Class Contract

I see all classes, but particularly graduate ones, as a kind of ‘social contract’ among the participants, both students and teachers. This means through our participation, we all agree to observe certain ground rules that support the continued success of the class. Because it’s not fair to any of us to keep those implicit, I want to describe specifically what they are.

As students, you agree to attend all class meetings; participate fully in class discussions and on the wiki; complete and excel at all assignments; and demonstrate a high degree of self-motivation and commitment to your work. Any absences should be discussed with me in advance, excepting emergency, and may impact your final grade. You agree to contribute to a positive class climate by both giving and accepting constructive criticism/challenges; voicing and defending your positions; spending the requisite time to master the technical skills you need to complete your projects; and raising concerns about the course and my actions or those of other students early enough for us to address the problem.

As teacher, I agree to attend all classes (excepting emergency); be accessible (return your email within 24 hours, hold office hours and lab sessions, offer appointments outside of class time if necessary); be prepared for class discussions and presentations; respectfully facilitate discussions; challenge your work and your ideas; clearly state expectations for assignments; provide written and oral feedback on your projects and midterm progress; be receptive to student opinions, feedback and criticism; and grade fairly and thoughtfully.

Evaluation

While I would prefer for learning environments to be completely self-motivated and ungraded, we live in a world and work at a university where grades are important benchmarks, significant incentives, and powerful determinants of the courses of people’s lives. I respond to this situation by trying to make them as meaningful as possible and to recognize outstanding achievement when it happens. In other words, I often give as many grades students consider ‘bad’ as ‘good.’ At the same time, I recognize that, particularly at the graduate level and in an interdisciplinary course, there may be some projects, topics, etc. that ‘do it’ for you more than others. I’d like to give you some flexibility in determining the precise weighting of your projects and forms of participations (written vs. oral) according to this breakdown:

Participation (wiki, wayfaring and in-class discussion): 40%
Projects (one and two): 50%
Exercises (cumulative): 10%

At final, you will be asked to determine what weight-value you’d like assigned to the two projects and the two forms of participation. 10% is the minimum weight that can be assigned to any single element. For example, if you do a bang-up job on project one and therefore neglect project two, you can elect to have project one count for 40% of your final grade and project two only 10%. If you feel uncomfortable verbalizing your thoughts in class but take a leading role in posting and editing wiki articles, you can choose 10% for in-class participation and 30% for the wiki/wayfaring map.

Every mini-project and project will be given a letter grade (A, B, C, etc.) with pluses and minuses, even though those will not appear on your final grade. Participation grades will be figured at midterm and final. I will provide you with a midterm cumulative grade and feedback on October 12.

MCMA 516, Fall 2006 / Thursdays, 2-4:50 PM, COMM 9E / Recommended Lab: Thursday, 6-8 PM, COMM 9E
Prof. Sarah Kanouse / Office: Comm 1121K / Tues 1-3 PM; Wed 3-5 PM; Thu 8:30-9:30 AM, 1-2 PM / kanouse@siu.edu