Assignments

Participation (30%); due September 8 to December 8

Your participation in class is essential.

Face to face: Three face-to-face sessions are scheduled, to give us the opportunity to meet in person. I hope you will be able to attend them, especially the first. If you know in advance that you will not be able to attend, please let me know in advance; if prevented at the last minute, please let me know when you can. You are adults with responsibilities, and life happens (blizzards sweep over the roads; children spike fevers; cars break down; trustees and town councils call emergency meetings about budgets -- and those things aren't even the worst). Your attendance decisions will be made ethically, in the context of all your responsibilities, not just this course. Until I hear from you, I will try not to imagine the worst. When I hear from you, I will be grateful to know the reality.

There will be no individual make-up sessions for missed face-to-face meetings. My prepared notes will be available online; written assignments may be submitted online; for the rest, what's missed is just missed.

Online: Most "sessions" of this course are asynchronous. Each week's session will include the "lecture" notes, due to appear by 3:30 p.m. on Thursday of each week, and class discussion on the week's issues, due to occur on the WebCT discussion board between then and the following Thursday. (Discussions will remain open for an extra week, in case anybody has afterthoughts; they will then be archived, so you can refer to them but not access them.) Some weeks will also include special features. Just as face-to-face courses have break-out sessions and oral presentations by students, this online course will have occasional small-group discussions (virtual break-out sessions, reporting back to the group) and a Wiki assignment (see below) requiring you to write articles similar to seminar reports. Since you have a whole week to participate in each class "session," passing emergencies should not prevent your weekly participation -- even if you're on the road, you can usually gain Internet access and check in. But again, remember to alert me if some dire event blocks your participation.

Evaluation of participation will be on the basis of quantity (50%) and quality (50%).

Quantity :

	B+ to A-: Attended all three face-to-face sessions (or communicated serious reasons for absence in a timely fashion); contributed at least twice a week to online discussion (26 messages over course of semester); was meaningfully active in all assigned small group "break-out" discussions; wrote messages of appropriate length
	B: Attended at least two face-to-face sessions (or communicated serious reasons for absence in a timely fashion); contributed an average of 1.5 times a week to online discussion (20 messages); was meaningfully active in most assigned small group discussions; wrote messages of appropriate length
	B- or below: Missed face-to-face sessions without excuse; contributed fewer than 20 messages, or "clumped" messages unevenly (for instance, did not participate or explain reason for absence over two or more weeks, and then "made up" by deluging the discussion board with two or more weeks' messages all at once); did not participate in one or more of the small group discussions; wrote many messages that were too long (paragraphs upon paragraphs, more appropriate for a Wiki article or an attempt to intimidate the competition) or too short (cryptic one-liners in response to forgotten messages that readers then have to look up if they want to understand what's being talked about)

Quality:

	B+ to A-: Contributed interesting and astute messages, advancing classmates' knowledge and understanding of professional ethics and ability to think critically about issues, values, and laws relevant to the course; introduced worthwhile readings and other good sources in support of writer's viewpoint; communicated respectfully, treating classmates as we all hope librarians and information professionals will treat clients and colleagues, even while freely contesting ideas and positions; communicated effectively -- online discussion messages are spontaneous (and thus not subjected to the same kind of grammar and spelling criticism as more formal written assignments), but good messages will be clear, understandable, and maybe even fun to read
	B: Contributed interesting messages, supporting classmates' knowledge and understanding of course content; backed up viewpoints with readings and other sources (not just personal experience or opinion); communicated respectfully, never treating classmates discourteously; communicated effectively, conveying ideas and information understandably
	B- or below: Added little substance or original thinking to the discussion; failed to back up points, or based them almost entirely on personal experience or opinion; was disrespectful of or impatient with classmates' opinions; was difficult to understand

Wiki (40%); due September 29 to November 17 (sign up for specific dates by September 22 at the latest)

Each student will create two articles (the moral equivalent of seminar reports, but available for subsequent reference by classmates) for our course Wiki (30%, or 15% each), and will edit two articles by classmates, providing follow-up and expansion (10%, or 5% each). Some of the many possible topics are suggested in the course calendar; each is due on the date listed, and will serve (like the instructor's notes) to support discussion for that week. You may propose other topics. Please do so by September 22 to receive an appropriate date. (This is an ethical obligation, as your selection of topics will affect the instructor's lecture preparations!)

Evaluation: Your original Wiki articles will be evaluated on the basis of form (20%) and content (80%). Naturally, they will be evaluated within the context of course goals (one reason for presenting this assignment in the Wiki format is to work on Educational Outcome 8 by giving you the opportunity to practice a newly popular communications medium).

Form:

	B+ or A-: The article is compulsively readable and interesting; all appropriate citations are present, correct, and complete
	B: The article is clear, well organized, grammatical, and correctly spelled; all appropriate citations are present, correct, and complete
	B- or lower: The article may be unclear, repetitive, or unnecessarily difficult to read; citations may be missing or incorrect

Content:

	B+ or A-: The article explains its topic in a clear, unbiased way; outlines major arguments or issues, noting the evidence to support each side; identifies important and worthwhile resources; and clarifies implications of the topic for professional ethics and other issues relevant to this course
	B: The article explains its topic; outlines major arguments and supports at least one side with excellent evidence; identifies useful resources; and addresses the implications of the topic for professional ethics, etc.
	B- or lower: The article fails to explain its topic; fails to address all sides of the issue; relies on sources that are too few or too flimsy; fails to make meaningful connections between the topic and other relevant course material

Portfolio (30%); due December 1, with earlier installments

Each student will keep a portfolio throughout the semester and turn it in at the end of the semester. Required items for the portfolio include:

	A short essay analyzing an ethical issue in the news; this is originally due on September 15, but may be rewritten before the portfolio is submitted for grading; Tavani's chapter on critical thinking may be useful (15%)
	A summative essay, reflecting how personal and professional ethics, laws, and other obligations would shape your own decision making in a library or information service of your choice; this is due with the final portfolio, but may be submitted for instructor review earlier in the semester (20%)

Elective items for the portfolio include:

	An ongoing log of items from mainline and/or library news sources, with analysis of how they are related to our professional ethics and how our profession (or your chosen field within it) should respond; this would build on and replace the original September 15 news analysis essay (30% of portfolio for three items, 35% for four items, 40% for five items, 45% for six or more items)
	An ongoing log of ethical decisions that you yourself make as a library or information professional this semester; this could include obvious ethical challenges, like responding to censorship attempts, but also less obvious ones, like dealing ethically with staff who believe that moving the YA fiction section from the children's room to the adult fiction room places an unfair burden on shelvers; do not just give a blow-by-blow account, but analyze the professional, moral, and legal bases for your decisions (20%)
	An interview with a library or information professional; if students are interested in this option, we will brainstorm an interview schedule starting at the first face-to-face meeting (15% for one interview, 25% for two)
	Content analysis of intellectual freedom and other ethics-related policies on the websites of libraries in your chosen field; if students are interested in this option, we will brainstorm a data collection instrument starting at the first face-to-face meeting (up to 45%, depending on number of sites and policies analyzed)
	Your own suggested assignment. If you have a special project in mind, and can make a good case that it will advance course goals, negotiate with the instructor ASAP to pin down a description and evaluative criteria for the project (up to 45%)

Evaluation of the portfolios will necessarily be flexible; to allow you the greatest leeway for ethical exploration and development in your own chosen direction, the assignment is not standardized. In general, grading will be 25% form, 75% content.

Form:

	B+ or A-: Individual items in portfolio are meaningfully organized, with a table of contents, an introduction, transitional blurbs showing relationships between items, and a conclusion (probably the summative essay); items are well written (intelligently organized and concisely expressed, clear, grammatical, correctly spelled); citations are correct and complete. Form may be imaginative (for instance, you could develop an original comprehensive exam question for each subsection).
	B: Portfolio items are clearly organized, with a table of contents; items are correctly written (clear, grammatical, correctly spelled); citations are correct and complete
	B- or below: Items are poorly or unclearly organized; items are ungrammatical, poorly spelled, unclear; citations are missing or incorrect

Content will be graded more according to the spirit than the letter; the object is to demonstrate excellence in the appropriate course goals, and the way you do that will depend on which items you choose to include and emphasize. For instance, your summative essay should demonstrate critical thinking skills; your news analysis should advance understanding of ethical, moral, and legal issues related to the course.