May 30, 2015: I've recorded the Test 1 scores in Gradebook. Two quick points:
The score you see is out of 20 (not 25) because that is how many points the test counts toward your final grade. You get the number by multiplying your Test 1 percent score by 20, e.g., an 80% is 0.8 x 20 = 16 points.
Since you can recoup points on Test 2, your Test 1 score can improve. The current number you see in Gradebook is how things stand now.
May 27, 2015: I've posted two versions of the Test 2 Study Guide under Lecture Materials (and in the Chat Room). One version is read-only and the other is shared and can be modified by anyone. Good luck!
May 26, 2015: In lieu of the readings I have crossed off of the schedule, please read the following before class tomorrow: http://filos.io/b/. There are two questions contained within the reading that you must answer before tomorrow's class for participation points.
May 18, 2015: The final poll results indicate a desire stronger than despair to discuss the Group Project. As mentioned in lecture, I have posted more information about the 20-point portion of the assignment under lecture materials. Please read it over before class Wednesday to see if you have any questions.
May 13, 2015: As mentioned in lecture, the format for Test 2 is slightly different from Test 1. Test 2 will consist of:
10 multiple choice questions worth 1 point each (you only need to answer 9 of the 10 questions)
10 short answer questions (1-3 sentences) worth 2 points each (you only need to answer 8 of 10 questions)
2 extra credit questions worth 1 point each
Explanation: If you correctly answer 9 multiple choice, 8 short answer, and 2 extra credit questions, you will earn 27 points, which is 108%, just as on Test 1.
If you decide to answer the additional multiple choice question and the two additional short answer questions, you can earn 5 additional points (1 for the multiple choice and 4 for the short answer). Since each point is worth 4% (100/25=4), that means you can earn an additional 20%. Those points will be added to your Test 1 score. So if you earned a 72% on Test 1, and you answer the additional Test 2 questions correctly, that bumps the Test 1 score to 92%. Extra points cannot be applied to participation grades or group project grades.
May 5, 2015
On the Study Guide, items 40, 41 and 42 under the Stace section, I accidentally used Hanson's name instead of Stace. But the questions are about Stace's views of the nautical almanac example, predicting the past, and fictions. You will be asked about Stace's views on fictions on the test. The items should read as follows:
40.Understand how Stace's nautical almanac example is supposed to illustrate that the formulae of the atomic theory are true.
41. Stace thinks that science can predict events in the future as well as events in the past--such as an eclipse in 585 B.C.E. Understand what he means by this.
42. Understand why Stace thinks forces are a fiction.
I have corrected this on the Study Guide and on the shared study guide.
May 3, 2015: Three brief announcements:
The 38th item on the Test 1 Study Guide cuts off mid-sentence, so just cross that one out.
As a reminder, I have office hours on Mondays from 3-5 p.m. in SSH 1233. So if you have questions about the material as you prepare for Test 1, please avail yourself of that opportunity.
Some things to think about before lecture tomorrow about the reading, "Do Sub-Microscopic Entities Exist" by Stephen Toulmin: How is Toulmin's example of cartographic lines similar to Stace's example of the nautical almanac? How are they different? How do they affect the arguments?
April 29, 2015:
A few of you posted some interesting questions/comments to the website during class yesterday, which I did not get to (sorry). I'm posting them below, just as a way to get you to think further about the issues.
In the reading of Stace, he mentions Gravity being a mathematical formula, not a "thing". Since he says that gravity and a formula cannot make a body fall, then what is causing a body to not float away? How can a formula (gravitation) not cause us to fall, but not cause us to float up either?
How does the truth depend on the thinker and the mind? Does the truth really depend on facts?
Talking about Stace, it almost sounds like we need to prove theories wrong, and falsify them in order to make new theories and prove them "right", or to expand on the old(er) theory.
It has been pointed out to me—via the Online Suggestion Box—that the requirement to bring the textbook to class is (literally) cumbersome since it's bulky and heavy and some of you have to carry it around all day. So the requirement to bring the book to class is dropped.
April 16, 2015: Three announcements:
Here is a question to keep in mind when doing the reading for Monday: According to Carnap, why should we distinguish observational from theoretical terms?
Also for Monday: As mentioned in Wednesday's lecture, you need to outline the Carnap reading in 10 sentences. This is an ungraded assignment worth two participation points. You can either complete the assignment on your own or with your group. If you do it on your own, bring your 10 sentence outline to class on Monday to turn in. If you do it with your group, put the 10 sentence outline in your Google Doc by 6 p.m. on Monday.
Please feel free to use the Online Suggestion Box above to provide feedback about any aspect of the course, e.g., how lecture went Wednesday, the usefulness of the slides, the reading, etc.
Discussion sections—which are always optional—are canceled next week.
Next week only, Shawn's 3-5 p.m. Monday office hours will be from 1-3 p.m. Monday instead. After that, it will be 3-5 p.m. Monday as usual.
Everyone should have received an email giving access to your group Google Doc. If you requested a specific group, and the email you received did not reflect that, please let me know. If you haven't used Google Docs before, you should ask your group members for help. There is also plenty of information here. If neither of those solutions work, let me know.