ASSIGNMENT OF INTERNET RESEARCH FOR CONTEMPORARY MORAL PROBLEMS

PHIL 2320: SPRING (II) 2001

Bob Corbett, instructor

THE RESEARCH ASSIGNMENT: PREPARATION HINTS; GRADING CRITERIA

• ASSIGNMENT: Find two papers on-line that are:
  1. Specifically relevant position papers on the topic under discussion.
  2. Are philosophically serious.
  Then, after identifying these papers:
  • E-mail the URL to Corbett at:
    Bob Corbett bobcorbett@earthlink.net
    
    Also mail to:
    
    
    Bob Corbett corbetre@webster.edu

  • The e-mail must have this form:
    1. The URL (eg: http://www......)
    2. The name of the article.
    3. The name of the author, or specify that the author is not named (a danger sign that you may not have a decent article.)
    4. Include a two sentence description of what one will find in these papers.
    5. Include a couple of sentences to explain why this article seems relevant to you for our particular discussion. What can we find there of particular interest?

• THINGS I WILL ESPECIALLY NOTE AND LOOK FOR IN GRADING THE RESEARCH WORK:
  1. Are the essays actually EXPLICITLY on the topic we are studying?
  2. Do the papers take and develop a stand on the topic?
  3. Are the papers philosophically serious?
  4. Are the papers from a refereed journal?
  5. Do the URLs actual work and lead somewhere? :)

• THE GRADES THEMSELVES:
  • A grade of A will mean:
    Two live, up and running URLs are reported and each is to a genuine serious philosophical papers from refereed journals on the topic under question. The accompanying short sentences are clear and revealing of what's found on the URLs. In order to be accepted for the grade of A they must be the first submission of that particular URL. If a student submits a URL which has already be submitted I will immediately notify the student by e-mail.
  • A grade of B will mean:
    
    1. Two live, up and running URLs are reported and are to a genuine serious philosophical papers on the topic under question. The accompanying short sentences are clear and revealing of what's found on the URL. Again, these must be the first submissions of these URLs.
    2. Or, two live, up and running URLs are reported, but either they are not quite as serious philosophically and I might wish, or they are not as clearly on the matter under discussion, or the sentences describing them are not as useful descriptions as one might expect. Again, these must be the first submissions of these URLs.
  • A grade of C will mean:
    Two very useful URLs are reported, and are up and running, but some minor problems of usefulness or accuracy are discovered. These must be the first submission of these URLs.
  • A grade of D will mean:
    Some more serious deviations from the criteria expressed above. These might papers that are not very relevant to the topic we are considering, or papers which are rather clearly not philosophically sophisticated, or the descriptive sentences are especially unhelpful in describing what's at the URLs.
  • A grade of F may mean anyone of four things:
    
    1. The assignment was not in my e-mail box on time.
    2. The first attempt was on time, but already used URLs were submitted and no unused URLs were submitted within one week of the original assignment.
    3. Significant failures to meet the assignment at the level of reasonable university level expectations of thought, attention to detail, attention to the time guidelines or presentation expectations. (Specifics will be pointed out).
    4. Some of the particular aspects of the assignment were ignored (length, form, separate of sections, etc.) or presented in quite unacceptable forms.

    Please note that any evidence of plagiarism, that is work that is not the student's own, will result not only is a grade of F for the paper, but for the entire course.

HOME