[Philosophy] Course Review

Wed Mar 1 17:01:33 EST 2006

Hi Richard,
I've enjoyed reading the reflections of other year 12 teachers, and I
thought I'd throw in my two cents.
Firstly, although I found it quite a challenge to teach the course for the
first time last year, by the end of it all I was quite impressed with the
'balance' of the texts, so far as they seemed to reflect the more
significant and interesting philosophical issues that have grabbed the
attention of thinkers. Even Murdoch, for all her complexity, is particularly
relevant and speaks for an increasing proportion of philosophers.
Secondly, when you look at the content of the other humanities subjects that
compete for the interest of students, there might be the danger that
watering down the course will not be received well by students and teachers
alike, such that this newly sprouted subject withers before it has bloomed.
There will always be some students who would prefer everything to be made
easier.
Thirdly, I'm not sure that the analysis of popular films, in place of
traditional written texts, guarantees more philosophical depth in the
classroom. Films can exemplify the philosophical issues that we analyse, and
I make extensive use of wonderful texts such as 'Waking Life'; however, I
don't feel that they are substitutes for the current written philosophical
texts.
My gripe is probably more with the exam format than the texts. I would
prefer to see an exam that requires students to evaluate more of the
core/central arguments, as opposed to examining them on their knowledge of
what is sometimes peripheral detail. I might add, however, that the students
in my class who scored well in the exam last year were, without exception,
the better philosophers in the class (as opposed to rote learners).
Finally, we might remember that the essay question is of considerable weight
in terms of the marks allocated for it. And it is pretty difficult to write
a good section C essay unless you have understood the key ideas in the
texts, and have the ability to evaluate them in the appropriate analytical
manner.
By the way, I rather like the dramatic difference between the year 11 and
the year 12 curricula. We've got 3 year 10 classes up and running now, and I
wouldn't want to disappoint students who have completed year 10 and then
year 11 philosophy with a weaker year 12 curriculum.
Great to see so many thinking about the subject!
Jeff Kinsman (Uni High)
P.S. Anyone who is in the area and wants to drop in for a coffee and an
exchange of materials. . .

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard O'Donovan" <rodonovan at fhs.vic.edu.au>
To: "Year 12 Philosophy Teachers' Mailing List" <philosophy at edulists.com.au>
Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2006 11:35 PM
Subject: RE: [Philosophy] Course Review

> I like your thinking Lyn.  Sadly I've only seen 3 of the movies you've
mentioned - I really have to get out more, or stay in more given they're all
on video now...  I think Minority Report raises some good issues that could
be worked into Unit 4 as a kind of commentary on science - Groundhog Day
would be a good one for The Good Life in Unit 3, or even 50 First Dates or
Memento (if we'd get away with it).  I wouldn't mind coupling Inherit the
Wind with the DVD sent to all Australian schools called Unlocking the
Mystery of Life, which I think does an excellent job of making Intelligent
Design look intelligent.  I suspect moving to non-print texts would first
need a shift toward the kind of thing Emmanuel suggested in terms of having
optional texts to choose from.  Once we cross that bridge it would be much
easier to start to incorporate some of the more interesting movies into the
course as optional texts...
>
> Thanks for those two documents BTW - if it's ok with you I'll pop them
onto the website.
>
> If anyone else has anything they're willing to share please send it
through to me (rodonovan at fhs.vic.edu.au) and I'll upload it too.
>
> Incidentally, for those doing Yr 11 Philo you may be interested to know
that some changes are coming through for all Victorian schools with regards
to the use of animals in teaching.  An Animal Ethics Committee has been
established and all animal based activities will have to be approved by it.
Once it's up and running they will have a website and are looking for
resources that would be relevant to any subject, but VCE Philosophy is one
they're targetting in particular because of the animal rights component.  So
if anyone has any materials/ideas/suggestions/requests etc. let me know and
I'll pass it on to the relevant people.
>
> Richard
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: philosophy-bounces at edulists.com.au on behalf of
lr at willihigh.vic.edu.au
> Sent: Tue 28-Feb-06 10:40 PM
> To: philosophy at edulists.com.au
> Subject: RE: [Philosophy] Course Review
>
>
>
> here's some ideas, for what they're worth.  i've used all of them over the
years, usually as movie/philosophy cafe evenings.  final cut (metaphysics
and ethics), flowers for algernon (metaphysics, ethics), i, robot
(artifiicial intelligence, ethics), inherit the wind (oldie but a goodie
about creationism vs. evolution), let him have it (docudrama about death
penalty), rashomon (japanese movie that explores epistemological issues),
rosencrantz and guildenstern are dead (existentialism), the truman show.
> does any of that help?
> lyn.
>
> "Richard O'Donovan" <rodonovan at fhs.vic.edu.au> on Mon, 27 Feb 2006
14:18:42 +1100 wrote:
> > I haven't seen What the Bleep yet.  Waking life is good, but a bit
scatter gun.  I wonder if we could come up with a decent movie for each
theme ala Emmanuel's suggestion...?
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> > From: philosophy-bounces at edulists.com.au on behalf of
lr at willihigh.vic.edu.au
> > Sent: Mon 27-Feb-06 1:54 PM
> > To: philosophy at edulists.com.au
> > Subject: RE: [Philosophy] Course Review
> >
> >
> >
> > i would crop the murdoch and include something like "waking life" or,
even better, "what the bleep do we know?", which is fantastic despite some
poor acting!
> >
> > "Richard O'Donovan" <rodonovan at fhs.vic.edu.au> on Mon, 27 Feb 2006
10:40:23 +1100 wrote:
> > > Thanks for the feedback Lyn.  I'd like to see a non-print text
included too... any suggestions?  If you had to crop something, what would
it be??
> > >
> > > Richard
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > >
> > > From: philosophy-bounces at edulists.com.au on behalf of
lr at willihigh.vic.edu.au
> > > Sent: Thu 23-Feb-06 10:33 AM
> > > To: philosophy at edulists.com.au; philosophy at edulists.com.au
> > > Subject: RE: [Philosophy] Course Review
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > hi all,
> > > have to disagree with greg on the king.  i feel it's highly relevant -
especially when i have a mix of theists, atheists and agnostics in the room.
turing is little value without the objections, but i tend not to give my
students the objections straight away.  instead i ask them to come up with
some ideas, which are noted on the board, then i hand out the actual
objections and we classify their own thoughts under the different headings.
> > > i don't actually have a problem with any of the readings.  our school
doesn't have great resources, but i have enough time to do the course with 3
weeks at the end just for revision.  my kids usually perform at or above the
state average on the end of year exam.  some modern (non-print?) texts could
be good.  there NEEDS TO BE at least one SAC that is orally presented - the
running of a philosophy cafe, a speech, a role-play, whatever.  but if we
seriously want them doing philosophy and not just regurgitating the ideas of
dead white men they need to be assessed on their ability to speak!
> > >
> > > "Richard O'Donovan" <rodonovan at fhs.vic.edu.au> on Wed, 22 Feb 2006
12:38:27 +1100 wrote:
> > > > Hi Clare & Greg & Ian - thought I'd combine response here.  Yes,
sorry I forget to say that I'm on the review panel.  I went to the first
meeting last Thursday and will go to another next Thursday.  It all feels
quite rushed to me as the preliminary report on changes is supposed to be
finished by the end of this term from memory - which is why I'm keen to get
as many responses/suggestion ASAP.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Greg - I now have another metaphor for philosophy;
intellectual tennis - banging arguments from one side of the net back to the
other.
> > > >
> > > > I think there are also a drastic shortage of secondary sources as
part of the course - I think that if we're going to have originals that it
would also be useful to have a bit of modern scholarship based on the
extracts included too... at least there'd be less of a vacuum for newcomers
like Ian - it's no mean task to get Philo up and running from scratch.
> > > >
> > > > I believe that VCAA is keen to keep Philosophy rigorous - the
Specialist Maths of Humanities (although you can't do Specialist without
doing Maths Methods in Yr 11) - but I'm concerned that we are trying to
squeeze in too much; which is ok for schools who can afford to run
Philosophy camps and the like, but less realistic for the poorer resourced
sites... and I don't think anyone would want to restrict access to something
like philosophy based purely on socio-economic background.
> > > >
> > > > Richard
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > >
> > > > From: philosophy-bounces at edulists.com.au on behalf of Murphy, Clare
I
> > > > Sent: Wed 22-Feb-06 9:03 AM
> > > > To: Year 12 Philosophy Teachers' Mailing List
> > > > Subject: RE: [Philosophy] Course Review
> > > > Hello Richard,
> > > > My name is Clare McKay and I teach @Eltham High School. I am on the
mailing list and can now reply. Generally I agree with your recommendations.
Are you on the review panel?
> > > > Clare
> > > >
> > > > From: philosophy-bounces at edulists.com.au on behalf of Greyruin
> > > > Sent: Tue 21-Feb-06 11:09 PM
> > > > To: Year 12 Philosophy Teachers' Mailing List
> > > > Subject: Re: [Philosophy] Course Review
> > > > I do agree, Richard. The King is great - but irrelevant, and I have
to
> > > > confess that the Murdoch just seems murky. Right, let's get back to
> > > > practising philosophy, not just memorising stuff. I know, it hurts
the kids
> > > > who can only memorise, but, then, I've always felt uncomfortable
about
> > > > tennis. Seems that all that attention to ball skills and being able
to belt
> > > > the jolly thing back at 250 m per second, or whatever, basically
> > > > inconvenienced us skinny intellectual dudes with thin wrists and
spaghetti
> > > > arms.
> > > >
> > > > The Turing is good - but leave out the objections, right. My kids
thought
> > > > that was pointless. I'm not sure about dumping Aristotle altogether,
though.
> > > > We could look at his logic, perhaps. Yes, on Kuhn. Find something
more
> > > > closely connected with Popper. That's a bit strained at the moment.
How long
> > > > do we have to make a plea?
> > > >
> > > > Greg
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > philosophy mailing list
> > > > philosophy at edulists.com.au
> > > > http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/philosophy
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > philosophy mailing list
> > > > philosophy at edulists.com.au
> > > > http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/philosophy
> > >
> > >
> > > ---
> > > lr at willihigh.vic.edu.au
> > > http://www.willihigh.vic.edu.au/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > philosophy mailing list
> > > philosophy at edulists.com.au
> > > http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/philosophy
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > philosophy mailing list
> > > philosophy at edulists.com.au
> > > http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/philosophy
> >
> >
> > ---
> > lr at willihigh.vic.edu.au
> > http://www.willihigh.vic.edu.au/
> > _______________________________________________
> > philosophy mailing list
> > philosophy at edulists.com.au
> > http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/philosophy
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > philosophy mailing list
> > philosophy at edulists.com.au
> > http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/philosophy
>
>
> ---
> lr at willihigh.vic.edu.au
> http://www.willihigh.vic.edu.au/
> _______________________________________________
> philosophy mailing list
> philosophy at edulists.com.au
> http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/philosophy
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> philosophy mailing list
> philosophy at edulists.com.au
> http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/philosophy
>