PAPER 3 REMINDERS

THREE SECTIONS Critical Thinking Moral Reasoning Tentative solution

Mechanics 6-8 pages long (estimate only) Critical thinking = 3 pages Moral reasoning = 3 pages Conclusion/solution = 1 pages Full Works Cited Section Writing = as perfect as you can make it MLA format = as perfect as possible

Part I: CRITICAL THINKING: Analysis of argumentation and Evidence Evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of each side’s body of argumentation – Each argument and related evidence – Evaluate their arguments, not your own! Think of each major argument as a question needed to answer – Will Keystone XL pipeline reduce the price of oil? – Will the dream act reduce illegal immigration?

Decide Who wins the argument Take a stand on who “wins” each argument Which side’s argument is more substantial and complete Make certain you review EACH MAJOR ARGUMENT you discussed in Submission 2 – Do not create new arguments, or leave important arguments on the table

Part II: Moral Reasoning Your paper has a value-laden problem Paper 3 uses moral reasoning to assess the moral components of each position Read Section 4 of the Handbook

Moral Reasoning Requirements for the Capstone Project For Each Side in Paper 3 you must identify analyze for the proponents and opponents – The Obligations inherent in the position – The Values underlying the position – The potential consequences of the position – The position in terms of the normative principles and theories that support it (two for each side)

Moral Reasoning and Capstone Don’t simply list the values, obligations and consequences Use direct quotes to justify these things for each side. Do not just assume that they believe it. Conclude your moral reasoning section with a justification of which side has presented the more moral argument

Part III Tentative Conclusion Your answer to the thesis question (what should we do) You must take a stand, i.e., answer the question – Note reservations, if you have any Support your position (moral, critical reasons)

This conclusion forms the basis for your final conclusion

SUBMISSION FOUR FIELD RESEARCH

Purpose? See controversy from a different perspective Gain more information about the controversy Get Feedback about your tentative solution

Three Parts Two Fieldwork components 1.Interviews 2.Civic Engagement Final Conclusion Due April 23rd

Submission Four – 15% Content Approx. 5-7 new pages Write-up and analysis of TWO in-person expert interviews. Civic Engagement (supporting action) and Reflection Concludes with your supported final conclusion and moral reasoning.

Form Perfect MLA Organization Full Works Cited No spelling/grammar errors

EXPERT INTERVIEWS

Identifying experts Education and/or work experience in the area (usual) Not just people with opinions

How Many Experts Two total – 1 For Each Side You must include the contact information in your research file No anonymous interviews

What You Cannot Do Interview family members SEU affiliates Interview via telephone

Finding interviewees Ask your professors Check library. – List of organizations Check the internet Get a directory of elected officials

THE QUESTIONS

Writing your questionnaire P in Handbook Ask About issues (3-5 questions) Ask About moral reasoning (consequences) Ask About your conclusion/solution Ask each interviewee the same questions.

WRONG QUESTIONS! What do you know about the controversy? Where do you stand on the controversy? (This is too much in your face) Personal information, questions that put people in awkward situations.

Setting up the interviews Start now. Contact at least 3X as many people as you need. Be professional – these people are doing you a favor. Prepare to describe Capstone and your controversy quickly.

Setting Up the Interviews Have a phone where you can be reached or a message can be left. Ask for a time you can call back. Ask for referrals. Be persistent.

THE INTERVIEW

Conducting the interview Be on time. Dress appropriately. Taping: – Pre-ask – Be prepared Take notes efficiently.

Conducting the Interview Listen. – You are a reporter, not a debater. Maintain control. – Keep the interview focused. Remain courteous and open-minded. Thank you note- you are representing future generations of St. Edward’s students.

WRITING IT UP

Writing Up the Results Do it as soon as possible You can always come back to it

Write-up: The questions Report on every question Direct quotation: – Use sparingly

Write-up: The analysis “Feel” of the interviews Interviewees: – Knowledgeable? – Open-minded? – Demeanor? Did they change your mind on the issue?