Teaching Portfolio - andrew t. dilts · Teaching Portfolio Andrew Dilts, Ph.D. Pedagogical...

Teaching PortfolioAndrew Dilts, Ph.D.

Pedagogical Statement 1

Teaching History 4

Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness: Selected Comments from Teaching Evaluations 5

Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness: Summary Statistics from Teaching Evaluations 8

Sample Syllabi 13

Pedagogical Statement

My approach to teaching is centered on developing my students’ skills of critical engagement of texts, phenomena, and discursive objects of analysis so that they can ultimately employ those skills to understand, interpret, and respond to the world around them, as well as their own selves. In this sense, I see my teaching as part of a larger project of enabling students to develop their entire selves, reflecting their own multiplicity, plurality, and difference.

Practically, this mean that the most important thing that I want to impart to my students is that any text, practice, discourse, or object of thoughtful analysis that is worth thinking and writing about calls for a sympathetic critique. By this I mean that texts of all forms require something akin to what Nietzsche calls an “art of interpretation,” and that the essence of this “art” is to provide careful support from one’s reading first and foremost from within the text itself. My pedagogy is driven by a strong preference for teaching original and primary sources by reading them closely while attending to their historical, social, and political contexts. But above all, I want to teach my students that a critical engagement with a thinker begins with taking them seriously on their own terms, sympathetically and internally. I work for my students to appreciate the power and pleasure of such an approach, and to come away from any seminar, lecture, or advising session with the practical reading and writing skills to put this into practice in their own well-supported reading of a text.

This approach of critical and immanent interpretation means that my courses rely on original and primary sources if at all possible. All class sessions, whether lectures or seminars, work from these texts and are structured around my goal of developing an interpretative and evidence-supported reading of the text. This requires historical sensitivity and close attention to the contingency of political and social practices as well as theoretical discourses. In this sense, I do not teach “truth” or “facts” of a text, but instead teach my students to appreciate the meaning of “truth” and “facts” by questioning the value of truth itself. This is what it means for me to give a meaningful account of a text, idea, or practice. As such, I insist that the skill of argumentative interpretation is a crucial method, a necessary approach, a powerful language, and above all, a productive style of analysis for any branch of the humanities or social sciences. To the degree that there exist important facts about a system of thought or about the political world, these facts are presumed to be contingent and

open to interpretation, predicated on a certain regime of truth that must be rendered visible to be subsequently useful and productive for understanding.

The difficulty with this approach from a teaching point of view, however, is that it is incumbent on me to offer a reading of these texts in a way that is exemplary but never definitive. That is to say, while I want my students to understand what Aristotle or Hobbes “think” and know what Plato’s Republic or Du Bois’ “Souls of Black Folks” are “about,” I am far more concerned with developing the ability to give their own account of why it can be said that an authors “thinks” any particular thing or these texts are “about” anything at all. Any reading that we develop in class, any interpretation of the text that I present, has to be taken as provisional, and only as good as the textual evidence we can marshal. I understand my role in this process as a guide, as someone who can model this method of reading and writing for them. This is not to say that I do not end up giving my students a specific reading of a text (this is especially unavoidable in lecture-based courses), but I work to present my reading as an illustration of how to build an interpretive argument supported with primarily internal textual evidence.

I realize these principles practically with two devices that keep my students grounded in close reading and centered on arguing for an interpretation of the texts. First, we belabor short passages, often spending entire class sessions on the opening paragraphs of texts. For example, the preface to On the Genealogy of Morality perfectly shows the necessity of close and careful reading, and gives students a taste of what close reading is like. In the preface are both the incredibly dense and difficult first section and the relatively straightforward assertion in the final section of how the book must be read. We work through each section, showing students the painstakingly slow way that a few lines can and must be unpacked. As a second example, this method of “belaboring” also works well with the first five paragraphs of Du Bois’ Souls of Black Folks, whose poetic character, philosophical density, and literary and mythological allusions can motivate far more than a single seminar session. When we include the musical “texts” that mark the openings of each chapter, it becomes even clearer that close reading of texts can be much broader than students may have previously thought.

Second, I routinely shift the interpretive burden onto the students with an agenda-setting practice, beginning class sessions by collecting questions about specific passages from each student in turn. Students are required to submit reading questions to a shared website before class, and then asked to offer their questions publicly. I stay at the chalkboard and record them, noting the specific passages they point to. In contrast to the “belaboring” session, where I directly guide the discussion through a linear reading of the text, I pull back in these sessions, asserting my control only by connecting their questions. What quickly emerges is a visual map of the day’s reading, bringing together passages, page numbers, characters, and concepts that require our attention. We then try (usually in vain) to move through as much of the map as possible. For the students, even if we cannot possibly cover the entire agenda in class, they at least get a sense of what their classmates see as important, and (if they are taking good notes), they are building their own index of important passages and concepts from the text. Overall, the hope is that students come to see the value in analyzing a text through questions about it, rather than passively recounting its main points or searching for definitive answers.

In a larger lecture course, I adapt these two methods, self-consciously presenting my lectures as readings of the texts that are open to interpretation and refutation. I move between the two devices, alternating between close literary readings of short passages, and building a visual map of key moments, terms, and questions from the text either with slides or on the board. In both a lecture or seminar setting, the method of evaluation is essentially the same: my students must demonstrate

Teaching Portfolio Andrew Dilts, Ph.D.

2

through their own writing that they realize that it is insufficient to merely assert a claim, but that they must argue for it as an art of interpretation. I want students to see that the point of writing about hard books is not simply to be able to recount what the author says, but to argue that they are correct in their interpretation of what the author says. The quality of an interpretive argument rests upon the student's ability to offer a persuasive case that they understand the text, and understand the ways in which reading it might be contentious.

The demands of graduate education do not differ here in substance, but perhaps only in form. That is, the role of the canon takes on greater importance at this level, in that what I teach graduate students is self-consciously a disciplined and organized regime of knowledge. I do not understand my position to be to authorize or endorse this literature, but to enable my students to master this literature. As such, the skills of interpretative argument and close reading are essentially the same. I also understand that my primary goal in graduate education is to teach pedagogy itself. The work of graduate education is always also about teaching teachers, and training them, above all, in the same skills of critical and sympathetic interpretation but with a constant eye toward their future roles as teachers themselves.


3

Teaching History

Loyola Marymount UniversityBellarmine College of Liberal Arts, Assistant Professor

• Foundations of Political Thought (POLS 220), 2011 - Present, every semester, required course for POLS majors.

• Contemporary Political Theory (POLS 327), Fall 2011 & 2013, biennial.

• The Politics of “The Wire” (POLS 392), Fall 2011, Spring 2012.• Society and its Discontents (HRNS 130), Spring 2012 & 2013.• Punishment & Mercy (POLS 392), w/ John Parrish, Fall 2012.• Critical Race Theory (POLS 392), Spring 2014.• Punishment and Incarceration (POLS 592), Spring 2014.

University of ChicagoThe College, Collegiate Assistant Professor

• Classics of Social and Political Thought I, II, & III (Social Sciences 15100, 15200, 15300), 2008-2011.

“Classics” is a part of the University of Chicago’s “Common Core” curriculum, emphasizing Socratic pedagogy in a yearlong small seminar format, focusing on the skills of interpretation and argument through the close reading of primary texts and extensive written work.

The College, Lecturer • Classics of Social and Political Thought III (SOSC 15300), Spring 2007, 2008.

• Classics of Social and Political Thought II (SOSC 15200), Winter 2007.

Department of Political Science, Lecturer

• Politics of Punishment (Political Science 20702 / Comparative Race Studies 20702), Autumn 2006

The College, Teaching Intern • Classics of Social and Political Thought I (SOSC 15100), Professor Nathan Tarcov, Autumn 2006.

• Classics of Social and Political Thought II (SOSC 15200), Professor Jacob Levy, Winter 2006.

• Classics of Social and Political Thought III (SOSC 15300), Professor Patchen Markell, Spring 2006.

Department of Political Science, Teaching Assistant

• Political Nature of the American Judiciary, Professor Gerald Rosenberg (PLSC 22515), Winter 2007.

• Intro. to Data Analysis (PLSC 30500, Graduate Course), Professor Eric Oliver, Autumn 2005.

• African-American Politics (PLSC 22100), Professor Cathy Cohen, Winter 2005.

• Intro. to American Government (PLSC 20500), Professor Melissa Harris-Lacewell, Spring 2004, 2006.

Indiana University, BloomingtonDepartment of Economics, Teaching Intern

Introductory Microeconomics (ECON 201), Professor Elyce Rotella, Fall Semester 2000, 2002; Professor James Walker, Fall Semester 2001.


4

Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness: Selected Comments from Teaching Evaluations

The following is a representative sample of student comments from previous courses I have taught.

I have tried to include comments that are substantive, and which also reflect both positive and negative evaluations of my teaching. In the interest of brevity, I have selected only five or six comments from each term.

Following these comments are selected summary statistics from my teaching evaluations at both institutions. Complete copies of the original evaluations from LMU as well as from the University of Chicago (which are publicly available on the UofC’s internal computer network) are available upon request.

Fall Semester, 2012 – Foundations of Political Thought (POLS 220), LMU (required class for Political Science Majors):The course renewed my interest in theory and philosophy. Nobody else is more capable of making this usually dry subject entertaining. Professor Dilts is engaging and welcoming of all view points. He fosters good discussion and is very enlightening.

The professor’s advanced knowledge of the subject really helped. I’ve read Du Bois in history classes before but Dilts broke down the book in a way that couldn’t have been explained any better, in my opinion.

Dilts is amazing – wish he taught all my classes.

A slightly slower pace would allow for greater understanding.

Professor Dilts is probably the best teacher I’ve had at LMU thus far. My only regret is that I was unable to make it to every class. His teaching style, lessons, and overall excitement made this class amazing.

One of the most through-provoking classes. Great instruction / direction / discussions but very loaded with work towards end, very stressful.

Spring Semesters, 2012 & 2013 – Society and its Discontents (Honors 130), LMU (required class for Honors Core) :The class was really well planned and fit together well. This was my favorite class I’ve ever taken. The class presentations were beneficial and the professor was extremely knowledgable. … I wish we could had more time with Foucault because it was really challenging and I don’t quite have it.

Always available to answer questions, great great discussions, essay topics were challenging, presentations challenged us to do our best analyses and think on our own.

The reading questions really made me read, and gave a focus to the reading.

Difficult, but fair grading.

The course challenged me and opened my eyes in ways other classes never have. I see the world in a new way of after this course. The is one of the best classes I’ve ever taken. Professor Dilts is absolutely brilliant and has inspired me and enlightened me about ideologies and concepts and connections I never would have seen. Class was incredibly enjoyable each and every day. The only issue I had with the course was that I think one of the readings (maybe Marcuse) should be eradicated because then we could spend more time on the other readings and get more engaged in each text.

The grading rubrics clearly showed your desires and I liked how you graded papers (in that we laid out where we wanted to go and you graded us on if we achieved it).


5

The interdisciplinary nature of the subject and disciplines was fascinating and the class opened my eyes to many new ways of looking at life. I felt that the professor gave feedback in person that made it seem that the grades would be very high, but my grades didn’t always reflect how I felt in class discussions.

Some discussion were very good. The presentations were good. The papers weren’t interesting or fun to write. If there were more general it could encourage more creativity. Similarly, sometimes discussions were too structured and didn’t allow students to organically come to some conclusions.

Really engaging discussions. Fascinating lecture, good choice of readings. Professor was on top of things, there was clearly a plan. … Would have liked a little more time on some writers (Fanon, Foucault), they felt a little rushed.

I enjoyed being able to look at the philosophy of such a diverse body of works, and that our class discussions following the reading were really good reflections on the reading we had done.

Fall Semester, 2011 – Contemporary Political Theory (Political Science 327), LMU: Incredible discussion and learning experience!

Professor Dilts is a wonderful instructor, it is as if he has been teaching for 40 yrs. He connects w/ the class so well and gives us constructive feedback, pressuring us to open up our minds in ways we wouldn’t think possible.

He was one of the best teachers I have seen at communicating difficult concepts to students.

Now I’m interested in French thinkers. I never thought I would say that.

Professor Dilts is a passionate and inspirational teacher; he made the class really fascinating and insightful. We went slightly too fast over each reading in my opinion.

The discussions in class were very helpful especially when the reading tended to be hard.

Fall Quarter, 2009 – Classics of Social and Political Thought I, UofC:Andrew is a fantastic instructor. Every discussion we had was riveting and often completely changed my opinion of the reading we’d just done. He was able to make completely clear books that had utterly eluded me when I’d read them the night before, while simultaneously being extremely funny and encouraging the participation of almost the entire class. The only weakness I could think of is that he’s kind of a harsh grader, but never to an extent that I’d consider unfair.

Very dedicated, very engaged in class discussion. He was timely and gave adequate feedback. Sometimes it wasn’t entirely clear what he was looking for in a paper’s thesis.

Dilts is an amazing discussion leader, he takes the input of all the students and creates for us a framework for understanding the reading.

Wonderful instructor. My favorite was when he mentioned a talk he was having with a friend at a bar, and the new insight he got on Aristotle then. Wonderful class!

Andrew is an excellent sosc professor. He brings direction to every class and is great at guiding discussion, but also has students post discussion questions every night to build an organizational framework for the next class. He can clearly explain complex ideas and uses the board well. Also, he is extremely helpful during office hours with both general advice on paper writing and specific suggestions for improvement.


6

Andrew is always very dynamic and seems actually excited to be teaching Sosc - which is not always the case with core classes! I would highly recommend him as a sosc professor. The fact that he always seems to have an idea of where the class is going is both positive and negative: it’s nice to have some sort of goal ahead of us, but sometimes interesting ideas are passed by because they don’t fit the class plan.

Winter Quarter, 2010 – Classics of Social and Political Thought II, UofC:Prof. Dilts is smart, funny, friendly, very familiar with the texts, and open to students` opinions. Everything one would want in a discussion leader. Maybe he talked and pushed his personal interpretation of the text a liiiittle too much, but he never actively discouraged any student from making their own interpretation.

Professor Dilts was very enthusiastic and always brought simulating discussions in class. He did a good job of keeping things flowing in discussion and not letting the discussion lull. He also did a good job of hammering home some of the main ideas of the writers, I wish he would have chosen I bit more of a direction to go with every class though.

Dilts is one of those instructors that gives an excellent name to young professors. Extremely talented at drawing useful points from the group while politely discouraging remarks lacking insight. Very eager to meet outside of class, and obviously devoted to constantly improving his undergraduate teaching abilities. It’s a shame he’s not teaching next quarter.

Professor Dilts was great at encouraging us to think independently. We were expected to analyze the texts ourselves with only minimum direction from the instructor. That said, class discussion was conducted through a process of bouncing ideas off of the Professor rather than open discussion among ourselves. This was often positive, but it would have been interesting to see how it would have worked if we were left entirely to ourselves once in a while. Another strength of Professor Dilts is that his grading was always detailed and rigorous, and he was always eager to help us with our assignments.

Professor Dilts is Amazing!!!! I love every minute in his class. The discussions are great, he is very knowledgeable about the material. I wish I could have him for third quarter. He is a difficult grader, but it makes you become a better writer.

Dilts is a phenomenal lecturer and a great discussion leader. He can sometimes get sidetracked, but I don’t think that detracts from the quality of the lecture at all. If anything, it makes the class flow more smoothly.


7

Evidence of Teaching Effectiveness: Summary Statistics from Teaching Evaluations

-

Spring 2013

143

00

0

00

02

15

133

00

0

161

00

0 00

05

12170

017

017

00

00

0

00

02

15

01

12

13

00

05

120

00

215

00

015

00

03

14

NO

TES:

Atten-

dance

GPA

Class

Year

THIS STA

TEMEN

T'SU

NIVER

SITY-WID

EPER

CEN

TILE BR

AC

KETS*

ALL C

OU

RSES

UN

IVERSITY-

WID

EA

LL CO

UR

SESTH

IS DEPA

RTM

ENT

THIS

SECTIO

N

-

Core

Req'd

Major

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

STATE-M

ENT

SAgreeAgree

Uncertain

Disagree

SDisagree

FREQ

UEN

CY O

F RESPO

NSES

AVERAG

E SCO

RE FO

R TH

IS STATEMEN

T FOR

...

KEY TO

STATEM

ENTS

If the average score for a particular statement in this course section falls BELO

Wor A

BO

VE

itscorresponding 10th or 90th percentile bracket value, then that score is am

ong the LOW

ES

T orH

IGH

EST 10% of all scores for this statem

ent averaged across all courses university-wide.

CO

UR

SE TITLE:

DISC

IPLINE, C

OU

RSE N

UM

BER

, SECTIO

N:

NU

MB

ER O

F QU

ESTION

NAIR

ESC

OM

PLETED FO

R TH

IS SECTIO

N:

DEPARTM

ENT:

INSTRUCTOR:

CO

LLEGE:

SEMESTER

AND YEAR:

1. Learning outcomes w

ere clearly stated2. Learning outcom

es effectively addressed3. C

onstructive interactions re: Instr/Student

4. Instructor accessible for discussion5. R

eceived feedback that improved learning

6. Challenged m

e to do best work

7. Increased interest in subject matter

8. Rate overall effectiveness of instruction

9. Optional question for local usage


What is your class year?

Your LM

U C

umulative G

PA

Society & Its Discontents

POLS

Dilts, A

ndrew T.

17

-- - -----

(10th 90th)

Loyola Marym

ount University - C

ourse Evaluation Form

*

Your C

lass Attendance

Was this course in your m

ajor department?

Was this course required by your m

ajor?

Copyright ©

RB

W(2004). A

ll rights reserved.

4.824.884.884.714.714.944.59

4.88

4.474.424.484.514.254.374.29

4.37

4.494.464.484.504.304.304.11

4.36

4.074.87

4.004.88

3.954.93

4.064.91

3.734.87

3.784.81

3.404.80

3.704.90

YesNo

FreshSoph

JuniorSenior

Grad

< 2.02.0-2.49

2.5-2.993.0-3.49

3.5-4.0

Always

Almost

Always

Usually

Occa-

sionallyR

arely

College Survey Services Inc. - 800 755 9065

LA - Bellarm

ine College of Liberal Arts

HN

RS 130-03

INITIAL

ENR

OLLM

ENT:

20

ALL C

OU

RSES

THIS C

OLLEG

E

4.494.454.474.534.274.274.05

4.36

100

00

00

-

Are you taking this to fulfill C

ore Reqts?

I had a strong interest in taking this course.

Interest9

71

00

SAgreeAgree

Uncertain

Disagree

SDisagree

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

CRN:74164

2

SAgreeAgree

Uncertain

Disagree

SDisagree

V Good

Good

FairPoor

V Poor

Other

N/A0 0

SAgreeAgree

Uncertain

Disagree

SDisagree

V Good

Good

FairPoor

V Poor5

43

21

Rating Scales for scorable statem

ents 1-10:

54

32

1

StronglyAgree

StronglyD

isagree

POLS

LA - Bellarm


N/A

N/A


8

- Fall 2012

96

10

0

00

110

4

07

53

0

143

00

0 00

02

15413

152

152

00

00

1

00

00

16

00

22

13

00

01

160

00

017

00

016

00

02

15

NOTES:

Atten-dance

GPA

ClassYear

THIS STATEMENT'S

UNIVERSITY-WIDE

PERCENTILE BRACKETS*ALL CO

URSESUNIVERSITY-

WIDE

ALL COURSES

THIS DEPARTMENT

THISSECTIO

N

-

CoreReq'dM

ajor

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

STATE-M

ENT

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

FREQUENCY O

F RESPONSES

AVERAGE SCO

RE FOR THIS STATEM

ENT FOR ...

KEY TO STATEM

ENTS


Wor A

BO

VE


ong the LOW

ES

T orH

IGH



COURSE TITLE:

DISCIPLINE, COURSE NUM

BER, SECTION:

NUMBER O

F QUESTIO

NNAIRESCO

MPLETED FO

R THIS SECTION:

DEPARTMENT:

INSTRUCTOR:

COLLEG

E:

SEMESTER AND YEAR:







6. Challenged m

e to do best work






Your LM

U C

umulative G

PA

Foundations Political Thought

POLS

Dilts, A

ndrew T.

17

-- - -----

(10th 90th)

Loyola M

arymou

nt U

niversity - C

ourse E

valuation

Form

*

Your C

lass Attendance


ajor department?


ajor?

Copyright ©

RB

W(2004). A

ll rights reserved.

4.884.945.004.944.884.824.65

5.00

4.554.534.574.584.334.454.33

4.48

4.444.394.414.454.214.264.00

4.28

4.004.87

3.854.86

3.824.94

4.004.90

3.584.86

3.734.82

3.214.80

3.564.90

YesNo

FreshSoph

JuniorSenior

Grad

< 2.02.0-2.49

2.5-2.993.0-3.49

3.5-4.0

Always

Almost

Always

UsuallyO

cca-sionally

Rarely


LA - Bellarm


POLS 220-03

INITIALENRO

LLMENT:

20

ALL COURSES

THIS COLLEG

E

4.474.434.464.514.254.263.98

4.34

101

00

00

-


ore Reqts?


Interest8

71

10

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

CRN:41283

1

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

V Good

Good

FairPoor

V Poor

Other

N/A2 0

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagreeV G

oodG

oodFair

PoorV Poor

54

32

1

Rating Scales for scorable statements 1-10:

54

32

1

StronglyAgree

StronglyDisagree

POLS

LA - Bellarm


5.005.00


9

- Fall 2011

96

10

0

00

19

5

01

96

0

134

00

0 00

05

12710

88

143

00

00

0

00

04

13

00

13

13

00

01

160

00

215

00

013

00

04

13

NOTES:

Atten-dance

GPA

ClassYear

THIS STATEMENT'S

UNIVERSITY-WIDE


URSESUNIVERSITY-

WIDE

ALL COURSES

THIS DEPARTMENT

THISSECTIO

N

-

CoreReq'dM

ajor

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

STATE-M

ENT

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

FREQUENCY O

F RESPONSES

AVERAGE SCO

RE FOR THIS STATEM

ENT FOR ...

KEY TO STATEM

ENTS


Wor A

BO

VE


ong the LOW

ES

T orH

IGH



COURSE TITLE:


BER, SECTION:

NUMBER O

F QUESTIO

NNAIRESCO

MPLETED FO

R THIS SECTION:

DEPARTMENT:

INSTRUCTOR:

COLLEG

E:

SEMESTER AND YEAR:







6. Challenged m

e to do best work






Your LM

U C

umulative G

PA

Contemporary Political Theory

POLS

Dilts, A

ndrew T.

17

-- - -----

(10th 90th)

Loyola M

arymou

nt U

niversity - C

ourse E

valuation

Form

*

Your C

lass Attendance


ajor department?


ajor?

Copyright ©

RB

W(2004). A

ll rights reserved.

4.764.764.884.944.714.764.71

4.76

4.614.564.524.624.344.504.25

4.47

4.474.434.444.494.244.284.04

4.31

4.004.88

3.924.88

3.874.94

4.004.93

3.634.88

3.744.81

3.274.80

3.604.90

YesNo

FreshSoph

JuniorSenior

Grad

< 2.02.0-2.49

2.5-2.993.0-3.49

3.5-4.0

Always

Almost

Always

UsuallyO

cca-sionally

Rarely


LA - Bellarm


POLS 327-01

INITIALENRO

LLMENT:

22

ALL COURSES

THIS COLLEG

E

4.494.454.474.554.244.283.98

4.35

100

00

00

-


ore Reqts?


Interest8

72

00

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

CRN:42962

4

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

V Good

Good

FairPoor

V Poor

Other

N/A1 0

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagreeV G

oodG

oodFair

PoorV Poor

54

32

1


54

32

1

StronglyAgree

StronglyDisagree

POLS

LA - Bellarm


N/A

N/A


10

- Fall 2011

107

00

0

01

26

8

04

48

0

125

00

0 00

04

13413

314

152

00

01

1

00

01

16

00

00

17

00

00

170

00

116

00

016

00

02

15

NOTES:

Atten-dance

GPA

ClassYear

THIS STATEMENT'S

UNIVERSITY-WIDE


URSESUNIVERSITY-

WIDE

ALL COURSES

THIS DEPARTMENT

THISSECTIO

N

-

CoreReq'dM

ajor

9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

STATE-M

ENT

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

FREQUENCY O

F RESPONSES

AVERAGE SCO

RE FOR THIS STATEM

ENT FOR ...

KEY TO STATEM

ENTS


Wor A

BO

VE


ong the LOW

ES

T orH

IGH



COURSE TITLE:


BER, SECTION:

NUMBER O

F QUESTIO

NNAIRESCO

MPLETED FO

R THIS SECTION:

DEPARTMENT:

INSTRUCTOR:

COLLEG

E:

SEMESTER AND YEAR:







6. Challenged m

e to do best work






Your LM

U C

umulative G

PA

SS: Politics of ""The Wire""

POLS

Dilts, A

ndrew T.

17

-- - -----

(10th 90th)

Loyola M

arymou

nt U

niversity - C

ourse E

valuation

Form

*

Your C

lass Attendance


ajor department?


ajor?

Copyright ©

RB

W(2004). A

ll rights reserved.

4.884.944.945.004.764.715.00

4.94

4.614.564.524.624.344.504.25

4.47

4.474.434.444.494.244.284.04

4.31

4.004.88

3.924.88

3.874.94

4.004.93

3.634.88

3.744.81

3.274.80

3.604.90

YesNo

FreshSoph

JuniorSenior

Grad

< 2.02.0-2.49

2.5-2.993.0-3.49

3.5-4.0

Always

Almost

Always

UsuallyO

cca-sionally

Rarely


LA - Bellarm


POLS 392-01

INITIALENRO

LLMENT:

18

ALL COURSES

THIS COLLEG

E

4.494.454.474.554.244.283.98

4.35

101

00

00

-


ore Reqts?


Interest13

11

01

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

CRN:43431

1

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagree

V Good

Good

FairPoor

V Poor

Other

N/A0 0

SAgreeAgree

UncertainDisagree

SDisagreeV G

oodG

oodFair

PoorV Poor

54

32

1


54

32

1

StronglyAgree

StronglyDisagree

POLS

LA - Bellarm


4.505.00


11

Andrew

Dilts

Summ

ary Statistics for Teaching Evaluations

University of C

hicago, 2006-2010

Po

litics of

Pu

nish

men

tA

utu

mn

06

Au

tum

n 0

8A

utu

mn

08

Au

tum

n 0

9A

utu

mn

09

Win

ter 0

7W

inte

r 09

Win

ter 0

9W

inte

r 10

Win

ter 1

0S

prin

g 0

7S

prin

g 0

8S

prin

g 0

9S

prin

g 0

9(S

ect. 2

)(S

ect. 5

)(S

ect. 4

)(S

ect. 7

)(S

ect. 2

)(S

ect. 5

)(S

ect. 4

)(S

ect. 7

)(S

ect. 2

)(S

ect. 5

)n

=2

3/

24

n=

10

/1

9n

=1

2/

19

n=

17

/1

9n

=1

6/

19

n=

13

/2

1n

=1

5/

17

n=

15

/1

9n

=1

3/

18

n=

15

/1

9n

=1

1/

21

n=

7/

18

n=

18

/2

0n

=1

6/

17

THE IN

STR

UCTO

R:

... organized course clearly4.61

4.503.80

4.884.56

4.854.73

4.735.00

4.804.55

4.714.73

4.88... presented clear lectures

4.644.50

3.904.79

4.644.75

5.004.60

4.834.71

4.634.40

5.005.00

... held my attention and m

ade this course interesting4.78

4.424.30

4.884.50

4.694.92

4.734.92

4.574.45

4.574.92

4.94... stim

ulated and facilitated questions and discussions4.83

4.584.20

4.884.69

4.774.75

4.934.92

4.734.64

5.004.75

4.94…

responded well to student questions

4.874.58

4.504.75

4.534.85

4.754.73

4.924.86

4.734.86

4.754.94

… w

as available outside of class4.71

4.754.11

4.364.62

4.774.64

4.794.73

4.645.00

5.004.64

4.94... w

as helpful during office hours4.81

4.894.17

4.364.67

4.904.78

5.004.75

4.924.90

4.864.78

4.93... m

otivated independent thinking4.74

4.424.10

4.474.60

4.694.75

4.714.62

4.674.82

4.864.75

4.76

THE R

EAD

ING

S:

... fulfilled the objectives of this course4.61

4.834.40

4.654.88

4.544.67

4.604.69

4.804.45

4.434.67

4.71... w

ere reasonable in number

3.964.75

3.904.12

3.674.15

4.174.40

4.624.53

4.274.71

4.174.53

... were appropriately difficult

4.524.75

4.304.35

4.384.54

4.424.73

4.694.69

4.554.71

4.424.88

THE A

SSIG

NM

ENTS

:H

ow helpful w

ere the lectures and discussions in preparing for exam

s and completing assignm

ents?4.33

3.673.90

3.944.38

4.424.80

4.234.54

4.534.18

4.674.80

4.53

How

appropriately were the requirem

ents of the course proportioned to the course goals?

4.614.64

4.224.35

4.574.62

4.824.50

4.694.60

4.644.83

4.824.71

How

well did the requirem

ents contribute to the goals of the course?

4.484.55

4.334.35

4.504.62

4.824.50

4.694.53

4.644.83

4.824.76

How

timely and useful w

as feedback on assignments and

exams?

4.573.92

2.904.29

3.804.38

3.924.00

4.384.33

4.274.83

3.924.18

How

fairly were the assignm

ents graded?4.70

4.083.80

4.444.47

4.234.45

4.334.46

4.434.55

4.504.45

4.71

OVER

ALL:

This course met m

y expectations4.78

4.273.90

4.594.47

4.544.75

4.474.85

4.474.55

4.574.75

4.94

This course provided me w

ith new insight and know

ledge4.87

4.254.20

4.764.81

4.544.91

4.534.92

4.604.45

4.864.91

4.88

This course provided me w

ith useful skills4.43

4.253.90

4.354.25

4.234.58

4.134.62

4.404.45

4.574.58

4.88The content of this course w

as presented at an appropriate level

4.704.58

4.204.47

4.634.69

4.834.80

4.854.73

4.554.71

4.835.00

I put my best effort into this course

4.224.58

4.304.41

4.444.38

4.254.27

4.384.40

4.094.57

4.254.53

The class had a high level of morale/enthusiasm

4.614.50

4.204.47

4.444.38

4.584.60

4.694.71

4.364.86

4.584.76

Cla

ssics of S

ocia

l an

d P

olitica

l Th

ou

gh

t IIC

lassics o

f So

cial a

nd

Po

litical T

ho

ug

ht III

This table sum

marizes the quantitative inform

ation from m

y undergraduate University of C

hicago course evaluations, dating back to Autum

n of 2006. The data are broken dow

n by course and by section, based on sum

mary tables reported on the C

ollege's course evaluation website. Students are asked to circle num

bers from 1 (“strongly disagree” or “not at all”)

to 5 (“strongly agree” or “a great deal”) in response to each item. T

hey may also circle “N

/A,” and a few

students circle nothing for some item

s. In this summ

ary, I have treated "N

/A" as a non-response, and rem

oved it from calcuation (m

eaning that for some item

s, the N varies). For purposes of this sum

mary I have sim

ply provided the mean of all reported

numerical scores for each item

. With only a few

exceptions, the modal response for nearly every question w

as a 5. Copies of com

plete evluations are available on request.

Cla

ssics of S

ocia

l an

d P

olitica

l Th

ou

gh

t I


12

Sample Syllabi

In the following pages, I have collected a selection of sample syllabi that exemplify my pedagogical approach:

• “Contemporary Political Theory” – This is an upper-division course for Political Science majors at Loyola Marymount University. It is a broad survey of movements within political theory in the post-war period. I teach this course every other year at LMU.

• “Society and its Discontents” – this is a first-year seminar designed for students enrolled in Loyola Marymount University’s Honors Program. Students critically engage in the social, economic, and political theories of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud through close readings of their thought and through reading a series of twentieth century re-interpreters of their thought.

• “The Politics of ‘The Wire’” – this is a special 1-unit course I developed for upper-level undergraduate students at Loyola Marymount University. The course uses the critically acclaimed HBO television series “The Wire” to question the efficacy and ethics of the “war on drugs” in the United States.

• “Classics of Social and Political Thought” – This is a year long undergraduate seminar that I taught annually at the University of Chicago between 2008 and 2011 as a Collegiate Assistant Professor, and which I taught previously as a Graduate Lecturer since 2007. I have condensed the three-quarter sequence into a single syllabus here.

• “Foucault’s Turn to Ethics” – This is a graduate political theory seminar focusing on the “late” Foucault and around the debate over his so-called “ethical turn.” This syllabus is easily adaptable for upper-level undergraduate course for majors in political theory.

• “Politics of Punishment” – This is the syllabus from an undergraduate seminar that I taught in 2006 as a Grodzins Prize Lectureship at the University of Chicago in the departments of Political Science and Comparative Race Studies.

• “African-American Politics in Theory and Practice” – This race and politics course offers a survey of empirical and theoretical approaches to understanding race and political theory, the history of black politics in the United States, and specific social and political “critical issues” facing all Americans today. Each unit of the course serves as the basis for in-depth field seminars on each of the 15 topics presented here.

• “Introduction to U.S. Politics: Institutions and Issues” – This is an introductory U.S. Politics course suitable for a lecture or seminar setting, which relies on primary historical documents and canonical texts in political science (rather than using a textbook) to study political institutions and problems in contemporary U.S. politics.

Additional course descriptions and syllabi are available by request and online: http://dilts.org/

Teaching Portfolio - Sample Syllabi Andrew Dilts, Ph.D.

13

CONTEMPORARY POLITICAL THEORYPolitical Science (POLS) 327

Fall 2013, 4 Units

Instructor: Prof. Andrew DiltsOffice: University Hall 4134Office Hours: MW 4:30-5:30p, F 12:30-1:30p http://dilts.org/officehours

Email: [email protected]: 310.338.5165

Class Meetings: MWF, 2:00p–2:50pSt. Robert’s Hall 022

Course Website: https://mylmuconnect.lmu.edu/

COURSE INFORMATION

DESCRIPTION: This is a survey course of late 20th and early 21st century political theory. We will cover a range of theoretical approaches in contemporary political theory, including: (1) social welfare liberalism, (2) libertarianism, (3) civic and humanist republicanism, (4) identitarian critiques and critical theory, (5) post-structuralism, and (6) queer/trans* theory. Throughout the semester, we will pay special attention to two constellations of questions centered on the ideas of “freedom” and “critique.” What do we mean by freedom? Who is the “free agent” or “free subject” of political life? What is the relation between political freedom and freedom in social, economic, and moral spheres? Secondly, what is critique? What is the object of critique? What grounds critique? What role does critical analysis play in political theory? What does it mean to be a critical political thinker in our daily lives and in our multiplicity? What, in the end, is the relationship between freedom and critique?

INSTITUTIONAL MISSION: Loyola Marymount University’s mission is to encourage student learning, to educate the whole person, and to serve faith and promote justice. The Department of Political Science pursues this mission by encouraging and challenging students to be perceptive observers of political life in all its variety and richness; to seek a systematic understanding of the causes and consequences of political institutions, policies, and behavior; to develop a moral and ethical perspective that allows them to critically evaluate actions, institutions, and policies; and to prepare themselves for a life of active citizenship and involvement in creating a more just and humane world. “Contemporary Political Theory” serves these university and departmental missions by reinforcing on students knowledge of political theory, which draws a variety of moral values and political realities into a relationship of dialogue, challenge, compromise, and conflict. The course will serve to equip students with sharper analytical tools, and hopefully also greater moral sensitivity in perceiving and confronting the political dimensions of the world around them.

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES:1. Students will learn about key movements and thinkers in contemporary political theory. 2. Students will dramatically expand their understanding of freedom as a normative and descriptive idea in

political theory.3. Students will reflect on the method of political theory, and in particular, on the role that critique plays in

contemporary political theory. 4. Students will improve their critical, argumentative, and interpretive writing skills. 5. Students will improve their research and information literacy skills.6. Most importantly, students will develop their critical thinking skills and apply them to their political and

social lives, allowing them to grow as persons and as reflective citizens.

PREREQUISITES/RECOMMENDED BACKGROUND: Students should have completed POLS 220 and be familiar with the history of political thought. Preference will be given to students who have taken some combination of POLS 323, 324, 325, and 326.


14

http://dilts.org/officehours


mailto:[email protected]


https://mylmuconnect.lmu.edu


COURSE REQUIREMENTS

This course is a 4-unit, upper-division course, that carries a CORE writing flag. In particular, it has intensive reading requirements and you will be held accountable for that reading with frequent writing assignments; it will require multi-draft writing throughout the semester; it will substantively focus attention on methodological training in political theory (through its emphasis on critique as a practice); it includes a significant individual mentoring component. To reflect these ends, the course has the following requirements:

(1) You will submit write a substantial research paper during the semester. This paper must be formatted and submitted properly to receive full credit, as documented in the course paper requirements on the course website.

(2) You will submit multiple drafts of this paper throughout the semester, both to the instructor and to your peers. You will take part in a formal peer-review session, editing and commenting on two of your colleagues’ paper drafts.

(3) You will prepare an annotated bibliography supporting your research paper, turned in and updated a multiple points throughout the semester.

(4) You must schedule an individual mentoring meeting with the instructor no later than 6th week to discuss your planed term paper.

(5) You will submit an abstract and detailed outline of your research paper no latter than 9th week.(6) You will be held accountable to each other for the substantial course reading by submitting a written

reading question twenty-four hours before each class meeting. Your reading questions must demonstrate (a) completion of the reading assignment and (b) thought and reflection on the reading assignment. The grading criteria for these questions are discussed in detail below. You should make it a practice read each others questions before the class meets.

(7) You must attend class and be an active participant in discussion. Because this is a text-driven course, you must always bring a hard-copy of the day’s reading to class and you must be prepared to publicly present your reading question in class. If you are more than 5 minutes late to class, you will be marked as absent. If you do not bring your copy of the reading with you to class, you will be marked as absent.

GRADE BREAKDOWN:Term paper: 40%Peer Review: 20%Paper Abstract & Outline: 10%Annotated Bibliography: 10%Reading Questions: 10%Attendance: 5%Participation: 5%

GRADING SCALE: A 93-100A- 90-92B+ 88-89B 83-87B- 80-82C+ 78-79C 73-77C- 70-72D 60-69F 0-59

***Any student who receives a failing grade for attendance and participation will receive a failing grade for the class. Any student who has not turned in all paper drafts will receive a failing grade for the class.***

READING QUESTIONS: A good reading question is one that directly and explicitly engages with the text. Your question should cite a specific passage, term, or concept that you are puzzled about, and it should offer your interpretation of the passage at hand. It should be focused on something that genuinely puzzles you in the reading, and which you can probably assume that others find puzzling or confusing as well.

You will submit one question per class meeting. Questions must be submitted twenty-four (24) hours before class meets. Late questions will be accepted for partial credit. Questions posted after class meets will receive no credit. Questions will be graded on a three point scale: Excellent = 2, Satisfactory (or late) = 1,


15

Unacceptable (or not submitted) = 0.

In the unlikely event that students are not keeping up with the reading, the instructor reserves the right to add short reading quizzes without notice.

COURSE POLICIES

ATTENDANCE: Timely, prepared, and engaged attendance is required. Absences will only be excused in the case of illness or emergency. If there is a conflict between course participation and religious observance, please contact me in advance. It is not necessary to obtain prior approval from the instructor when missing a meeting is unavoidable, but note that students bear the entire responsibility for the decision to miss class and for whatever effect that may have on their course grade and their learning experience. Repeated absences and lateness will directly affect the discussion and attendance portion of a student’s grade, as detailed in the course requirements section. Participation in class discussions will be evaluated on quality, quantity, and appropriateness of student questions and comments. Please note: it is just as possible to talk too much as it is to talk too little in class. Likewise, there is such a thing as active listening, and yes, your professors are capable of distinguishing this from passive listening. If you are worried about your the level and/or quality of your participation, the best thing to do is to come to office hours, where the professor can give you direct feedback throughout the semester, rather than at the end (when it is too late to change your behavior!).

RESPECT FOR OTHERS: Given the sensitive nature of the topics explored, a spirit of toleration and civility is crucial for classroom discourse. Students should respectfully listen to others’ critiques and articulate responses in a thoughtful manner.

LATE PENALTIES: Assignments are accepted when they are due. Assignments must be turned in at the designated time and place. Failure to turn in an assignment on time is unacceptable except with the prior agreement of the instructor (which will be given only in exceptional circumstances). Except in documented cases of illness or emergency, a penalty of up to a full letter grade may be assessed for each day (24hrs) the assignment is late. When assignments are submitted electronically, this includes weekend days.

PLAGIARISM & ACADEMIC HONESTY: Academic dishonesty will be treated as an extremely serious matter. Proven plagiarism of any kind may result in automatic failure of the course, and will be referred to the University for further disciplinary action without exception. I reserve the right to submit your electronic document to plagiarism detection websites if necessary. It is never permissible to turn in any work that has been copied from another student or copied from a source (including the Internet) without properly acknowledging the source. It is your responsibility to make sure that your work meets the standard of academic honesty set forth in the “LMU Honor Code and Process” which appears in the LMU Bulletin 2013-2014. It is not permissible to turn in work for a class that has been previously submitted in part, or in whole, for credit in another course. Any doubts of questions related to this policy should be brought to your instructor as soon as they arise and before you turn in the work. You should also refer to the additional statement on academic honesty in the writing requirements posted on the course website.

GENDER NEUTRAL & GENDER SPECIFIC LANGUAGE, NAMES & ACCENTS: Academics no longer use the pronoun “he” to apply universally to all persons, nor do we use the term “man,” when we are referring to humanity or people in general. In our writing, when we are making generalizations we should use gender neutral pronouns, that is, sie and hir, s/he, him or her, they/their, etc. When referring to a specific person or group of people, we should use the language and pronouns that they prefer if we know them. Further, we should be attentive to the spelling and accents of author’s names. Finally, all authors must be referred to by their entire names, or only their last names, not by their first names, orally and in writing.

Where this is not possible (either because the claim you are making is gendered, or because you are relying on a text that uses gender-exclusive pronouns), you must explain why this is the case. Usually, this requires no more than a footnote (e.g. Rawls uses “he” or “mankind” as universals. Add a footnote at your first usage of his language, directly quoted or not, and say that you are following Rawls’ usage here, and do not mean to


16

endorse his usage). You aren’t necessarily required to solve these problems, but you are required to make note these problems and signal your awareness of them.

EMAIL COMMUNICATION: At times I will communicate with the entire class using campus email systems, so it is essential that you regularly check your lion.lmu.edu email address or forward your lion account email to your preferred email address. I encourage you to contact me via email with questions about the course, the material we cover in class, and assignments.

You are expected to be professional in all communication with the instructor. All email communication should be in complete sentences with a proper salutation and conclusion. Treat the email more as a letter and less like a text message. Include a comprehensible subject heading (e.g. “POLS 327 paper question”), address and sign the email, making sure to identify what class you are in (usually instructors are teaching more than one class) and explain clearly what it is that you are inquiring about. Failure to do these will guarantee that you will not get a response. Also, unless I’ve explicitly stated otherwise, I generally check my faculty email only during normal business hours (more or less from 7am to 6pm).

Finally, here is a short list of things to which I will not respond:• Questions that can be answered by checking the course syllabus or looking online.• A request to know if you missed anything during an absence. (The answer is yes.)• A request to know what you missed during an absence. (Instead of asking this through email, take the

appropriate next steps to catch up: ask a classmate for notes, meet with me in my office hours, etc.)

TECHNOLOGY USE DURING CLASS: You are welcome to bring a computer or tablet to class provided that it enables you to engage more in the class discussion. You may also use a computer or tablet to help you take notes. Email, Twitter, Facebook, or anything at all that is not directly related to the conversation we are having will not be tolerated. Using a computer in this way during a seminar is rude and disrespectful to your classmates. If you need to use a computer in class, you will be expected to post copies of your class notes on the class website immediately following the class session to share with others. If you are not willing to do this, do not bring a computer with you.

Please note that E-Reserve texts should be *printed* and brought to class. Electronic/digital editions of the texts are not acceptable for this course.

There is no reason to use your phone. It should be turned off and put away. If your phone rings during class, be prepared for me to answer it for you, and you will be marked absent for the session.

OFFICE HOURS: I look forward to meeting with you all during regularly scheduled office hours, or by appointment when meeting during office hours is not possible. Students who would like to discuss issues raised in the course further than class discussions will permit, or students who encounter difficulties with the course or the assigned material, are especially encouraged to attend office hours. Students are strongly encouraged to schedule office hour appointments in advance and to keep those appointments promptly.

ACCOMMODATION: Loyola Marymount University is committed to equality in educational opportunity. Students with special needs as addressed by the Americans with Disabilities Act who need reasonable modifications, special assistance, or accommodations in this course should promptly direct their request to the Disability Support Services Office. Any student who currently has a documented disability (physical, learning, or psychological) needing academic accommodations should contact the Disability Services Office (Daum Hall Room 224, 310-338-4535) as early in the semester as possible. All discussions will remain confidential. Please visit http://www.lmu.edu/dss for additional information.

TENTATIVE NATURE OF THE SYLLABUS: If necessary, this syllabus and its contents are subject to revision; students are responsible for any changes or modifications distributed in class or posted on MYLMU Connect

REQUIRED TEXTS


17

http://www.lmu.edu/dss


These texts will all be available for purchase from the bookstore. You are welcome to purchase them wherever you please or borrow them from the library, but please use these editions of the texts so that we are all literally on the same page during class. You will be expected to come to class with the text in hand. Some readings will be made available via electronic reserve in PDF format. You must print hard copies of these readings, i.e. do not bring your computer or e-reader in order to refer to the texts.

• John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Revised Edition (Belknap, 1999), ISBN: 0674000781

• Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia (Basic Books, 1977), ISBN: 9780465097203.

• Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, (Chicago, 1998), ISBN: 9780226025988.

• Iris Young, Justice and Politics of Difference (Princeton, 1990), ISBN: 9780691023151.

• Charles Mills, The Racial Contract (Cornell, 1997), ISBN: 9780801484636.

• Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1 (Vintage, 1990), ISBN: 9780679724698.

• Dean Spade, Normal Life (South End Press, 2011), ISBN: 9780896087965.

• Michael Harvey, Nuts and Bolts of College Writing (Hackett, 2003), ISBN: 9780872205734.

• Stanley Chodorow, Writing a Successful Research Paper (Hackett, 2011), ISBN: 9781603844406.

TENTATIVE COURSE SCHEDULE

Week 1: What is Contemporary Political Theory? M Aug. 26: Course Introduction / Giorgio Agamben, “What is the Contemporary?” (E-reserve)W Aug. 28: NO CLASS - Instructor AbsenceF Aug. 30: NO CLASS - Instructor Absence *** During this week, read Chodorow, Writing a Successful Research Paper, Introduction &

Chapters 1-3, and familiarize yourself with Harvey’s Nuts and Bolts of College Writing.***

Week 2: Welfare Liberalism 1: RawlsM Sep. 2: LABOR DAY, NO CLASST Sep. 3: ***Research Paper Proposal Due by 5pm.***W Sep. 4: John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, §1-4, 11-13.F Sep. 6: John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, §§16, 17, 20-26.

Week 3: Welfare Liberalism 2: RawlsM Sep. 9: John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, §§33, 34, 35, 38, 39, 43, 44 W Sep. 11: John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, §§65-67, 77, 78, 82, 85, 86 F Sep. 13: Will Kymlicka, “Liberal Equality” in Contemporary Political Theory (E-Reserve).

Week 4: Libertarianism 1: NozickM Sep. 16: Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia, pp. 1-20 (top), 22 (bottom)-53.W Sep. 18: Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia, pp. 54-62 (middle), 65-91 (top), 93 (top)-119.F Sep. 20: Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia, pp. 149-164, 167-182, 189-209 (top), 228-231.

Week 5: Libertarianism 2: NozickM Sep. 23: Robert Nozick, Anarchy, State and Utopia, pp. 297 – 299 (middle), 307-334.T Sep. 24: ***Updated Paper Proposal and Bibliography Due by 5pm***W Sep. 25: Will Kymlicka, “Libertarianism” in Contemporary Political Theory (E-Reserve).F Sep. 27: G.A. Cohen, “Robert Nozick and Wilt Chamberlain: how patterns preserve liberty” (E-

reserve).

Week 6: Neo- “Republicanism” 1: Arendt


18

M Sep. 30: Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, Prologue & Chapter 1, pp. 1-21W Oct. 2: Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, Chapter 2, pp. 22-78.F Oct. 4: Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, Chapters 3 & 4, pp. 79-174.

Week 7: Neo- “Republicanism” 2: ArendtM Oct. 7: Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, Chapter 5, pp. 175-247.W Oct. 9: Hannah Arendt, The Human Condition, Chapter 6, pp. 248-325.F Oct. 11: NO CLASS, AUTUMN DAY

Week 8: Identitarian Critiques / Critical Theory 1: YoungM Oct. 14: NO CLASS - Instructor Absence / Chodorow, Writing a Successful Research Paper, Chapters 4-5W Oct. 16: Iris Young, Justice and Politics of Difference, Introduction, Chapters 1-2, pp. 3-65.F Oct. 18: Iris Young, Justice and Politics of Difference, Chapters 3-4; pp. 66-121.

Week 9: M Oct. 21: Iris Young, Justice and Politics of Difference, Chapters 5-6; pp. 122-191.W Oct. 23: Iris Young, Justice and Politics of Difference, Chapters 7-8; pp. 192-256.F Oct. 25: NO CLASS - Instructor Absence **Abstract, Outline, and Complete Bibliography due 5:00pm**

Week 10: Identitarian Critiques 2: MillsM Oct. 28: Class attends Bellarmine Forum Panel, details TBA.W Oct. 30: Charles Mills, The Racial Contract, Introduction and Overview.F Nov. 1: Charles Mills, The Racial Contract, Chapter 2 (Details) & Chapter 3 (Naturalized Merits).

Week 11: Post-Structuralism 1: FoucaultM Nov. 4: Robert Gooding-Williams, “Race, Multiculturalism, and Democracy” (E-Reserve)W Nov. 6: Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, pp. 1-50. (skim pp. 51-73).F Nov. 8: Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, pp. 76-133.

Week 12 Post-Structuralism 2: Foucault / ButlerM Nov. 11: Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, pp. 76-133. (reread; this is a difficult but

important section)W Nov. 13: Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, pp. 133-159.F Nov. 15: Judith Butler, Precarious Lives, “Indefinite Detention” (E-Reserve).

Week 13: Post-Structuralism 3 / Queer & Trans* Theory: SpadeM Nov. 18: Judith Butler, Precarious Lives, “Violence, Mourning, Politics” (E-Reserve).W Nov. 20: Dean Spade, Normal Life, Preface, Intro, Ch. 1 (7-78); Susan Stryker, “An Introduction to

Transgender Terms and Concepts” (E-Reserve).F Nov. 22: Dean Spade, Normal Life, Chs. 2-4 (79-170).

Week 14: Queer & Trans* Theory 2: SpadeM Nov. 25: Dean Spade, Normal Life, Chs. 5-6, Conclusion (171-228).T Nov. 26: **First Draft of Paper Due 5:00pm via email**W Nov. 27: NO CLASS - Thanksgiving BreakF Nov. 29: NO CLASS - Thanksgiving Break

Week 15: M Dec. 2: Peer Review Day 1W Dec. 4: Peer Review Day 2

***Final Paper Due, Monday December 9, by 5pm***


19

SOCIETY AND ITS DISCONTENTSHonors (HNRS) 130, Section 2

Spring 2012, 3 Units

Instructor: Dr. Andrew DiltsOffice: University Hall 4203Office Hours: T/R 10:00a-12:00p http://dilts.org/officehours

Email: [email protected]: x85165

Class Meetings: T/R, 3:00p-4:15pUniversity Hall 4442


COURSE INFORMATIONDESCRIPTION: “Society and its Discontents” serves as an introduction to the cultural and ideological formations that have shaped our understanding of social, political, economic, and cultural questions in the contemporary period. In particular, we will focus our attention on the typically fraught relationship between the “self ” and “society.” We will organize this discussion through the work of two quintessentially ‘modern’ theorists of society, Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud, and their reinterpretation in twentieth century social theory. By tracing Marx and Freud’s theories of the self and society through the work of W.E.B. DuBois, Herbert Marcuse, Simone de Beauvoir, Frantz Fanon, and Michel Foucault, we will ask how we should best think about society at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century.

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES:1. Students will develop a solid grounding in the major concepts and arguments in the work of Marx and

Freud. 2. Students will learn how Marxist and Freudian thought have shaped key movements in 20th century social

theory.3. Students will develop an appreciation for how theory helps us to think about our contemporary

condition, especially the “tensions” between difference and unity, between the “self ” and “society.” 4. Students will improve their skills of deliberation and logical argumentation. 5. Students will develop an appreciation for close reading and textual analysis.6. Students will improve their critical, argumentative, and interpretive writing skills. 7. Most importantly, students will develop their critical thinking skills and apply them to their political and

social lives, allowing them to grow as persons and as critical citizens.

PREREQUISITES/RECOMMENDED BACKGROUND: This is a course for honors students at LMU. There are no additional prerequisites other than college-level reading, writing, and study skills.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS(1) You will submit two writing assignments during the semester. Each assignment must be formatted and

submitted properly in order to receive full credit, as documented in the course paper requirements, available on MYLMU Connect. Specific requirements for each assignment will be given during the semester.

(2) Twenty-four hours before each class meeting, you must post a prepared reading question on the course website. Be prepared to present your question at the beginning of class.

(3) You will give an in-class presentation with another student during the second half of the semester. Presentations will last no longer than 15 minutes and will follow the presentation requirements.

(4) You must attend class and be an active participant in discussion having completed each day’s assigned reading. This is a text-driven course, and as such, you must bring your copy of the day’s reading to class.


20







GRADE BREAKDOWN:Marx / Freud Essay: 25%20th Century Essay: 25%Presentation: 25%Reading Questions: 15%Class Participation: 5%Attendance: 5%


***Any student who receives a failing grade for attendance and participation will receive a failing grade for the class. Any student who has not turned in all three writing assignments and given an in-class presentation will receive a failing grade for the class.***

PAPER SUBMISSION: Exact deadlines for papers and writing assignments will be announced in class and posted online. All papers will be submitted electronically for and prepared for blind review by the instructor. Submission requirements and formatting details will be posted with each assignment.

READING QUESTIONS: A good reading question is one that directly and explicitly engages with the text. Your question should cite a specific passage, term, or concept that you are puzzled about, and it should offer your interpretation of the passage at hand. It should be focused on something that genuinely puzzles you in the reading, and which you can probably assume that others find puzzling or confusing as well.

You will submit one question per class meeting. Questions must be submitted twenty-four (24) hours before class meets. Late questions will be accepted for partial credit. Questions posted after class meets will receive no credit. Questions will be graded on a three point scale: Excellent = 2, Satisfactory (or late) = 1, Unacceptable (or not submitted) = 0.

In the unlikely event that students are not keeping up with the reading, the instructor reserves the right to add short reading quizzes without notice.

COURSE POLICIESATTENDANCE: Timely, prepared, and engaged attendance is required. Absences will only be excused in the case of illness or emergency. If there is a conflict between course participation and religious observance, please contact me in advance. It is not necessary to obtain prior approval from the instructor when missing a meeting is unavoidable, but note that students bear the entire responsibility for the decision to miss class and for whatever effect that may have on their course grade and their learning experience. Repeated absences and lateness will directly affect the discussion and attendance portion of a student’s grade, as detailed in the course requirements section.

LATE PENALTIES: I accept assignments when they are due. Assignments must be turned in at the designated time and place. Failure to turn in an assignment on time is unacceptable except with the prior agreement of the instructor (which will be given only in exceptional circumstances). Except in documented cases of illness or emergency, a penalty of up to a full letter grade may be assessed for each day (24hrs) the assignment is late. However, each student may, at his or her discretion, take a 24-hour extension for one of the writing assignments, no questions asked (if you are using your extension please indicate this on the first page of your paper).

PLAGIARISM & ACADEMIC HONESTY: Academic dishonesty will be treated as an extremely serious matter. Proven plagiarism of any kind may result in automatic failure of the course, and will be referred to the University for further disciplinary action. I reserve the right to submit your electronic document to plagiarism detection websites if necessary. It is never permissible to turn in any work that has been copied from another


21

student or copied from a source (including Internet) without properly acknowledging the source. It is your responsibility to make sure that your work meets the standard of academic honesty set forth in the “LMU Honor Code and Process” which appears in the LMU Bulletin 2011-2012. You should also refer to my own writing requirements posted on the course website.


EMAIL COMMUNICATION: At times I will communicate with the entire class using campus email systems, so it is essential that you regularly check your lion.lmu.edu email address or forward your lion account email to your preferred email address. I encourage you to contact me via email with questions about the course, the material we cover in class, and assignments.

TECHNOLOGY USE DURING CLASS: You are welcome to bring a computer to class provided that it enables you to engage more in the class discussion. You may also use a computer to help you take notes. Email, Twitter, Facebook, or anything at all that is not directly related to the conversation we are having will not be tolerated. Using a computer in this way during a seminar is quite simply RUDE and deeply disrespectful to your classmates. If you need to use a computer in class, you will be expected to post copies of your class notes on the class website immediately following the class session to share with others. If you are not willing to do this, do not bring a computer with you. There is simply no reason whatsoever for you to be using your phone/PDA/Kindle/iPad/whatever during class time. E-Reserve texts should be *printed* and brought to class. Your phone should be turned off and put away. If your phone rings during class, I will answer it for you, and it will be your responsibility to arrange for coffee service for every member of the class during our next meeting.

OFFICE HOURS: I look forward to meeting with you all during regularly scheduled office hours, or by appointment when meeting during office hours is not possible. Students who would like to discuss issues raised in the course further than class discussions will permit, or students who encounter difficulties with the course or the assigned material, are especially encouraged to attend office hours.

ACCOMMODATION: Loyola Marymount University is committed to equality in education. Students with special needs as addressed by the Americans with Disabilities Act who need reasonable modifications, special assistance, or accommodations in this course should promptly direct their request to the Disability Support Services Office. Any student who currently has a documented disability (physical, learning, or psychological) needing academic accommodations should contact the Disability Services Office (Daum Hall Room 224, 310-338-4535) as early in the semester as possible. All discussions will remain confidential. Please visit http://www.lmu.edu/dss for additional information.

TENTATIVE NATURE OF THE SYLLABUS: If necessary, this syllabus and its contents are subject to revision; students are responsible for any changes or modifications distributed in class or posted on MYLMU Connect.

REQUIRED TEXTS These texts will all be available for purchase from the bookstore. You are welcome to purchase them wherever you please or borrow them from the library, but you must use these editions of the texts so that we are all literally on the same page during class. You will be expected to come to class with the text in hand. Some readings will be made available via electronic reserve in PDF format. You must print hard copies of these readings, i.e. do not bring your computer or e-reader in order to refer to the texts.


22





• Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels, The Marx-Engels Reader, 2nd ed. (W.W. Norton & Co). [ISBN: 9780393090406]

• Sigmund Frued, Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis. (W.W. Norton). [ISBN: 9780871401182]• Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization (Beacon Press). [ISBN: 9780807015551]• Michel Foucault, History of Sexuality, Vol. 1 (Vintage). [ISBN: 0679724699]• Frantz Fanon, Black Skins, White Masks. (Grove Press). [ISBN: 978-0802143006]• W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls of Black Folks (Bedford/St. Martins). [ISBN: 0312091141]

TENTATIVE COURSE SCHEDULEWeek 1: Introduction1) T Jan 10: Course Introduction.2) R Jan 12: Marx, “Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844” (MER, pp. 70-81).

Week 2: Marx3) T Jan 17: Marx, “Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844” (MER, pp. 81-93).4) R Jan 19: (1) Marx & Engels, “The German Ideology” (MER, pp. 149-175);

(2) Marx & Engels, “The Communist Manifesto” (MER pp. 473-483); (3) Marx, “Grundrisse” (MER pp. 221-226, 236-244).

Week 3: Marx5) T Jan 24: Marx, Capital, Volume 1 (MER, pp. 302-312, 319-336).6) R Jan 26: Marx, Capital, Volume 1 (MER, pp. 336-384).

Week 4: Marx7) T Jan 31: Marx, Capital, Volume 1 (MER, pp. 384-438).8) R Feb 2: Marx, “Grundrisse” (MER, pp. 278-292).

Week 5: Freud9) T Feb 7: Freud, Introductory Lectures. Chapter I, V-VI (pp. 17-28, 101-137).10) R Feb 9: Freud, Chapters VII, IX-X (pp. 138-153, 167-208).

Week 6: Freud11) T Feb 14: Freud, Chapters XI, XVII-XVIII (pp. 209-226, 318-353).12) R Feb 16: Freud, Chapters XIX-XX (pp. 354-396).

Week 7: Freud13) T Feb 21: Freud, Chapters XXI-XXII (pp. 397-444). 14) R Feb 23: Freud, Chapters XXIII, XXVII (pp. 445-468, 536-556).

Week 8: SPRING BREAKSpring Break Reading: Selections from Freud’s Civilization and its Discontents (E-Reserve).

Week 9: Marcuse15) T Mar 6: Herbert Marcuse, Eros and Civilization, Introduction & Chapters 1-4.16) R Mar 8: Marcuse, Eros and Civilization, Chapters 6, 10, 11.

** Freud/Marx Paper Due Friday, March 9**

Week 10: Marcuse / Beauvoir17) T Mar 13: Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex, pp. 3-17, 49-68 (E-Reserve). 18) R Mar 15: Beauvoir, The Second Sex, pp. 638-664, 721-751 (E-Reserve).


23

Week 11: Beauvoir19) T Mar 20: Beauvoir, The Second Sex, pp. 266-274, 753-766 (E-Reserve). 20) R Mar 22: W.E.B. Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk, Forethought, Chapters 1-2.

Week 12: Du Bois21) T Mar 27: Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk, Chapters 4 and 7. 22) R Mar 29: Guest Lecture, Prof. Bethany Albertson (University of Texas, Austin)

Week 13: Du Bois23) T April 3: Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folk, Chapters 8-9, 11, 13-14. 24) R April 5: NO CLASS, Easter Break

Week 14: Fanon25) T April 10: Frantz Fanon, Black Skins, White Masks, Introduction, Chapters 1 & 5. 26) R April 12: Fanon, Black Skins, White Masks, Chapters 4 & 6.

Week 15: Fanon / Foucault27) T April 17: Fanon, Black Skins, White Masks, Chapters 7 & 8. 28) R April 19: Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, pp. 1-50. (skim pp. 51-73)

Week 16: Foucault29) T April 24: Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, pp. 76-133.30) R April 26: Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1, pp. 133-159.

** Final Paper Due Friday, May 4**


24

THE POLITICS OF “THE WIRE”: AMERICA AT WAR WITH ITSELFPolitical Science (POLS) 392

Spring 2012, 1 Unit

Instructor: Dr. Andrew DiltsOffice: University Hall 4203Office Hours: T/R 10:00a-12:00p http://dilts.org/officehours/


Class Meetings: W, 12:00p–12:50pUniversity Hall 1775


COURSE INFORMATION

DESCRIPTION: In the original pitch made to HBO, David Simon explains that “The Wire” was intended to be “a vehicle for making statements about the American city and even the American experiment.” Simon goes on to note that, at its core, “The Wire” is a tragedy. “At the end of thirteen episodes,” he writes, “the reward for the viewer–who has been lured all this way by a well-constructed police show–is not the simple gratification of hearing handcuffs click. Instead, the conclusion is something that Euripides or [Eugene] O’Neill might recognize: an America, at every level at war with itself.”

The central “war” that shapes the narrative of the “The Wire” is the now 40 year old “war on drugs,” and one of the key “statements” it makes about the “American experiment” is that this war has been a policy failure. We will critically evaluate this argument through a close reading of the first season of the show, which will serve as our central “text” for the semester. Moreover, we will ask what role the idea of “war” itself plays in shaping (and possibly distorting) other figures, ideals, and motifs in political thought and practice. To this end, the course will pair the first thirteen episodes of the program with short readings in political and social theory, U.S. history, criminology, and political science. This is not a course on the “The Wire,” but rather a course which will use “The Wire” to explore broader themes including: racial, economic, and sexual dimensions of (in)equality, personal freedom and capitalism, the state’s monopoly on the use of violence, the effects of systemic poverty and residential segregation on political agency, and the relationship between punishment and surveillance.

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES:1) Students will be introduced to the history and effects of the war on drugs in the United States.2) Students will learn to read visual media as a text to aid in the analysis and understanding of social and

political questions.3) Students will learn to connect abstract theories of political and social life to concrete contemporary social

and political problems. 4) Students will learn to evaluate persuasive and narrative accounts through empirical social science data and

analysis.5) Students will enhance their skills in evaluating social and criminal justice policy.6) Students will improve their critical, argumentative, and interpretive writing skills.7) Most importantly, students will develop their critical thinking skills and apply them to their political and

social lives, allowing them to grow as persons and as reflective citizens.

PREREQUISITES/RECOMMENDED BACKGROUND: Students are expected to have an interest in U.S. politics, crime and punishment, public policy, and popular cultural representations of social problems. Students are strongly recommended to be familiar “The Wire,” but prior knowledge of the program is not strictly required. Should the course be over-enrolled, priority will be given to majors and minors in political science.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS


25

http://dilts.org/officehours/






This course is a 1-unit course, and while this means that the course will take up considerably less time than most of your other classes, this does NOT mean that you can expect to breeze through this course. Each week you will be responsible for viewing and reflecting upon an episode of “The Wire,” reading the assigned articles and essays, responding critically online, and coming to class prepared to actively participate in our discussions. Specifically, the course has the following requirements:

• You will write a short term paper. This paper must be formatted and submitted properly to receive full credit, as documented in the course paper requirements on the course website. Details about the paper will be provided later in the semester.

• You will post a discussion question each week online in the discussion board corresponding to each episode. You must post your question by Tuesday each week by Noon. Discussion questions posted late will receive only partial credit.

• You must attend class and be an active participant in discussion.

GRADE BREAKDOWN:Term paper: 60% Discussion Questions 20%Attendance: 10%Participation: 10%


Any student who receives a failing grade for attendance and participation will receive a failing grade for the class.

COURSE POLICIES

DISCLOSURE: “The Wire” is a work in “realist” fictional representation, originally produced for a subscription-based television service. As such, it graphically depicts poverty, sexuality, drug-use, and brutal violence. The use of profanity and vulgar language is replete throughout the show, and arguably central to parts of its narrative. As such, students who may be offended or uncomfortable with such language and themes should avoid taking this course. Students for whom such depictions of drug use and violence might serve as “triggers” should exercise caution in taking this course.

For students who enroll in the course, it is imperative that they be able and willing to engage with their colleagues in a mature, respectful, and ethical manner consistent with the letter and spirit of the University’s anti-harassment policies. We will inevitably need to talk and think about the language used in the show, and also about our own usage and deployment of frank and sometimes painful language. We will collectively set a series of “ground rules” for our class discussions at the beginning of the semester, and we will also self-consciously revisit these “rules” throughout the term to be sure that our classroom is an inclusive, safe, and productive space for everyone involved.

ATTENDANCE: Timely, prepared, and engaged attendance is required. Absences will only be excused in the case of illness or emergency. If there is a conflict between course participation and religious observance, please contact me in advance. It is not necessary to obtain prior approval from the instructor when missing a meeting is unavoidable, but note that students bear the entire responsibility for the decision to miss class and for whatever effect that may have on their course grade and their learning experience. Repeated absences and lateness will directly affect the discussion and attendance portion of a student’s grade, as detailed in the


26

course requirements section.

LATE PENALTIES: Assignments must be turned in at the designated time and place. Failure to turn in an assignment on time is unacceptable except with the prior agreement of the instructor (which will be given only in exceptional circumstances). Except in documented cases of illness or emergency, a penalty of up to a full letter grade may be assessed for each day the assignment is late.

PLAGIARISM & ACADEMIC HONESTY: Academic dishonesty will be treated as an extremely serious matter. Proven plagiarism of any kind may result in automatic failure of the course, and will be referred to the University for further disciplinary action. I reserve the right to submit your electronic document to plagiarism detection websites if necessary. It is never permissible to turn in any work that has been copied from another student or copied from a source (including Internet) without properly acknowledging the source. It is your responsibility to make sure that your work meets the standard of academic honesty set forth in the “LMU Honor Code and Process” which appears in the LMU Bulletin 2011-2012. You should also refer to my own writing requirements posted on the course website.


OFFICE HOURS: I look forward to meeting with you all during regularly scheduled office hours, or by appointment when meeting during office hours is not possible. Students who would like to discuss issues raised in the course further than class discussions will permit, or students who encounter difficulties with the course or the assigned material, are especially encouraged to attend office hours.

ACCOMMODATION: Students with special needs as addressed by the Americans with Disabilities Act who need reasonable modifications, special assistance, or accommodations in this course should promptly direct their request to the Disability Support Services Office. Any student who currently has a documented disability (physical, learning, or psychological) needing academic accommodations should contact the Disability Services Office (Daum Hall Room 224, 310-338-4535) as early in the semester as possible. All discussions will remain confidential. Please visit http://www.lmu.edu/dss for additional information.

TENTATIVE NATURE OF THE SYLLABUS: If necessary, this syllabus and its contents are subject to revision; students are responsible for any changes or modifications distributed in class or posted on MYLMU Connect. The precise schedule of readings will be updated throughout the semester, so it is your responsibility to stay on top of announced readings and assignments.


27



REQUIRED TEXTS

None; all readings will be distributed via electronic reserve.

It is strongly recommended, however, that you obtain a copy of the first season of The Wire in some format so that you can be sure to view (and review) the episodes for each week. The DVD is available for purchase online, and the entire first season can be purchased easily via iTunes or via Amazon video.

TENTATIVE COURSE SCHEDULE

Week 1, W Jan 11: Course Introduction

Week 2, W Jan 18: “... when its not your turn.”• Episode 1: The Target• Margaret Talbot, “Stealing Life: The crusader behind ‘The Wire’” in The New Yorker.• David Simon, “The Wire” Bible, Series Overview• David Simon, “Letter to HBO” • Ed Burns, David Simon, and George Pelecanos, “The Wire's War on the Drug War” in Time Magazine.

Week 3, W Jan 25: The “War” on Drugs• Episode 2: The Detail• “Timeline: America’s War on Drugs”, from NPR. • Michael Tonry, “Race and the War on Drugs,” in Malign Neglect. • Michael Moriarty, “Pilots in the War on Drugs,” in Doing Time: 25 Years of Prison Writing.

Week 4, W Feb 1: The Street• Episode 3: The Buys• Elijah Anderson, “Code of the Streets,” in After the War on Crime.• David Simon and Ed Burns, “Chapter Two,” in The Corner.

Week 5, W Feb 8: Murder• Episode 4: Old Cases• Jonathan Simon, “Drugs Are Not the (Only) Problem: Structural Racism, Mass Imprisonment, and the

Overpunishment of Violent Crime”• Loic Wacquant, “West Side Story: A High Insecurity Ward in Chicago” in Urban Outcasts.

Week 6, W Feb. 15: Collateral Consequences• Episode 5: The Pager• Vesla Weaver and Amy Lerman, “Political Consequences of the Carceral State.”• Bruce Western, “Invisible Inequality” in Punishment and Inequality in the United States.• Loic Wacqaunt, “Race as Civic Felony.”

Week 7, W Feb. 22: Surveillance • Episode 6: The Wire• Emma Short and Jason Ditton, “Seen and Now Heard: Talking to the targets of open street CCTV.”• Michel Foucault, Selection from Discipline and Punish, Part 1

Week 8, W Feb. 29: NO CLASS, Spring Break

Week 9, W Mar. 7: Surveillance• Episode 7: One Arrest• Michel Foucault, Selection from Discipline and Punish, Part 2.


28

Week 10, W Mar. 14: Teaching Kids• Episode 8: Lessons • Ann Ferguson, “The Real World” in Bad Boys: Public Schools and the Making of Black Masculinity

Week 11, W Mar. 21: Policing Kids• Episode 9: Game Day• Victor Rios, “‘Dummy Smart’: Misrecognition, Acting Out, and ‘Going Dumb’” in Punished: Policing the Lives

of Black and Latino Boys.

Week 12, W Mar. 28: Labor, Work, and Reentry.• Episode 10: The Cost• Devah Pager, “The Labor Market Consequences of Incarceration” in Marked: Race, Crime, and Finding Work

in an Era of Mass Incarceration.• David Weiman, “Barriers to Prisoners’ Reentry into the Labor Market and the Social Costs of Recidivism”

Week 13, W April 4: NO CLASS, Easter Break

Week 14, W April 11: Alternatives to Prohibition?• Episode 11: The Hunt• Michael Specter, “Getting a Fix” in The New Yorker.

Week 15, W April 18: Drug Courts and their Hidden Dangers• Episode 12: Cleaning Up• This American Life, “Very Tough Love”: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/430/very-tough-love• Justice Policy Institute, “Addicted to Courts.”

Week 16, W April 25: Prison• Episode 13: Sentencing• Jon Marc Taylor, “Pell Grants for Prisoners” in Doing Time: 25 Years of Prison Writing.• Michael Wayne Hunter, “Sam” in Doing Time: 25 Years of Prison Writing.• Kathy Boudin, “Our Skirt” in Doing Time: 25 Years of Prison Writing.


29

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/430/very-tough-love

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/430/very-tough-love

Classics of Social and Political ThoughtSocial Sciences (SOSC) 15100, 15200, & 15300

University of Chicago2007 - 2011

Instructor: Andrew DiltsOffice: Gates-Blake 317Office Hours: Weds, 10:00a-12:00aEmail: [email protected]: 773-702-0354

Course Meetings: Tuesdays & ThursdaysWebsite: http://chalk.uchicago.edu/

COURSE DESCRIPTION: While Classics of Social and Political Thought might look very much like an introduction to political theory, or a “great books” course, it is more properly understood as an integral part of a broad liberal arts education animated by the manner of questions we will ask. These texts, not all of which you will probably find “great,” will be our objects of interpretive analysis, and will serve as tools to help us ask a wide range of questions about ourselves and the world we share in common. We will ask questions about justice, truth, value, happiness and the good life, individual and common good, the foundations of political societies, the origins and work of inequality, the value of freedom, subjection, subjectivity and citizenship, violence and morality, and many others. Perhaps above all, we will ask what it means to even think about a “canon” of political thought, and what makes anything “classic” at all?

COURSE REQUIREMENTS: This class is focused around reading, writing, and discussion, and this is reflected in the course requirements:

(1) You will submit three papers. Papers MUST be formatted and submitted properly in order to receive full credit, as documented in the course paper guidelines, available on Chalk. Specific requirements for each paper will be given during throughout the quarter.

(2) You will complete an exam. The exam will be a comprehensive, closed-book/notes “blue-book” style exam, held during the standard exam period.

(3) You must attend class and be an active participant in discussion. You are required to post a prepared question about the day’s reading on the Chalk discussion board by midnight before each class session (detailed below). Be prepared to present your question at the beginning of class. This is a text-driven course, and as such, you must bring your copy of the day’s reading to class.

ABSENCES: Absences will only be excused in the case of illness or emergency. If there is a conflict between course participation and religious observance, please contact me in advance. The rule of thumb is simple: stay in touch with me. If you have more than two absences, you should come and see me. If you have more than four, you can expect me to contact your advisor.

LATE PAPERS: Except in documented cases of illness or emergency, late papers will be penalized by 5 percentage points per day. However, each student may, at his or her discretion, take a 24-hour extension for one of the papers, no questions asked (If you are using your extension please indicate this on the first page of your paper). Should you find yourself in the position that you have to turn in work late, stay in touch with me! I don’t really care why your work is late, but you are always better off keeping me posted on what is going on.

DAILY DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: A good reading question is one that directly and explicitly engages the text. Your question should cite a specific passage, term, or concept that you are puzzled about, and it should offer your interpretation of the passage at hand. It should be focused on something that genuinely puzzles you in the reading, and which you can probably assume that others find puzzling or confusing as well.


30



http://chalk.uchicago.edu


GRADES: First paper: 15%; second 20%; third paper 20%; exam: 20%; discussion questions are worth 10%; class participation is 10%; daily attendance is 5%. Any student who receives a failing grade for attendance and participation will receive a failing grade for the class. Any student who has not turned in all papers and taken the exam will receive a failing grade for the class.

PLAGIARISM & ACADEMIC DISHONESTY: Proven plagiarism of any kind may result in automatic failure of the course, and will be referred to the University for further disciplinary action. I reserve the right to submit your electronic document to plagiarism detection websites if necessary.

ACCOMMODATION: Students in need of accommodation for an impairment and/or disability should contact me as soon as possible. You should also contact the Coordinator for Disability Services (773-834-4469), as outlined in the Student Handbook, to document your needs and determine a reasonable accommodation.

REQUIRED TEXTS: These texts will all be available for purchase from the Seminary Co-Op Bookstore. Please use these editions of the texts, so that we are all literally on the same page during class. You will be expected to come to class with the text in hand. Some readings will be made available via Chalk in PDF format. You should print hard copies of these readings, i.e. do not bring your computer in order to refer to the texts.

Autumn Quarter• Anthony Weston, A Rulebook for Arguments, 4th ed. Indianapolis: Hackett, 2009).• Sophocles, Antigone, in Sophocles I: Oedipus The King, Oedipus at Colonus, Antigone, trans. Grene/Lattimore

Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992 [probably around 420 BCE].• Plato, The Republic, trans. Bloom. New York: Basic Books, 1991 [probably around 380 BCE].• Aristotle, The Politics, trans. C.D.C. Reeve. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1998 [probably around 350 BCE].• Thomas Aquinas, On Law, Morality, and Politics, trans. & ed. Baumgarth & Regan, 2nd ed. Indianapolis:

Hackett, 2003 [1265-1274].• Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince, trans. Mansfield, 2nd ed. Chicago: U of Chicago Press, 1998 [1513/1532].

Winter Quarter• Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Edited by Edwin Curley. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing, 1994 [1688].• Locke, John. Two Treatises on Government. Edited by Peter Laslett. Student Ed. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1988 [1690].• Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. ‘The Discourses’ and Other Early Political Writings. Translated and Edited by Victor

Gourevitch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997 [1755].• Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. ‘The Social Contract’ and Other Later Political Writings. Translated and Edited by

Victor Gourevitch. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997 [1762].

Spring Quarter• Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Edited by J.P. Mayer, trans. George Lawrence. New York:

Harper Perennial Modern Classics, 2006 [1835/1840]. • John Stuart Mill, On Liberty and Other Essays, Edited by John Gray. Oxford: Oxford World’s Classics, 2008.• Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels, The Marx-Engels Reader, 2nd ed., Edited by Robert Tucker. New York:

W.W. Norton, 1978.• Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morality, trans. Clark and Swenson. Indianapolis: Hackett

Publishing, 1998 [1887].• W.E.B. Du Bois, The Souls of Black Folks, Edited by Blight & Gooding-Williams Boston: Bedford, 1997

[1903].

READING SCHEDULE: Autumn Quarter1.1: Introduction; Sophocles’ Antigone, pp. 160-169.1.2: Antigone, pp. 169-212.


31

Plato2.1: Plato’s Republic, Book I (pp. 3-34); Weston, pp. 1-22; 37-47; 73-79.2.2: Republic, Books II & III (pp. 35-96).3.1: Republic, Book IV to Book V 471e (pp. 97-152).3.2: Republic, Book V 471e to Book VII 531c (pp. 152-211).4.1: Republic, Book VII 531d to Book IX 576b (pp. 211-256).4.2: Republic, Book IX 576b-592b to end of Book X (pp. 256-303); Weston pp. 49-65; 81-86.

Aristotle5.1: Aristotle’s Ethics Book I, chapters 1-2, 5, 7-9, 12-13 [e-reserve]; Aristotle's Politics Book I chaps. 1-7;

Book II chaps. 1-2, 5.5.2: Politics, Book III.6.1: Politics, Book IV chapters 1-2, 4-9, 11-12; Book V chapters. 1, 8-9.6.2: Politics, Book VII chapters 1-5, 7-10, 13-15; Book VIII chapter 1.

Alfarabi7.1: Alfarabi’s The Enumeration of the Sciences and The Political Regime [e-reserve].7.2: Alfarabi’s The Attainment of Happiness [e-reserve].

Thomas Aquinas8.1: Aquinas (all selections are in On Law, Morality, and Politics) Summa Theologica I-II Questions 90-95 (pp.

10-59).8.2: Aquinas, continued: Summa Theologica I-II Q. 96-Q. 97 (pp. 59-75); Q. 100 A. 1, 2, 8-9 (pp. 76-79, 81-86);

Q. 105 A. 1 (pp. 93-96); II-II Q. 57 A. 2 (pp. 100-101); Q. 58 A. 2 (pp. 107-108); Q. 40 A. 1 (pp. 164-67); Q. 104 A. 5-6 (pp. 182-85); Q. 42 A. 2 (pp. 188-89); Q. 10 A. 8, 11, Q. 11 A. 3, Commentary on the Sentences Distinctions 44, 37 (pp. 190-96); On Kingship I 6 (pp. 207-210).

Nicollo Machiavelli9.1: Machiavelli’s Prince, Letter & Chapters I-VIl; Discourses Letter, I Preface, 9-10, 19-20, 58, II 2, III 30.1

[e-reserve].9.2: NO CLASS, THANKSGIVING10.1: Aristotle's Politics, Book V Chapters 10-11; Prince Chapters VIII-XIX; Discourses I 11-12, 18.4, 27, III

40-42 [e-reserve]; 1 Samuel 17:12 to 18:9 [e-reserve].10.2: Prince, Chapters XX-XXVI; Discourses III 9 [e-reserve].

Winter Quarter1.1: Introduction and the farewell speech of Elizabeth I (e-reserve).

Thomas Hobbes1.2: Hobbes, Leviathan, Frontispiece, Dedicatory Letter, Introduction, Chapters 1-6; pp. 1-35.2.1: Leviathan, Chapters 7-12; pp. 35-74.2.2: Leviathan, Chapters 13-19 (focus especially on 13 and 17); pp. 74-127.3.1: Leviathan, Chapters 20-25; pp. 127-172.3.2: Leviathan, Chapters 26-30; pp. 172-233.4.1: Leviathan, Chapters 12 (reread), 31-32, 35-37, 38 (§§1-15), 42 (§§1-10 & 67-80), 43, 46, Review and

Conclusion; pp. 233-250, 271-310, 333-338, 366-373, 397-410, 453-468, 489-497.

John Locke4.2: Locke, Second Treatise, Chapters 1-4, & selections from the Fundamental Constitution of the Carolinas (e-

reserve).5.1: Second Treatise, Chapter 5.5.2: Second Treatise, Chapters 6-10.6.1: Second Treatise, Chapters 11-15.6.2: NO CLASS


32

7.1: Second Treatise, Chapters 16-19.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau7.2: Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality, Letter, Preface, & Part 1; pp. 111-160, 189-217.8.1: Rousseau, Discourse on Inequality, Part 2; pp. 164-188, 218-222.8.2: Rousseau, The Social Contract, Book I; pp. 39-56.9.1: Rousseau, The Social Contract, Book II; pp. 57-81.9.2: Rousseau, The Social Contract, Book III; pp. 82-120.10.1: Rousseau, The Social Contract, Book IV; pp. 121-152.10.2: Reading Period, review session.

Spring QuarterAlexis de Tocqueville1.1: Tocqueville, Democracy in America, pp. xiii-xiv; 9-20 [12].1.2: Democracy in America, pp. 31–70; 173–208; 220–230. [86]2.1: Democracy in America, pp. 231-315. [85]2.2: Democracy in America, pp. 316–363; 395-400. [54]; Sojourner Truth, “Ain’t I a Woman?” and “Keeping

the Thing Going While Things Are Stirring” (e-reserve).3.1: Democracy in America, pp. 417–418; 429–436; 503–513; 555–558; 584-603; 665–705 [86]; Sarah M.

Grimke, “Letter VIII: On the Condition of Women in the United States” (e-reserve).

J.S. Mill And Harriet Taylor3.2: Mill, On Liberty, chaps. 1-2; pp. 5–61. [57]4.1: On Liberty, chaps. 3-5; pp. 62–128. [67]4.2: John Stuart Mill and Harriet Taylor Mill “Enfranchisement of Women,”; Elizabeth Cady Stanton,

“The Declaration of Sentiments” (e-reserve). [34]

Karl Marx5.1: Marx, “On the Jewish Question,” pp. 26–52. [27]; Emma Goldman, “The Tragedy of Women’s

Emancipation” (e-reserve).5.2: Marx, “Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts,” pp. 66–105. [40]6.1: Marx & Engels, Manifesto of the Communist Party, pp. 469-500.6.2: Marx, Capital, Volume One, pp. 302-343. [42]7.1: Capital, pp. 376-384; 417-438 & “Crisis Theory,” pp. 450-465. [**** skim Capital, pp. 344-364 before starting 7.1’s reading assignment ****]

Friedrich Nietzsche7.2: Nietzsche, “Genealogy of Morality,” Preface and First Essay, pp. 1–33. [33]8.1: “Genealogy of Morality,” Second Essay, pp. 35–66. [32]8.2: “Genealogy of Morality,” Third Essay, pp. 67–118. [32]

W.E.B. Du Bois9.1: Du Bois, Souls of Black Folks, Fore., ch. 1, 3-6; pp. 34–44, 62-102. [51]9.2: Souls of Black Folks, ch. 9-14; pp. 133–195. [63]

Simone de Beauvoir/Zadie Smith10.1: Simone de Beauvoir, Introduction to The Second Sex (e-reserve). [20]10.2: Reading Period, Optional Review Session on Zadie Smith, “Speaking in Tongues” (e-reserve).


33

Foucault’s Turn to Ethics

Instructor: Dr. Andrew DiltsOffice: University Hall 4203Office Hours: T/R 10:00a-12:00p http://dilts.org/officehours/


Class Meetings: W, 12:00p–12:50pUniversity Hall 1775


COURSE DESCRIPTION: In 1976, when Michel Foucault published the introduction to the History of Sexuality, it was planned to be the first in a multi-volume series of texts on the development of sexuality in the modern era. In what turned out to be only a few months before his death in 1984, two additional volumes were published. These texts were, on Foucault’s own appraisal, a significant departure from what he had intended to write. The 8-year gap between these works saw a transformation in Foucault’s thought, which Foucault scholars have frequently identified as a turn away from analysis of discursive power to an ethical project. This seminar in Foucault’s late thought takes up this ethical turn through a close reading of several lectures given during his period along with the entire 3 volumes of the History of Sexuality. We will focus particular attention on the 1982 lecture course at the College de France entitled The Hermeneutics of the Subject. This course will give students a fuller picture of Foucault’s thought in the several years before his untimely death. We will take up the question of whether his late work is continuous with, or signals a break from, his early thought. Additionally, we will take this opportunity to explore the differences between writing and speaking, between the book and the lecture as genres of political theory.

COURSE PREREQUISITES: This course is intended for graduate students in political theory. Students must have a background in political theory, and are expected to have already read some Foucault’s (preferably Discipline and Punish and History of Sexuality Vol. 1). Familiarity with the French language and ancient Greek philosophy will be helpful, but are not required. Advanced undergraduates may petition to enroll in the course with the instructor’s consent.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS: Students will submit a seminar paper at the end of the quarter, approx. 20-25 pages in length. Each student will also be responsible for one in-class presentation. Class attendance and active participation in the seminar are mandatory.

GRADING: Seminar paper (50%); class presentation (25%); attendance and participation (25%).


REQUIRED TEXTS: These texts will all be available for purchase from the Seminary Co-Op Bookstore. Please use these editions of the texts, so that we are all literally on the same page during class. You will be expected to come to class with the text in hand. Some readings will be made available via Chalk in PDF format. You should print hard copies of these readings, i.e. do not bring your computer in order to refer to the texts.

• Foucault, Michel, and Arnold I. Davidson. 2005. The Hermeneutics of the Subject: Lectures at the College De France 1981-82: New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

• Foucault, Michel. 1990. The History of Sexuality Vol. I: An Introduction. Vintage Books ed. New York: Vintage Books.

• Foucault, Michel. 1990. The History of Sexuality Vol. 2: The Use of Pleasure New York: Vintage Books.• Foucault, Michel. 1988. The History of Sexuality Vol. 3: The Care of the Self. New York: Vintage Books.


34







READING SCHEDULE: Part 1: Writing, Speaking, Power, and Sexuality, 1975-19761.1: Introduction and course overview1.2: Books and Lectures

• “What is an Author” in Language, Counter-memory, Practice [E-Reserve]• “What is an Author” in The Essential Foucault [E-Reserve]

These readings represent two versions of the same essay; one is a published article, while the other is a transcribed lecture.

2.1: Bio-Power and Governmentality• Society Must be Defended, Lectures 1 and 11, and Course Summary [E-Reserve]• Foucault, Michel. 1982. "The Subject and Power." Critical Inquiry 8 (4):777-795. [E-Reserve]

2.2: History of Sexuality I• History of Sexuality Vol. 1: An Introduction

Part 2: Turning towards Subjectivity, 1980-1982 lectures3.1: Dartmouth Lectures, November 1980.

• Foucault, Michel. 1993. "About the Beginning of the Hermeneutics of the Self: Two Lectures at Dartmouth." Political Theory 21 (2):198-227. [E-Reserve]

3.2: Hermeneutics of the Subject I• Introduction and Lectures 1-6

4.1: Hermeneutics of the Subject II• Lectures 7-12

4.2: Hermeneutics of the Subject III• Lectures 13-16

5.1: Hermeneutics of the Subject IV• Lectures 17-20

5.2: Hermeneutics of the Subject V• Lectures 21-24, and course summary

6.1: Vermont University Lectures, Oct. 1982• “Technologies of the Self,” in Technologies of the Self, ed. by L.Martin et.al, (Amherst: Univ. of

Massachusetts Press, 1988), pp.16-49. [E-Reserve]• “On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in Progress” (1983) [E-Reserve]

Part 3: The History of Sexuality, 19846.2: History of Sexuality II

• The Use of Pleasure, Introduction, Parts 1-27.1: History of Sexuality III

• The Use of Pleasure, Parts 3-57.2: History of Sexuality IV

• The Care of the Self, Parts 1-48.1: History of Sexuality V

• The Care of the Self, Parts 5-6 8.2: The Berkley Lectures

• Fearless Speech• “The Ethics of the Concern of the Self as a Practice of Freedom” [E-Reserve]

Part 4: Critical Analysis of the Late Foucault9.1: Sex and Sexuality

• Halperin, David M. 1989. "Is There a History of Sexuality?" History and Theory 28 (3):257-274. [E-Reserve]

• Halperin, David M. 1998. "Forgetting Foucault: Acts, Identities, and the History of Sexuality." Representations (63):93-120. [E-Reserve]

9.2: Subjectivity• Thompson, Kevin. 2003. “Forms of Resistance: Foucault on tactical reversal and self formation,”


35

Continental Philosophy Review 36:113-128. [E-Reserve]• McWhorter, Ladelle. 1999. “Self-Overcoming through Ascetic Pleasures,” Chapter 6 of Bodies and

Pleausres: Foucault and the Politics of Sexual Normalization. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. [E-Reserve]

• Sebastian Harrer. 2005. “The Theme of Subjectivity in Foucault's Lecture Series L'Herméneutique du Sujet”, Foucault Studies. 2:75-96. [E-Reserve]

• “Deep subjects: Foucault and the Return of the Individual” and “Arts of Living: Antiquity, Modernity, and the Experience of Self ” in Paras, Eric. 2006. Foucault 2.0: Beyond Power and Knowledge. New York: Other Press. [E-Reserve]

10.1: Ethics I• Réal Fillion. “Freedom, Truth, and Possibility in Foucault's Ethics,” Foucault Studies 2:50-64. [E-Reserve]• Chapters 1-3 of O'Leary, Timothy. 2002. Foucault: The Art of Ethics. London; New York: Continuum.

[E-Reserve]10.2: Ethics II

• Selections from Oksala, Johanna. 2005. Foucault on Freedom. New York: Cambridge University Press. [E-Reserve]

• Luxon, Nancy. 2004. “Truthfulness, risk, and trust in the late lectures of Michel Foucault,” Inquiry 47:464-489. [E-Reserve]

• Paul Veyne. 1993. "The Final Foucault and His Ethics," Critical Inquiry 20:1-9. [E-Reserve]• Neil Levy. 2004. “Foucault as Virtue Ethicist,” Foucault Studies 1:20-31. [E-Reserve]


36

The Politics of PunishmentPolitical Science 20702 / Comparative Race Studies 20702

University of ChicagoAutumn Quarter 2006

Instructor: Andrew DiltsEmail: [email protected] Hours: TBA, Pick Hall 406

Course Meetings:Mondays and Wednesdays, 3:00 - 4:20Cobb Hall 102

Course Description:This is a seminar course asking what punishment means in a modern democratic state and what particular forms of punishment reveal about conceptions of personal responsibility and subjectivity. The first half of the course will explore the dominant modern approaches to understanding punishment, covering Durkhiem, Marxist interpretations, modern Anglo-American legal traditions, expressive retributivism, and culminating with a close reading of Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish. The second part of the course focuses on incarceration as it is practiced in the United States in light of these theoretical approaches. The third part of the course asks how such practices play out in terms of collateral consequences and the importance of racial, gender, and sexual identities in relation to punishment.

Course Requirements/Grading:Response Papers (30%): Each student must prepare three short response papers to the reading. These papers should be concise reflections on a single piece of assigned reading for a week. You should focus on a particular claim made, piece of evidence offered, or account provided by an author and critically assess that statement. I do not actually care if you agree or disagree with the author, rather, I want to hear what you have to think about the piece. These should be handed in at the beginning of class on the same day in which we are scheduled to discuss that reading.

The first of these papers should respond to material from the first 3 weeks of class (submitted no later than 10/11), the second must be a critical response to a section of Discipline and Punish (submitted no later than 10/25), and the final should respond to something in the last half of the course (submitted no later than 11/29).

These must absolutely be no longer than 3 double spaced pages in 12-point Times New Roman. I really mean this, actually, as part of the assignment is to learn how to constrain yourself to a narrow and specific point and work within strict limits.


37



Research Paper (40%): Each student will be expected to write a 12-15 page research paper, exploring an existing or historical form of state-based punishment or punitive state action that has not been taken up explicitly in the course readings. Some possible examples include sentencing, plea bargaining, appeals processes, private prisons, the death penalty, probation/parole, etc.

The paper should provide 1) an empirical account of the operation of the practice, 2) a theoretical account of how the practice is justified as punishment, and 3) a critical account of the meaning and significance of the practice. Topics must be submitted for approval by 10/30 (week 6).

Attendance and Participation (30%): This is a discussion seminar, and as such, active participation is mandatory. Students must come to class prepared to discuss the assigned reading, and are expected to have at least one well formed discussion question to offer to the class. We will routinely begin class by building a discussion agenda based upon these questions, so be ready to pose a specific question or point to a passage in the texts that begs discussion. Students with four unexcused and undocumented absences will fail the participation section of the course.

Please note that you must pass each component of the course in order to pass the course. For example, even if you turn in brilliant and amazing reading responses and an inspired final paper, but you fail the attendance portion of the course, you will fail the entire course.

Plagiarism: If you, even for a moment, think that you need to plagiarize, please come see me. If you think you can get away with it, you are wrong. Proven plagiarism of any kind will result in an automatic failure of the course, and will be referred to the University for further disciplinary action.

Texts Required for Purchase:Conover, Ted. 2001. New Jack: Guarding Sing Sing. New York: Vintage Books.Foucault, Michel. 1995. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by A.

Sheridan. 2nd ed. New York: Vintage Books.Garland, David. 1990. Punishment and Modern Society, Studies in Crime and Justice. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.Mauer, Marc, and Meda Chesney-Lind. 2002. Invisible Punishment: The Collateral

Consequences of Mass Imprisonment. New York: New Press.Parenti, Christian. 1999. Lockdown America: Police and Prisons in the Age of Crisis. London:

Verso.Tonry, Michael. 1995. Malign Neglect: Race, Crime, and Punishment in America. New York:

Oxford University Press.

These texts have all been ordered through the Seminary CO-OP bookstore. All other required readings marked with an * will be made available via electronic reserve or found on the chalk website.


38

Tentative Schedule of Class Sessions: Week 1:Mon 9/25: Introduction and course overview.

Wed 9/27: Defining Punishment• Hart, H.L.A. 1968. “Prolegomenon to the Principles of Punishment” in Punishment and

Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1-27.*• Feinberg, Joel. 1970. “Justice and Personal Desert.” Chapter 4 in Doing and Deserving.

Princeton: Princeton University Press. 55-94. *

Week 2:Mon 10/2: How should we think about punishment?• Garland. Chapter 1.• Mead, Geroge H. 1918. “The Psychology of Punitive Justice” The American Journal of

Sociology. Vol. 23, No. 5. 577-602. *

Wed 10/4: Functions of Punishment 1: Social Solidarity • Durkheim, Emile. 1984. “Mechanical Solidarity, or Solidarity by Similarities.” Chapter 2 in

The Division of Labor in Society. New York: Free Press. 31-67. *• Garland – Chapters 2-3.

Week 3:Mon10/9: Functions of Punishment 2: Control• Garland – Chapter 4• Pashukanis, Evgeny. 1924. “Law and Violation of Law.” Chapter 7 of A General Theory of

Law and Marxism. Online at: http://www.marxists.org/archive/pashukanis/1924/law/ch07.htm *

• Garland - Chapter 5

Wed 10/11: Functions of Punishment 3: Expression• Feinberg, Joel. 1970. “The Expressive Function of Punishment.” Chapter 5 in Doing and

Deserving. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 95-118.*• Hampton, Jean. 1992. "An Expressive Theory of Retribution." In Retributivism and Its

Critics, edited by W. Cragg.*

Week 4:Mon 10/16: Functions of Punishment 4: Discipline, Normalization, and Power• Garland, Chapter 6.• Foucault, Discipline and Punish. Part 1: Torture, 3-69.

Wed 10/18: Discipline and Punish• Foucault, Part 2: Punishment, 73-131.


39

http://www.marxists.org/archive/pashukanis/1924/law/ch07.htm




Week 5:Mon 10/23: Discipline and Punish• Foucault, Part 3: Discipline, 135-228.

Wed 10/25: Discipline and Punish• Foucault, Part 4: Prison, 231-308.• Garland, Chapter 7.

Additional/Suggested Readings for Foucualt:• “Prison Talk” in Power/Knowledge• Abnormal, Lectures 1 and 2• Society Must be Defended, Lecture 11

Week 6:Mon 10/30: Incarceration in the US.• Patterson, Alexander. 1951. “Why Prisons?” Chapter 1 in Patterson on Prisons. London:

Frederick Muller. 21-29.*• Morris, Norval. 1995. “The Contemporary Prison: 1965-Present” In The Oxford History of

the Prison, 202-231.*• Parenti, Chapters 1-5.• BJS Bulletin: Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2005*

Wed 11/1: Incarceration in the US, Being in Prison• Parenti, Chapters 8-10.• Wright, Paul, and Tara Herivel. 2003. Section 5 of Prison Nation: The Warehousing of

America's Poor. New York ; London: Routledge. 168-215.*

Week 7:Mon 11/6: Being in Prison 2: Corrections Officers.• Jacobs, James B with Norma Crotty. 1983. “The Guard’s World” in New Perspectives on

Prisons and Imprisonment. 133-141.*• Conover, Ted. 2001. New Jack: Guarding Sing Sing.

Wed 11/8: Incarceration and Health• Torrey, E. Fuller. 1997. “Deinstitutionalization: A Psychiatric ‘Titanic’”. Excerpts from Out

of the Shadows New York: Wiley and Sons. Online at http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/asylums/special/excerpt.html

Suggested Reading:• Farmer, Paul. 2002. “The House of the Dead: Tuberculosis and Incarceration.” In Invisible

Punishment. 239-257.• BJS Bulletin: HIV in Prisons, 2003. Online at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/

hivp03.pdf *


40

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/asylums/special/excerpt.html




http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/hivp03.pdf




Week 8:Mon 11/13: Punishment and Race• Tonry, Malign Neglect

Wed 11/15: Punishment and Race• Wacquant, Loïc. 2001. “Deadly Symbosis: When Ghetto and Prison Meet and Mesh.”

Punishment and Society 3(1). 95-133 *

Week 9:Mon 11/20: Punishment and Gender/Sexuality• Roberts, Dorothy. 1995. “Punishing Drug Addicts Who Have Babies.” in Critical Race

Theory: The Key Writings that Fromed the Movement. Crenshaw et. al Eds. New York: The New Press. 384-426. *

• Chesney-Lind, Meda. 2002. “Imprisoning Women: The Unintended Victims of Mass Imprisonment” in Invisible Punishment. 79-94.

• Richie, Beth. 2002. “The Social Impact of Mass Incarceration on Women” in Invisible Punishment. 136-149.

• Richie, Beth. 2001. “Challenges Incarcerated women Face as They Return to Their Communities: Findings From Life History Interviews". In Crime and Deliquency, 47(3). 368-389. *

• Haley, Janet. 1995. "The Politics of the Closet: Legal Articulation of Sexual Orientation Identity" in After Identity: A Reader in Law and Culture. New York: Routledge. 24-38. *

Wed 11/22: Collateral Effects: Welfare/Economy/Etc.• Rubinstein, Gwen and Debbie Mukamal. 2002. “Welfare and Housing - Denial of Benefits to

Drug Offenders” in Invisible Punishment. 37-49.• Braman, Donald. 2002. “Families and Incarceration” in Invisible Punishment. 117-135.• Western, Bruce, et. al. “Black Economic Progress in the Era of Mass Imprisonment.” In

Invisible Punishment. 165-180.• Huling, Tracy. 2002. “Building a Prison Economy in Rural America” in Invisible

Punishment. 197-213.• Miller, Teresa. 2002. “The Impact of Mass Incarceration on Immigration Policy.” in Invisible

Punishment. 214-238

Week 10: Mon 11/27: Collateral Effects: Civil Rights• Buckler, Kevin, and Lawrence Travis. 2003. “Reanalyzing the prevalence and social context

of Collateral Consequence Statues.” Journal of Criminal Justice 31. 435-453. *• Manza, Jeff, and Christopher Uggen. 2004. "Punishment and Democracy:

Disenfranchisement of Nonincarcerated Felons in the United States." Perspectives on Politics 2 (3):491-505. *

• Clegg, Roger. 2002. "Who Should Vote?" Texas Review of Law and Politics 6:159-178. *


41

• Reiman, Jeffrey. 2005. “Liberal and Republican Arguments Against the Disenfranchisement of Felons.” Criminal Justice Ethics. Winter/Spring 2005. 3-18. *

Wed 11/29: Punishment, Democracy, and Subject Formation. • Garland, Chapters 11-12.• Harcourt, Bernard. 2001. “The Implications of Subject Creation.” in Illusion of Order: The

False Promise of Broken Windows Policing. Boston: Harvard University Press. 160-184. *• Wacquant, Loïc. 2005. “Race as Civic Felony.” International Social Science Journal.

57(183). *


42

African-American Politics in Theory and Practice



COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course asks what it means to talk about African-American in both theory and practice over the course of the American experience. The first half of the course begins by focusing on the theoretical and philosophical foundations of race, asking how race figured into abstract notions of politics as well as in the founding of the United States during the late 18th century. We continue historically, asking how the end of the Civil War, reconstruction, redemption, and the rise of Jim Crow shaped black politics during those periods and how it has shaped black politics for future generations. In particular, we will explore the dramatic emergence of a black voting block and the “realignment” of black voters from the Republican to Democratic parties in the early 20th century. In the second half of the course, we will focus on the civil rights movement and its legacy of shifting from “protest to politics,” questioning the very idea of “black politics” itself. Challenged on the one hand by internal cleavages amongst African-Americans and on the other hand by external pressures of systemic racism in institutions such as the criminal justice system, we will ask if the idea of black politics even makes sense any longer. At the end of the course, we will ask what the future of black politics looks like, and how our own theoretical and philosophical commitments continue to form and shape our political praxis in the “Age of Obama.” A constant voice throughout the course we be that of W.E.B. Du Bois. If, as DuBois puts it, the problem of the 20th century is the “problem of the color-line,” we will force our selves to ask in what way it continues to be the problem of the 21st century as well.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS: (1) You will submit one term paper (15-20 pages in length) at the end of the semester. Papers MUST be

formatted and submitted properly in order to receive full credit, as documented in the course paper guidelines, available on the course website. Paper topics must be approved in advance by the instructor or the Teaching Assistant.

(2) You will complete a midterm exam. The exam will be a closed-book/notes “blue-book” style exam. (3) You must attend class and be an active participant in discussion. This is a reading intensive course, and

as such, students should be prepared to cover a large amount of material each week, and should pan accordingly.

(4) You will give one in-class presentation on the day’s material. The presentation should be no longer than 25 mins, and should focus offering both a specific question prompted by the readings as well as a preliminary answer to your own question.

GRADES: Term paper: 50%; midterm exam 20%; presentation 20%; class participation and attendance is 10%. Any student who receives a failing grade for attendance and participation will receive a failing grade for the class.

PLAGIARISM & ACADEMIC DISHONESTY: Proven plagiarism of any kind may result in automatic failure of the course, and will be referred to the University for further disciplinary action. I reserve the right to submit your electronic document to plagiarism detection websites if necessary.



43





READING SCHEDULE:

Week 1: What do we mean by Race? • Selections from Idea of Race, Part I (Bernier, Voltaire, Kant, Herder, Blumenbach, & Hegel) pp. 1-44 & Part

II (Gobineu, Darwin, Galton) pp. 45-79. • W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls, Forethought, Chapter 1, and “Conservation of the Races”

Week 2: Race and Foundations of the Political Community• John Locke, Second Treatise of Civil Government, Chapters 1-5.• Jean-Jacques Rousseau, selections from the Discourse on Inequality and Book I of The Social Contract.• Charles Mills, The Racial Contract (entire book).

Week 3: Race and the American Republic• Alexis de Tocqueville, “On theThree Races that Inhabit America” in Democracy in America. • Selections from Louis Ruchames (ed.), Racial Thought in America, pp.162-169, 307-315, 337-346, 380-382,

388-403 (Thomas Jefferson, William Lloyd Garrison, Catherine E. Beecher, Angelina Grimké, Abraham Lincoln, John C. Calhoun, Henry Clay, Supreme Court).

• Frederick Douglass, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?”, 1852.• Michael Omi and Howard Winant, Racial Formation in the United States, in Idea of Race, pp. 181-212.

Week 4: What do we mean by “Black Politics?”• W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls, Chapters 2-3.• Michael C. Dawson, Behind the Mule, pp. 45-68. • Cathy J. Cohen, The Boundaries of Blackness, pp. 33-77.• Tommie Shelby, We Who Are Dark: The Philosophical Foundations of Black Solidarity (entire book).

Week 5: Black Political Ideology• Michael Dawson, Black Visions, pp. 1-43.• Melissa Harris-Lacewell, Barbershops, Bibles and BET, pp. 1-34.• Cathy Cohen and Jamilla Celestine-Michener, “‘Minority Report’: Kany West, Barack Obama, and Political

Alienation” in Democracy Remixed, pp. 108-155.

Week 6: Reconstruction• W.E.B. DuBois, “Reconstruction and its Benefits” & “Reconstruction, Seventy-Five Years After” and

selections from Black Reconstruction.• Phil Klinkner and Rogers Smith, The Unsteady March, pp. 72-105.• Paul Frymer, Uneasy Alliances, pp. 49-86.• Douglas A. Blackmon, Slavery by Another Name, pp. 1-113.

Week 7: From Jim Crow to New Deal Black Politics• W.E.B. DuBois, Souls, Chapters 4-9. • Phil Klinkner and Rogers Smith, The Unsteady March, pp. 106-135.• Nancy J.Weiss, Farewell to the Party of Lincoln, pp. 13-61; 78-95; 180-235.

***MIDTERM EXAM***

Week 8: Civil Rights Movement and the Black Power Movement • Manning Marable, Race, Reform and Rebellion, 1-184.• The Black Panthers Speak, Philip Foner, ed., pp. 1-37, 45-47, 81-87, 145-166.

Week 9: Voting Rights Act and Black Elected Officials• Chandler Davidson, “The Voting Rights Act: A Brief History,” pp. 7-51.• William E. Nelson, Jr., “Cleveland: The Rise and Fall of the New Black Politics,” pp. 187-208.• Katherine Tate, From Protest to Politics, pp. 75-108.


44

• Malcolm X, “The Ballot or the Bullet.”

Week 10: Voting and Representation• Judith Shklar, American Citizenship, Part 1: Voting.• Adolph Reed, Jr., “The Black Urban Regime: Structural Origins & Constraints,” pp. 79-115.• Carol M. Swain, Black Faces, Black Interests: The Representation of African Americans in Congress, pp. 3-44,

193-225.• Lani Guinier, The Tyranny of the Majority," pp. 41-118.• Paul Frymer, Uneasy Alliances, pp. 87-119.• Cathy J. Cohen, “‘Fight the Power’: From Jena to the White House,” in Democracy Remixed, pp. 156-200.

Week 11: A Divided Black Political Agenda? Poverty and Class• W.E.B. DuBois, “The Economic Future of the Negro.”• Michael Dawson, Behind the Mule, pp. 15-44.• William Julius Wilson, The Truly Disadvantaged, pp. 3-106.• Adolph Reed, Jr., “The ‘Underclass’ as Myth and Symbol: The Poverty of Discourse about Poverty,” pp.

179-196.• Bart Landry, The New Black Middle Class, pp. 67-115.• Henry Louis Gates, Jr., “Two Nations... both Black,” pp. 132-138.

Week 12: A Divided Black Political Agenda? Religion, Gender, Sexuality and Black Feminism• W.E.B. DuBois, Souls, Chapters 10-12. • bell hooks, “Black Women: Shaping Feminist Theory” in Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center. pp. 1-15.• Patricia Hill Collins, Black Feminist Thought, pp. 3-40.• Johnetta Betsch Cole and Beverly Guy-Sheftall, Gender Talk, pp. 128-181.• Phillip Brian Harper, Are We Not Men?, pp. 3-38.• Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence

Against Women of Color.” • Cathy Cohen, “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens.” & “‘Baby Mama’: Black Love, Black Deviance,

and the Sexual Politics of Morality” in Democracy Remixed, pp. 50-107.

Week 13: Critical Issues, Black Popular Culture• Stuart Hall, "What is This 'Black' in Black Popular Culture," pp. 21-33.• Adolph Reed Jr., "The Allure of Malcolm X and the Changing Character of Black Politics," pp. 197-224.• Tricia Rose, Black Noise, pp. 1-21, 99-145.• Cathy Cohen, “‘Gangsta Rap Made Me Do It’: Bill Cosby, Don Imus, and Black Moral Panics” in Democracy

Remixed, pp. 18-49.

Week 14: Critical Issues, Incarceration• W.E.B. Du Bois, “The Negro Criminal” from The Philadelphia Negro. • Marc Mauer, Race to Incarcerate, 1-14, 118-194.• Richie, Beth. “Challenges Incarcerated women Face as They Return to Their Communities: Findings From

Life History Interviews."• Bruce Western, “Punishment and Inequality in America” Chapters 1-3.• Manza, Jeff, and Christopher Uggen. "Punishment and Democracy: Disenfranchisement of

Nonincarcerated Felons in the United States." Perspectives on Politics 2 (3):491-505.• Loïc Wacquant, "Deadly Symbiosis: When Ghetto and Prison Meet and Mesh."• Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness, Chapters 1 & 5.

Week 15: Which Way Forward?• W.E.B. Du Bois, Souls, Chapters 13-14, and Afterthought.• Shelby Steele, The Content of Our Character, pp. 149-175.• Glenn C. Loury, One by One from the Inside Out, pp. 63-82.• Orlando Patterson. The Ordeal of Integration: Progress and Resentment in America's "Racial" Crisis, pp.


45

171-203.• Adolph Reed Jr., “Sources of Demobilization in the New Black Political Regime: Incorporation, Ideological

Capitulation, and the Radical Failure in the Post-Segregation Era,” 117-159.• Cathy J. Cohen. “Deviance as Resistance: A New Research Agenda for the Study of Black Politics,” 27-45.• Cathy J. Cohen, “‘My President is Black’: Barack Obama and the Postracial Illusion” & “‘A Change is

Gonna Come’: Policy and Politics,” in Democracy Remixed, pp. 201-240.• Zadie Smith, “Speaking in Tongues”


46

Introduction to U.S. Politics: Institutions and Issues



COURSE DESCRIPTION: This is an introductory course in the politics of the United States. We will cover a large range of topics, institutions, and issues driven by historical documents and supplemented by classic Political Science analysis.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS: (1) Two papers, each of 1250–1500 words (approx. 5–6 pages),(2) A Midterm Examination,(3) A final paper of 2000–2500 words (approx. 8–10 pages), (4) Regular class attendance and participation. Each class meeting will begin by setting a group agenda on the board. As such, are you required to come to each class with a typed reading question in advance to contribute get us started each meeting. Be prepared to present your question at the beginning of class and turn in the question at the end of each session.

GRADES: First paper 15%; second paper 15%; midterm 20% final paper 35%; attendance and participation 15%. Any student who receives a failing grade for attendance and participation will receive a failing grade for the class.

PLAGIARISM: If you, even for a moment, think that you need to plagiarize, please come see me. If you think you can get away with it, you are wrong. Proven plagiarism of any kind may result in automatic failure of the course, and will be referred to the University for further disciplinary action.

CLASS SCHEDULE:[Note: this syllabus assumes a 15-week semester, with course sessions meeting twice per week]

1) “Beginnings”• Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Book I, Chapters 1-3. • John Locke, Fundamental Compact of Carolinas• The Mayflower Compact

2) Founding • Declaration of Independence of the United Sates of America, 1776.• The Declaration of Sentiments, Seneca Falls Conference, 1848.• Frederick Douglass, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?”, 1852.• Black Panther Party Platform and Program, “What we want. What we believe.” 1966.

3) Re-founding: The U.S. Constitution• Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, 1777.• The Constitution of the United States, 1787.• Federalist Papers 10, 15, 39 & 51. • Anti-Federalist Papers, Essays of Brutus, II and V

4) Public Ideologies• Tocqueville, “The Principle of Sovereignty of the People in America” & “Why it can strictly be said

that the people govern in the United States” in Democracy in America.• Louis Hartz, The Liberal Tradition in America, Parts 1 and 2. • Rogers Smith, “Beyond Tocqueville, Myrdal and Hartz,"


47





5) Federalism • Federalist Papers 44-46. • Thomas Jefferson, “The Kentucky Resolutions” • “Statement and Proclamation of Governor George C. Wallace, University of Alabama, June 11, 1963,”• United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), excerpts.

6 & 7) Individual and Group Interests• The Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. • Abraham Lincoln, “The Perpetuation of Our Political Institutions” • Sojourner Truth, “Ain’t I a Woman?”• Reverend Henry McNeal Turner, “I Claim the Rights of a Man”• Martin Luther King Jr. “Letter from Birmingham Jail”

8) Congress 1• Federalist Papers 52-53, 59, 62-63.• V.O. Key "The Voice of the People: An Echo"

9) Congress 2• Richard Fenno, "U.S. House Members in Their Constituencies: An Exploration."• Kahn and Kenney Spectacle of US Senate Campaigns.

10) Congress 3 • David Mayhew, Congress: The Electoral Connection

11) Congress 4• Gary Jacobson, The Politics of Congressional Elections

12) The Presidency (4 Sessions)• Federalist Papers Nos. 51, 68, 69, 73, 74• Woodrow Wilson, "The President of the United States"• James Bryce, “Why Great Men Are Not Chosen Presidents,” 1888.

13) The Presidency 1• Stephen Skowronek, The Politics Presidents Make, Chapters 1-3. • Richard Neustadt, Presidential Power and the Modern Presidents, Chapters 1 & 3.

14) The Presidency 2• Theodore Lowi, The Personal President: Power Invested, Promise Unfulfilled, Chapters 1-4, 7.

15) The President Speaks• George Washington, First Inaugural Address• Abraham Lincoln to Albert G. Hodges, April 4, 1864• Franklin D. Roosevelt, “First Inaugural Address”• Richard Nixon, “Checkers” Speech• Ronald Regan, “A Time for Choosing” 1964• Barack Obama, “A More Perfect Union,” 2008

16 & 17) The Supreme Court and the Appellate System• Marbury v. Madison (1803) • Robert McCloskey, The American Supreme Court

18 & 19) The Court and Social Change, The Cases• Brown v. Board of Education 347 U.S. 483 (1954)


48

• Bowers v. Hardwick 478 U.S. 186 (1986)• Lawrence v. Texas 539 U.S. 558 (2003)• Gerald Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope, Chapters 1, 2-5, & 12-14.

20) Electoral Participation 1• Alex Keyssar, The Right to Vote, Selections• Judith Shklar, American Citizenship, Part 1: Voting.• Malcolm X, “The Ballot or the Bullet”

21) Electoral Participation 2• Rosenstone and Hanson, Mobilization, Participation, and Democracy in America, Chapters, 1, 2 & 5.• Michael Dawson, Behind the Mule, Chapters 1 & 6.• Manza and Uggen, Locked Out: Felon Disenfranchisement and American Democracy, Chapters 1-3.

22) Civic Participation• Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Volume 2, Part II, Chapters 4-7.• Robert Putnam, Bowling Alone, Chapters 1, 2, 3, & 15. • Theda Skocpol, Diminished Democracy, Chapters 1, 2 & 7.

23) Infrapolitics• James Scott, Domination and the Arts of Resistance, Chapters 3 & 7.• Cathy Cohen, "Deviance as Resistance"• Robin Kelly, “Shiftless of the World Unite!” in Race Rebels.

24) Political Parties, History and Theory• Tocqueville, Democracy in America, Part II, Chapter 2, “Parties in the United States.”• Richard Hofstadter, The Idea of a Party System, Chapters 1, 2 & 6. • John Aldrich, Why Parties, Chapters 1, 2 & 9. • Michael Dawson, Behind the Mule, Chapter 5.

25) Political Parties and Machine Politics• Plunkitt of Tammany Hall • Steven Erie, Rainbow’s End, Chapters 1, 6 & 7.

26) Public Opinion • Tocqueville, “The Omnipotence of the Majority in the United States and its Effects,” in Democracy in

America. • Walter Lippmann, "The World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads" in Public Opinion.• Samual Popkin, The Reasoning Voter, Chapters 1, 2 & 3.

27 & 28) Social Movements• Douglas McAdam, Political Process and the Development of Black Insurgency, Chapters 1-3.• Aldon Morris, The Origins of the Civil Rights Movment, Selections.

29) Prisons and Politics• Marc Mauer Race to Incarcerate• Bruce Western, “Punishment and Inequality in America” Chapters 1-3.• Loïc Wacquant, "Deadly Symbiosis: When Ghetto and Prison Meet and Mesh."

30) 21st Century U.S. Politics?• Zadie Smith, “Speaking in Tongues”• Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw, “Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence

Against Women of Color”• Cathy Cohen, “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens.”


49

Teaching Portfolio - andrew t. dilts · Teaching Portfolio Andrew Dilts, Ph.D. Pedagogical...

Documents

Transcript of Teaching Portfolio - andrew t. dilts · Teaching Portfolio Andrew Dilts, Ph.D. Pedagogical...