This is a Global Module that would fit in very well with our second year Core class, COR 240: Capitalism & Democracy. It would be a good fit for Economics or Sociology classes as well.
Inequality
Week 1
Let’s take the opportunity to get to know each other. You’ll find three folders in the Week 1 area, one called Introductions, one called Perceptions, and one called Questions.
During a normal week, unless otherwise directed, always remember to post at least two times.
We’ll begin our reading and discussing next week. With this in mind, we want you to do a few things this first week.
1. Post an introduction in the Introduction folder. What are your interests? Do you have experience travelling overseas? What do you hope to learn in the Global Module? Also, take the opportunity to greet your fellow students and find out more about them. Be sure to include contact information such as your email address or IM.
2. What are your perceptions of your partners in the Global Module? For the _____ students, what do you think of the US? For the American students, what do you think of when you think of _____? Post your initial views in the Perceptions folder.
3. Post any questions that you might have in the Questions folder. Some of you are probably quite experienced in working online, and might have even participated in Global Modules before, and could help out your classmates if they have any concerns.
Keep in mind that you should always feel free to contribute to the Casual Conversations folders found elsewhere on the site. Feel free to introduce a topic or post questions. The password for the Casual Conversations folder is: moose.
Thanks, and we’re really looking forward to getting started.
Week 2
This week we begin our discussion of inequality. We will be using four short articles. The following links take you to the Global Issues website, which provides information on poverty (http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats), and to a portion of the Millennium Development Goals (http://www.undp.org/mdg/goal1.shtml) website. In addition, we will be reading the Nobel Prize speech of the 2006 recipient, Muhammad Yunus (http://nobelpeaceprize.org/en_GB/laureates/laureates-2006/yunus-lecture/), as well as a description of microfinance from the Grameen Bank site (http://www.grameen-info.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=28&Itemid=108). Please follow these links and read the four articles.
Once you have read the texts you will answer a series of questions. You will be required to post answers at least twice, although you can contribute more often if you wish. You can either post an original answer to a question or comment on the posting of another student. Either way, your postings should be detailed and analytical. If you are late posting for the week do not simply answer a question that has already been answered by another student – contribute in a new way. Build upon your fellow students’ answers. Think of it as the class as a whole answering the question.
1. How bad of a problem is global poverty? Is it getting better or worse?
2. What are the biggest obstacles to bringing about change?
3. What are the Millennium Development Goals? How can they help to decrease global poverty?
4. In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech Muhammad Yunus proposed that “Poverty is the absence of all human rights.” What does this mean?
5. What is microfinancing? How does it work?
Week 3
Let’s continue our discussion this week, focusing on specific examples from our two countries. Work on the following question. Be sure to post at least twice this week.
1. How In his Nobel Prize acceptance speech Muhammad Yunus proposed that “Poverty is a threat to peace.” Do you believe him?
2. How serious of a problem is poverty in your own country?
3. Can you suggest specific actions for reducing poverty on an individual or community level?
4. Can you suggest specific actions for reducing footprints on a national or global level?
Week 4
Sadly, it’s already time to say goodbye. Each student should post at least once this week.
1. What have we learned about poverty in our two countries, and in the larger world?
2. Do we have an obligation to try and end global poverty?
3. What have we learned about each other and ourselves from this discussion?
4. Would you like to say goodbye to your new friends? What do you want them to know about your country?
In addition, Champlain College students should write a short reflective piece to be posted in their ePortfolio. What did you learn from the process? What were the similarities and differences that you discovered? What might explain them? What political, religious or cultural influences shaped these views? Are the viewpoints expressed in the Global Module shaped more by personal or larger societal influences?
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Human Rights Global Module
This Global Module fits in very well with a second year course we offer at Champlain entitled Capitalism & Democracy. It would be a good fit for many political science or international relations or constitutional courses.
Human Rights – Universal or Relative?
Week 1
Let’s take the opportunity to get to know each other. You’ll find three folders in the Week 1 area, one called Introductions, one called Perceptions, and one called Questions.
During a normal week, unless otherwise directed, always remember to post at least two times.
We’ll begin our reading and discussing next week. With this in mind, we want you to do a few things this first week.
1. Post an introduction in the Introduction folder. What are your interests? Do you have experience travelling overseas? What do you hope to learn in the Global Module? Also, take the opportunity to greet your fellow students and find out more about them. Be sure to include contact information such as your email address or IM.
2. What are your perceptions of your partners in the Global Module? For the _____ students, what do you think of the US? For the American students, what do you think of when you think of _____? Post your initial views in the Perceptions folder.
3. Post any questions that you might have in the Questions folder. Some of you are probably quite experienced in working online, and might have even participated in Global Modules before, and could help out your classmates if they have any concerns.
Keep in mind that you should always feel free to contribute to the Casual Conversations folders found elsewhere on the site. Feel free to introduce a topic or post questions. The password for the Casual Conversations folder is: moose.
Thanks, and we’re really looking forward to getting started.
Week 2
This week we begin our discussion of human rights. We will be using two short texts. The first is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html); the second is the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/cairodeclaration.html). Please follow these links and read the two declarations.
These two declarations represent two different approaches to the issue of human rights. One is from a universalist perspective, while the other focuses on a particular cultural and social context for human rights. By reading and discussing both of them we can gain a better understanding of how different societies interpret the concept of human rights.
Once you have read the texts you will answer a series of questions. You will be required to post answers at least twice, although you can contribute more often if you wish. You can either post an original answer to a question or comment on the posting of another student. Either way, your postings should be detailed and analytical. If you are late posting for the week do not simply answer a question that has already been answered by another student – contribute in a new way. Build upon your fellow students’ answers. Think of it as the class as a whole answering the question.
1. Look at the dates for both of these proclamations. Do the eras in which they were issued affect their content? Why and how?
2. What organizations promulgated each declaration? How might the goals of these organizations differ, and how might those differences affect the declarations?
3. In compare this, from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
“Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all people and all nations, to the end that each individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.”
With this, from the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam:
“Believing that fundamental rights and freedoms according to Islam are an integral part of the Islamic religion and that no one shall have the right as a matter of principle to abolish them either in whole or in part or to violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine commands, which are contained in the Revealed Books of Allah and which were sent through the last of His Prophets to compete the preceding divine messages and that safeguarding those fundamental rights and freedoms is an act of worship whereas the neglect or violation thereof is an abominable sin, and that the safeguarding of those fundamental rights and freedom is an individual responsibility of every person and a collective responsibility of the entire Ummah . . .”
What are the essential differences between these two foundations for the idea of human rights?
4. Compare Article 16 in the Universal Declaration, with Article 5 in the Cairo Declaration. What are the main differences? Are both articles equivalent in their recognition of marital and family rights?
5. How does Article 6 of the Cairo Declaration compare with the status of women in the Universal Declaration?
6. What limits a person’s rights in the Universal Declaration? What limits them in the Cairo Declaration?
Week 3
Let’s continue our discussion this week, focusing on specific examples from our two countries. Work on the following question. Be sure to post at least twice this week.
1. What role does a society, religion, faith, or political system have in defining rights in that case?
2. Is the idea of a declaration of “Human Rights in Islam” compatible with the idea of universal human rights?
3. What is more important, the concept of universal human rights or the freedom of societies to define rights according to faith?
4. Can you have true equality for men and women without running afoul of various religious beliefs? Or would religious beliefs actually lead to true equality for men and women?
5. If human rights are truly universal, then what should be the role of the United Nations or other organizations in protecting them?
6. Are there places in the world where human rights are being routinely violated? Should we care?
Week 4
Sadly, it’s already time to say goodbye. Each student should post at least once this week.
1. What have we learned about the existence of human rights in our two countries, and in the larger world?
2. Are human rights truly a universal concept?
3. Which of the human rights expressed in the two documents are the most important in today’s world?
4. What have we learned about each other and ourselves from this discussion?
5. Would you like to say goodbye to your new friends? What do you want them to know about your country?
In addition, Champlain College students should write a short reflective piece to be posted in their ePortfolio. What did you learn from the process? What were the similarities and differences that you discovered? What might explain them? What political, religious or cultural influences shaped these views? Are the viewpoints expressed in the Global Module shaped more by personal or larger societal influences?
Human Rights – Universal or Relative?
Week 1
Let’s take the opportunity to get to know each other. You’ll find three folders in the Week 1 area, one called Introductions, one called Perceptions, and one called Questions.
During a normal week, unless otherwise directed, always remember to post at least two times.
We’ll begin our reading and discussing next week. With this in mind, we want you to do a few things this first week.
1. Post an introduction in the Introduction folder. What are your interests? Do you have experience travelling overseas? What do you hope to learn in the Global Module? Also, take the opportunity to greet your fellow students and find out more about them. Be sure to include contact information such as your email address or IM.
2. What are your perceptions of your partners in the Global Module? For the _____ students, what do you think of the US? For the American students, what do you think of when you think of _____? Post your initial views in the Perceptions folder.
3. Post any questions that you might have in the Questions folder. Some of you are probably quite experienced in working online, and might have even participated in Global Modules before, and could help out your classmates if they have any concerns.
Keep in mind that you should always feel free to contribute to the Casual Conversations folders found elsewhere on the site. Feel free to introduce a topic or post questions. The password for the Casual Conversations folder is: moose.
Thanks, and we’re really looking forward to getting started.
Week 2
This week we begin our discussion of human rights. We will be using two short texts. The first is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html); the second is the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/instree/cairodeclaration.html). Please follow these links and read the two declarations.
These two declarations represent two different approaches to the issue of human rights. One is from a universalist perspective, while the other focuses on a particular cultural and social context for human rights. By reading and discussing both of them we can gain a better understanding of how different societies interpret the concept of human rights.
Once you have read the texts you will answer a series of questions. You will be required to post answers at least twice, although you can contribute more often if you wish. You can either post an original answer to a question or comment on the posting of another student. Either way, your postings should be detailed and analytical. If you are late posting for the week do not simply answer a question that has already been answered by another student – contribute in a new way. Build upon your fellow students’ answers. Think of it as the class as a whole answering the question.
1. Look at the dates for both of these proclamations. Do the eras in which they were issued affect their content? Why and how?
2. What organizations promulgated each declaration? How might the goals of these organizations differ, and how might those differences affect the declarations?
3. In compare this, from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:
“Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a common standard of achievement for all people and all nations, to the end that each individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.”
With this, from the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam:
“Believing that fundamental rights and freedoms according to Islam are an integral part of the Islamic religion and that no one shall have the right as a matter of principle to abolish them either in whole or in part or to violate or ignore them in as much as they are binding divine commands, which are contained in the Revealed Books of Allah and which were sent through the last of His Prophets to compete the preceding divine messages and that safeguarding those fundamental rights and freedoms is an act of worship whereas the neglect or violation thereof is an abominable sin, and that the safeguarding of those fundamental rights and freedom is an individual responsibility of every person and a collective responsibility of the entire Ummah . . .”
What are the essential differences between these two foundations for the idea of human rights?
4. Compare Article 16 in the Universal Declaration, with Article 5 in the Cairo Declaration. What are the main differences? Are both articles equivalent in their recognition of marital and family rights?
5. How does Article 6 of the Cairo Declaration compare with the status of women in the Universal Declaration?
6. What limits a person’s rights in the Universal Declaration? What limits them in the Cairo Declaration?
Week 3
Let’s continue our discussion this week, focusing on specific examples from our two countries. Work on the following question. Be sure to post at least twice this week.
1. What role does a society, religion, faith, or political system have in defining rights in that case?
2. Is the idea of a declaration of “Human Rights in Islam” compatible with the idea of universal human rights?
3. What is more important, the concept of universal human rights or the freedom of societies to define rights according to faith?
4. Can you have true equality for men and women without running afoul of various religious beliefs? Or would religious beliefs actually lead to true equality for men and women?
5. If human rights are truly universal, then what should be the role of the United Nations or other organizations in protecting them?
6. Are there places in the world where human rights are being routinely violated? Should we care?
Week 4
Sadly, it’s already time to say goodbye. Each student should post at least once this week.
1. What have we learned about the existence of human rights in our two countries, and in the larger world?
2. Are human rights truly a universal concept?
3. Which of the human rights expressed in the two documents are the most important in today’s world?
4. What have we learned about each other and ourselves from this discussion?
5. Would you like to say goodbye to your new friends? What do you want them to know about your country?
In addition, Champlain College students should write a short reflective piece to be posted in their ePortfolio. What did you learn from the process? What were the similarities and differences that you discovered? What might explain them? What political, religious or cultural influences shaped these views? Are the viewpoints expressed in the Global Module shaped more by personal or larger societal influences?
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Woman as "Other" Global Module
This is a very good Global Module for a Gender or Sociology course.
Woman as “Other”
Week 1
Let’s take the opportunity to get to know each other. You’ll find three folders in the Week 1 area, one called Introductions, one called Perceptions, and one called Questions.
During a normal week, unless otherwise directed, always remember to post at least two times.
We’ll begin our reading and discussing next week. With this in mind, we want you to do a few things this first week.
1. Post an introduction in the Introduction folder. What are your interests? Do you have experience travelling overseas? What do you hope to learn in the Global Module? Also, take the opportunity to greet your fellow students and find out more about them. Be sure to include contact information such as your email address or IM.
2. What are your perceptions of your partners in the Global Module? For the _____ students, what do you think of the US? For the American students, what do you think of when you think of _____? Post your initial views in the Perceptions folder.
3. Post any questions that you might have in the Questions folder. Some of you are probably quite experienced in working online, and might have even participated in Global Modules before, and could help out your classmates if they have any concerns.
Keep in mind that you should always feel free to contribute to the Casual Conversations folders found elsewhere on the site. Feel free to introduce a topic or post questions. The password for the Casual Conversations folder is: beaver.
Thanks, and we’re really looking forward to getting started.
Week 2
We are going to discuss the status and perception of women. Our text will be Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex. You will be reading the Introduction. Follow this link and read her introduction:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/ethics/de-beauvoir/2nd-sex/introduction.htm
By reading and discussing The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir we will not only learn about her views, but this will also allow us to introduce the topic of the status of women.
Once you have read the assignment we will answer a series of questions. You will be required to post answers at least twice, although you can contribute more often if you wish. You can either post an original answer to a question or comment on the posting of another student. Either way, your postings should be detailed and analytical. If you are late posting for the week do not simply answer a question that has already been answered by another student – contribute in a new way. Build upon your fellow students’ answers. Think of it as the class as a whole answering the question.
1. Who was Simone de Beauvoir and what was her reason for writing The Second Sex? Do you find her arguments convincing? Are her points still valid or has the world changed dramatically since de Beauvoir wrote The Second Sex?
2. In The Second Sex, de Beauvoir makes the point, “But if I wish to define myself, I must first of all say: ‘I am a woman’: on this truth must be based all further discussion. A man never begins by presenting himself as an individual of a certain sex.” What point is de Beauvoir making here?
3. In a famous quote, de Beauvoir proposes that, “He is the Subject, he is the Absolute – she is the Other.” What does this mean? Is woman “the Other?” If she is “the Other,” what are the consequences?
4. If we believe de Beauvoir then a good question to ask would be – was the creation of “the Other” a conscious or unconscious decision? That is, were women deliberately given a supporting role?
5. Simone de Beauvoir suggested that, “The bond that united her to her oppressors is not comparable to any other.” What does she mean?
Week 3
Let’s continue our discussion this week, focusing on specific examples from our two countries. Work on the following question. Be sure to post at least twice this week.
1. In what ways are the lives of women in your two countries similar? Do these similarities tell us something about the universality of the female experience?
2. In what ways are the lives of women in your two countries different? How can these differences be explained?
3. Is life getting better or worse for women in your countries? Why might it be getting better or worse in one country as compared to another?
4. Can we think of specific suggestions for ways to improve the status of women around the world?
Week 4
Sadly, it’s already time to say goodbye. Each student should post at least once this week. In addition, Champlain College students should write a short reflective piece to be posted in their ePortfolio. What did you learn from the process? What were the similarities and differences that you discovered? What might explain them?
1. What have we learned about the status of women in our two countries, and in the larger world?
2. What have we learned about each other and ourselves from this discussion?
3. Would you like to say goodbye to your new friends? What do you want them to know about your country?
Woman as “Other”
Week 1
Let’s take the opportunity to get to know each other. You’ll find three folders in the Week 1 area, one called Introductions, one called Perceptions, and one called Questions.
During a normal week, unless otherwise directed, always remember to post at least two times.
We’ll begin our reading and discussing next week. With this in mind, we want you to do a few things this first week.
1. Post an introduction in the Introduction folder. What are your interests? Do you have experience travelling overseas? What do you hope to learn in the Global Module? Also, take the opportunity to greet your fellow students and find out more about them. Be sure to include contact information such as your email address or IM.
2. What are your perceptions of your partners in the Global Module? For the _____ students, what do you think of the US? For the American students, what do you think of when you think of _____? Post your initial views in the Perceptions folder.
3. Post any questions that you might have in the Questions folder. Some of you are probably quite experienced in working online, and might have even participated in Global Modules before, and could help out your classmates if they have any concerns.
Keep in mind that you should always feel free to contribute to the Casual Conversations folders found elsewhere on the site. Feel free to introduce a topic or post questions. The password for the Casual Conversations folder is: beaver.
Thanks, and we’re really looking forward to getting started.
Week 2
We are going to discuss the status and perception of women. Our text will be Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex. You will be reading the Introduction. Follow this link and read her introduction:
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/ethics/de-beauvoir/2nd-sex/introduction.htm
By reading and discussing The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir we will not only learn about her views, but this will also allow us to introduce the topic of the status of women.
Once you have read the assignment we will answer a series of questions. You will be required to post answers at least twice, although you can contribute more often if you wish. You can either post an original answer to a question or comment on the posting of another student. Either way, your postings should be detailed and analytical. If you are late posting for the week do not simply answer a question that has already been answered by another student – contribute in a new way. Build upon your fellow students’ answers. Think of it as the class as a whole answering the question.
1. Who was Simone de Beauvoir and what was her reason for writing The Second Sex? Do you find her arguments convincing? Are her points still valid or has the world changed dramatically since de Beauvoir wrote The Second Sex?
2. In The Second Sex, de Beauvoir makes the point, “But if I wish to define myself, I must first of all say: ‘I am a woman’: on this truth must be based all further discussion. A man never begins by presenting himself as an individual of a certain sex.” What point is de Beauvoir making here?
3. In a famous quote, de Beauvoir proposes that, “He is the Subject, he is the Absolute – she is the Other.” What does this mean? Is woman “the Other?” If she is “the Other,” what are the consequences?
4. If we believe de Beauvoir then a good question to ask would be – was the creation of “the Other” a conscious or unconscious decision? That is, were women deliberately given a supporting role?
5. Simone de Beauvoir suggested that, “The bond that united her to her oppressors is not comparable to any other.” What does she mean?
Week 3
Let’s continue our discussion this week, focusing on specific examples from our two countries. Work on the following question. Be sure to post at least twice this week.
1. In what ways are the lives of women in your two countries similar? Do these similarities tell us something about the universality of the female experience?
2. In what ways are the lives of women in your two countries different? How can these differences be explained?
3. Is life getting better or worse for women in your countries? Why might it be getting better or worse in one country as compared to another?
4. Can we think of specific suggestions for ways to improve the status of women around the world?
Week 4
Sadly, it’s already time to say goodbye. Each student should post at least once this week. In addition, Champlain College students should write a short reflective piece to be posted in their ePortfolio. What did you learn from the process? What were the similarities and differences that you discovered? What might explain them?
1. What have we learned about the status of women in our two countries, and in the larger world?
2. What have we learned about each other and ourselves from this discussion?
3. Would you like to say goodbye to your new friends? What do you want them to know about your country?
Saturday, November 1, 2008
Sample GM - Stem Cell Research
Here's another sample Global Module:
Stem Cell Research Debate
In this global module, students from different cultures would get to examine together the science and ethics of stem cell research and use. To help students better understand the issues involved, they will be asked to read and respond to several articles selected for that purpose. The first is Selecting the Perfect Baby: The Ethics of Embryo Design by Julia Omarzu.
http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/genetics/genetic_selection.html
The second is Stem Cells: Promises to Keep by Lauren Yaich
http://www.sciencecases.org/stem_cells/stem_cells.asp
The third is Saving Superman (Part I: A-C)
http://www.sciencecases.org/superman/superman1.asp
Though the discussion will involve some exposure to scientific concepts and terminology, the principle objective of the discussion will be to try and highlight and discuss cultural differences in the way participants may see the role of science and the meaning of life. Many questions may arise in that conversation. Are there ethical issues of vital concern to students when they think about in-vitro fertilization and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis? Should decisions about the beginning of human life be made by governments? Scientists? Potential parents? Religious authorities? Or some other institution responsible for the ethical application of science? Do students see different ethical issues related to use of totipotent, pluripotent or multipotent stemcells? Do they see the use of adult stem cells (for example in therapeutic cloning) as controversial as use of embryonic stem cells in reproductive cloning?
Ultimately, there will be significant global ramification if some countries gain access to medical and genetic capabilities that others do not have or cannot use. Can students predict any of these possibilities?
Naturally, this description just begins to touch the surface of what the possibilities for a discussion like this are.
SUGGESTED ASSIGNMENTS:
Week One: Introductions
During the first week, students will introduce themselves to one another. Just to make the conversation interesting, along with the introduction it might be engaging to here each students share a movie they have seen or book they have read or a cartoon they have seen that relates to the conversation about stem cells, genetic engineering, or cloning. Are their own perceptions about these issues being shaped by literature and theater more or less than by scientists?
http://members.inode.at/359743/frankenstein/images/dickwright-frank-cartoon.gif
Week Two: Discussions
During week two, students will be reading the assigned texts found in the Suggested Description above. A number of questions have been supplied and students might wish to select one or more to respond to. Ideally, students will include with their opinions about these complicated issues a paragraph or two about what experiences or assumptions best explain why they have arrived their present stances. The objective of the module is not only to become better acquainted with the issues of stem cell research but more importantly, to get a better understanding of how our different experiences and national histories may be shaping the way we frame the issues.
Week Three: Group Work
A few years ago, the United States Congress debated the funding of stem cell research and the following exchange was recorded in the course of that debate:
"The embryos to be used here are discarded. If not used for the research, they will not be used at all,'' Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Penn., who co-authored the legislation, explained Wednesday. Thus, "no human life is to be taken.''
"This sounds ... like what happened in World War II,'' Senator Brownback countered, comparing embryo destruction for science to Nazi contentions that "these people are going to be killed, why not experiment on them.''
Yet the embryos in question are no bigger than the period at the end of a sentence.
"To equate that with individuals Nazis experimented on is stretching the meaning of humanness,'' said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who co-authored Specter's legislation.
Because embryonic stem cells could save lives, `"our position is just as moral as your position,'' Harkin added."
Students will be divided into smaller groups to engage in similar though hopefully more productive discussions about the issue. Students should do some background research on what, if any, research is being done in their own countries and what, if any, part their own governments are playing in funding or limiting that research. Students should also discuss what historical antecedents may or may not be helpful in coming to mutually satisfactory conclusions in this debate. Are there historical precedents that are helping people in their country think more clearly about the issue? Are there precedents that are clouding it? As a final product, students should examine the hypothetical differences that will exist between their two countries or regions if present policies are pursued for the next hundred years.
Week Four: Debriefing
In the final week, students will share the results to their group work. Groups may wish to supply three or four questions that the Global Module has inspired.
SUGGESTED ASSESSMENTS:
Discussion Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be evaluated on one thoughtful response to a week one and week two question. A score of 25 will be awarded to posts that demonstrate a thorough reading of the assigned text, that demonstrates critical thought and reflection upon the text, and that shares a personal experience, insight, or question that comes from outside the assigned text.
Group Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be assigned to a small group and will receive a grade on the report submitted by that group in week four. Lack of participation in group-work by an individual student will result in appropriate deductions.
Reflection Essay: 25 pts
Each Champlain student will be asked to write a critical reflection after the GM. This assignment will require the student to cite three “moments” in the conversation that they feel best highlights for them the ways that students involved shared either a commonality or a difference about some fundamental issue.
Survey: 25 pts
A final survey of the involved students will be created from the questions students verbalize in week three and four. Data from this survey will be collected by the instructors and distributed to the participating classes.
SUGGESTED FACULTY EXPECTATIONS:
At least one faculty member will be responsible for:
1. Logging in at least every other day to read posts
2. Responding as appropriate
3. Organizing and overseeing group work
4. Evaluating final essays
5. Assembling surveys and survey results
Stem Cell Research Debate
In this global module, students from different cultures would get to examine together the science and ethics of stem cell research and use. To help students better understand the issues involved, they will be asked to read and respond to several articles selected for that purpose. The first is Selecting the Perfect Baby: The Ethics of Embryo Design by Julia Omarzu.
http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/genetics/genetic_selection.html
The second is Stem Cells: Promises to Keep by Lauren Yaich
http://www.sciencecases.org/stem_cells/stem_cells.asp
The third is Saving Superman (Part I: A-C)
http://www.sciencecases.org/superman/superman1.asp
Though the discussion will involve some exposure to scientific concepts and terminology, the principle objective of the discussion will be to try and highlight and discuss cultural differences in the way participants may see the role of science and the meaning of life. Many questions may arise in that conversation. Are there ethical issues of vital concern to students when they think about in-vitro fertilization and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis? Should decisions about the beginning of human life be made by governments? Scientists? Potential parents? Religious authorities? Or some other institution responsible for the ethical application of science? Do students see different ethical issues related to use of totipotent, pluripotent or multipotent stemcells? Do they see the use of adult stem cells (for example in therapeutic cloning) as controversial as use of embryonic stem cells in reproductive cloning?
Ultimately, there will be significant global ramification if some countries gain access to medical and genetic capabilities that others do not have or cannot use. Can students predict any of these possibilities?
Naturally, this description just begins to touch the surface of what the possibilities for a discussion like this are.
SUGGESTED ASSIGNMENTS:
Week One: Introductions
During the first week, students will introduce themselves to one another. Just to make the conversation interesting, along with the introduction it might be engaging to here each students share a movie they have seen or book they have read or a cartoon they have seen that relates to the conversation about stem cells, genetic engineering, or cloning. Are their own perceptions about these issues being shaped by literature and theater more or less than by scientists?
http://members.inode.at/359743/frankenstein/images/dickwright-frank-cartoon.gif
Week Two: Discussions
During week two, students will be reading the assigned texts found in the Suggested Description above. A number of questions have been supplied and students might wish to select one or more to respond to. Ideally, students will include with their opinions about these complicated issues a paragraph or two about what experiences or assumptions best explain why they have arrived their present stances. The objective of the module is not only to become better acquainted with the issues of stem cell research but more importantly, to get a better understanding of how our different experiences and national histories may be shaping the way we frame the issues.
Week Three: Group Work
A few years ago, the United States Congress debated the funding of stem cell research and the following exchange was recorded in the course of that debate:
"The embryos to be used here are discarded. If not used for the research, they will not be used at all,'' Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Penn., who co-authored the legislation, explained Wednesday. Thus, "no human life is to be taken.''
"This sounds ... like what happened in World War II,'' Senator Brownback countered, comparing embryo destruction for science to Nazi contentions that "these people are going to be killed, why not experiment on them.''
Yet the embryos in question are no bigger than the period at the end of a sentence.
"To equate that with individuals Nazis experimented on is stretching the meaning of humanness,'' said Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who co-authored Specter's legislation.
Because embryonic stem cells could save lives, `"our position is just as moral as your position,'' Harkin added."
Students will be divided into smaller groups to engage in similar though hopefully more productive discussions about the issue. Students should do some background research on what, if any, research is being done in their own countries and what, if any, part their own governments are playing in funding or limiting that research. Students should also discuss what historical antecedents may or may not be helpful in coming to mutually satisfactory conclusions in this debate. Are there historical precedents that are helping people in their country think more clearly about the issue? Are there precedents that are clouding it? As a final product, students should examine the hypothetical differences that will exist between their two countries or regions if present policies are pursued for the next hundred years.
Week Four: Debriefing
In the final week, students will share the results to their group work. Groups may wish to supply three or four questions that the Global Module has inspired.
SUGGESTED ASSESSMENTS:
Discussion Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be evaluated on one thoughtful response to a week one and week two question. A score of 25 will be awarded to posts that demonstrate a thorough reading of the assigned text, that demonstrates critical thought and reflection upon the text, and that shares a personal experience, insight, or question that comes from outside the assigned text.
Group Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be assigned to a small group and will receive a grade on the report submitted by that group in week four. Lack of participation in group-work by an individual student will result in appropriate deductions.
Reflection Essay: 25 pts
Each Champlain student will be asked to write a critical reflection after the GM. This assignment will require the student to cite three “moments” in the conversation that they feel best highlights for them the ways that students involved shared either a commonality or a difference about some fundamental issue.
Survey: 25 pts
A final survey of the involved students will be created from the questions students verbalize in week three and four. Data from this survey will be collected by the instructors and distributed to the participating classes.
SUGGESTED FACULTY EXPECTATIONS:
At least one faculty member will be responsible for:
1. Logging in at least every other day to read posts
2. Responding as appropriate
3. Organizing and overseeing group work
4. Evaluating final essays
5. Assembling surveys and survey results
Sample GM - Human Rights in a Cultural Context
Here's another sample Global Module:
Human Rights in a Cultural Context
It is fair to say that all over the planet, human beings do rotten things to other human beings. Much is being done to decrease the frequency and severity of the abuse and of those many initiatives, the declaration of a common standard by international and multinational agencies is a step in the direction of clarity. What exactly are the rights that all human beings should be entitled to and what standard of behavior will the world’s governments hold their citizens accountable to? Can the world come to a universal agreement, at least at the level of official policy so that these standards of behavior and treatment can filter down eventually into the ghettos, barrios, favellas, shuks, suburbs, and national capitals of human society?
In this Global Module, students will be asked to look at two separate human rights declarations put forth by international human rights agencies. The first text will be the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which can be obtained here:
UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
The second text is the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights, available here:
Islamic (Cairo) Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.alhewar.com/ISLAMDECL.html
In the course of the discussion students will be comparing and contrasting the documents to determine if they are redundant or essentially incongruous in some areas. Students will be asked to look at specific examples where the human rights culture of the U.N. may allow for behavior that the Islamic declaration might regard as a human rights abuse. Students will be asked to look at specific examples where behavior the Islamic declaration finds acceptable might be regarded as abusive by U.N. standards. In these specific cases, an attempt will be made to discover the philosophical or religious roots of the difference.
For the sake of engendering a lively debate, students will break into small groups to discuss the documentary, China’s Lost Girls, a movie about population control and its implications for female fetuses in traditional Chinese villages. Students will discuss whether or not it is possible for mutually satisfactory definitions of human rights to be developed and what, if any, action should be taken when some other culture violates one of “our” basic tenets of human ethical behavior when it seems entirely appropriate to them.
SUGGESTED ASSIGNMENTS:
Week One: Introductions
During week one, students will be introducing themselves and getting familiar with the course objectives. As a way of introducing themselves and priming the pump for further discussions, students are asked to include a paragraph or two detailing a right which they would like to have that is presently not guaranteed to them or protected by their present government. They may wish to include some argument as to why this right should be guaranteed.
Week Two: Discussions
During week two, students will be reading and discussing:
The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
The Islamic Declaration of Human Rights,
http://www.alhewar.com/ISLAMDECL.html
Students are asked to look for differences in the two documents. These may involve certain rights that are protected in one list but not in the other or certain justifications for the protection of rights that might be at the heart of the differences mentioned. For example, are women being treated differently in the two documents? Are reproductive rights being extended or denied? Are rights relating to conscience and practice of religion given similar treatment? Each student will be asked to find and share a contemporary issue that highlights one way in which these differences might lead to conflict or to a an exchange of recriminations between two countries. For example, one might highlight a story about religious freedom or the right of women to drive in Saudi Arabia or the publishing of novels or cartoons in England or Denmark.
Week Three: Group Work
On September 5, 1995, Hillary Clinton, wife of U.S. President Bill Clinton gave a speech at the U.N.’s fourth conference on women held in Beijing, China. Her speech, entitled Women’s Rights are Human Rights included a list of instances where Mrs. Clinton felt that a line had to be drawn with respect to human rights. An excerpt of that speech follows:
“I believe that, on the eve of a new millennium, it is time to break our silence. It is time for us to say here in Beijing, and the world to hear, that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women's rights as separate from human rights.
These abuses have continued because, for too long, the history of women has been a history of silence. Even today, there are those who are trying to silence our words.
The voices of this conference and of the women at Huairou must be heard loud and clear: It is a violation of human rights when babies are denied food, or drowned, or suffocated, or their spines broken, simply because they are born girls.
It is a violation of human rights when women and girls are sold into the slavery of prostitution.
It is a violation of human rights when women are doused with gasoline, set on fire and burned to death because their marriage dowries are deemed too small.
It is a violation of human rights when individual women are raped in their own communities and when thousands of women are subjected to rape as a tactic or prize of war.
It is a violation of human rights when a leading cause of death worldwide among women ages 14 to 44 is the violence they are subjected to in their own homes.
It is a violation of human rights when young girls are brutalized by the painful and degrading practice of genital mutilation.
It is a violation of human rights when women are denied the right to plan their own families, and that includes being forced to have abortions or being sterilized against their will.
If there is one message that echoes forth from this conference, it is that human rights are women's rights - and women's rights are human rights.”
The speech raises interesting questions about human rights and culture and the right of one country’s leadership to declare which rights should be declared non-negotiable in other countries. After watching the documentary China’s Last Girls students in their small groups will discuss the specific issue of China’s one-child policy and Mrs. Clinton’s objection to it. Are there issues of American policy that a Chinese leader might raise as human rights abuses? Do communities like China have rights that may trump the rights of the individuals in them? Were Hillary Clinton’s remarks appropriate given the context? If your group was charged with the task of preparing this speech, would they change anything?
Week Four: Debriefing
In the final week of the Global Modules students will report on their week three discussions about Women’s Rights are Human Rights speech. Given what they have learned in the past three weeks, would they have rewritten any portions of the speech. If so, what would it look like? Would they have added anything? Taken something out? Rephrased the demands? Groups may wish to supply the wider audience with three or four questions that the GM has inspired that they might like to pursue.
SUGGESTED ASSESSMENTS:
Discussion Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be evaluated on one thoughtful response to a week one and week two question. A score of 25 will be awarded to posts that demonstrate a thorough reading of the assigned text, that demonstrates critical thought and reflection upon the text, and that shares a personal experience, insight, or question that comes from outside the assigned text.
Group Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be assigned to a small group and will receive a grade on the report submitted by that group in week four. Lack of participation in group-work by an individual student will result in appropriate deductions.
Reflection Essay: 25 pts
Each Champlain student will be asked to write a critical reflection after the GM. This assignment will require the student to cite three “moments” in the conversation that they feel best highlights for them the ways that students involved shared either a commonality or a difference about some fundamental issue.
Survey: 25 pts
A final survey of the involved students will be created from the questions students verbalize in week three and four. Data from this survey will be collected by the instructors and distributed to the participating classes.
SUGGESTED FACULTY EXPECTATIONS:
At least one faculty member will be responsible for:
1. Logging in at least every other day to read posts
2. Responding as appropriate
3. Organizing and overseeing group work
4. Evaluating final essays
5. Assembling surveys and survey results
Human Rights in a Cultural Context
It is fair to say that all over the planet, human beings do rotten things to other human beings. Much is being done to decrease the frequency and severity of the abuse and of those many initiatives, the declaration of a common standard by international and multinational agencies is a step in the direction of clarity. What exactly are the rights that all human beings should be entitled to and what standard of behavior will the world’s governments hold their citizens accountable to? Can the world come to a universal agreement, at least at the level of official policy so that these standards of behavior and treatment can filter down eventually into the ghettos, barrios, favellas, shuks, suburbs, and national capitals of human society?
In this Global Module, students will be asked to look at two separate human rights declarations put forth by international human rights agencies. The first text will be the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which can be obtained here:
UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
The second text is the Islamic Declaration of Human Rights, available here:
Islamic (Cairo) Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.alhewar.com/ISLAMDECL.html
In the course of the discussion students will be comparing and contrasting the documents to determine if they are redundant or essentially incongruous in some areas. Students will be asked to look at specific examples where the human rights culture of the U.N. may allow for behavior that the Islamic declaration might regard as a human rights abuse. Students will be asked to look at specific examples where behavior the Islamic declaration finds acceptable might be regarded as abusive by U.N. standards. In these specific cases, an attempt will be made to discover the philosophical or religious roots of the difference.
For the sake of engendering a lively debate, students will break into small groups to discuss the documentary, China’s Lost Girls, a movie about population control and its implications for female fetuses in traditional Chinese villages. Students will discuss whether or not it is possible for mutually satisfactory definitions of human rights to be developed and what, if any, action should be taken when some other culture violates one of “our” basic tenets of human ethical behavior when it seems entirely appropriate to them.
SUGGESTED ASSIGNMENTS:
Week One: Introductions
During week one, students will be introducing themselves and getting familiar with the course objectives. As a way of introducing themselves and priming the pump for further discussions, students are asked to include a paragraph or two detailing a right which they would like to have that is presently not guaranteed to them or protected by their present government. They may wish to include some argument as to why this right should be guaranteed.
Week Two: Discussions
During week two, students will be reading and discussing:
The UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
The Islamic Declaration of Human Rights,
http://www.alhewar.com/ISLAMDECL.html
Students are asked to look for differences in the two documents. These may involve certain rights that are protected in one list but not in the other or certain justifications for the protection of rights that might be at the heart of the differences mentioned. For example, are women being treated differently in the two documents? Are reproductive rights being extended or denied? Are rights relating to conscience and practice of religion given similar treatment? Each student will be asked to find and share a contemporary issue that highlights one way in which these differences might lead to conflict or to a an exchange of recriminations between two countries. For example, one might highlight a story about religious freedom or the right of women to drive in Saudi Arabia or the publishing of novels or cartoons in England or Denmark.
Week Three: Group Work
On September 5, 1995, Hillary Clinton, wife of U.S. President Bill Clinton gave a speech at the U.N.’s fourth conference on women held in Beijing, China. Her speech, entitled Women’s Rights are Human Rights included a list of instances where Mrs. Clinton felt that a line had to be drawn with respect to human rights. An excerpt of that speech follows:
“I believe that, on the eve of a new millennium, it is time to break our silence. It is time for us to say here in Beijing, and the world to hear, that it is no longer acceptable to discuss women's rights as separate from human rights.
These abuses have continued because, for too long, the history of women has been a history of silence. Even today, there are those who are trying to silence our words.
The voices of this conference and of the women at Huairou must be heard loud and clear: It is a violation of human rights when babies are denied food, or drowned, or suffocated, or their spines broken, simply because they are born girls.
It is a violation of human rights when women and girls are sold into the slavery of prostitution.
It is a violation of human rights when women are doused with gasoline, set on fire and burned to death because their marriage dowries are deemed too small.
It is a violation of human rights when individual women are raped in their own communities and when thousands of women are subjected to rape as a tactic or prize of war.
It is a violation of human rights when a leading cause of death worldwide among women ages 14 to 44 is the violence they are subjected to in their own homes.
It is a violation of human rights when young girls are brutalized by the painful and degrading practice of genital mutilation.
It is a violation of human rights when women are denied the right to plan their own families, and that includes being forced to have abortions or being sterilized against their will.
If there is one message that echoes forth from this conference, it is that human rights are women's rights - and women's rights are human rights.”
The speech raises interesting questions about human rights and culture and the right of one country’s leadership to declare which rights should be declared non-negotiable in other countries. After watching the documentary China’s Last Girls students in their small groups will discuss the specific issue of China’s one-child policy and Mrs. Clinton’s objection to it. Are there issues of American policy that a Chinese leader might raise as human rights abuses? Do communities like China have rights that may trump the rights of the individuals in them? Were Hillary Clinton’s remarks appropriate given the context? If your group was charged with the task of preparing this speech, would they change anything?
Week Four: Debriefing
In the final week of the Global Modules students will report on their week three discussions about Women’s Rights are Human Rights speech. Given what they have learned in the past three weeks, would they have rewritten any portions of the speech. If so, what would it look like? Would they have added anything? Taken something out? Rephrased the demands? Groups may wish to supply the wider audience with three or four questions that the GM has inspired that they might like to pursue.
SUGGESTED ASSESSMENTS:
Discussion Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be evaluated on one thoughtful response to a week one and week two question. A score of 25 will be awarded to posts that demonstrate a thorough reading of the assigned text, that demonstrates critical thought and reflection upon the text, and that shares a personal experience, insight, or question that comes from outside the assigned text.
Group Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be assigned to a small group and will receive a grade on the report submitted by that group in week four. Lack of participation in group-work by an individual student will result in appropriate deductions.
Reflection Essay: 25 pts
Each Champlain student will be asked to write a critical reflection after the GM. This assignment will require the student to cite three “moments” in the conversation that they feel best highlights for them the ways that students involved shared either a commonality or a difference about some fundamental issue.
Survey: 25 pts
A final survey of the involved students will be created from the questions students verbalize in week three and four. Data from this survey will be collected by the instructors and distributed to the participating classes.
SUGGESTED FACULTY EXPECTATIONS:
At least one faculty member will be responsible for:
1. Logging in at least every other day to read posts
2. Responding as appropriate
3. Organizing and overseeing group work
4. Evaluating final essays
5. Assembling surveys and survey results
Friday, October 31, 2008
Sample GM - Carbon Footprints
As we've discussed, participating professors can either come up with their own topics (and we'll help shape them) or make use of what we call "master modules" - that is, GMs that we have run before or which have been specially created. Even the master modules can be adapted to fit a professor's own interests or the needs of a specific course. So, I thought it would be a good idea to post some of these sample GMs so that you can get a clearer sense of the approach we take - and the variety of themes that you can explore.
Gary Scudder
scudder@champlain.edu
Carbon Footprints
This Global Module hopes to look at the subject of global warming and carbon footprints in an international context. Students will be reading articles about the environmental impacts of their lifestyle and energy use patterns and they will have the opportunity to calculate their personal impact and to discuss that impact and strategies for sustainable living.
Links to each of the articles students will be discussing can be found below:
Article 1:
http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/...&articleID=532
A Tale of Two Families
Article 2:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...,4370244.story
Plans for a zero-carbon city.
Article 3:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...a_fact_specter
Big Foot article
Ideally, students from regions of the world that supply fossil fuels will interact with students from regions of the world that consume them, or would like to consume more of them, or would like to see consumption reduced. A number of engaging questions may arise: Should people with large carbon footprints pay some sort of tax to discourage them from doing so? Should developing countries continue pursuing consumption levels of those who have already high-consumption levels? Are there moral arguments that can be effectively made or must the solution be found in economic incentives? Should everyone begin reducing their carbon emission impact or just those with high usages? Should we regard certain lifestyles as a threat? As potentially lethal?
The possibilities for discussion are numerous.
SUGGESTED ASSIGNMENTS:
Week One: Introductions
During the first week, students will be introducing themselves to one another and formulating their own personal objectives for the exercise. As a means of getting the conversation going, students will be asked to view the short lecture The Story of Stuff located at: http://www.storyofstuff.com/
Students are asked to include a paragraph or two of reaction to the video with their introductions.
Week Two: Discussions
During week two, students will read the three articles supplied in the Suggested Description section above. A number of questions have been asked and students may wish to pick one or more to address in their weekly post. Each student is asked to include some information or perspective that they have acquired from some research outside the assigned texts as well as offering their critical reflections upon what they find in them. It may well be that the carbon footprints of the different participants are significantly different. It is hoped that students will be able to communicate with each other how they feel about this divide. Might one group have a sense of resentment? Entitlement? Shame? Pride? The intent of the discussion is not simply to better understand the science and economics of carbon footprints and global warming but also to better understand one another.
Week Three: Group Work
By now your professors have divided you up into groups. Contact your fellow group members, both the ones at your school and also your international partners. As a group, work on the following questions:
Students should go to http://www.earthday.net/footprint/index.asp (Or a site like it) and calculate their ecological footprint twice--once with their lifestyle as a citizen of the United States, and a second time with the same lifestyle as a citizen of Ethiopia.
How big is that ecological footprint? Why do you think the footprint was calculated differently based on where the student lives? If a student lived in Dubai, would they expect their actual number to be higher or lower than what was calculated for them in the United States?
Together with your group, make a reasonable plan for reducing footprints . . .
A. On an individual level
B. On a community level
C. On a national level
D. On a global scale
Week Four: Debriefing
In the last week, students will be sharing their group plans. Some reference should be made as to whether both groups feel equally responsible for solving the problem by the making of lifestyle changes. Each group may wish to supply three or four questions raised by the GM that they might like to pursue further in the future.
SUGGESTED ASSESSMENTS:
Discussion Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be evaluated on one thoughtful response to a week one and week two question. A score of 25 will be awarded to posts that demonstrate a thorough reading of the assigned text, that demonstrates critical thought and reflection upon the text, and that shares a personal experience, insight, or question that comes from outside the assigned text.
Group Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be assigned to a small group and will receive a grade on the report submitted by that group in week four. Lack of participation in group-work by an individual student will result in appropriate deductions.
Reflection Essay: 25 pts
Each Champlain student will be asked to write a critical reflection after the GM. This assignment will require the student to cite three “moments” in the conversation that they feel best highlights for them the ways that students involved shared either a commonality or a difference about some fundamental issue.
Survey: 25 pts
A final survey of the involved students will be created from the questions students verbalize in week three and four. Data from this survey will be collected by the instructors and distributed to the participating classes.
SUGGESTED FACULTY EXPECTATIONS:
At least one faculty member will be responsible for:
1. Logging in at least every other day to read posts
2. Responding as appropriate
3. Organizing and overseeing group work
4. Evaluating final essays
5. Assembling surveys and survey results
Gary Scudder
scudder@champlain.edu
Carbon Footprints
This Global Module hopes to look at the subject of global warming and carbon footprints in an international context. Students will be reading articles about the environmental impacts of their lifestyle and energy use patterns and they will have the opportunity to calculate their personal impact and to discuss that impact and strategies for sustainable living.
Links to each of the articles students will be discussing can be found below:
Article 1:
http://www.nwf.org/nationalwildlife/...&articleID=532
A Tale of Two Families
Article 2:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-f...,4370244.story
Plans for a zero-carbon city.
Article 3:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2...a_fact_specter
Big Foot article
Ideally, students from regions of the world that supply fossil fuels will interact with students from regions of the world that consume them, or would like to consume more of them, or would like to see consumption reduced. A number of engaging questions may arise: Should people with large carbon footprints pay some sort of tax to discourage them from doing so? Should developing countries continue pursuing consumption levels of those who have already high-consumption levels? Are there moral arguments that can be effectively made or must the solution be found in economic incentives? Should everyone begin reducing their carbon emission impact or just those with high usages? Should we regard certain lifestyles as a threat? As potentially lethal?
The possibilities for discussion are numerous.
SUGGESTED ASSIGNMENTS:
Week One: Introductions
During the first week, students will be introducing themselves to one another and formulating their own personal objectives for the exercise. As a means of getting the conversation going, students will be asked to view the short lecture The Story of Stuff located at: http://www.storyofstuff.com/
Students are asked to include a paragraph or two of reaction to the video with their introductions.
Week Two: Discussions
During week two, students will read the three articles supplied in the Suggested Description section above. A number of questions have been asked and students may wish to pick one or more to address in their weekly post. Each student is asked to include some information or perspective that they have acquired from some research outside the assigned texts as well as offering their critical reflections upon what they find in them. It may well be that the carbon footprints of the different participants are significantly different. It is hoped that students will be able to communicate with each other how they feel about this divide. Might one group have a sense of resentment? Entitlement? Shame? Pride? The intent of the discussion is not simply to better understand the science and economics of carbon footprints and global warming but also to better understand one another.
Week Three: Group Work
By now your professors have divided you up into groups. Contact your fellow group members, both the ones at your school and also your international partners. As a group, work on the following questions:
Students should go to http://www.earthday.net/footprint/index.asp (Or a site like it) and calculate their ecological footprint twice--once with their lifestyle as a citizen of the United States, and a second time with the same lifestyle as a citizen of Ethiopia.
How big is that ecological footprint? Why do you think the footprint was calculated differently based on where the student lives? If a student lived in Dubai, would they expect their actual number to be higher or lower than what was calculated for them in the United States?
Together with your group, make a reasonable plan for reducing footprints . . .
A. On an individual level
B. On a community level
C. On a national level
D. On a global scale
Week Four: Debriefing
In the last week, students will be sharing their group plans. Some reference should be made as to whether both groups feel equally responsible for solving the problem by the making of lifestyle changes. Each group may wish to supply three or four questions raised by the GM that they might like to pursue further in the future.
SUGGESTED ASSESSMENTS:
Discussion Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be evaluated on one thoughtful response to a week one and week two question. A score of 25 will be awarded to posts that demonstrate a thorough reading of the assigned text, that demonstrates critical thought and reflection upon the text, and that shares a personal experience, insight, or question that comes from outside the assigned text.
Group Work: 25 pts.
Each student will be assigned to a small group and will receive a grade on the report submitted by that group in week four. Lack of participation in group-work by an individual student will result in appropriate deductions.
Reflection Essay: 25 pts
Each Champlain student will be asked to write a critical reflection after the GM. This assignment will require the student to cite three “moments” in the conversation that they feel best highlights for them the ways that students involved shared either a commonality or a difference about some fundamental issue.
Survey: 25 pts
A final survey of the involved students will be created from the questions students verbalize in week three and four. Data from this survey will be collected by the instructors and distributed to the participating classes.
SUGGESTED FACULTY EXPECTATIONS:
At least one faculty member will be responsible for:
1. Logging in at least every other day to read posts
2. Responding as appropriate
3. Organizing and overseeing group work
4. Evaluating final essays
5. Assembling surveys and survey results
Monday, June 23, 2008
Variety of Global Module Topics
It would be a good time to give a brief overview of the variety of Global Modules that we ran last semester. One of the great advantages of the Global Module approach is the flexibility it provides in linking seemingly very different classes together for an international and interdisciplinary experience. There is an endless choice of topics, readings and approaches that professors can take to enrich the educational experience. These different topics were run in just one semester, and we are busy creating dozens of new modules. Also, keep in mind that professors still have the freedom to create, with our assistance, their own Global Modules.
The students of Soonu Dhunjisha (THINC College, India) and Bob Mayer (Champlain) discussed the universality of human rights and read portions of the United Nations Declaration of Humans Rights and the Cairo Islamic Declaration of Rights.
The students of Akosua Darkwah (University of Ghana, Ghana) and Barb DuBois (Champlain) discussed domestic violence and read Belknap, Trials of Measuring the "Success" of Domestic Violence Policies and Fernandez, Cultural Beliefs and Domestic Violence.
The students of Sally Totman (Deakin University, Australia) and Mike Lange (Champlain) discussed perceptions of Arabs in film, while using as a common "text" two films - Kingdom of Heaven and Three Kings.
The students of Carmen Flys (University of Alcala, Spain) and Sandy Zale (Champlain) discussed immigration while reading Cariboo Cafe and examining provocative photographs.
The students of Andras Tetenyi (Corvinus University, Hungary) and Jennifer Vincent (Champlain) discussed the global public good vs. national interest while reading Nye's The American National Interest and Global Public Good.
The students of Bouziane Zaid (Al Akhawayn University, Morocco) and Nancy Nahra (Champlain) discussed the Google virtual library project and read Kevin Kelly's Scan This Book!
The students of Kate O'Neill (Zayed University, United Arab Emirates) and Ken Wade (Champlain) discussed cultural differences, specifically the interplay between one's personal culture and the culture of an organization, and read articles from the Gulf News.
The students of Erika Alm (Goteborg University, Sweden), Soonu Dhunjisha (THINC, India), Aarti Valia (THINC, India) and Fiona Mills (Champlain) discussed the concept of Woman as "Other" and read the introduction to Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex.
The students of Brigitte Howarth (Zayed University, United Arab Emirates) and Cyndi Brandenburg (Champlain) discussed ecological and carbon footprints, and read three articles: Hinrichsen, A Tale of Two Families, Plans for a Zero-Carbon City, and Specter, Big Foot.
The students of Richard Szanto (Corvinus University, Hungary), Reka Matolay (Corvinus), and Jenny Noller (North Carolina A&T University, U.S.) discussed conflict and cultural differences while reading portions of the play 12 Angry Men.
The students of Klaus Himpsl (Donau University Krems, Austria), Andreas Raith (Donau), Petra Szucsich (Donau), and Rob Williams (Champlain) discussed technologies as extensions of human beings while reading McLuhan's Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.
The students of Inas Ababneh (University of Jordan, Jordan) and Phil Crossman (Champlain) discussed boundaries while reading Lincoln's 1st Inaugural Address, the Gettysbury Address, and Bierce's Incident at Owl Creek Bridge.
The students of Susan Jones (Zayed University, United Arab Emirates) and Tom Jordan (Champlain) discussed women's suffrage and read two pieces: Addams, Why Women Should Vote and Reynolds, Anti-Woman Suffrage.
The students of Michael Wainaina (Kenyatta University, Kenya) and Cameron Webster (Champlain) discussed community, family and adulthood while reading the poems of several contemporary African poets: Ngatho, Footpath, Niyongo, Songs from the Congolese, Muigui, The Troubled Warrior, and Ingonga, Come, My Mother's Son.
The students of Mikael Ejdaback (University of Skovde, Sweden), David Kite (Champlain) and Alfonso Capone (Champlain) discussed medical ethics and health care while reading Omarzu's Selecting the Perfect Baby: The Ethics of "Embryo Design" and Yaich's Stem Cells: Promises to Keep.
The students of Lazaward Sughayer (University of Jordan, Jordan) and Anne Charles (Champlain) discussed connections and empathy while reading Nafisi's Mysterious Connections That Link Us Together.
The students of Joanne Valin (Nipissing University, Canada) and Richard Hunt (Champlain) discussed the topic of community and living deliberately while reading a section from Thoreau's Economy.
The students of Usha Narayanan (THINC, India) and Allyson Wattley (Normandale Community College) discussed perceptions of Arabs in film and read portions of Reel Bad Arabs.
The students of Inas Ababneh (University of Jordan), Hani Ellayan (University of Jordan) and Phil Crossman (Champlain) discussed the concepts of naming and identity and read portions of Levitt's Freakonomics and Watson's Nameless: Gender and Person in Chinese Society.
Gary Scudder
scudder@champlain.edu
globalmodules@gmail.com
http://www.globalmodules.net
The students of Soonu Dhunjisha (THINC College, India) and Bob Mayer (Champlain) discussed the universality of human rights and read portions of the United Nations Declaration of Humans Rights and the Cairo Islamic Declaration of Rights.
The students of Akosua Darkwah (University of Ghana, Ghana) and Barb DuBois (Champlain) discussed domestic violence and read Belknap, Trials of Measuring the "Success" of Domestic Violence Policies and Fernandez, Cultural Beliefs and Domestic Violence.
The students of Sally Totman (Deakin University, Australia) and Mike Lange (Champlain) discussed perceptions of Arabs in film, while using as a common "text" two films - Kingdom of Heaven and Three Kings.
The students of Carmen Flys (University of Alcala, Spain) and Sandy Zale (Champlain) discussed immigration while reading Cariboo Cafe and examining provocative photographs.
The students of Andras Tetenyi (Corvinus University, Hungary) and Jennifer Vincent (Champlain) discussed the global public good vs. national interest while reading Nye's The American National Interest and Global Public Good.
The students of Bouziane Zaid (Al Akhawayn University, Morocco) and Nancy Nahra (Champlain) discussed the Google virtual library project and read Kevin Kelly's Scan This Book!
The students of Kate O'Neill (Zayed University, United Arab Emirates) and Ken Wade (Champlain) discussed cultural differences, specifically the interplay between one's personal culture and the culture of an organization, and read articles from the Gulf News.
The students of Erika Alm (Goteborg University, Sweden), Soonu Dhunjisha (THINC, India), Aarti Valia (THINC, India) and Fiona Mills (Champlain) discussed the concept of Woman as "Other" and read the introduction to Simone de Beauvoir's The Second Sex.
The students of Brigitte Howarth (Zayed University, United Arab Emirates) and Cyndi Brandenburg (Champlain) discussed ecological and carbon footprints, and read three articles: Hinrichsen, A Tale of Two Families, Plans for a Zero-Carbon City, and Specter, Big Foot.
The students of Richard Szanto (Corvinus University, Hungary), Reka Matolay (Corvinus), and Jenny Noller (North Carolina A&T University, U.S.) discussed conflict and cultural differences while reading portions of the play 12 Angry Men.
The students of Klaus Himpsl (Donau University Krems, Austria), Andreas Raith (Donau), Petra Szucsich (Donau), and Rob Williams (Champlain) discussed technologies as extensions of human beings while reading McLuhan's Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man.
The students of Inas Ababneh (University of Jordan, Jordan) and Phil Crossman (Champlain) discussed boundaries while reading Lincoln's 1st Inaugural Address, the Gettysbury Address, and Bierce's Incident at Owl Creek Bridge.
The students of Susan Jones (Zayed University, United Arab Emirates) and Tom Jordan (Champlain) discussed women's suffrage and read two pieces: Addams, Why Women Should Vote and Reynolds, Anti-Woman Suffrage.
The students of Michael Wainaina (Kenyatta University, Kenya) and Cameron Webster (Champlain) discussed community, family and adulthood while reading the poems of several contemporary African poets: Ngatho, Footpath, Niyongo, Songs from the Congolese, Muigui, The Troubled Warrior, and Ingonga, Come, My Mother's Son.
The students of Mikael Ejdaback (University of Skovde, Sweden), David Kite (Champlain) and Alfonso Capone (Champlain) discussed medical ethics and health care while reading Omarzu's Selecting the Perfect Baby: The Ethics of "Embryo Design" and Yaich's Stem Cells: Promises to Keep.
The students of Lazaward Sughayer (University of Jordan, Jordan) and Anne Charles (Champlain) discussed connections and empathy while reading Nafisi's Mysterious Connections That Link Us Together.
The students of Joanne Valin (Nipissing University, Canada) and Richard Hunt (Champlain) discussed the topic of community and living deliberately while reading a section from Thoreau's Economy.
The students of Usha Narayanan (THINC, India) and Allyson Wattley (Normandale Community College) discussed perceptions of Arabs in film and read portions of Reel Bad Arabs.
The students of Inas Ababneh (University of Jordan), Hani Ellayan (University of Jordan) and Phil Crossman (Champlain) discussed the concepts of naming and identity and read portions of Levitt's Freakonomics and Watson's Nameless: Gender and Person in Chinese Society.
Gary Scudder
scudder@champlain.edu
globalmodules@gmail.com
http://www.globalmodules.net
Thursday, June 19, 2008
Conversations with Moi University
I was able to visit Moi University in Eldoret, Kenya in November. We had run a Global Module with a professor by the name of Naomi Shitemi a couple years ago and I finally had the opportunity to actually travel to Moi University to have more substantial discussions about expanding their participation. Unfortunatey, Naomi was out of town and left me in the competent hands of Gilbert Nduru who heads up the Geography Department. Moi University itself is located about an hour's drive outside of Eldoret. It is a beautiful drive out to Eldoret and countryside looked like a cross between Vermont and Indiana - Eldoret is big cheese country.
Moi is struggling with some technological limitations but they are also actively working to deal with the problems. The meetings went well, and I talked to the Dean of Arts & Sciences, several faculty members, and hundreds of students. I think that even considering the technological challenges the potential is definitely here for a great collaboration - and the will certainly exists on the part of Moi for grater international dialogue. Gilbert did manage to put together a Geography lab with pretty good Internet access, so I think we can eventually start by running GMs housed in Geography classes.
Gary Scudder
globalmodules@gmail.com
scudder@champlain.edu
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
GM with the University of Ghana
We've just begun working with the University of Ghana so it's too early to talk of an actual partnership yet, but the early returns have been very promising. This past semester Akosua Darkwah from the University of Ghana paired with Barb DuBois from Champlain to discuss the complex issues surrounding domestic violence in Africa and the United States. The students examined two articles, Cultural Beliefs and Domestic Violence and The Trials of Measuring the "Success" of Domestic Violence Policies and discussed the situation surrounding domestic violence in their two countries and proposed suggestions for reducing violence against women. We're discussing a visit to the university within the next few months.
Gary Scudder
globalmodules@gmail.com
scudder@champlain.edu
Gary Scudder
globalmodules@gmail.com
scudder@champlain.edu
Danube University Krems
We want as many different voices represented in the international dialogue as possible. We're focusing on creating a strong foundation in Africa and the Middle East, two areas that are all too often either ignored or vilified. That said, we also other parts of the world included as well. Obviously, we want European universities and we're trying to get a variety of schools. Last year I visited universities in Sweden, Spain, Austria and Hungary.
One example of a potential Austrian partner is Danube University Krems. It is about an hour outside of Vienna, meaning that you travel around on the great intercity train system and then jump on one of the S lines that head out of town. Danube University Krems is an innovative school that is only around 15 years old and has around 3000 students. This last spring semester Klaus Himpsl, Andreas Raith and Petra Szucsich from Danube University Krems combined with Rob Williams from Champlain to run a Global Module on media, using portions of Marshall McLuhan's Understanding Media: The Extension of Man as their common text. The conversation was wonderful.
Our initial local champion at Danube University Krems was Sabine Zauchner. Her interest in the project shows how even in the academic world there are advantages to "networking." I met a professor from Klagenfurt University in Austria when Champlain's Associate Provost Michelle Miller and I presented on the Global Modules at a conference in Hyderabad, India. The Klagenfurt professor then asked me to present at a Learning Communities conference in Klagenfurt, where I met Sabine after my presentation. She then encouraged me to visit her school and now it is paying benefits. After this initial success we are discussing ways to expand our partnership.
Gary Scudder
globalmodules@gmail.com
scudder@champlain.edu
Friday, June 6, 2008
Kenyatta University
One of the newest members of our expanding Global Modules network is Kenyatta University. Kenyatta is Kenya's second largest public university and it is located just outside Nairobi, Kenya. I was fortune enough to visit the university this past November and they were enthusiastic in their support of creating more substantial ties to international universities. The Vice-Chancellor, Professor Olive Mugenda, the Director of University of Advancement, Professor Frederick Gravenir, and the Director of International Programs, Professor Caroline Thoruwa graciously took time out of their busy schedules to meet with me to discuss the Global Modules project and ways that our two schools could work together. This last semester Dr. Michael Mwaura from Kenyatta combined with Dr. Cameron Webster from Champlain to run a discussion focusing on African poetry and perceptions of adulthood and community.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Champlain student visits University of Jordan
This past fall, a senior Champlain College student, Jenica Norrish, from here in Burlington, VT visited Jordan to meet some of the students from the University of Jordan. Her visit was prompted from a series of articles she was writing for the campus newspaper about Global Modules being embedded into the new CORE curriculum at Champlain, with a final piece about her actual experience in Jordan. You can find Jenica's blog here and read about her first trip to the Middle East and about her time meeting some of the students and faculty on the other side of the Global Modules discussion.
Jenica at UJ in front of Big Ben campus clock
Jenica at UJ in front of Big Ben campus clock
Monday, January 21, 2008
Global Modules Partners Spring 2008
After spending the last six (give or take) months visiting, recruiting and contacting universities to pair up with Champlain classes, the list is ready.
Here are international universities represented in the GM pairings for Champlain's Concept of Community class (COR 120) this semester:
Here are international universities represented in the GM pairings for Champlain's Concept of Community class (COR 120) this semester:
Deakin University, Australia
Corvinus University, Hungary
Zayed University, United Arab Emirates
University of Skovde, Sweden
Kabul University, Afghanistan
University of Ghana, Ghana
University of Jordan, Jordan
Kenyatta University, Kenya
Goteborg University, Sweden
University of Alcala, Spain
Nipissing University, Canada
Al Akhawayn University, Morocco
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
