal attacks are considered in poor taste. The questioner may insult one of the authors but should refrain from attacking the student who has that position.


A given debate will consist of the following sequence:

Coin flip to determine sides

    •         Pro--the pro stater makes his or her points.  (2 minutes)
    •         Con--the con stater defines his or her counterpoints. (2 minutes)
    •         Pro--the pro prover brings on his or her evidence. (8 minutes)
    •         Con--the con prover delivers his or her data. (8 minutes)
    •         Pro--the pro attacker can move in. (5 minutes)
    •         Con--the con attacker can respond in kind. (5 minutes)

 8 minutes preparation/conference time – audience formulates questions

    •         Pro--the pro stater salvages all the undamaged arguments he or she has left and makes a summary. (2 minutes)

                            Con--the con stater salvages the intact arguments that are left and makes a concluding statement. (2 minutes)

 

Audience questions and discussion

 

Grading for all debates may be based on the following evaluation criteria:

  • Use of supporting materials outside of the Taking Sides readings.
  • Grasp of the issue and important related points.
  • Proper use of supporting empirical evidence.
  • Realization of points of agreement and points of disagreement.
  • The ability to anticipate and counter opposing viewpoints.
  • Use of supporting points not suggested by Taking Sides introductions.
  • The ability to see and challenge flaws in the opposition's arguments and research as well as one's own flaws.
  • Use of constructive criticism and rationales.
  • The ability to make the topic relevant to the audience and/or opposition (if there is one).
  • The ability to anticipate questions.
  • The ability to ask appropriate questions.

 

 

Journal 4 (For 9/29)
For next Monday, read Section E in Quick Coach and Chapter Two in The Middle East Opposing Viewpoints. For your assigned article 1-4, identify 1) the main claim and type of claim and 2) the main reasons provided and what the reasons appeal to (logic, ethos, and/or pathos). 3) Then, analyze which fallacies are present. 4) Finally, evaluate the argument and its author for potential biases. (500 word minimum. Put count on the page.)

 

Additionally, bring one article per person in your group from page 92 in support of your argument.  Attach to journal.

 

Journal 5 (10/06)

Same as Journal 4 except for Chapter 3 in The Middle East Opposing Viewpoints.  Use your assigned article 1-4 to write the journal.  Bring in one additional article.

 

Eng/Phil 13   Mumford     Essay 2

In essay two you will argue for one out of the four perspectives debated in class (see group assignments for debate on web page).  In this essay, you will denote a clear position.  You must use at least two additional peer-reviewed sources (one pro, one con) in addition to The Middle East as evidence for your argument giving necessary background and context.  Also, you must examine any warrants (CT-29), or underlying beliefs, that lead you to have the view you do.  Finally, you must also address the rebuttals (CT-30) to your position.  Be cautious to avoid absolute statements and bombastic language.  The essay must be in MLA format and 1100 words long.   

1st draft, at least 500 words, due 10/20
Final draft, due 10/27

 

For  Monday 10/27:

Read chapters 1-9 in Zinn’s A Power Governments Cannot Express.  In your journal, identify the main idea of one of the chapters.  What support does Zinn use?  What appeals and fallacies are present.  Use specific examples.  Lastly, what kind of an audience do you think Zinn is writing for?  How can you tell? 

 

For Monday 11/17:  Essay 3 due

Essay pointers

-Give author, title, background, and context of all sources.  Don’t assume we will know what the source is or why it is being used.

-Cite all sources—if you didn’t know it before you read it, cite it.

-General template for using sources—topic/main idea sentence of paragraph, source (paraphrase or direct quote), interpretation/analysis of source

-Last name and page #s

-Word count at end

 

 

For Week 15

 

Phil/Eng 13       Mumford          Argumentative Research Essay 3          

 

In the final essay, you will choose a theme developed in at least three of Zinn’s essays in A Power Governments Cannot Suppress.  You will develop your own claim and clear position regarding your topic.  You will then provide evidence supporting your claim from at least three peer reviewed sources in addition to Zinn’s essays (for a total of six sources).  You must include an opposing viewpoint.  The essay is to be 2000 words in length and in MLA format.

11/24   3 articles, annotated bibliography, and prospectus due

12/1     1000 words due

12/8     Full length draft due  

12/15   8pm     Final draft due

 

Annotated bibliography: A bibliography with a brief summary no more than 100-150 words long of each source . 

 

Prospectus: A proposal that states what the main argument will be and how the argument will be supported.  It is an outline in prose form.  Your prospectus will need to contain the other side’s argument.  You might also briefly mention any warrants to your argument.  Should be about three hundred words or one page.

 

 

SOCRATIC QUESTIONING from http://changingminds.org/techniques/questioning/socratic_questions.htm

Socrates was one of the greatest educators who taught by asking questions and thus drawing out (as 'ex duco', meaning to 'lead out', which is the root of 'education') answers from his pupils. Sadly, he martyred himself by drinking hemlock rather than compromise his principles. Bold, but not a good survival strategy. But then he lived very frugally and was known for his eccentricity. His pupils, by the way, include Plato and Aristotle. Plato wrote up much what we know of him.

Here are the six types of questions that Socrates asked his pupils. Probably often to their initial annoyance but more often to their ultimate delight. He was a man of remarkable integrity and his story makes for marvelous reading.

The overall purpose, by the way, is to challenge accuracy and completeness of thinking in a way that acts to move people towards their ultimate goal. Don't waste time by doing it for your own gratification. Get your kicks vicariously, from the movement you create.

Conceptual clarification questions

Get them to think more about what exactly they are asking or thinking about. Prove the concepts behind their argument. Basic 'tell me more' questions that get them to go deeper.

  • Why are you saying that?
  • What exactly does this mean?
  • How does this relate to what we have been talking about?
  • What is the nature of ...?
  • What do we already know about this?
  • Can you give me an example?
  • Are you saying ... or ... ?
  • Can you rephrase that, please?

Probing assumptions

Probing of assumptions makes them think about the presuppositions and unquestioned beliefs on which they are founding their argument. This is shaking the bedrock and should get them really going!

  • What else could we assume?
  • You seem to be assuming ... ?
  • How did you choose those assumptions?
  • Please explain why/how ... ?
  • How can you verify or disprove that assumption?
  • What would happen if ... ?
  • Do you agree or disagree with ... ?

Probing rationale, reasons and evidence

When they give a rationale for their arguments, dig into that reasoning rather than assuming it is a given. People often use un-thought-through or weakly understood supports for their arguments.

  • Why is that happening?
  • How do you know this?
  • Show me ... ?
  • Can you give me an example of that?
  • What do you think causes ... ?
  • What is the nature of this?
  • Are these reasons good enough?
  • Would it stand up in court?
  • How might it be refuted?
  • How can I be sure of what you are saying?
  • Why is ... happening?
  • Why? (keep asking it -- you'll never get past a few times)
  • What evidence is there to support what you are saying?
  • On what authority are you basing your argument?

Questioning viewpoints and perspectives

Most arguments are given from a particular position. So attack the position. Show that there are other, equally valid, viewpoints.

  • Another way of looking at this is ..., does this seem reasonable?
  • What alternative ways of looking at this are there?
  • Why it is ... necessary?
  • Who benefits from this?
  • What is the difference between... and...?
  • Why is it better than ...?
  • What are the strengths and weaknesses of...?
  • How are ... and ... similar?
  • What would ... say about it?
  • What if you compared ... and ... ?
  • How could you look another way at this?

Probe implications and consequences

The argument that they give may have logical implications that can be forecast. Do these make sense? Are they desirable?

  • Then what would happen?
  • What are the consequences of that assumption?
  • How could ... be used to ... ?
  • What are the implications of ... ?
  • How does ... affect ... ?
  • How does ... fit with what we learned before?
  • Why is ... important?
  • What is the best ... ? Why?

Questions about the question

And you can also get reflexive about the whole thing, turning the question in on itself. Use their attack against themselves. Bounce the ball back into their court. Etc.

  • What was the point of asking that question?
  • Why do you think I asked this question?
  • What does that mean?