1. Questions for discussion. Presenters should view this assignment as their opportunity to direct the conversation in each class meeting. To this end, they'll pose at least 3 general questions in their presentation to stimulate discussion. Presenters should also prepare follow-up questions or other ways to sustain the dialogue they have initiated. Presenters' questions may address concepts or issues that they didn't understand from the readings and want further clarification, but most should give the presenter a way to introduce...
2. A clear argument that addresses the prompting questions/theses/debates (shown under the readings on the course Moodle). Don't worry about saying all there is to be said in response to these prompts. An insightful discussion of a few key ideas is generally preferable to a weak and rushed attempt to discuss everything.
3. New material for discussion that supplements or complicates the readings. You can introduce relevant data or case study (see the research resources); juxtapose a reading to prior arguments or themes we've encountered; or discuss the readings' historical or theoretical contexts in useful ways. Hand-outs are encouraged!
4. No rote summary of the readings. Remember: everyone else has done the readings, so don't rehash what they've already read. If you choose to cover points and quotations from the readings, frame them so that the conversation moves to a level beyond "what the author said."

On days when two students are assigned presentations, these needn't be scheduled back-to-back. Instead, they should be formatted in order to lead class discussion in the direction presenters believe to be most valuable. For instance, the first student may begin class with an argument that organizes class discussion for 30 minutes; in the second hour, the second student may present a counter-argument that organizes class discussion in a different direction for the rest of class. I strongly encourage students assigned to the same week to coordinate their presentations with each other in advance of class day.

 

Analytic briefs

For 6 weeks' of your choice, you'll write an analytic brief of minimum 500-word length on any part or all of that week's readings. These briefs should have a clear progression (thesis, evidence, counter argument, conclusion); stream of consciousness or personal feelings, no matter how potentially fascinating, are inappropriate. These briefswill be posted onto the corresponding Moodle forum by the appropriate deadline (see below).

There are two kinds of briefs, for which you'll write 3 of each: (a) those written before class, and (b) those written after class.

Briefs written before class will explicitly respond to the reading(s) assigned for that week. They're due by the beginning of class, and no late briefs will be accepted. They can take the form of either (a) a theoretical discussion or (b) an application of the readings to a real-life example you find in the news. In either case you should strive to analyze, synthesize, integrate, or apply the ideas you have found provocative. Do not simply summarize or compare two readings. Think of issues that you'd like to discuss in class. Good commentaries generally raise more questions than answers, so you may conclude your analysis by listing several additional concerns.

Briefs written after the class will draw upon the readings as well as classroom discussion from the week. These are due within 24 hours after each class meeting. These after-class statements should reflect and build upon the ideas developed in class and the readings; they should demonstrate a more confident and sophisticated understanding of the materials, after you've better understood the readings and had time after class to mull the ideas over.

 

Term paper

The final assignment is a term paper in which you select a case study event or problem of corporate power, describe its history, and analyze it in terms of the theory and methods we encounter in the course. You'll propose a topic on November 1, write up Part 1 and present it in class on November 15, write up Part 2 by December 6, and integrate the two parts into a full, revised draft by December 15.

The Case study: Select a corporation, nonprofit business organization, event, trend or problem that is current and relevant to the class.

Data Sources: I expect that you'll draw heavily on secondary sources for this case study, primarily journalistic and electronic. I've compiled some additional research resources to help you find a topic of interest; Vassar librarians can help you find articles, books, and other online resources once you have chosen a case study. Corporations generate numerous documents about themselves, so you should request an annual report as well as other legally mandated reports; also, use written advertisements, promotion brochures, and media communications.

Your goal in this paper is to consolidate the various sources of information into a 10-12 page case-study description (Part 1), followed by a 5-6 page case analysis (Part 2).

Part 1: Case Description: The description of your case study should include:

1. Context. Relevant contextual elements might be internal and/or external to the organization and issue, taking into account historical, technological, social, legal, cultural, and demographic considerations as appropriate.
2. Problem. This should be described in historical constructivist terms, e.g., how did this issue become a problem?
3. Solution. The "solution" refers to how various stakeholders are currently approaching a resolution of the problem — not how sociologists might understand its broader relevance. Still, it's likely to be controversial and newsworthy, so describe the various stakeholders and the unanticipated consequences thus far.

Presentations: On November 15, each student will give a 15-minute presentation of their case description, providing hand-outs or other visual aids and fielding questions from the rest of the class.

Part 2: Theoretical Analysis: The analysis should assess the case as a whole from several sociological perspectives, as covered throughout the course readings, lectures, and additional sources that I refer you to. This section should also propose new, sociological ways of undersanding the problem and solution to the issues at hand. This portion will be evaluated for depth and breadth of analysis, use of course concepts, and writing ability.