Vaccination rates in the United Kingdom hit a low of 80 per cent in the early 2000s, leaving children unprotected from serious diseases. The repercussions are still being felt today, with Dr Wakefield being hailed as a hero by vaccine sceptics.
One clue is that the overwhelming majority of the papers were ostensibly written by authors who claim to be affiliated with Chinese institutions. Universities in China often reward researchers for publishing in notable journals listed on the Science Citation Index, in some cases paying them cash bonuses, though China’s science and education ministries have recently tried to crack down on the practice. It’s also long been a requirement that doctoral students at many Chinese universities publish a paper before they graduate.
Plagiarism and the lack of academic integrity it engenders are intricately connected to the larger debate about intellectual property rights (IPR) in China and the government’s promoted idea of a harmonious society to support stability.
Information Media and Digital Literacy for GLST 195:Global Society & Citizenship
Instructor: Prof. Chuks Ugochukwu Per Syllabus:
COURSE LEARNING OUTCOMES: The course meets Liberal Education Program (LEP), Goal Area 8: Global Perspective; and Goal Area 9: Ethical and Civic Responsibility objectives Goal Area 8: Global Perspective. Objective: Develop a comparative perspective and understanding of one’s place in a global context.
Students will be able to:
Describe and analyze political, economic, and cultural elements which influence relations of states and societies in their historical and contemporary dimensions.
Demonstrate knowledge of cultural, social, religious and linguistic differences.
Analyze specific international problems, illustrating the cultural,economic, and political differences that affect their solution.
Understand the role of a world citizen and the responsibility world citizens share for their common global future.
Goal Area 9: Ethical and Civic Responsibility Objective: Understand and evaluate ethical or civic issues and theories and participate in active citizenship or ethical judgment
OUR HUSKY COMPACT
Our Husky Compact is a bond shared by St. Cloud State University and its students that a SCSU education will prepare students for a life of growth and fulfillment – intellectually, professionally, and personally. When students graduate with an SCSU education, they will:
Think Creatively and Critically
Seek and Apply Knowledge
Communicate Effectively
Integrate Existing and Evolving Technologies
Engage as a Member of a Diverse and Multicultural World
Act with Personal Integrity and Civic Responsibility
+++++++++++++++++++++
Week ???: Information – Media and Digital Literacy
Mini-Assignment: After reading the information from the links above, take a minute to write out your own definition of 1. Fake News 2. Alternative Facts
Mini-Assignment: After reading the information from the links above, take a minute to write out your own definition of 1. Misinformation 2. Disinformation. What are their main characteristics? How do they differ?
Propaganda
Mini-Assignment: What is Propaganda? How do misinformation, disinformation, fake news and alternative facts fit into the process of propaganda?
Mini-Assignment: Using the information from the links above, can you establish the connection between conspiracy theories, propaganda, mis- and disinformation, fake news, alternative news and social media?
Mini-Assignment: using the info from the links above and/or information you have collected, can you define the role of bots and trolls in social media in regard to propaganda and conspiracy theories?
Mini-Assignment:: based on your own information and experience, as well as the information offered in the links, can you define your own resistance to clickbaits?
In a short paragraph, identify the issues you see as important to address in order to improve your own news literacy. time to accomplish the assignment: ~45 min (including listening to the podcast).
Why is it important to understand these processes?
Assignment: why is it important:
In a short paragraph, share your initial feeling about Fake News / Misinformation / Disinformation. 1. Do you think, it is important at all? 2. If yes, why; if not, why. 3. If yes, what is the importance, the impact? time to accomplish the assignment: ~5-10 min
How to deal with these processes
how do we apply hands-on critical thinking to withstand these processes?
Similarly to the assessment of popular information sources, academia requires vigorous vetting if the sources you will be using for your academic work. In the 21st century, your ability to find information in peer-reviewed journals might not be sufficient to assure accurate and reliable use of information from those resources for your research and writing. After your selection of peer-reviewed literature, you must be able to evaluate and determine the veracity and reliability of those sources. How do you evaluate a source of information to determine if it is appropriate for academic/scholarly use. There is no set “checklist” to complete but below are some criteria to consider when you are evaluating a source.
Here is a short (4 min) video introducing you to the well-known basics for evaluation of academic literature: https://youtu.be/qUd_gf2ypk4
ACCURACY
Does the author cite reliable sources?
How does the information compare with that in other works on the topic?
Can you determine if the information has gone through peer-review?
Are there factual, spelling, typographical, or grammatical errors?
AUDIENCE
Who do you think the authors are trying to reach?
Is the language, vocabulary, style and tone appropriate for intended audience?
What are the audience demographics? (age, educational level, etc.)
Are the authors targeting a particular group or segment of society?
AUTHORITY
Who wrote the information found in the article or on the site?
What are the author’s credentials/qualifications for this particular topic?
Is the author affiliated with a particular organization or institution?
What does that affiliation suggest about the author?
CURRENCY
Is the content current?
Does the date of the information directly affect the accuracy or usefulness of the information?
OBJECTIVITY/BIAS
What is the author’s or website’s point of view?
Is the point of view subtle or explicit?
Is the information presented as fact or opinion?
If opinion, is the opinion supported by credible data or informed argument?
Is the information one-sided?
Are alternate views represented?
Does the point of view affect how you view the information?
PURPOSE
What is the author’s purpose or objective, to explain, provide new information or news, entertain, persuade or sell?
Does the purpose affect how you view the information presented?
In 2021, however, all suggestions above may not be sufficient to distinguish a reliable source of information, even if the article made it through the peer-reviewed process. In time, you should learn to evaluate the research methods of the authors and decide if they are reliable. Same applies for the research findings and conclusions.
Assignment: seeking reliable information
From your syllabus weekly themes: 1. Food; 2. Health; 3. Energy; 4. Environment; 5. Security, chose a topic of your interest.
For example: Food: raising cattle for food contributes to climate changes, because of the methane gas, or Health: COVID is the same (or not the same) as the flu; or Energy: Fossil energy is bad (or good) for the environment; etc.
Please consult with me (email me for a zoom appointment: pmiltenoff@stcloudstate.edu), if you need to discuss the choice and narrowing down of the topic.
Once you decide on the topic, do the research by collecting four sources of information:
The first couple of sources will be from popular media, whereas each of the two articles will be having an opposite approach, arguments and understanding of the issue. For example, one article will claim fossil energy is bad for the environment and the other one will argue fossil fuel has insignificant impact on climate change. You must be able to evaluate the veracity and the leaning of each source. The source can be a newspaper or magazine article, video (TV or Social Media), audio (podcasts, TV, etc.), presentations (PowerPoint, SlideShare, etc.).
Having troubles finding opposing resources? Feel welcome to search for your topic among these news outlets on the conservative side: https://www.conservapedia.com/Top_Conservative_news_websites
and the https://aelieve.com/rankings/websites/category/news-media/top-liberal-websites/
In the same fashion, you will evaluate the second couple of sources from peer-reviewed journals. Each source will have different approach, argument and understanding of the issue and you must evaluate the robustness of the research method.
time to accomplish the assignment: ~30 min
Module 2 (video to introduce students to the readings and expected tasks)
Digital Citizenship, Global Citizenship and Multiculturalism
Assignment:
Global Citizenship and Multiculturalism and Information and Media Literacy
Study the following tweet feed https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2021/02/18/facebook-google-australia/
If the information from the tweet feed is insufficient, research the issue by seeking reliable sources. (In a short paragraph defend your choice of reliable sources).
What do you see as more important issue: the Facebook stance that it can be a subject of Australian law or the Australian government stance that Facebook is interfering in Australian life with its news delivery? Is Facebook a news outlet or a platform for news outlets? Does Facebook need to be regulated? By who; each country do have to regulate Facebook or Facebook needs to be regulated globally?
time to accomplish the assignment: ~30 min
Module 3 (video to introduce students to the readings and expected tasks)
Sugimoto, C. R., Work, S., Larivière, V., & Haustein, S. (2016). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: a review of the literature. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.08112
One of the central issues associated with altmetrics (short for alternative metrics) is the identification of communities engaging with scholarly content on social media (Haustein, Bowman, & Costas, 2015; Neylon, 2014; Tsou, Bowman, Ghazinejad, & Sugimoto, 2015) . It is thus of central importance to understand the uses and users of social media in the context of scholarly communication.
most identify the following major categori es: social networking, social bookmarking, blogging, microblogging, wikis , and media and data sharing (Gu & Widén -Wulff, 2011; Rowlands, Nicholas, Russell, Canty, & Watkinson, 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013) . Some also conside r conferencing, collaborative authoring, scheduling and meeting tools (Rowlands et al., 2011) or RSS and online documents (Gu & Widén -Wulff, 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013) as social media. The landscape of social media, as well as that of altmetrics, is constantly changing and boundaries with othe r online platforms and traditional metrics are fuzzy. Many online platforms cannot be easily classified and more traditional metrics , such as downloads and mentions in policy documents , have been referred to as altmetrics due to data pr ovider policies.
the Use of social media platforms for by researchers is high — ranging from 75 to 80% in large -scale surveys (Rowlands et al., 2011; Tenopir et al., 2013; Van Eperen & Marincola, 2011) .
but
less than 10% of scholars reported using Twitter (Rowlands et al., 2011) , while 46% used ResearchGate (Van Noorden, 2014) , and more than 55% use d YouTube (Tenopir et al., 2013) —it is necessary to discuss the use of various types of social media separately . Furthermore, there i s a distinction among types of us e, with studies showing higher uses of social media for dissemination, consumption, communication , and promotion (e.g., Arcila -Calderón, Piñuel -Raigada, & Calderín -Cruz, 2013; Van Noorden, 2014) , and fewer instances of use for creation (i.e., using social media to construct scholarship) (British Library et al., 2012; Carpenter, Wetheridge, Tanner, & Smith, 2012; Procter et al., 2010b; Tenopir et al., 2013) .
Frequently mentioned social platforms in scholarly communication research include research -specific tools such as Mendeley, Zotero, CiteULike, BibSonomy, and Connotea (now defunct) as well as general tools such as Delicious and Digg (Hammond, Hannay, Lund, & Scott, 2005; Hull, Pettifer, & Kell, 2008; Priem & Hemminger, 2010; Reher & Haustein, 2010) .
Social data sharing platforms provide an infrastructure to share various types of scholarly objects —including datasets, software code, figures, presentation slides and videos —and for users to interact with these objects (e.g., comment on, favorite, like , and reuse ). Platforms such as Figshare and SlideShare disseminate scholars’ various types of research outputs such as datasets, figures, infographics, documents, videos, posters , or presentation slides (Enis, 2013) and displays views, likes, and shares by other users (Mas -Bleda et al., 2014) . GitHub provides for uploading and stor ing of software code, which allows users to modify and expand existing code (Dabbish, Stuart, Tsay, & Herbsleb, 2012) , which has been shown to lead to enhanced collaboratio n among developers (Thung, Bissyande, Lo, & Jiang, 2013) . As w ith other social data sharing platforms, usage statistics on the number of view and contributions to a project are provided (Kubilius, 2014) . The registry of research data repositories, re3data.org, ha s indexed more than 1,200 as of May 2015 2 . However, only a few of these repositories (i.e. , Figshare, SlideShare and Github) include social functionalities and have reached a certain level of participation from scholars (e.g., Begel, Bosch, & Storey, 2013; Kubilius, 2014) .
Video provide s yet another genre for social interaction and scholarly communication (Kousha, Thelwall, & Abdoli, 2012; Sugimoto & Thelwall, 2013) . Of the various video sharing platforms, YouTube, launched in 2005, is by far the most popular
A study of UK scholars reports that the majority o f respondents engaged with video for scholarly communication purposes (Tenopir et al., 2013) , yet only 20% have ever created in that genre. Among British PhD students, 17% had used videos and podcasts passively for research, while 8% had actively contributed (British Library et al., 2012) .
Blogs began in the mid -1990s and were considered ubiquitous by the mid- 200 0s (Gillmor, 2006; Hank, 2011; Lenhart & Fox, 2006; Rainie, 2005) . Scholarly blogs emerged during this time with their own neologisms (e.g., blogademia , blawgosphere , bloggership) and body of research (Hank, 2011) and were considered to change the exclusive structure of scholarly communication
Technorati, considered t o be on e of the largest ind ex of blogs, deleted their entire blog directory in 2014 3 . Individual blogs are also subject to abrupt cancellations and deletions, making questionable the degree to which blogging meets the permanence criteria of scholarly commu nication (Hank, 2011) .
ResearchBlogging.org (RB) — “an aggregator of blog posts referencing peer -reviewed research in a structured manner” (Shema, Bar -Ilan, & Thelwall, 2015, p. 3) — was launched in 2007 and has been a fairly stable structure in the scholarly blogging environment. RB both aggregates and —through the use of the RB icon — credentials scholarly blogs (Shema et al., 2015) . The informality of the genre (Mewburn & Thomson, 2013) and the ability to circumve nt traditional publishing barr iers has led advocates to claim that blogging can invert traditional academic power hierarchies (Walker, 2006) , allow ing people to construct scholarly identities outside of formal institutionalization (Ewins, 2005; Luzón, 2011; Potter, 2012) and democratize the scientific system (Gijón, 2013) . Another positive characteristic of blogs is their “inherently social” nature (Walker, 2006, p. 132) (see also Kjellberg, 2010; Luzón, 2011 ). Scholars have noted the potential for “communal scholarship” (Hendrick, 2012) made by linking and commenting, calling the platform “a new ‘third place’ for academic discourse” (Halavais, 2006, p. 117) . Commenting functionalities were seen as making possible the “shift from public understanding to public engagement with science” (Kouper, 2010, p. 1) .
Studies have also provided evidence of high rate s of blogging among certain subpopulations: for example, approximately one -third of German university staff (Pscheida et al., 2013) and one fifth of UK doctoral students use blogs (Carpenter et al., 2012) .
Academics are not only producers, but also consumers of blogs: a 2007 survey of medical bloggers foundthat the large majority (86%) read blogs to find medical news (Kovic et al., 2008)
Mahrt and Puschmann (2014) , who defined science blogging as “the use of blogs for science communication” (p. 1). It has been similarly likened to a sp ace for public intellectualism (Kirkup, 2010; Walker, 2006) and as a form of activism to combat perceived biased or pseudoscience (Riesch & Mendel, 2014. Yet, there remains a tension between science bloggers and science journalists, with many science journals dismissing the value of science blogs (Colson, 2011)
.
while there has been anecdotal evidence of the use of blogs in promotion and tenure (e.g., (Podgor, 2006) the consensus seem s to suggest that most institutions do not value blogging as highly as publishing in traditional outlets, or consider blogging as a measure of service rather than research activity (Hendricks, 2010, para. 30) .
Microblogging developed out of a particular blogging practice, wherein bloggers would post small messages or single files on a blog post. Blogs that focused on such “microposts” were then termed “tumblelogs” and were described as “a quick and dirty stream of consciousness” kind of blogging (Kottke, 2005, para. 2)
most popular microblogs are Twitter (launched in 2006), tumblr (launched in 2007), FriendFeed (launched in 2007 and available in several languages), Plurk (launched in 2008 and popular in Taiwan), and Sina Weibo (launched in 2009 and popular in China).
users to follow other users, search tweets by keywords or hashtags, and link to other media or other tweets
.
Conference chatter (backchanneling) is another widely studied area in the realm of scholarly microblogging. Twitter use at conferences is generally carried out by a minority of participants
Wikis are collaborative content management platforms enabled by web browsers and embedded markup languages.
Wikipedia has been advocated as a replacement for traditional publishing and peer review models (Xia o & Askin, 2012) and pleas have been made to encourage experts to contribute (Rush & Tracy, 2010) . Despite this, contribution rates remain low — likely hindered by the lack of explicit authorship in Wikipedia, a cornerstone of the traditional academic reward system (Black, 2008; Butler, 2008; Callaway, 2010; Whitworth & Friedman, 2009) . Citations to scholarly documents —another critical component in the reward system —are increasingly being found i n Wikiped ia entries (Bould et al., 2014; Park, 2011; Rousidis et al., 2013) , but are no t yet seen as valid impact indicators (Haustein, Peters, Bar -Ilan, et al., 2014) .
The altmetrics manifesto (Priem et al., 2010, para. 1) , altmetrics can serve as filters , which “reflect the broad, rapid impact of scholarship in this burgeoning ecosystem”.
There are also a host of platforms which are being used informally to discuss and rate scholarly material. Reddit, for example, is a general topic platform where users can submit, discuss and rate online content. Historically, mentions of scientific journals on Reddit have been rare (Thelwall, Haustein, et al., 2013) . However, several new subreddits —e.g., science subreddit 4 , Ask Me Anything sessions 5 –have recently been launched, focusing on the discussion of scientific information. Sites like Amazon (Kousha & Thelwall, 2015) and Goodreads (Zuccala, Verleysen, Cornacchia, & Engels, 2015) , which allow users to comment on and rate books, has also been mined as potential source for the compilation of impact indicators
libraries provide services to support researchers’ use of social media tools and metrics (Lapinski, Piwowar, & Priem, 2013; Rodgers & Barbrow, 2013; Roemer & Borchardt, 2013). One example is Mendeley Institutional Edition, https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/mendeley/Mendeley-Institutional-Edition, which mines Mendeley documents, annotations, and behavior and provides these data to libraries (Galligan & Dyas -Correia, 2013) . Libraries can use them for collection management, in a manner similar to other usage data, such as COUNTER statistics (Galligan & Dyas -Correia, 2013) .
Factors affecting social media use; age, academic rank and status, gender, discipline, country and language,
The Honor system is a phenomenon well known in many cultures across the globe and strongly presented in cultures since Ancient Greece and Rome. The concepts of honor and shame have long been associated with cultures in the Mediterranean region mostly because the first scholars to study the social impact of these concepts did so in Southern Europe. Honor has two fundamental components: birth and morality. People could gain or lose their honor by the morality of their conduct. Despite the scholarly emphasis on the Mediterranean, the concept of honor influenced social systems all over the world, and historians are beginning to detect its traces in places as different as China and Africa. The Southern Honor system can firmly be traced back in the European roots and determined to a great degree the American history of the 19th century.
This course will study the geography, history, sociology and religions, cultural and political systems of two worlds and learn to compare the findings. Based on those comparisons, lessons in gender, culture and politics will be drawn.
What is Honor and Shame system and why is it so important to know about it and recognize it
What is the connection between the Honor system in the Mediterranean and in the American South
How does the knowledge of the Honor system aim our daily actions and our global perspective
Course Goals
Students in this course will
Practice research methods and ability to find and evaluate information as well as select reliable information technologies.
Explore applications and technologies for communication and creative collaboration.
Gain practical, hands-on experience with a wide variety of research and online communication tools.
Students will demonstrate ability to research and find academically reliable information from peer-reviewed sources in the online databases, which SCSU is subscribed. Students will demonstrate ability to find and evaluate information from the Internet.
Students will demonstrate competencies in creation of textual and multimedia narratives in individual and collaborative environment.
Students will demonstrate competencies in application of technology toward creation and dissemination of textual and multimedia materials.
Attendance/Discussion Requirements
Attendance is required. If you cannot attend class, it is required to alert the instructor in advance. If the reason for the absence is an emergency, it is expected to approach the instructor and provide an explanation thereafter about the character of the emergency.
Discussion are expected. If you are shy and are hesitant to participate in class, you must compensate with the use of other communication tools (e.g., D2L Discussion List).
Assignment Descriptions
Discussions. You are expected to contribute to each class session with your ideas and your responses to the ideas of your peers. Your comments are expected in class and in between class sessions (using, e.g., D2L discussion list). Your comments must go beyond “yes, I agree,” and “no, I disagree” and provide analysis and synthesis of your thoughts.
Readings – you will be expected to contribute to each class sessions with bibliographical findings on your own.
Written responses – you will be expected to deliver four written responses to peer-reviewed articles related to topics discussed in the class sessions.
Final project – you will be expected to write and present a final project. The written part of the project will be in the realm of 4-5000 words; will adhere to academic research and style; will include a bibliography with at least 2/3 of the sources being peer-reviewed and outside of the 5000 words. The presentation can be of any multimedia form, whereas it will be peer-evaluated, but my (instructor’s) preference will be given to advance multimedia presentations (beyond PPT and using e.g. Prezy, iMovie/Moviemaker movie and/or audio narration)
All assignments should be submitted by midnight of the date on which they are due. Ten percent of an assignment’s point value will be removed for each day an assignment is late. This policy will be adjusted on a case-by-case basis if emergencies prevent you from submitting an assignment on time. In these situations, contact me as soon as is reasonable to determine how this policy can be adjusted in a way that meets your needs and is still fair to other students.
The grade book in D2L will be used to show detailed information about grades in this course. The table below shows the value of each assignment and the total number of points available.
Overall Grade
94% – 100% = A
90 % – 93.99% = A-
86% – 89.99% = B+
83% – 85.99% = B
80% – 82.99% = B-
70% – 79.99% = C
60% – 69.99% = D
59.99% or lower = F
Assignments Schedule
WEEK 1. August 28
Reading[s]:
Peruse through all articles in the D2L content area. Choose one article to your liking and be ready to reflect on it.Assignment[s]:
1. complete entry survey. 2. Prepare to present in coherent and concise manner your understanding of Honors and Shame and discuss the goals for this course. 3. Enter a short essay in the D2L discussion on how do you see applying the knowledge from this course in your future studies, research and work
Introduction. Orientation, class parameters and familiarizing with the syllabus. Questions and issues. Course goals
What is an/the Honor System? Entry Interview (D2L survey is completed and analyzed). Why explore this topic and these vastly different geographic entities (US South and the Mediterranean). Define interest in this class and interest for a project; how this class can help your studies? Your career? All over as a human being?
WEEK 2.Sept 4
Reading[s]:
BUSATTA, S. (2006). Honour and Shame in the Mediterranean. Antrocom, 2(2). 75-78. Retrieved March 19, 2013, from http://www.academia.edu/524890/Honour_and_Shame_in_the_Mediterranean
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499. (p. 24-26).
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Esmer, T. U. (n.d.). Honor in Ottoman and Contemporary Mediterranean Societies: Controversies, Continuities, and New Directions. conference announcement. Retrieved from http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=196551
Assignment[s]: 1. Find an article on Honor and Shame. 2. Outline in two paragraphs the content of one of the three articles and in a third paragraph compare to your findings; use academic style to log your responses. If you have hesitation about your style, please check with the Write Place, your peers and me.
Why research? Work on the reading material for class
Find articles for the course.
What is academic research? What is a peer-review article? When and how research the Internet. How do I access and keep track of resources.
RefWorks versus Zotero and Mendeley
What is an academic paper. How do I write an academic paper. The Write place.
Making plans: final project
WEEK 3. Sept 11
Reading[s]:
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Smith, A. (2004). Murder in Jerba: Honour, Shame and Hospitality among Maltese in Ottoman Tunisia. History and Anthropology Routledge, 15(2), 107–132.
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Assignment[s]:
Your first written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a historical perspective
Do we have a robust theory/notion about the Honor/Shame system through the centuries? Do you think tracking that model through centuries helps in the 21st century? If yes, how and if no, why?
WEEK 4. Sept 18
Reading[s]: Fernand Braudel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernand_Braudel) and the Annales School
Santos, N. F. (2008). Family, Patronage, and Social Contests: Narrative Reversals in the Gospel of Mark. S&J, (2). (footnote p. 200).
Hall, J. L. (1907). Half-hours in southern history. B. F. Johnson publishing co.
Harrell, L. A. (2009, December 4). It’s an honorable choice: Rebellions Against Southern Honor in William Styron’s The Confessions of Nat Turner. Retrieved from http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.16/2614
Assignment[s]:
Your second written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a geographic perspective
Is there a “southern” connection (Mediterranean is the European South)? Can be Annale School be right (geography and relief determines history)? To what degree geography and geographical conditions determine such models (Honor/Shame)?
WEEK 5. Sept 25
Reading[s]: Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611.
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499 (p. 22)
Lever, A. (1986). Honour as a Red Herring. Critique of Anthropology, 6(3), 83–106. doi:10.1177/0308275X8600600305
Assignment[s]:
Your third written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a cultural perspective. Gender roles, Masculinity
Does the Honor/Shame model help understand gender roles, social status, masculinity etc.?
WEEK 6. Oct 2
Reading[s]:
Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611. (p. 593)
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499. (p. 26-27; p. 30-33).
Cohen, D. (n.d.). Insult, Aggression, and the Southern Culture of Honor: An “Experimental Ethnography.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 945–960.
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Assignment[s]:
Your forth written response is due in the D2L dropbox. Your response must adhere to the requirements of an academic paper, including in-text citation and bibliography.
Honors and Shame from a political and social perspective
Can Honor/Shame be connected with the current political situation in Egypt, Syria, Turkey? Did Honor/Shame system influence decision in American history?
WEEK 7. Wednesday Oct 9
Assignment[s]: final project details
Start working on the final project
Present and discuss your final project: 1. Finalized title 2. Outline 3. Plan 4. Clear work distribution among group members 5. Clear way for peer assessment.
WEEK 8. Wednesday Oct 16
Assignment[s]: details on final project
Final brainstorming and start working on the project
Meeting as a whole: 1. Present group’s plan to class. 2. Share group’s ideas with class. 3. Share technology 4. Share sources 5. Share means for peer assessment
WEEK 9. Wednesday Oct 23
Assignment[s]: draft of bibliography
Class as a whole: peer review and brainstorming
Meeting as a whole: 1. Are sources reliable? 2. Are sources of academic origin (peer-reviewed)? 3. Is the bibliography adhering correctly to the formats (APA, Chicago, ALA)
WEEK 10. Wednesday Oct 30
Assignment[s]: details on presentation
Work on the final project
Meeting as a whole: 1. Presentation format 2. Share technology 3. Share ideas
WEEK 11. Wednesday Nov 6
Assignment[s]: paper draft due in D2L dropbox
Work on final project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 12. Wednesday Nov 13
Assignment[s]: paper draft and presentation
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Nov 20
Assignment[s]: paper draft due in D2L dropbox
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Nov 27
Work on project
Meeting as a whole: share group’s progress and seek other group’s feedback
WEEK 13. Wednesday Dec 4
Assignment[s]: paper final draft due in D2L dropbox
Cohen, D. (n.d.). Insult, Aggression, and the Southern Culture of Honor: An “Experimental Ethnography.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70(5), 945–960.
Crook, Z. (2009). Honor, Shame, and Social Status Revisited. Journal of Biblical Literature, 128(3), 591–611.
Dussere, E. (2001). The Debts of History: Southern Honor, Affirmative Action, and Faulkner’s Intruder in the Dust. Faulkner Journal, 17(1), 37–57.
Esmer, T. U. (n.d.). Honor in Ottoman and Contemporary Mediterranean Societies: Controversies, Continuities, and New Directions. conference announcement. Retrieved from http://www.h-net.org/announce/show.cgi?ID=196551
Family, Patronage, and Social Contests.pdf. (n.d.).
Hall, J. L. (1907). Half-hours in southern history. B. F. Johnson publishing co.
Harrell, L. A. (2009, December 4). It’s an honorable choice: Rebellions Against Southern Honor in William Styron’s The Confessions of Nat Turner. Retrieved from http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/resolver/1840.16/2614
Harris, J. W. (2002). Honor, Grace, and War (But Not Slavery?) in Southern Culture. Reviews in American History, 30(1), 1–7. doi:10.2307/30031707
Hellerman. (n.d.). Reconstructing Honor in Roman Philippi. Cambridge University Press.
Herzfeld, M. (1980). Honour and Shame: Problems in the Comparative Analysis of Moral Systems. Man, 15(2), 339–351. doi:10.2307/2801675
Honor, Shame, and Social Status.pdf. (n.d.).
honor-04-Antrocom_Honour and Shame in the Mediterranean_S.pdf. (n.d.).
Moxnes, V. (1996). Honor and Shame. In R. L. Rohrbaugh (Ed.). The Social Sciences and New Testament Interpretation (pp. 19-40). Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson. http://tinyurl.com/qdvc499
Murder in Jerba_ Honour, Shame and.pdf. (n.d.).
Osiek, C. (2008). Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity, 64(1), 323–337. doi:10.4102/hts.v64i1.2
Women, honor, and context in Mediterranean antiquity.pdf. (n.d.).
Wyatt-Brown, B. & Milbauer, Richard J. (2004). Honor, Shame, and Iraq in American Foreign Policy. In Note prepared for the Workshop on Humiliation and Violent Conflict, Columbia University, New York, November 18-19, 2004. Presented at the Workshop on Humiliation and Violent Conflict, Columbia University, New York,. Retrieved from http://www.humiliationstudies.org/documents/WyattBrownNY04meeting.pdf
