Warren 10B Biotechnology & Athletics

Course Description

Sport is a key component of American culture. It embodies our ideals about achievement, fairness and overcoming obstacles. But recent advances in biotechnology in areas such as prosthetics, performance-enhancing substances and sports medicine have changed the playing field in terms of player performance and ability. This course will examine arguments about competition versus the search for perfection, the difference between a surgery to repair an injury and one designed to enhance performance, and the best way to design rules and policies to monitor athletic competitions.

Experts disagree on a range of questions: At what point is medical intervention therapeutic or corrective? When does it provide an unfair advantage? When does natural ability become 'unnatural'? How do we decide who gets to play and at what level? Is the nature of sport in question if an athlete uses a prosthetic? Does the use of a prosthetic level the playing field between athletes with and without disabilities? Or does it give disabled athletes an unfair advantage? What surgeries or treatments can be reasonably considered medical therapy versus what surgeries or treatments can be considered enhancements?

In the arguments that emerge in our readings, we will see that even commonly used terms don't share the same definition, and that participants in real-life debates often don't agree on what constitutes the central problem. For us, these disagreements and even confusion are an opportunity. Because argumentation is central to academic work, scholars and scientists are expected to support their conclusions with good reasons and compelling evidence. The articles on sports and biotechnology that we will read in this course come from individuals who represent different constituencies and interests. For instance, we will encounter parents, doctors, disability rights activists, and bioethicists, all of who have something different at stake in these discussions. Continuing the work begun in 10A, we will use the Toulmin model of argumentation to summarize, analyze and write academic arguments. Students will write academic summaries and short arguments as part of the development of three graded essays.

Required Readings
Biotechnology & Athletics, Winter 2009, 10B Course Reader (available at AS Soft Reserves)

Required Materials
One manila file folder, 8.5"x11," tabbed on one side
About $10 for photocopying costs

Online Resources
Warren College Writing Program:
http://provost.ucsd.edu/warren/academiclife/warren_writing/warren_writing.php

Grammar, Punctuation, Spelling, and ESL:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/grammar/index.html

MLA documentation style:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/research/r_mla.html

Non-sexist language:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/general/gl_nonsex.html

Related Websites:
Olympic websites, Oscar Pistorius

Course Policies and Requirements

Portfolios: You must maintain a portfolio (a manila file folder) containing all of the work you do for this class. The instructor will hand back papers after reading and commenting on them. You are responsible for keeping them in your portfolio. At the end of the quarter, you must submit your portfolio with all of your writing assignments collected within it. You must include the copies with the instructor's comments on them. If you wish to keep your portfolio, you can go to the Warren office and pick it up during the following quarter.

Attendance: Attendance is mandatory. The workshop nature of the course requires participation, and you must attend to participate. No more than two absences are permitted during the quarter. Missing a scheduled conference is considered an absence. Lateness is not accepted, and being more than five minutes late twice is equal to one absence.

Copies for Workshops: On workshop days, it is expected that you come prepared with copies of your assignment to discuss with the class and/or your group. The number of copies needed is described in the course schedule and will be discussed in class. You must come to class on time with the appropriate number of copies for distribution.

Late Papers: No late papers will be accepted, including drafts and revisions, unless you make special arrangements with the instructor. Late papers are subject to grade penalties at the discretion of the instructor.

Paper Format: Papers must be stapled, typed, and double-spaced. Submit assignments in black ink on 8.5" X 11" white paper. Use a non-decorative 12-point font, such as Times New Roman, and use 1" margins. Do not include title pages. Include your name, section number, instructor name, assignment number and date. Include page numbers on all pages. Use the MLA website or a current MLA style guide for style, grammar, format, and citation questions.

Non-sexist Language: Please refer to the Non-sexist language policies as described by the Online Writing Lab at http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/general/gl_nonsex.html. In general, Warren Writing endorses the use of the singular they to resolve the problem of indefinite pronoun references in written and spoken English. The singular they is gender-inclusive, has a long and continuing history of use and seldom leads to awkward constructions. The OWL website provides background information and good examples for how to maintain non-sexist language use in your writing.

Classroom Environment: Any comments or actions that instigate or contribute to a hostile environment will not be tolerated. This classroom is a place where claims can be explored, challenged, and argued for and against without fear of oppression and/or reprisal by your peers or the instructor. Any individual who, as a result of their words and/or behavior, silences their classmates will be held accountable. Cell phones must be turned off.

Statement of Academic Integrity: Students are expected to do their own work, as outlined in the UCSD Policy on Academic Integrity published in the UCSD General Catalog: "Cheating will not be tolerated, and any student who engages in suspicious conduct will be confronted and subjected to the disciplinary process. Cheaters will receive a failing grade on the assignment or the exam and/or in the entire course. They may also be suspended from UCSD. Academic misconduct includes but is not limited to:
    o Cheating, such as using "crib notes" or copying answers from another student during the exam, modifying a graded exam and returning it for a new grade, or submitting the same paper or assignment for two or more different courses unless authorized by the instructors concerned.
    o Plagiarism, such as using the writings or ideas of another person, either in whole or in part, without proper attribution to the author of the source.
    o Collusion, such as engaging in unauthorized collaboration on homework assignments or take home exams, completing for another student any part or the whole of an assignment or exam, or procuring, providing or accepting materials that contain questions or answers to an exam or assignment to be given at a subsequent time.

Students with Disabilities: Students with disabilities are encouraged to speak with me at the beginning of the quarter to discuss any accommodations we should make to guarantee your full participation.

Revision and Editing
Revision is central to the writing process and therefore we make it central to the structure of our course. When you revise a paper you are improving the substance of the essay, the argument, the explanations, the presentation of a summary or paraphrase of another author's ideas, so on. You are improving the content and structure of the essay. When you edit a paper you are identifying and fixing errors in grammar, punctuation, spelling, and so forth. During the revision process, you are expected to edit your own paper. Revision and editing are different and they employ different sets of skills.

When you have made all the possible revisions to your essay that you can think of, and you think the draft reflects the best possible presentation and analysis that you can produce, do one or both of the following: read your paper aloud (it will force you to read it word by word and you will hear spots that are awkward or don't make sense) and/or ask another person (find someone who has good editing skills and a solid command of English) to edit it with you.

Once you have revised and edited your paper, perhaps more than once, then you should be ready to submit the paper to your instructor and/or classmates for help with further revision. Editing is not the job of the person reading your paper; they can offer suggestions on grammar or organization and point out awkward passages, but ultimately these are skills we must develop for ourselves.

The best kind of help someone can give you during the revision process is:
-- A few big suggestions that can help you make changes to your paper that will improve the quality of the argument or the analysis.
-- Identify examples of sections that are unclear, vague or confusing. This will alert you to problems. It is then your responsibility to look for ways to improve the clarity of your entire paper, not simply the marked selection.

Grading Policy
--     Assignments 1D, 2E and 3D will receive a letter grade. These grades will be used to determine your course grade.
--     To be eligible to receive a grade on each of the above assignments, you must complete (on time) all preceding assignments (for example, to receive a grade on 1D, you must do 1A, 1B and 1C).

Evaluation of Papers
The following questions will be considered when papers are evaluated and graded. All questions may not be relevant to each assignment.

o Does the paper respond to the various parts of the prompt?
o Does the paper make an argument?
o Is the claim clear and plausible? Is it stated and contextualized effectively?
o Is there sufficient and relevant evidence to ground the claim?
o Does the paper effectively select and use material from the course readings to support and validate the analysis? Does it summarize, paraphrase, and quote effectively?
o Does the paper use all relevant details from the readings both to support the claim and to provide a context for the case being made? Does it ignore material that should be taken into account?
o Does the paper demonstrate an awareness of how the argument being proposed fits into the larger set of claims made about the topic in our course readings?
o Does the paper work through the complexities of the material (as opposed to oversimplifying or over-generalizing)?
o Is the paper well organized?
o Does it cite material from the sources using MLA documentation style?
o Are there sentence structure problems or grammatical errors that interfere with the meaning?

Evaluation Standards at Warren Writing
o An "A" essay demonstrates excellent work. It has something to say and says it well. It develops its argument clearly and consistently, demonstrating a complex understanding of the assignment, and does so using varied sentence structure. It often rises above other essays with particular instances of creative or analytical sophistication. There may be only minor and/or occasional grammatical errors.

o A "B" essay demonstrates good work. It establishes a clear claim and pursues it consistently, demonstrating a good understanding of the assignment. There may be some mechanical difficulties, but not so many as to impair the clear development of the main argument. While a "B" essay is in many ways successful, it lacks the originality and/or sophistication of an "A" essay.

o A "C" essay demonstrates adequate work. It establishes an adequate grasp of the assignment and argues a central claim. In addition, the argument may rely on unsupported generalizations or insufficiently developed ideas. It may also contain grammatical errors.

o Work that earns a grade of "D" or "F" is often characterized by the following problems: it fails to demonstrate an adequate understanding of the assignment; it fails to articulate an adequate argument; and/or it contains significant grammatical problems.

Written Assignments

Assignment #1

1A: Consider one of the key terms from the Davis article, "Constructing Normalcy." Craft an examination of one of the following terms as it has been used in Davis' article. You may wish to consider the following questions before you write your essay: What is the meaning of this term in the text? What argument is this word central to or supporting? What function does this keyword serve in the text? How does it relate to the overall claim of the author? (2 pages)

    normalcy
    ideal
    average
    disabled
    perfection

1B: In this essay take one of the possible keywords from Sandel's "The Case Against Perfection" or create one of your own. Craft an examination of this term as it has been used by Sandel. You may wish to consider the following questions before you write your essay: What is the meaning of this term in the text? What argument is this word central to or supporting? What function does this keyword serve in the text? How does it relate to the overall claim of the author? Does Sandel see this concept in a different way than did Davis? How might these two authors compare? (2 pages)

    competition
    fairness
    enhancement
    achievement
    giftedness

1C: In this essay, take one (or more) of the possible keywords from assignments 1A and/or 1B and analyze how that term is used in or is applicable to the debate surrounding biotechnology. You can use any of the keywords from the previous assignments or create your own. Think about what the different authors argue is at stake in these debates and what underlying assumptions they are basing their argument on. You should not simply provide a list of definitions or examples from the readings. Instead, use a specific and focused claim to unify your discussion, examine and analyze the evidence, and express your own individual understanding or interpretation of the keyword and the ways in which it is being used in this debate. You may find that both the Sandel and Davis articles help support your analysis, but in different ways. Feel free to include this material in your essay. (3-4 pages)

1D: Revise 1C to be graded. (3-4 pages, 1 copy)

Assignment #2

2A: After having read the articles by Rowbottom, Goldberg, Secor, Epstein, and Keim, etc., craft a claim and argument in which you argue why Oscar Pistorius should not be allowed to compete in the Olympics. This claim and argument should go beyond representing the position of any one article. You have read many different positions and should be able to craft one of many possible claims that argue that Pistorius shouldn't compete. (1-2 pages)

2B: Now, craft a claim and argument in which you argue why Oscar Pistorius should be allowed to compete in the Olympics. This claim and argument should go beyond representing the position of any one article. You have read many different positions and should be able to craft one of many possible claims that argue that Pistorius should be allowed compete. (1-2 pages)

2C: Write a tentative plan for your 2D argument. Include an overview of the organization of your argument and your main claim. Include 2-3 sub-claims and provide examples of the grounding you intend to use. Consider the stakes and how the sub-claims support your main claim.

2D: In this paper you will craft your own claim about Oscar Pistorius' quest to compete in the Olympics. This essay may address some aspect of his bid to compete in the Olympics, but should also include some of the deeper and more controversial issues surrounding the debate. Consider bringing information and ideas from the Sandel, Davis, Jones and Howe, and Oswald articles to bear on your analysis. (4-5 pages)

2E: Revise 2D to be graded. (4-5 pages)

Assignment #3

3A: Take one of the keywords discussed in assignment 1A and analyze how the concept was used or interpreted by Jones and Howe. What is the meaning of this term in the text? What argument is this work central to or supporting? What function does this keyword serve in the text? How does it relate to the overall claim? Do Jones and Howe see things differently from either Davis or Sandel? What similarities are there? (2 pages)

3B: Write an outline for your argument, as described in 3C. Key elements to include will be a mission statement, regulations and procedures, the stakes involved, and counter-arguments. Also think through and include a brief description of the games, what sports will be included, and what classifications, if any, will be made (2-3 pages).

3C: You have been appointed as a "Special Commissioner" for the 2009 National Athletic Challenge, a multi-sport series of competitions modeled on the Olympic Games. The NAC Games will be limited to the best athletes in the United States from their respective sports. The games will need, as a part of its charter, a clear statement that outlines its stance on enhancement procedures, disability and prosthesis use as they apply to athletes who wish to compete. Your job is to craft that statement that outlines how the NAC Games will handle questions of disability and enhancement.

When crafting this statement you will need to reference precedent cases that will support your position. You may choose to examine the Olympic Charter and the Olympic Committees' recent decisions as to who will and will not be allowed to compete in the Olympic Games. (5-6 pages)

3D: Revise 3C to be graded. (5-6 pages.)