Important dates

Midterm exam

The midterm exam will take place Monday and Wednesday, May 2 & 4. On Monday, you will take the test as you normally would. On Wednesday, you have the option of re-taking the test in a small group, where group members can discuss your answers before turning in one exam for the group (still closed book, though).

The individual portion of the exam (Monday’s test) will be worth 75% of your total grade for the test, and the group portion 25%. If you prefer, you can take the test again on Wednesday by yourself, or choose not take it again and settle for whatever grade you end up with from Monday’s test (sorry, I won’t have them graded …). If your group on the second day scores lower than you as an individual did the previous day, I will not lower your grade (i.e., I’ll give you 100% of the points based on your Monday, individual score). The point of this exercise is to, hopefully, turn the test into a learning exercise as well as an evaluation tool.

Worth 100 points.

return to top

Web site analysis: Critical thinking assignment

To do well on this assignment, you'll have to display your critical thinking talents.
On the course web page is a list of web sites related to the environment in some way. Here is the link. Your job is to choose one of these web sites, and evaluate it. There are three parts to this assignment:

1. Who’s behind the website (sponsoring organization(s), funders, etc.)? What is their interest in disseminating information about the environment? You might want to do some google searching to check up on the sponsors—things on the web are not always what they seem . . .
2. Website content. What kinds of content can you find, how current is the information, what is the quality of the content (i.e., is it written by the webmaster, by well-known scientists [and how would you find this out?], politicians, PR professionals, etc.), who seems to be the intended audience, etc.?
3. Functionality. Is it easy to navigate, intuitive, do you get lost, is there content that is hard to find because of poor design, is it full of commercial ads and banners, pop-ups, etc., are there 15 different font styles . . . does it look homemade, or is it the product of slick production and web authoring, etc.?

Critical thinking skills

I'll expect to see that you've done the following:

1. What reference sources does the site use (informational sources, scientific, news, watchdog, googled sources, etc.)?
2. Site history (any clues as to why it was created, either official or from critics?), what organizations/foundations are behind (i.e., funding/supporting) the site? How transparent is the site (how much can you learn about who’s behind it from their own content)? How is it funded?
3. Is the site deceptive? In what ways (concrete examples—think about the sources of information—where do they come from, are they credible/respected, etc.)? Do they use specific techniques of deception, ‘spin,’ references to patriotism, fear, smearing critics, referring to ‘junk science,’ etc.? To respond to this one, you will have to do some homework and examine some of the claims made by the site.
4. How effective is the site at communicating its information? What kinds of ‘experts’ are involved? Does it have links for journalists (is it trying to work its way into mainstream news)? Do other sites link to this one? Mainstream sites, or other like-minded sites? How easy is the site to navigate, how accessible is the information?
5. Production, graphics—is it slick, does it look homemade, like something the Unabomber would do?
6. Describe what you did, where you went, what research you undertook.

You’ll be evaluated on your description and analysis:

• Description of the site. The above should serve as a guide.
• Using evidence and logic to develop your points. Have you drawn on evidence from articles/online resources to support your points/conclusions?
• Assessing the authority. Have you evaluated the author’s / authority’s points of view, and their credibility in asserting these points of view (what are their credentials? Are they credible, reputable? Where do they get their funding?)
• Recognition of multiple dimensions of an issue. It isn’t enough to pick apart the website—all of these sites have valid points to make as well, and it is your job to explore the complexity of some of these issues—few are black and white—and to show me you understand both sides of an argument (you may disagree violently with one side, but you must show me you understand it).
  Keep in mind that this is a major, 100 point project, and will obviously require some detective work on your part—I want to know what the site is all about, what individuals or groups or corporations are behind it, what others may think or be writing about it (you might want to do a google search), in what kinds of activities they engage (e.g., do they specialize in natural resources, energy, environmental litigation, property rights, etc.), what is their philosophy, how do they engage in politics and where do they fall on the political spectrum (e.g., liberal, conservative, partisan, libertarian).

I expect a paper of 4-5 pages, and a good deal of analysis—I do not want summaries of content on specific pages. I want to know what the organization or website is all about, its audience, its strategy/techniques for communicating to its audience, etc. Are they who they appear to be, or are they hiding behind a phony-sounding name? On the list of websites are other web-based resources that will help you do some of this work, but I’d also recommend spending some time searching Google. Again, this is detective work. Some combination of these resources will be indispensable in doing this assignment:

The following sites will help you ask some critical questions about the site you’ve chosen:

• Cornell University Library page on website evaluation
• Esther Grassian, ‘Thinking critically about world wide web resources’
• Penn State University Library tutorial on evaluating web resources

The following resources will help you with your detective work about the site (i.e., learning all of the things you’re unlikely to find from the site itself--most of these have search functions):

• Sourcewatch (excellent for exposing PR and propaganda—good not only for listing and describing front groups, but specific individuals as well—use the search function liberally)
• Media Transparency (very good for identifying organizations funding front groups, and the non-profit foundations that support their work)
• Google it (see what other sites have to say about the one you’re researching)
• Multinational Monitor (for checking out some of the corporate sponsors)
• CorpWatch (more corporate watchdogism)
• Mapcruzin Greenwash page (a search on the term ‘greenwash’ would yield some useful sites)
  

For content research, these sites might prove helpful:

• ENN (Environmental News Network)
• Grist Magazine (more environmental news)
• Union of Concerned Scientists
• Natural Resources Defense Council
• Rep. Henry Waxman's Committee on Government Reform

I will be looking to see that you used outside sources to analyze your website and write your papers. You should cite all of the sources, web-based or otherwise, that you use at the end of your paper. APA style is fine, or you can use the format I use when citing articles or web pages. But you need to cite all the sources you use.

Point breakdown:

1. Thoughtful analysis: 40 points
2. Good research, use of sources: 30 points
3. Covered all of the elements of the assignment: 10 points
4. Documented sources: 5 points
5. Evidence you've proofread: 5 points

100 points possible. These papers are due Monday, May 23. Use the above assignment description as a checklist—your final grade will reflect how faithfully you followed it. Papers should be submitted in Blackboard--you'll find a link there. Submit it as a file (but not Word Perfect or .wps), and also paste it into the field to make sure I receive it at least one way.

Link to signup sheet

Class participation: Attendance and Small Group Discussion

You’ll be rewarded for attending class—60 points are possible (2 pts for each day of class). We'll have a sign-up sheet every day. The readings will be posted beneath the regular readings for the week.

Another part of your participation grade will involve discussion groups, occurring on Fridays of weeks 2, 4, 7 and 9. I will assign a separate group of readings (generally pretty short), which can be found in the readings schedule page (under ‘Friday Discussion’ right below the regular readings for the week). You will need to read these ahead of time, and write an ‘abstract’—a brief summary and analysis, 250 words should be sufficient (about a page typewritten, double-spaced)—of the readings to bring to class on the day of discussion. In class groups will be given a set of 4-5 questions to which they’ll respond. Discussions will be on topical issues—nuclear power, tourism, use of plastic bags, carbon footprints. Each discussion is worth 35 points—10 points possible for turning in the abstract, 25 possible for the group responses to the questions in class.

For full credit on the abstract, you’ll need to:

• Demonstrate you’ve done each of the assigned readings (through a very brief summary);
• Demonstrate you got something out of the readings (the abstract should end with some analysis on your part—what did you get out of the readings?)

Making up small group discussions

You can make up one of these (out of four—possibility of a second make-up on a case-by-case basis). The make-up requires you to do what you would have done had you attended: First, you need to do an abstract (summary and analysis) of the readings. Second, I will post the questions the groups responded to on the course website (in the readings schedule page--look for the link to 'make up' questions). You should spend the same amount of time on these as you would have in the groups. This can be turned in electronically--combine the abstract and question responses into one file, and you can send it as an email attachment.

top of page

Writing assignments--some guidance

Format

I'd like you to stick with double-spaced, or 1 1/2 spacing, with margins that give enough room for comments. You don't need a cover page, but your name and the class will be a big help in identifying you. As always, do your own work. Cite sources whose ideas you've used (ON TOP of doing your own work ... ). They should be cited where they're used in the text (for example, Smith 1979), and they should be cited at the end of the assignment in the references section. The standards I'm interested in are these: if it's not your own work or idea, cite it; you need to provide enough information so that I could go find the article in the library or on the Web. As for using web-based sources, you may want to be a little more cautious (the Web Resources page has some links to sites that have good advice on evaluating content on the Web). Penn State University has a good web page for citing sources--take the time to go through some of it and you won't be sorry.

Content

Unless specified otherwise, the focus should be on analysis over summary or description. You need summary and description to set up the analysis, but the analysis is most important--it shows you're thinking. I'm not looking for book reports--I want to be able to see you thinking on paper. Headings, or at the least paragraphs, are a big help for the reader as well as the author (they should help you figure out what your main points are, and whether or how they're tied together). As far as the length of the assignment, the short 'periodic' assignments are sometimes the trickiest. You need to be pretty efficient in your use of words--4-5 pages doesn't mean easy, it means make your points quickly, make sure the reader knows what they are, support them with evidence, eliminate unnecessary verbiage, and get out.

And above all, proofread. You will lose points if you haven't proofread.

Grammar/spelling

By mid-term, I'll start deducting credit on writing assignments if they get in the way of me understanding the points you're trying to make. If you're having trouble, see me or go to the University's Writing Lab. They are not an editing service, but the tutors there can help you think through the writing process, which often solves minor editing problems. And please please please have your work proofread--spill checkers will be tray yew given heiffer chants.

Turning in assignments electronically

You may turn the assignment in electronically, as an attachment sent to me. I prefer it actually--my handwriting is pretty bad if not illegible. However, sometimes attachments won't open at the other end, because they're in the wrong format, sent from a Mac to a PC, etc. I'd suggest sending electronic files either in MS Word, or rtf format. I use a PC. I will confirm that I received your assignment--so don't send it and leave town, or you might regret it, maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon, and for the rest of your life . . .
Strike that. Anyway, wait for confirmation.

The 'P' word: Cite your sources!

Just a reminder about plagiarism. It's using someone else's work or ideas and claiming them as your own. It violates the spirit of the learning process, and anyone caught plagiarizing will receive an 'F' for the assignment, and possibly for the course. Much better to cite others' works properly. Who knows--one day you may be the ones whose brilliant ideas are being stolen. Again, you might want to check out a tutorial on citing others' works.

The big picture

Keep in mind the intent of the assignment--not to turn in something for a grade, but to demonstrate to a discerning audience what you've learned, and how it can be applied. Use common sense, think about how important the subject matter of this course is to real-life human beings, and show some perspective.