Pages
Study Groups
See also the handout entitled: “Working groups” available on the Lecture Notes page.
The class will be divided randomly into 4–6 Study Groups. Why randomly? If you are reading this before the class has actually begun, try to answer this question for yourself before reading further. Be prepared to argue for or against this method of procedure as you see fit.
Here is our rationale:
Much of the subject matter is contemporary, controversial and complex. In addressing it we aim to proceed in as scientifically credible a manner as is possible. That means controlling (insofar as we can) for the presence and potentially biasing influences of at least some plausibly influential variables.
In a community like ours, one such variable is the likely presence among the participants of various “invisible loyalties”. Beyond that, please recall what was previously said about each of us coming from a background that is separate and distinct from everyone else’s. Precisely because “everything said is said by someone”, and because each of us enters into this setting (i.e. “this collaborative learning system-in-formation”) with certain default assumptions, preconceptions, expectations and attitudes already established, the explicit randomization of study group membership is a procedural step aimed at creating for ourselves a “level playing field”. We know no better way to systematically control for the otherwise powerful sources of bias, including the putative existence of “visible and invisible loyalties (shared sympathies antipathies)” within this cohort of students prospectively comprising this class.
Study groups are to meet for 2 hours weekly, starting during the first week of class. Don’t meet too soon after class. It is best to meet 3-5 days after class, so everyone has a chance to do homework assignments before meeting. The point is for you to start working your way through the syllabus and studying alone and together, independently of the instructors and other students. The workload thus includes attendance at and participation in weekly class meetings lasting a total of 5 hours per week. In addition, the situational “demand characteristics” nominally include one hour per day or 7 hrs. per week, of solo homework. (Time spent watching assigned videos with groupmates or doing assigned readings together, etc. does not count in fulfillment of the weekly study group meeting requirement.)
The time and place of study group meetings need to be agreed upon among the members and reported back to the instructors and other members of the class; however, certain procedural cautions and scheduling constraints apply. (See below and under F. Study group minutes".) Bear in mind that you are supposed to be meeting as a study group. What, precisely, does this mean? Think about this seemingly overly simple question and discuss this with your groupmates. Pick a meeting place and time appropriate to the purposes that the group is constituted to pursue. Schedule and hold weekly meetings Regularly at times and in places where interruptions, distractions, etc. won’t arise and impair your ability to concentrate, to remain task-oriented, and to listen and talk with each other. Avoid public spaces; avoid distracting sounds and sights, avoid “floating” from one meeting place / time to another.
The group should conscientiously consider negotiate, devise, and implement equitable ways of working together. Recognition of the need for all basic social positions to be played (e.g. leading, opposing, following, bystanding) is essential. Question: should these roles be played by each person as appropriate to the situation of the moment or ought each role be assigned to particular people in a certain order? Should roles be assigned or be played arbitrarily?
These questions not intended to be “merely rhetorical”—we will stay for an answer. Respectful and sincere production and processing of meaningful feedback and serious negotiation regarding objectives may be required to achieve an open and effective learning system. Authenticity seems to correspond with “best practice.” Insofar as possible, everyone should be expected to behave in every given instance as appropriate. Effort will probably be required to ensure that all members become involved in giving and getting feedback as needed in relation to group process and task. Strive for a fair division of labor and a workable system of checks and balances. Don’t let the same people get stuck with the same routine tasks over and over again (e.g. aim for equitable rotation of note-taking tasks). Especially when the workload feels like it is becoming a bit too heavy, dividing (“jig-sawing”) assignments will enhance the quality of the collaborative learning experience on all levels (individual, study group, and whole-class).
Study Group Meetings and Minutes
Each week each study group is responsible for preparing and submitting to the instructors–via email—a brief (1–2 page) collaborative report, henceforth referred to as “study group meeting minutes”. (Or merely “Minutes”).
“Minutes” must be received by instructor(s) 1 day before class. It follows that your study group should not arrange to meet later than the day before class in the afternoons / evenings or at any time on the day of class. As already noted, weekly study group meetings should not be scheduled to occur too soon after class. Everyone needs a chance to reflect on the previous class and get a good head-start on the assigned homework. It is thus best to try to schedule meetings on on 3–4 days before class, insofar as possible.
The minutes submitted by each group will be read and commented upon, successively, by the instructional staff. Everyone in your group will receive your annotated minutes by return email. Annotated copies of the minutes from each group will also be forwarded to all members of the study group that is serving as the “steering group of the week”. This “steering group pro tempore”, will carefully review all of the annotated minutes and find ways of incorporating pertinent items / questions / problems / comments into their already-ongoing plans to facilitate the next day’s class meeting.
The steering group of the week will also prepare and distribute to the class as a whole a brief summary / overview of substantive or procedural “issues of note” raised in the minutes received (e.g. stressing common themes, general concerns, etc.) as well as a provisional agenda for the next day’s class.
Important: The readers of your weekly minutes are looking for information that will contribute to the development of the class into a sustainable collaborative learning system. They are not merely or even mainly interested in “grading” you or in evaluating the quality of your study group’s minutes. Facilitating the learning process here is mainly a matter of each and all of us constantly and recurrently formatively evaluating what is going on. Toward this end, we do not need or want a word-by-word transcript of “who said what” at your meeting. Nor will it suffice for us to receive a mere list of who was present and what was discussed. Rather, you should strive to produce meaningful “process notes” consisting of summary statements, insights, points of agreement / disagreement, queries, requests for clarification, and comments relating to all aspects of the learning experience (problematic issues relating to both process and content should be addressed). Minutes are most valuable in guiding the process when they contain something true and (for you) significant about either the form or content of your 9.70 learning experience. You can help most by reporting (e.g.):
- “What is good and what is not good?” Identify points of consensus and / or disagreement regarding the presentation (in class, syllabus, text, etc.) of topically relevant issues; review and discuss assigned readings / films; comment on the quality / quantity of the assigned material; upon conclusions arrived at by the group and whether meaningful agreement was reached on any significant topic, and what that outcome suggests or implies.
- Talk about the quality of the material; the quality of the class sessions, the quality of your group meetings, the educational value of your discussions and conclusions, the timeliness / completeness of attendance, the quality (valence / intensity) of group “feeling”– (e.g. positive or negative energy level, etc.). Acknowledge “local and world events"or “personal issues” that are having an influence on your life and learning experience.
- Include concise comments on or answers to substantive or procedural questions posed in the syllabus, express your opinions about the questions, add personal anecdotes and other musings / conclusions / ideas on these subjects as appropriate.
- Mention comments / questions / criticisms that some or all group members feel strongly about (e.g. organizational, procedural or substantive issues pertaining to homework—readings, films, etc.) or matters relating to study group and / or class meetings.
- Comment as appropriate on the role and performance of the instructional subsystem. In all living systems, from cells to societies, corrective feedback–both positive and negative–is necessary in all aspects and at all levels of organization and development.
Weekly minutes should also include a brief summary statement from each member, regarding the form, content and quality of his / her own 9.70-related activities since the previous class session.
Subject-related conversations and electronic communications between / among study groups and between / among members of the class within and across study groups are strongly encouraged. However, experience shows that an excessive resort to “side-channel” or “back-door” lines of communication can engender mistrust and miscommunication. It is generally “best practice” to avoid ad hominem remarks and to include a “cc” to everyone who is referred to by name in such exchanges.
In sum, weekly minutes will be most useful to the facilitation process (see next section), if they provide honest and concise, theoretically and practically relevant, substantively and procedurally constructive feedback regarding the organization and development of the class and its subsystems (i.e. your study groups).
Weekly study group meeting minutes are due one day in advance of each class. The study group responsible for facilitating the lecture is indicated. The midterm formative and summative evaluations are due one day after Lecture 7.
LEC # | UNITS # | TOPICS | KEY DATES |
---|---|---|---|
Phase 1 – Didactic Orientation | |||
1 | 1.1 | Welcome. A Definition of the situation; start of the 9.70/13 collaborative learning system lifecycle; individuals and groups (selves and societies); human systems: levels and aspects of organization and development; singular and plural persons in contexts; sets and settings; housekeeping. | |
2 | 1.2 |
The Science Of Social Psychology And Vice-Versa I. What is Social Psychology? Social psychology as a science; Paradigm 1: The Modern scientific approach: Substantive, procedural and ethical issues. |
Meeting minutes due |
3 | 1.3 | The Science Of Social Psychology And Vice-Versa II. Paradigm 2: An alternative “Human Systems” approach; substantive, ethical and methodological issues; what is participatory action research? Are paradigms 1 and 2 mutually exclusive or partly complementary? | Meeting minutes due |
Phase 2 – Collaborative Inquiry | |||
4 | 2.1 | Persons-In-Contexts I: Families as human social systems: Anorexia Nervosa in social context; Demonstration: Participatory action research: Diagnosis and treatment of psychosomatic disorders in adolescence |
Meeting minutes due Study group 1 facilitates |
5 | 2.2 | Persons-In-Contexts II: Self and society; group norms; conformity and deviance; obedience |
Meeting minutes due Study group 2 facilitates |
6 | 2.3 | Meaning and Power I: The social construction of reality. Media, mass communication, propaganda, and persuasion. Corporate personhood? What is going on when “conglomerations of Capital” come to be legally entitled to rights that the founders intended to constitutionally guarantee to some, but not all, natural persons? |
Meeting minutes due Study group 3 facilitates |
7 | 2.4 | Meaning, and Power II: The social construction of reality II; social cognition, affect and action in human systems: Interacting beliefs, values and practices at individual and collective levels of organization and development |
Meeting minutes due Study group 4 facilitates Midterm evaluations due |
8 | 2.5 | Us And Them I: Justifying ourselves & judging others; reification; attribution; self-justification |
Meeting minutes due Study group 5 facilitates |
9 | 2.6 | Us And Them II: Defining and dealing with aggression and violence; The medicalization of deviance; naming and taming: “The power to give names and enforce definitions.” |
Meeting minutes due Study group 6 facilitates |
10 | 2.7 | Who is / are “We” I: What is “human nature?” Prejudice and discrimination: Are the causes “in our genes?” Can they be overcome? |
Meeting minutes due Study group 7 facilitates |
11 | 2.8 | Who is / are “We” II: Positive attitudes and actions toward humanity and nature; liking, loving and interpersonal sensitivity; what is “humanecological sustainability?” Who needs it? Is it attainable? | Meeting minutes due |
Phase 3 – Final Projects | |||
12 | 3.1 | I. (Forming / Storming): Identifying and organizing end-of-term project(s); refining evaluation criteria | |
13 | 3.2 | II. (Storming / Norming): Working on projects; finalizing production and distribution of evaluation forms | |
14 | 3.3 | III. (Performing): Presenting project findings; completing / submitting evaluations and filing final grades; concluding the 9.70 / 11 collaborative learning system lifecycle | Final evaluations / grades due |
Course Overview
This page focuses on the course 9.70 Social Psychology as it was taught by Professor Stephan L. Chorover in Spring 2013.
This course examined interpersonal and group dynamics and considered how the thoughts, feelings, and actions of individuals are influenced by (and influence) the beliefs, values, and practices of large and small groups. Learning occurred through a combination of in-class activities, small study groups and regular homework assignments. The course also included occasional lectures and demonstrations.
Course Outcomes
Course Goals for Students
In this course, the instructor aimed to challenge the conventional “top-down” classroom arrangement, in which essentially everything of material and conceptual value presumably comes from “the front of the room” and, more specifically, from the uniquely powerful and centrally placed and particularly privileged position of the instructor-in-charge. The instructor aimed to replace this approach with an alternative that is scientifically credible, pedagogically sound, and educationally effective - a collaborative learning system.
Curriculum Information
Prerequisites
None
Requirements Satisfied
HASS-S
Offered
Professor Chorover is an emeritus professor and is no longer teaching this course.
Instructor Interview
Professor Chorover described various aspects of how he taught 9.70 Social Psychology extensively in the course syllabus.
The following sections principally depict Prof. Chorover’s approach to teaching the course:
Student Information
Enrollment
About 25 students
Breakdown by Year
Rougly 1/5 sophomores, 2/5 juniors and 2/5 seniors.
Breakdown by Major
Most students were from departments other than Brain and Cognitive Sciences.
How Student Time Was Spent
During an average week, students were expected to spend 12 hours on the course, roughly divided as follows:
In class
- Met 1 time per week for 3 hours per session; 14 sessions total; mandatory attendance.
- Study groups facilitated discussions of problems based on readings or viewings and from study group meetings.
Study group meetings
- Met 1 time per week for 2 hours per session; 14 sessions total; mandatory attendance.
- Membership in groups of 4-6 students was randomly assigned.
- Study groups submitted meeting minutes of their discussion of readings and viewings each week in advance of the class.
- Study groups were assigned to be facilitators for class over the semester and were responsible for preparing handouts summarizing all study group meeting minutes during their facilitation week.
Out of class
- Students were required to complete reading and viewing assignments.
- Students also compiled and submitted weekly meeting minutes or prepared facilitation handouts before class.
LEC # | LECTURE NOTES TOPICS | LECTURE NOTES AND HANDOUTS |
---|---|---|
Phase 1. Didactic Orientation | ||
1 | Welcome |
Preliminary information form and benchmark questionnaire (PDF) Human systems: Aspects and levels of organization and development (PDF) |
2 | The Science of Social Psychology and Vice-versa I | Lecture notes 2 (PDF) |
3 | The Science of Social Psychology and Vice-versa II | Lecture notes 3 (PDF) |
Phase 2. Collaborative Inquiry | ||
4 | Persons-In-Contexts I | |
5 | Persons-In-Contexts II | Lecture notes 5 (PDF) |
6 | Meaning and Power I | Lecture notes 6 (PDF) |
7 | Meaning and Power II | Lecture notes 7 (PDF) |
8 | Us and Them I | Lecture notes 8 (PDF) |
9 | Us and Them II | Lecture notes 9 (PDF) |
10 | Who is/are “We” I | Lecture notes 10 (PDF) |
11 | Who is/are “We” II | Lecture notes 11 (PDF) |
Required Textbook
[SA] = Aronson, Elliot. The Social Animal. Worth Publishers, 2011. ISBN: 9781429233415.
SA has been the main text for this class for many years. A consistent student favorite and an up-to-date book about the psychology of human interaction, written from the author’s own particular personal and social (e.g. academic and professional) point of view.
He is an acknowledged authority on the experimental study of social psychology and a master at making the relevant substantive and technical complexities of the modern scientific literature in the field intelligible to an undergraduate audience.
Aronson will lead us through the scientific literature relating to the dynamics of social influence in a wide range of both routine and problematical situations. He will also provide us with some theoretically sound and practically useful answers to questions of a kind that most of us will keep on asking about ourselves and other people throughout our lives:
“What makes us who and what we are?” “Why do we like or dislike each other?” “Does watching violence on TV or playing virtually violent video games make children (adults?) more (or less?) overtly aggressive?” “What are “cults?” “What is “terrorism?” “Are there ways to reduce or overcome human aggressiveness, violence, prejudice and discrimination?” “How can basically ordinary people who know right from wrong, blindly follow the commands of someone ostensibly in a position of legitimate authority who directs them to engage in punitive, hurtful, destructive and violent acts aimed at other people and or property, even to the point of committing acts of torture, mass murder and suicide?” “How can basically ordinary people who know right from wrong…collaborate with others in organizing and carrying out such acts?”
In effect, Professor Aronson will introduce us to some key substantive, procedural, and ethical issues in experimental social psychology and take us on an up-to-date tour of its varied literature.
Pertinently, this SA 11th is the latest (2011). It integrates relevant developments since the 10th edition back in 2008, including a discussion of recent fMRI evidence about the effects of social support on brain activity related to fear and references to the 2008 presidential election and its aftermath. It is, of course, silent on some significant events that have occurred since then, and we will surely want to consider some of them.
Much of the material that you will encounter via the text and otherwise in this class is perpetually timely and drawn from classical experiments—some of them decades old. Don’t expect the conclusions to be drawn to be outdated and of merely historical interest. The experiments are “classical” precisely because they speak eloquently on matters highly relevant to understanding current events.
Readings and Viewings
All readings and viewings are best done “solo”. Comprehension is key! Take notes, and try to complete the assignments before you meet with group-mates to discuss the week’s work.
Whether studying materials on line or reading texts or watching films: Please do so closely, carefully, critically, attentively, and conscientiously. Remember, for you this is not mere “entertainment”. Watch with a view to issues previously or concurrently arising in 9.70. The sequencing of assignments has been done advisedly. Generally speaking, the ordering of items in the assignments below has been arranged to facilitate comprehension. Please make an effort to do the assignments in the order that they are listed in this syllabus.
Some of the material is difficult and dense. Some of it is quite harsh and unpalatable. At times, you may find it necessary to take a break, and get away from it. At other times you may need to read, watch and / or listen to a given selection more than once before you can fully take it in. The acquisition of learnable knowledge and skills is a cumulative process. If, after going through the material and giving it the most careful and sustained consideration of which you are capable, you still “don’t get it,” then discuss it with your group-mates and / or bring it to the attention of the class and the instructors in person or via group minutes.
As you do the readings and watch the films, try to adopt and retain a perspective that is true to your role as a beginning student of the subject before us. Be constantly mindful of differences and similarities in the context in which the material you are reading and watching was produced and the one in which you are encountering it. Focus on the social psychological significance of the issues being raised and their meaning in terms of your 9.70 learning experience. Consider both the media and the messages. Keep track of points on which you strongly agree or disagree with the message or the manner in which it is presented. Don’t be unduly surprised or put off by the fact that some of the material is “old,” or that much of the video imagery is dated and many of the videos are of low production value or poor audiovisual quality. Furthermore, the people and situations portrayed may look different than today’s—characters may sport passé haircuts and outmoded dress styles. But don’t let that distract you from your main task.
In years past, many 9.70 students reported finding some of the assigned readings and videos mildly (and sometimes powerfully) disturbing. They complained that the conclusions to be drawn (e.g. about “human nature”) were generally very depressing. In recent years, we’ve aimed to counteract this effect by “deconstructing” the concept of “human nature” and by including some recent findings from the emerging subfield of “positive psychology.” This year we will try to build further on this experience by exploring what it means to be a specifically human being and searching for a humanecologically sustainable definition of the boundaries of human “personhood” in terms of (e.g.) corporate “constitutional rights”.
That being said, it must be added that some important social psychological lessons can be learned from a closer examination of the ways in which disturbing information affects us.
Pay close attention to the way you respond when some item of information (e.g. something in this syllabus or the material it refers to) disturbs your sense of what is true and important. Try to figure out precisely what it is about the information (message and / or medium) that makes you feel uncomfortable. Take a few minutes to observe your way of handling the situation (laughter, dismissal, denial, defection, etc.?). As you encounter such material and endeavor to come mentally and behaviorally “to grips with it”, lots of things may happen. You may experience feelings of disbelief, revulsion, or alienation that make it difficult for you to “take in” the information. If this happens, please understand that your strong affective (fight / flight) reactions are entirely natural and normal. All of us are inclined to defend ourselves against or distance ourselves from unpleasant information and generally tend to prefer to avoid situations in which we find the behavior (and thoughts and feelings) of others to be intellectually and emotionally disturbing. But for present purposes it would be best to endeavor to overcome this tendency, lest it impede your understanding of the material.
Viewing Films and Videos
Some of the videos that have to be viewed (and subsequently discussed in study groups and class) may be accessible via the course Web site.
Feel free to watch videos alone or better yet, with groupmates / classmates. In the latter case, you will be able to share your immediate impressions with others. However, the time spent viewing–like the time spent reading—should be allocated to “homework” and may not be used to even partially fulfill the weekly study group meeting requirement).
LEC # | LECTURE NOTES TOPICS | READINGS & VIEWINGS |
---|---|---|
Phase 1. Didactic Orientation | ||
1 | Welcome |
Preliminary Information Form and Benchmark Questionnaire Syllabus–Why such a gigantic Document? Working Groups Human Systems: Aspects and Levels of Organization and Development Human Systems: A Selection of Developmental Schemes Timesheet Study Group Roster Draft formative and summative evaluation form |
2 |
The Science of Social Psychology and Vice-versa I |
1.2-1 Syllabus 1.2-2 [SA] Front Matter, Back Matter, and Chapter 1. 1.2-3 Milgram, S. “The Perils of Obedience.” Harper’s Magazine, December 1973. 1.2-4 Baumrind, Diana. “Some Thoughts on Ethics of Research: After Reading Milgram’s” “Behavioral Study of Obedience.” American Psychologist 19, no. 6 (1964): 421–23. 1.2-5 Milgram, Stanley. “Issues in the Study of Obedience: A Reply to Baumrind.” American Psychologist 19, no. 11 (1964): 848–52. 1.2-6 [SA] Chapter 9. 1.2-7 The Human Behavior Experiments. Directed by Alex Gibney. Color, 58 min. 2006. [Fearless symmetry production company, USA, digital production.] 1.2-8 Aronson, Elliot, and Diane Bridgeman. “Jigsaw Groups and the Desegregated Classroom: In Pursuit of Common Goals.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 5, no. 4 (1979): 430–46. (Readings on the social animal.) |
3 |
The Science of Social Psychology and Vice-versa II |
1.3-1 Mindwalk. Directed by Bernt Capra. Color, 112 min. 1990. [Distributed by Triton Pictures, USA, digital production.] 1.3-2 Chorover, Stephan L. “Paradigms Lost and Regained: Changing Beliefs, Values, and Practices in Neuropsychology.” In Theories of the Evolution of Knowing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1990, pp. 87–106. ISBN: 9780805807554. 1.3-3 ———. Version 1.5. Front Matter, and Chapters 1–3 in HomeWork: An Environmental Literacy Primer. Collaborative Learning Systems, Cambridge, MA, 1995, pp.vii–xx. 1.3-4 Melucci, Alberto, and Stephan L. Chorover. “Knowledge and Wonder: Beyond the Crisis of Modern Science.” In Overcoming the Language Barrier: Problems of Interdisciplinary Dialogue: proceedings of an international roundtable meeting, sponsored by the Center … Sciences at Temple University May 14–17, 1997. Edited by G. Robert Flower. Center for Frontier Sciences at Temple University, 1998. ISBN: 9780963327215. |
Phase 2. Collaborative Inquiry | ||
4 |
Persons-In-Contexts I |
2.1-1 Human systems: A selection of development schemes (PDF) 2.1-2 Jackson, Don D. “The Individual and the Larger Contexts.” Family Process 6, no. 2 (1967): 139–47. 2.1-3 Minuchin, Salvador, Bernice L. Rosman, et al. Psychosomatic Families: Anorexia Nervosa in Context. Harvard University Press, 1978. ISBN: 9780674722200. [Preview with Google Books] |
5 |
Persons-In-Contexts II |
2.2-1 [SA] Chapter 2. 2.2-2 Asch, Solomon E. “Opinions and Social Pressure.” Scientific American 193, no. 5 (1955): 17–26. (Readings About the Social Animal) 2.2-3 The Wave. Directed by Alexander Grasshoff. Color, 44 min. 1981. 2.2-4 Jones, S. “You Will Do As Directed.” In Facing History and Ourselves: Holocaust and Human Behavior. Edited by Margot Stern Strom, and William S. Parsons. Facing History and Ourselves National Foundation, 1994. ISBN: 970961584146. 2.2-5 Part 1: The Challenger Disaster. Directed by Charles Wiener. [Videorecording.] |
6 |
Meaning and Power I |
2.3-1 [SA] Chapter 3. 2.3-2 The Corporation. Directed by Mark Achbar, and Jennifer Abbott. Color, 145 min. 2004. [Big Picture Media Corporation, digital production.] |
7 |
Meaning and Power II |
2.4-1 [SA] Chapter 4. 2.4-2 Ash, C. et al. “Living in Societies.” Science 317, no. 5843 (2007): 1337. (optional reading - entire Social Cognition section.) 2.4-3 Hardin, G. “The Tragedy of the Commons with Commentary by Crowe, B. and 1969.” The tragedy of the commons revisited, 1968. 2.4-4 Rowe, J., and Worldwatch Institute. “The Parallel Economy of the Commons.” In State of the World 2008_: Ideas and Opportunities for Sustainable Economies_. Earthscan, 2007, pp. 138–50. ISBN: 9781844074983. [Preview with Google Books] 2.4-5 Assadourian, E., and Worldwatch Institute. “Engaging Communities for a Sustainable World.” In State of the World 2008_:_ Ideas and Opportunities for Sustainable Economies. Earthscan, 2007, pp. 151–65. ISBN: 9781844074983. [Preview with Google Books] 2.4-6 Calder, J. S., and Worldwatch Institute. “Mobilizing Human Energy.” In State of the World 2008_:_ Ideas and Opportunities for Sustainable Economies. Earthscan, 2007, pp. 166–79. ISBN: 9781844074983. 2.4-7 Macy, J. R. Despair and Personal Power in the Nuclear Age. New Society Pubulication, 1983. ISBN: 9780865710313. |
8 |
Us and Them I |
2.5-1 [SA] Chapter 5. 2.5-2 Haney, Craig, W. Curtis Banks, et al. “Study of Prisoners and Guards in a Simulated Prison.” (PDF) Naval Research Reviews 9, no. 1–17 (1973). 2.5-3 Quiet Rage: The Stanford Prison Study. Directed by K. Musen, and P. G. Zimbardo. 1991. [Stanford, CA: Psychology Dept., Stanford University, videorecording.] 2.5-4 Osherow, Neal. “Making Sense of the Nonsensical: An Analysis of Jonestown.” Readings about the social animal (1988): 68-86. |
9 |
Us and Them II |
2.6-1 [SA] Chapter 6. 2.6-2 American academy of pediatrics, Committee on public education. “Media Violence.” Pediatrics 108, no. 5 (2001): 1222–6. 2.6-3 “Grand Theft Auto.” Rockstar Games, Inc., accessed March 4, 2014, video game. http://www.rockstargames.com/gta/ 2.6-4 Wilson, Edward O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1976. [Preview with Google Books] 2.6-5 Sociobiology: Doing what comes naturally. Published by Document Associates Inc., New York, NY 1976. [videorecording.] 2.6-6 Sociobiology: Doing what comes naturally transcript of the soundtrack. 2.6-7 2.6-8 Lewontin, Richard C., Arthur J. Schwartz, et al. Biology as a Social Weapon. Burgess Publication Company, 1977. ISBN: 9780808745341. |
10 |
Who is/are “We” I |
2.7-1 [SA] Chapter 7. 2.7-2 A Class Divided. Produced and directed by William Peters. Color, 60 min. 1985. [Broadcast on Frontline March 26, 1985, digital production.] 2.7-3 Crash. Produced and Directed by Paul Haggis. Color, 112 min. 2005 [Distributed by Lions Gate Entertainment Corporation, digital production.] |
11 |
Who is/are “We” II |
2.8-1 [SA] Chapter 8. 2.8-2 Aronson, Elliot, and Diane Bridgeman. “Jigsaw Groups and the Desegregated Classroom: In Pursuit of Common Goals.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 5, no. 4 (1979): 430–46. (Units 1.2–1.8.) 2.8-3 Assadourian, E., and Worldwatch Institute. “Engaging Communities for a Sustainable World.” In State of the World 2008: Ideas and Opportunities for Sustainable Economies. Earthscan, 2007, pp. 151–65. ISBN: 9781844074983. [Preview with Google Books] 2.8-4 Calder, J. S., and Worldwatch Institute. “Mobilizing Human Energy.” In State of the World 2008: Ideas and Opportunities for Sustainable Economies. Earthscan, 2007, pp. 166–79. ISBN: 9781844074983. |
Course Meeting Times
Lectures: 1 session / week; 3 hours / session
Index
Social Psychology in Theory and Practice
Modern and Systematic Paradigms: Two Mostly Complementary, not Always Contradictory, Perspectives
Meaning and Power (Mens et Manus?)
“Everything that is said is said by Someone”
Course Description
This course examines interpersonal and group dynamics, considers how the thoughts, feelings, and actions of individuals are influenced by (and influence) the beliefs, values, and practices of large and small groups. Learning occurs through a combination of in-class activities complemented by participation in small study groups and completion of regular homework assignments. The class also involves occasional lectures and demonstrations.
Collaborative Learning System for 9.70
This subject offering has been evolving for several decades. In the 1970s Playboy magazine listed it among the 10 best undergraduate classes at U.S. colleges and universities. In part, this was said to be “because you get to determine your own grade” (well, not exactly, but…).
Social Psychology in Theory and Practice:“Science Walks on Two Legs”
Here we are. On the verge of (another) “new” Spring Semester at the biggest and best and most tip-top and famous and only institute of its kind in beautiful downtown Cambridge, our fair city, MA 02139. Our respective and conjoint prospective participation in the 9.70 learning system places us in a consensually-shared social situation. I am being intentionally somewhat abstract and technical here. All of the foregoing words are part of a technical vocabulary that enables us to communicate with each other in a way that is conducive to consensual validation. You will need to master these terms and concepts. Do you understand their meaning in this context? If not, please Ask For Help. This process proceeds sequentially, and it will be seen that a “firm foundation” of “understanding” and common spatiotemporal, cultural, and linguistic frames of reference. We Want You To Feel Free To Stop The Process In Order To Ask For Clarification, Or To Question The Pace And Direction We Are Going At Any Point. We thus take the immediate and concrete, fact of our own concurrent co-participation in the formation of a particular human social system (This Class) as our point of departure and as a prime thematic focus to which we will recurrently return.
The"collaborative learning system" into which we will presently begin organizing ourselves, makes it structurally and functionally different in social organization from most undergraduate classes. What we are trying to do here is to engender a shift in attitudes; to help you to learn how to more sustainably and humanely Both participate in And observe, with ethical sensitivity and scientific rigor, the organization and development of a human social system of which you, yourself, are a common member. In this case, learning will take place within the multifariously limiting boundaries of a single semester long 12 unit subject of undergraduate instruction at MIT. These and other structural limitations notwithstanding, we aim to facilitate learning among us in this context by fostering collaboration in the formation, implementation, guidance and formative and summative evaluation of our efforts to comprehend the subject before us. If we are at all successful, we will succeed in shaping ourselves into a reasonable (if situationally limited) facsimile of a “real” scientific community, In other words, our efforts here are organized to advance our understanding of the world, and its contents, including ourselves and each other. Even more pointedly we hope and expect this class to become a context in which we all both profess and practice the art / science of real and serious scholarship.
Given a class size of 20, commonly devoted to and in the service of meaningful human inquiry; given a 14 week-long term duration, and a given by each participant a nominal commitment of 12 hours / week in the amount of time / effort to be put into the process by each and all of the individual participants, the 9.70 nominal workload works out to (20x12x14) or 3360 person-hours of (hopefully high quality) time and effort over the next 2 and ½ months.
In past years, the quality of the learning experience and the performance of the class “community” as a whole and in all its parts have achieved moments of real excellence. Like all members of all such communities, in whatever"fields", our inquiries proceed within the conceptual and material boundaries of particular scientific “paradigms”.
Paradigms
Paradigms, as will be explained, are humanly conceived systems with conceptual (e.g. epistemological and axiological) and material (e.g. methodological) aspects. It is part of the argument of this class that frameworks having cognitive, affective and expressive aspects are hallmarks of human systems at personal and social levels of organization. In science, paradigms set various tangible and intangible limits to the scope and penetrativeness of our theories, hypotheses, methods of procedure, and interpretations.
But we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves …
The system organization process will continue immediately after a short break….Upon reconvening, we who return consider ourselves committed (however provisionally) to being serious students. Next, we randomly divide the membership of the class into subsystems (study groups) intended to operate interdependently with others while each remaining together as a stable subsystem for the duration of the term, unless or until the participants determine otherwise. This random assignment helps to create a “level playing field”. The coursework will thus be approached in a way that provides everyone with equal first hand opportunities to experience and exchange ideas about what it means to scientifically investigate (experimentally / experientially) the subject before us on individual, small group, and large group levels.
Social Psychology in Action
Collaborative learning is not a spectator sport, and 9.70 is not a lecture class. Presence and active involvement by all in all aspects of the class is key. All enrolled students, like everyone else participating in this iteration of 9.70, are expected to come to every class well-prepared to participate fully in facilitating the organization and development of the class as a whole (and its parts) into an effective set of mutually and reciprocally collaborative learning systems.
A word needs to be said about this unusually long and detailed Syllabus. Taking the place of formal lectures, it consists of many narrative passages aimed at drawing your attention to issues that are centrally important in “making sense” of human social conduct. In lieu of lectures, the syllabus is thus intended to serve as a major Text and Guide at the outset and over the entire term. Your reading in it should be sequential. Proceed through it page-by-page, week-by-week. Please read it carefully and refer back to it frequently as we move along.
“Trust the process”—Our pedagogical model and collaborative learning approach have been co-evolving with constructively critical inputs and corrective feedbacks from many successive cohorts of 9.70 students over many years. Happily, this has enabled your predecessors not only to gain a good familiarity with the subject area, but also to attain levels of knowledge and skills that have turned out to be personally and socially useful to them. The experience will hopefully help you in contemporaneous and future contexts where you find yourself actively participating individually and collectively with others in the organization and development of what is intended to be a trustworthy community of inquiry into matters of serious human concern.
Prepare yourself, then, for semester-long involvement (at a level of 12 hours per week for 14 weeks) in a “hands-on” learning process. We encourage you to approach it—insofar as you can—as a kind of expedition on which you have embarked with others. Given the necessary modicum of individual and collective investment on your part, this can be an opportunity to participate with peers in a scientifically credible, ethically appropriate and academically sound exploration of the subject before us.
The subject area in question is represented in an enormous academic and professional (as well as popular) literature. Important scholarship has been done by adherents of the mainstream (so-called “modern”) experimental scientific approach to the study of social psychology. For access to a reasonable sample of this material, we are fortunate to be able to rely on a concise and eminently readable textbook that expertly and engagingly surveys the subject, offering clear and cogent explications of findings obtained in diverse experimental, clinical, field, and laboratory contexts. As we proceed through successive research topics, we concurrently observe, interpret, and evaluate our own progress toward the goals we have set for ourselves. This involves reliance on a credible “formative evaluation” process that becomes another main focus of our collaborative learning / teaching methodology.
Albeit partial and provisional, the model of inquiry that our approach enables us to construct for ourselves both emulates and differs from situations encountered in more conventional classroom, laboratory, clinical and field research contexts. While acknowledging differences in knowledge, age, and experience, between instructional and student subsystems, our goal is to challenge the conventional “top-down” arrangement, according to which essentially everything of material and conceptual value presumably comes from “the front of the room” and, more specifically, from the uniquely powerful and centrally placed and particularly privileged position of the instructor-in-charge. We aim to replace this approach with an alternative that is scientifically credible, pedagogically sound, and educationally effective. The aim here is to recognize realities while minimizing some of the unhelpful aspects of the more hierarchical model. Insofar as we can, we aim to encourage here the emergence of a collaborative learning system in which meaning, rather than merely power, deriving from position, directs the general flow of things, and in which all members share the kind of citizenship that encourages in each the power and responsibility for saying and doing what they feel and think they should be saying and doing while also respecting the rights of all others and agreeing to adhere to a few basic ground-rules pertaining to premises, principles, and procedures of inquiry.
By an hypothesis that we will further explore next week, comparatively many features of human social systems (dyads, families, groups of various kinds) can be identified as generic. This means that, given a particular social context, certain events are likely to be regularly observed to occur time and time again and to recur in other contexts in many superficially different forms. In other words, patterns and cycles that we are able to perceive and are accustomed to observing in one situation are likely to have organizational and developmental counterparts in other situations.
Still differently put, everything that happens in the weeks ahead will be uniquely the “one time only” result of the particular manner in which moments and issues and events arise for us in their own singular and unique ways. Nevertheless, we can safely promise that at least some of the knowledge and skills on offer here will be acquired by you and the most lasting and useful will be those gained by you experientially, via your participation in the 9.70 learning experience. Will that prove useful and relevant, mutatis mutandis, to your ability to understand and respond appropriately to things happening in myriad other human social contexts as well?
This syllabus is so big because it is partly intended to provide information that might previously or otherwise have been presented via lectures (of which we try to have no more than a few). Together with our textbook and other materials to which you will have access, the syllabus and other initial handouts are meant to engage, motivate, and guide your progress through the course of inquiry now getting under way.
Please note that our search for an understanding of the subject before us will bring you into direct experiential contact with social psychological situations in many ways and on many levels. Through this exposure you will hopefully learn to find your way around in the maze of social psychological theories (beliefs, values) and practices associated with two different scientific “paradigms.” (What is a"paradigm"? See the section on Paradigms above, see also “Human Systems Schematic” and"Developmental Schemes" Handouts)
Modern and Systemic Paradigms: Two Mostly Complementary, not Always Contradictory, Perspectives
Let’s keep talking quite abstractly: The epistemological, axiological and methodological entailments of the first–the modern scientific paradigm–are pertinently exemplified in and espoused by the textbook. The second—the so-called “systemic” or “contextual” or “post-modern”—paradigm–together with its key scientific beliefs, values, and practices, will be introduced and advocated (professed?) by the instructors. In our view the second paradigm retains many virtues of the first—generally validating and incorporating into itself many of the first paradigm’s theories and practices. We contend that for many scholarly intents and purposes, the second, systems-oriented, paradigm offers a richer, deeper, broader, and more inclusive human / ecological framework as its basis of understanding. In our judgment, it affords social psychologists (like us) a generally reasonable and realistic approach to human inquiry: an approach that is contextual, organic, participatory, and action-research oriented.
During the first four weeks of the term we will be both introducing the “territory to be covered” and examining–comparing and contrasting—some of the key conceptual and material particulars of these two paradigms. It is important to understand that in introducing and distinguishing between the two paradigms, and in endeavoring to describe their respective features, we do not at all mean to suggest or imply that they are completely contradictory or mutually exclusive. Excepting one key difference between them (the fundamentalist claim of the former to its own uniquely singular and universal superiority), we will argue that there is really no need to choose between them and that sole reliance on neither paradigm is wholly sufficient to the task of providing us with anything approaching a singularly and universally true and complete understanding of the subject before us.
In our view, faithful reliance upon some key conceptual epistemological, axiological and material (e.g. practical / methodological) features of each proves to be necessary and sufficient for the participant / observer to make credible, trustworthy, and practical sense of scientific experience in the realm of social psychology. Accordingly, we will be exploring and demonstrating the value of both paradigms in various situations. In this way, we hope to come as close as we presently can to attaining an epistemologically valid, axiologically (including ethically) sound, and methodologically effective way of attaining a scientifically credible, ethically appropriate and practically useful understanding of our subject. Do you find these to be difficult concepts to understand or too abstract to be worth serious consideration? Please reflect on what you think and how you feel about this material so far; discuss with peers and others until they make some sense to you. If this doesn’t do the job, please bring that fact to our attention, either privately or (better yet, in class).
Human Inquiry (Science)
A goal directed, task oriented activity having many aspects and involving, among other things, the organization and development of a more or less random group of able and interested persons into a self-organizing and self-validating “consensual domain.” Thus we come to see science–in significant part–as a consensually valid, pedagogically sound, practically effective Collaborative Learning System. The mix of inherited and acquired particulars that come to characterize the structure and functions of the 2013 iteration of the 9.70 collaborative learning system–the beliefs, values and practices that inform its organization and development–aspire to be scientific and are the product of many years of experience and involvement by many successive cohorts of students. And while experience has taught us to “trust the process,” we do not regard anything about it as absolutely or immutably fixed.
Meaning and Power (Mens et Manus?)
What are they? How can their “social influences” and the interplay between them be understood? We suggest them to be constant features of significant relations within, between and among human systems. What is really going on here? Education? Indoctrination? What are the rules? Who is “in charge”? Who decides? On what grounds? Who is to say? Says who? These and related questions will arise and need to be confronted, negotiated and (re)defined among us as we participate together in both forming our collaborative learning system and taking due note of variables pertaining to the process of its formation.
Learning = Changing mental sets and behavior at individual level; changing beliefs, values, and practices, worldviews, valuesystems, and lifeways at individual and collective levels.
Over the course of the semester, as we proceed–hopefully in the posture of serious students acquiring learnable skills–We will travel through the sequence of topics referred to above and detailed below. As already noted, the fact of our respective and conjoint participation in and observation of the organization and development of the class itself becomes one of our main foci. Expect conceptually and materially compound and complex interactions of various kinds to be constantly and recurrently taking place at three levels of organization: the individual, the instructional subsystem, the study group, and the class as a whole. (Not to mention influences arising from the organized environments within and around us)
As we participate in the formation of the 9.70_13 collaborative learning system, we closely observe the process and come to see certain aspects of it as “unique” and some “generic”. That is to say, we come to see that the processes of organization and development that we are undergoing in this class are specific instances of general trends and have their counterparts in other human social contexts.
"Everything that is said is said by Someone."
Our friend and onetime MIT colleague Professor Humberto “Chicho” Maturana was notorious for confounding his peers back in the 1970s by starting every formal scientific talk by announcing this fact. Why did he do that? Given the context, what does the statement suggest or imply? Do you take it to be true? Important? What relevance (if any) do you see in it for us and our present business?
We first of all take Maturana’s assertion as a timely reminder that everybody entering into the present situation (or “setting”) brings with him/her their/our own habitual mental sets, attitudes, default assumptions, and situational definitions. It is axiomatic, in other words, that the already-established attitudes (thoughts and feelings) and expectations / inclinations that we bring with us into any given situation have consequences for how we will actually behave and what we will experience therein. To say it again, in a slightly different way: the particulars of our personal and social lives (our backgrounds and experiences) influence our perceptions of and reactions to any new situation. And how we behave in the situation in question will tend to influence how we experience ourselves and others and how we come to be regarded by the latter.
The “social influence process”—this is a key concept from"The Social Animal" (see below)—of which what is presently going on here and now (at this moment of reading or classroom discussion) may be taken as a representative case in point; The process of coming to understand is a project for many lifetimes; our subject is complex, cyclical, and cumulative, with the play of multiple relevant factors everywhere constantly and recurrently ongoing. Is there something about this material that you find difficult to absorb or that makes you uncomfortable?
Do you understand that this interplay both enables and limits our available reactions? conditions and constrains the clarity and comprehensiveness of our interpretations? reflects and reinforces (or challenges and undermines) our fondly held beliefs and values? motivates our effort? influences our hypotheses? biases our inquiries? qualifies our conclusions?
Needless to say, there are many barriers that will need to be confronted and overcome in order to succeed, but this class continues to be offered because it “works”. Our longtime experience teaches us that undergraduate MIT cohorts like this one can—within the available modicum of time and effort,—organize themselves (ourselves) into scientifically credible, pedagogically sound and practically effective collaborative learning systems; systems in which and among which attitudes of social responsibility are encouraged and acts of personal and collective initiative are rewarded and in which collaboration evolves without engendering cynicism, freeloading, deception, or cheating.
In a “consensual domain of inquiry” like the one we will be endeavoring to establish among ourselves, it is critical that “meaning” and “power” issues be clearly identified as such and that “the power to make meaning”–initially the prerogative of the instructional subsystem—comes to be more or less equitably shared among the membership. For example, while recognizing and acknowledging real differences (e.g. between “students” and “teachers”) it should become routine for everyone participating in such a community to explicitly accept it as a “default assumption” that all reported observations and interpretations offered by different members (or even by the same member(s) at different times) are equipotentially valid (until or unless deemed otherwise) and thus equally deserving of serious scientific consideration. By the same token–conclusions and hypotheses should remain provisional; established ones will continue to prevail unless or until effectively called into question and shown to be false or untenable. Precisely because 9.70 is a collaborative learning process, we are all individually and collectively responsible for devising and implementing a mode of self-organization that includes an equitable division of labor in which all members are free to play various roles as appropriate.
In this class, each individual and (sub)group has the power and the responsibility to observe and participate honestly and actively in ways that help the system to work openly, fairly and effectively. Do not expect us to tell you what to do. We do not have all the answers. But if we point you in a particular way, do not comply with our instructions without understanding and agreeing with them. Each of us must take control of and responsibility for our own attitudes and actions.
Facilitation
The first several class sessions will be led / facilitated by the instructional subsystem. We will endeavor to model at least some of the functions of the facilitating group of the week. The fourth session will involve a presentation (a simulated family interview) in which the instructors and study group 1 will collaborate. Beginning with Group 1, the power and responsibility for continuing to perform this leadership task will rotate weekly through Groups 2, 3, 4 etc. In this way, each study group will have two or more opportunities to facilitate.
We (the instructors) see ourselves as both “members” and “leaders”; accordingly, after trying to get the learning system off to a good start, we will pretty much try to step aside and get out of your way, while continuing to participate in class sessions and otherwise remain part of the process—available for consultation or guidance where necessary. We remind all who facilitate to presume that everyone in the class is on the same level and in the same boat as they are.
Many years of experience teach us that the “demand characteristics” of the student leadership role in 9.70 will remain somewhat constant, while also varying, more or less predictably, in accordance with topical shifts in the syllabus. The need to deal with a number of developmental issues normally arises in the course of our general trajectory through the term. Unpredictable changes in the task or misunderstandings of various kinds should also be expected to occur, as substantive and procedural issues arise at individual, study group, and whole class levels of organization and development. Insofar as possible, the facilitating “study group of the week” represents the members of the class and the other study groups and is expected to consult with the instructors as needed to define and to deal with issues arising in the collaborative learning process.
During the week leading up to class session at which you and your group-mates are scheduled to serve as facilitators, everyone in your group should be prepared to put somewhat more than the usual weekly modicum of time and effort into the class. For example, in addition to preparing a provisional agenda for the following day’s class, the facilitating group of the week will also be responsible for making and distributing summary overviews and evaluations of each of the following:
- Significant events at the previous class session (at which they were supposed to be playing the role of observers, bystanders, and recorders). This document should be prepared and distributed as soon as possible after the previous class session.
- The form and content and usefulness of the submitted minutes.
- Plans for covering the current week’s main topics and assignments.
As soon as they are completed, copies of the foregoing documents, together with the proposed agenda, should be forwarded to all members of the class (thus giving everyone some time to read and digest the material before the upcoming class).
Grading
Formative and Summative Evaluations
There are no problem sets to be turned in, no quizzes, no final exam in 9.70. And yet a grade will need to appear next to your name on the registrar’s official grade report at the end of the term.
How is that grade to be arrived at? The question recalls Footnote 2 above. This has been a central problematique of this class for a very long time and remains so today. The process that has evolved and is presently in place may best be likened to the kind of formative evaluation that is familiar to anyone who has ever participated with others in a cumulative design process. Both formative (recurrent, interim, ongoing) and summative (terminal, final) evaluations of individual and group performance must be implemented in collaborative learning situations. In this class you will have an opportunity to acquire a number of valuable learnable social psychological skills, including ways of evaluating individual and group performance in collaborative contexts.
What there is to be learned here about social influences involved in evaluation will be learned mainly in a hands-on and frankly experiential way. This is not the place to enter into a detailed or in-depth discussion of this issue. Suffice it for present purposes merely to say that whereas conventional grading practices call for the instructors to evaluate the performance of students on an individual basis, the nature of our subject, and the size and kind and organization of the class make such a grading system wholly inappropriate here. Of course, the instructors will actively participate in the grading process, and will be required to endorse the letter grade that appears next to your name on the official grade report sheet to be submitted to the registrar at the end of the term. Please do not expect that grade to reflect merely or even mainly the instructors’ assessments of the quality of your own individual and collective work in 9.70. The organization and development the 9.70 Collaborative Learning System will proceed through a number of stages or phases (see Developmental Stages handout), and your formative and summative evaluations will be relied upon to both guide our progress and to assess our effectiveness in negotiating our way through the relevant developmental phases. Copies of formative and summative evaluation schemes developed in previous classes are available on request (ask for e.g. “9.70_13 Draft Evaluation Form.”)
These are not a lot of fun to fill out, but our memories are notoriously fallible and experience teaches us to most trust feedback that is prompt, timely, and frequently recurrent. Fair warning: you will need all the help you can get in fulfilling your dual tasks of Formatively and Summatively evaluating your 9.70 learning experience. We expect you to use your timesheet regularly, “on line and in real time”, to keep track of your work—including attendance at meetings and completion of assignments.
The Bottom Line: It is up to you to keep track of the amount of time and the quality of effort you devote to your performance in this class. This information is to be generated by you and recorded several times per week on your timesheet (and more extensively in your journal, as appropriate) and may be exchanged and acknowledged within the study group by all members. Experience teaches us that one of the most important and lasting lessons students stand to learn in this class is how to both give and take constructive feedback. The performance evaluation process begins with some credible means of keeping track of the quantity and quality of your participation in real time (or soon thereafter).
Final Grades
Your final letter grade will be the result of the formative and summative evaluation process–and will come at its Very end. Meanwhile, instead of thinking in terms of letter grades, try to think in terms of the “demand characteristics” of the situation as outlined above and what you take to be the desiderata for you to have a truly high Quality learning experience in 9.70 this term. Here the key is: successful “on task” performance by all constituents of the system. In order for excellence of performance to be achieved at whole class level, it must be achieved at study group level; in order to be achieved at that level, it must also be achieved at individual level. Etc. Etc. and vice-versa.
In other words, if the 9.70 learning system works really well in all the aspects and levels that we can directly observe, that will suggest that everyone is and all levels are doing good work: including timely, conscientious and constructive engagement with organizational process and task issues. The educational value of the student-centered, hands-on pedagogical approach taken here has been demonstrated in years past. It requires each and every participant to accept the power and responsibility of working meaningfully and effectively together with others. We expect the outcome to be highly “value-added” and highly correlated with individual final grades.
In 9.70, striving for success is an ongoing process. It involves:
- Serious attention to, conscientious, and timely completion of all reading and viewing assignments;
- Full, faithful, and punctual attendance as well as active / constructive participation in discussions—at the group level and at class level.
- Continuous collaborative formative evaluation (as explained above);
- Regular and timely submission of study group minutes (as explained on page 6);
- Facilitation preparation and process;
- Effective participation in design, conduct, completion and presentation of term project(s);
- Development and implementation of a sustainable summative evaluation process and result.
Keeping a Journal
Precisely because it will have a discernible trajectory, and pass through some theoretically and practically noteworthy milestones, the process of development of your 9.70 learning experience is worth keeping track of. Accordingly, everyone is expected to keep a journal. It is best to approach this task from the stance of a serious researcher–e.g. a member of an expedition keeping a field notebook. Honesty, accuracy and diligence count! Be faithful and conscientious in making regular and relevant entries; exercise compassion as well as curiosity. Use your journal to record (and thereby to explore) your own thoughts and feelings about any and all aspects of 9.70 as well as any other topics of social psychological interest. Share entries as appropriate with group-mates, classmates, and instructors.
Since we (the staff) are interested in learning what you think and how you feel about 9.70, it would be easy enough for us to simply require you to make your journal entries available to us for periodic or on-demand inspection. But that would be pedagogically self-defeating as well as an unwarranted invasion of your personal privacy. Instead, what we will do is trust you to do your part and ask you to be no less conscientious in your journal-keeping than you are in fulfilling other class requirements. Keep your journal with you at all times. Feel free to share parts of its contents with others–group-mates, classmates or us—as appropriate. Be prepared to show (without disclosure of the contents in detail) that it is being well-used for the purposes already outlined.
In Sum: Your journal is precisely that: your journal. Only in the event of disagreements relating to final grades (e.g. between self-assessments and peer-evaluations) may we find ourselves forced to ask to examine the contents of your journal. Punctual and full attendance at all regularly scheduled class meetings, study group meetings and other events is the sine qua non. But"being there" is only the beginning. It takes nothing less than constant conscientious and constructive involvement by everyone at all levels to make the system work
Bottom Line: The educational value of the learning experience and the quality of your final grade will be determined by the quality and amount of time and effort that the membership of this class puts into all the aspects of the task of creating a collaborative learning system that really works. Experience teaches us that diligent journal keeping is a key element in the process. Please act accordingly.