Friday, July 16, 2021

Honors Summer Read 2021: Rules of Engagement

"The Magdalen Reading" (1445) by Rogier van der Weyden

Welcome to the ECU Honors Program's Enduring Questions website!

If you are enrolled in an Enduring Questions class for the fall semester of 2021 at ECU (EQ1 or EQ3), this website is for you. Read on!

Responses to questions on this website are designed to generate "virtual conversation." By virtual, we do not mean something that looks like conversation but isn't. Instead, we mean REAL conversation in a virtual environment--this website.  And this fall, incoming first- and second-year Honors students will be engaged in the same discussion. Ten percent of each student's grade in both EQ1 and EQ3 will be based on your responses to the questions raised here.

The sort of conversation we're looking for is academic in character. Thus, your responses should consist of clear, concise statements of your ideas crafted in standard English (not text-speak!). They should be long enough to convey your thoughts, but short enough for other readers to read and respond to fairly quickly. In short, you don't want your responses to be so long that you monopolize (or kill) the conversation by going on, and on, and on.....(we all know how irritating that can be!).

Obviously, responses should not use profanity. They should be civil and respectful. People do not always agree. Responses can be critical; however, all communication is expected to be courteous and professional. Contributors' positions may be questioned; their character should not.

The object here is to reflect on some of the issues raised by the text, to connect the reading to your personal experience, and to help first- and second-year Honors students get to know each other better.

When should I begin posting my responses?
As soon as you have begin reading Think Again by Adam Grant

When is this assignment due?
This writing assignment is designed to be completed before classes begin in August.  Details about where and how to account for and submit your word count total will be provided in class when the semester starts.

How many questions should I respond to?
We do not expect you to respond to each question, but you should respond to several representing different sections of the book. Hopefully, by the time all the class has completed the assignment, every question will have at least one or two responses.

Are there any questions I have to answer?
Yes. The Takeaway. Only answer "The Takeaway" when you have finished reading the book. 

How will you know if I have read the book? Will we be tested on it?
We won't test you. We'll trust you. These questions are not designed to show whether or not someone has read the book. They are designed to enrich your engagement with the book and with other Honors students. But if your answers somehow raise suspicions about whether you've read the book or not, you may get further questions. The main thing at stake is your Honor.

How much should I write?
Your responses should add up to a sum total of not less than 750 words.  Don't try to load up all 750 words into one or two comments.  You should also respond to comments left by other readers. And pose questions to other readers. (Check back later to see if anyone has responded to your comments-and respond to their responses.)  All of this writing will count toward your 750-word total.  Students are responsible for keeping track of their word total (eventually, we will ask you to cut and paste your responses into a Microsoft Word document, which has a word count feature).  This is not just a writing assignment, though; it's a reading assignment, too.  Every student is responsible for reading every word of the assigned text. Each question is linked to a particular page in the book.  If you answer a question related to a particular page, you are also testifying that you have read up to that point.

Where do I post my responses?
At the bottom of each question post, you will find a "comment" link. If it has a "0" beside it, that means no one has commented yet; as more people comment, the number will go up. When you're ready to weigh in, click on the "comments" button, read any previous comments, and start writing. Please sign your posts. And use your real name--not a nickname--so we can get to know each other).

More questions?
E-mail us at sbenton@ecok.edu!

Engaging Think Again


In this post, you will find links to several questions about Adam Grant's 
Think Again. These questions are identified by their page numbers and are listed in the order in which the issues they address are raised by the text.

Once you've started reading the chapters listed below, click on the links, read the corresponding questions and comments other readers may have left (click on the "comment" button beneath each post to see them), and then join the discussion (or initiate it).

Most posts have several questions. You may answer any of them you wish. It is not necessary to answer all of them.

There is only one question that every student is required to answer.  That's the last one, referred to here as "The Takeaway." Don't answer it until you've finished reading the book. Your answer is your promise that you have read the entire book.

As you are reading, underline any passages that you consider to be thought-provoking, insightful, or artfully expressed (unless you're reading a library copy, in which case, you may want to just make note). You may want to refer to one of the passages you have underlined in "The Takeaway."

Prologue (1-12)

Chapter One: A Preacher, a Prosectuor, a Politician, and a Scientist Walk into Your Mind (15-31)

Chapter Two: The Armchair Quarterback and the Impostor: Finding the Sweet Spot of Confidence (33-54)

Chapter Three: The Joy of Being Wrong: The Thrill of Not Believing Everything You Think (55-76)

Chapter Four: The Good Fight Club: The Psychology of Constructive Conflict (77-93)

5. Dances with Foes: How to Win Debates and Influence People (97-119)

6. Bad Blood on the Diamond: Diminishing Prejudice by Destablizing Stereotypes (121- 141)

7. Vaccine Whisperers and Mild-Mannered Interrogators: How the Right Kind of Listening Motivates People to Change (143-160)

8. Charged Conversations: Depolarizing Our Divided Discussions (163-183)
172: It's Complicated
173: Shades

9. Rewriting the Textbook: Teaching Students to Question Knowledge (185-203)

10. That's Not the Way We've Always Done It: Building Culture of Learning at Work (205-222)

11. Escaping Tunnel Vision: Reconsidering Our Best-Laid Career and Life Plans (225-243)

Epilogue

Actions for Impact (251-257)

4. Bend or break?

"Flexibility and Strength" (2003) by Nyoman Masriadi

According to Grant, "Questioning ourselves makes the work more unpredictable. It requires us to admit that the facts may have changed, that what was once right may now be wrong. Reconsidering something we believe deeply can threaten our identities, making it feel as if we're losing a part of our ourselves" (4).

For this challenge, reflect on this question: do you consider yourself more someone whose identity is strongly related to a core set of beliefs or do you consider yourself  more as something of an "explorer" who frequently "tries on" new beliefs to see how they fit?  Do you tend to admire those who "stick to their guns" in the face of adversity or do you tend to admire people who more easily adopt new practices or ideas?

25. It's Science

"Science Class" (2011-2015) by Elina Brotherus

According to Grant, "In preacher mode, changing our minds is a mark of moral weakness; in scientist mode, it's a sign of intellectual integrity. In prosecutor mode, allowing ourselves to be persuaded is admitting defeat; in scientist mode, it's a step toward the truth" (25).

Option A:
Describe a time in your life in which changing your mind about something important or allowing yourself to be persuaded about something important was a struggle--intellectually or emotionally.  What was that experience like? How did you feel at the time and afterwards? Were you ever afraid that changing your mind was a sign of weakness or defeat?

Option: B:
Describe a memorable time in which someone you know well changed their mind about something important or allowed themselves to be persuaded. Did you see it as a sign of weakness or as capitulation to peer pressure? Did anyone see it that way?

27. Curiosity Feeder

"Curiosity" (XIX-XX Century) by Eugene de Blaas
According to Grant, the process of rethinking "starts with intellectual humility--knowing what we don't know. We should all be able to make a long list of areas where we're ignorant" (27-28). Grant then lists several areas that he is ignorant about. Some of them are broad:  "art, financial markets, fashion, chemistry, food" (28).  Some are very specific: "why British accents turn American in songs" or "why it's impossible to tickle yourself" (28).

This question/challenge has four parts. You must complete all 4 parts to get full credit. All parts should be combined in one comment.

First: identify something that you are both ignorant about and curious about. Don't include an "area" that is so specific that you can quickly find the answer with a 2-second internet search (like "What is the capital of Denmark?"). Feel free to choose an area that doesn't have a clear or simple "answer" (Grant's broad examples like "art" and "financial markets" would be examples).

Second: After you've identified the areas, do some research about one (or more) of them and teach the rest of us something surprising and significant that you learned as a result of the process. 100 words maximum for this part.

Third: Let us know how much time you spent researching this area (for this assignment) and where you found your answer. Ideally, you'll spend more than 5 minutes on it, but you're not expected to spend more than an hour, say.

Fourth: What other questions did your research leave you curious about?



38. Fortune favors the bold?

"The Orator" (1920) by Marcus Zeller

According to research done by David Dunning and Justin Kruger, "it's when we lack competence that we're most likely to be brimming with overconfidence" (38).

Option A:
Describe a time in your life when you were inexperienced and overconfident, but as you learned more, you became less confident.

Option B:
Do you think overconfidence or a lack of confidence is a greater challenge for you personally?

Option C:
Think about the people you come across in your personal life.  Do they tend to be drawn towards those who are overconfident but ignorant? Or do they tend to be drawn towards people who are knowledgeable but modest? Do the same standards apply in interpersonal interactions as they do with celebrity culture? What kind of person is more popular in different contexts?

54. New Teacher

"Child with a Stockpot" (2018) photo by Muhammad Muzamil
According to Grant, great thinkers "don't boast about how much they know; they marvel at how little they understand. They're aware that each answer raises new questions, and the quest for knowledge is never finished. A mark of lifelong learners is recognizing that they can learn something from everyone they meet" (54).

This challenge requires an action. 

Seek out someone you can learn from. You might learn a skill from them or gain knowledge from them about an area they know more about than you do, or you might just learn just from listening to something about their life journey.

If possible, seek out someone that you would not typically try to learn something from.

Describe the learning experience.