ReadMe 1Introductory Notes |
|
|
|
|
|
October 07 2008 05:42 EDT
Carnell Learning Center Atrium Lander University SITE SEARCH ENGINE![]() ![]() ![]()
since 01.01.06 |
Introduction to Philosophical Inquiry
ReadMe 1Abstract: Beginning study for the online course in introductory philosophy is outlined and discussed Welcome to the Course! A good way to begin the course is as follows: …
Your first week is probably the busiest week. Do not be overly concerned about a slow start. Many students are new to an online course, and to read the syllabus and sign up for the message board might take more than a few days. The most efficient way to proceed is to concentrate on one thing at a time and not try to do all things at once. Hopefully, by the end of the first full week of classes everyone will have figured out how to register for the message board, how to post a message, and how to locate the readings assignments for the course. Important! This online philosophy course is not for everyone. The course assumes that you are able to work independently and schedule time daily for reading and study. Your Web course puts a substantial burden on you to take charge of your own learning. Before continuing with this course carefully consider whether or not you are the kind of pro-active student who can motivate yourself to take charge of your own learning and who can follow written instructions carefully. You must be able to allocate at least the mininum amount of study time suggested in the syllabus for this course. Students who study daily often do well; students who study only on weekends, or study only just before tests, cannot hope to succeed in this course. Grades in previous WebCT introductory philosophy classes have proved to be “bi-modal”: about 30% are As, 25% Bs, 10% Cs, 10% D's, and 15% Fs. Virtually all of the Fs in previous courses are due to academic dishonesty. In this day and age, there are an amazing variety of ways to verifiy academic honesty which range from statistical tests, file metadata,to dedicated commercial programs—all of which are routinely applied by your instructor. The key to doing well in philosophy is to keep up with course content on a daily basis. The main reason some persons do not do well in this course is, I think, due to (1) misunderstanding how to approach the "open book" and "open notes" tests (2) forgetting to post comments on the readings to the mwforum Message Board, and (3) being unaware of how evident online paraphrasing of another person's work shows up in student work. Many persons believe that it is sufficient to briefly paraphrase the online notes and related Internet sources immediately prior to the due date of the tests. The lack of understanding of what is read and written in such cases is evident from inavdertent inconsistencies, vague language, a rush to meet a deadline, and poor or inappropriate examples thought up "on the fly." What I am looking for with respect to your essays on tests is your own reconstruction and explanation of the key ideas and philosophies. Anyone can do well in this course if he or she approaches the course in the same way as one approaches playing a sport, playing music, or learning a language. Just as it is difficult to "cram" the night before a soccer game, a tennis match, or a recital so likewise it is difficult to do well in philosophy by trying to do too much at one time. <\br> If you think about it, one cannot “cram” for something normally learned through intermittent and extensive practice. But, of course, through frequent practice, difficult activities transform into more easily and naturally mastered activities. If you have any trouble beginning these items listed above, email me at larchie@philosophy.lander.edu and I'll be glad to help you get started. I look forward to an exciting and fascinating semester and hope you do so as well. Further Recommended Reading:
"To say that an idea is necessary is simply to affirm that we cannot conceive the contrary; and the fact that we cannot conceive the contrary of any belief may be a presumption, but is certainly no proof, of its truth." Thomas Henry Huxley, Reflection (1907).
Contact
webmaster@philosophy.lander.edu |