Spring 2008
(Syllabus Revised:17 January 2008)
IS 3209H:
Apocalypse Now?
The science and
policy of preparing for catastrophe
Class: MW 10:30-11:20, Sci 3610
Instructor: Dr. Peter H. Wyckoff
Office: Science 1375
Phone: x6347
E-Mail: wyckoffp@mrs.umn.edu
Description
Assuming you are mortal, every day brings some risk of injury or death (morbidity and mortality for those who like jargon). Some causes of death seem completely personal—lightning strikes, for instance. Some causes of death impact large groups and entire societies—unrestrained thermonuclear warfare comes to mind. It can be debated, but some causes of death seem entirely the fault of the victim, while others seem completely beyond the victim’s control. Does “fault” make a difference?
What causes of death do you worry about at night? Are your worries proportional to the actual odds? Does our collective imagination compel us to focus on unrealistic risks, while ignoring very real, and preventable, risks? What factors contribute to decisions made by society regarding allocation of resources to reduce and prevent catastrophic risks? Should the next available dollar go to training another bomb sniffing dog? To vaccinating another kid? Or to raising a levee?
In this course, we will examine the political, scientific,
and cultural aspects of how the
Required
Texts
1) Keeney,
D. 2002. The doomsday scenario: how
2) Kolbert,
E. 2006. Field notes from a
catastrophe: man, nature, and climate change.
3) Posner, R. 2004. Catastrophe: risk and response. Oxford University Press, 322p.
In addition, you will be responsible for a series of shorter readings—see schedule.
Format
Class will be split primarily between lecture and discussion. Because of people’s varying backgrounds in
this field, I expect ½ or our time will be devoted to lectures expanding upon
and providing background for the reading and/or give you a sense of even more
current research. In other words, these
lectures will not simply replicate or summarize the material in the reading so
you’ll still need to read.
In addition to our two weekly class meetings, this class will include
the acclaimed six-part film series “Pete and Paula’s Disaster Cinema.”
(shortened to 4 in 2008) Screenings will
take place on Thursday evenings (see schedule), with the films available for
check-out before and after the screening.
Requirements
Your grade will be based on five elements:
Informed Class Participation 15%
Exam 1 15%
Final Exam 15%
Short Reaction Papers (4) 40%
Final Project 15%
Informed Class Participation: This will be based on your active, informed and reflective participation class discussions and activities. This class has been set up so that is reading and discussion intensive. This will only work if you all come to class ready to talk, think, question, argue, muse and ponder the subjects at hand in light of the reading. Questions will be provided to help stimulate your analysis. If it becomes necessary to give any pop-quizzes (and there will be a maximum of three), they will be figured as part of the participation grade at 3 1/3% each for a maximum of 10% of your total grade.
Midterm and Final: The purpose of the exams is to assess your knowledge of the course’s key concepts and themes or briefly stated, to keep you honest. They will consist of ids, short answers and a choice of essays. When I return your first exam grade, I will also give you a mid-term participation grade.
Short Reaction Papers: These will be short essays (2-3 pages
approx.) in which you will be asked to use the readings and class discussions to
reflect and write on a film from the famous “Pete and Paula’s Disaster Cinema”
series. These papers will allow you to do some critical rehashing, reflecting
and synthesizing of the material in light of the big questions of the course. Papers
will be due in class the two weeks from the original screening.
Final Project with Presentation: More on this later.
Expectations
1. First a predictable paean. This class is a joint collaborative venture
and thus can really only succeed if all (professor included) come to class
ready to engage in thoughtful and critical discussion of the material presented
in the reading and in lectures. This has
three implications. First, stay up on
the reading. It is neither difficult nor
especially voluminous. Second, you are
responsible for the material in the reading even if we do not discuss it in
class. There is a reason it is assigned. Third, you should reflect and think about the
reading in reference to other course material, the objectives of the course and
current events. Because this is a collaborative project,
Pete will provide some thought questions to help guide your reading and
stimulate your process of thoughtful reflection, but you should always feel
free to add your own questions to the mix.
2. Reading
assignments should be completed by the class day for which they are
listed. We reserve the right to give
up to 3 pop-quizzes a term on course material if students are not keeping up.
3. Doing the reading is necessary but not sufficient. You also need to be an informed participant in class at some point in a manner beyond occupying physical space. The variety of formats should make it possible to feel comfortable participating at least some and hopefully a great deal.
4. All written assignments should be typed or word-processed. They should also be double-spaced with standard margins (about an inch) and a conventional font (no micro or macro fonts please!).
5. All assignments
should be turned in by 5 pm on the day they are due. Anything turned in later will lose a full
letter grade (A to B, B to C, etc) for every 24 hours it is late. For the purposes of this penalty, once you
pass 5 pm on the day it is due, time divides into 24 hour segments. Thus there will be no difference between
being 36 or 48 hours late.
6. Keep an electronic copy of every paper you turn in
until I return the graded version. This is an insurance policy in case of
disaster.
9. Reasonable
accommodations can and will be provided for students with physical, sensory,
learning and psychiatric disabilities.
Such can more easily be provided if you inform me at the beginning of
the term.
9. Academic dishonesty (see definition below) in
any portion of the academic work for this course shall be grounds for awarding
a grade of F or N for the entire course.
Engaging in academic dishonesty
disrespects yourselves, your peers and me. If you have any questions regarding the expectations for a specific
assignment or exam, ask.
Recent actions by the University Senate requires that the
following University of Minnesota policies be printed on all course syllabi.
Grading standards
(definition of grades)
A Represents achievement that is outstanding relative to the level necessary to meet course requirements.
B Represents achievement that is significantly above the level necessary to meet course requirements.
C Represents achievement that meets the course requirements in every respect.
D Represents achievement that is worthy of credit even though it fails to meet fully the course requirements.
S Represents achievement that is satisfactory, which is equivalent to a C- or better.
F (or N) -- Represents failure (or no credit) and signifies that the work was either (1) completed but at a level of achievement that is not worthy of credit or (2) was not completed and there was no agreement between the instructor and the student that the student would be awarded an I (see also I)
I -- (Incomplete) Assigned at the discretion of the instructor when, due to extraordinary circumstances, e.g., hospitalization, a student is prevented from completing the work of the course on time. Requires a written agreement between instructor and student.
Make-up exam policy
Make-up quizzes and exams are available only when a student has an excellent reason for missing the regular quiz or exam and arrangements are made either before the missed quiz or exam or as quickly as humanly possible thereafter.
Senate student
academic workload policy
For undergraduate courses, one credit is defined as
equivalent to an average of three hours of learning effort per week (over a
full semester) necessary for an average student to achieve an average grade (C)
in the course. For example, a student
taking a 3 credit course that meets for three hours a week should expect to
spend an additional six hours a week on course work outside the classroom.
Statement on
classroom conduct
Students are expected to interact with the instructor and other students with respect and courtesy. Students should attend every class session prepared to learn and work. Participation in class is expected, which includes both speaking up and listening. Give class your full attention while here. Complete all assignments including the reading -- in a timely fashion. Students whose behavior is disruptive either to the instructor or to other students will be asked to leave. Students whose behavior suggests the need for counseling or other assistance may be referred to counseling services. Students whose behavior violates the University Student Conduct Code will be subject to disciplinary action.
Statement on academic misconduct
Scholastic dishonesty means plagiarizing; cheating on assignments or examinations; engaging in unauthorized collaboration on academic work; taking, acquiring, or using test materials without faculty permission; submitting false or incomplete records of academic achievement; acting alone or in cooperation with another to falsify records or to obtain dishonestly grades, honors, awards, or professional endorsement; altering forging, or misusing a University academic record; or fabricating or falsifying data, research procedures, or data analysis. A student responsible for scholastic dishonesty can be assigned a penalty up to and including an "F" or "N" for the course. If you have any questions regarding the expectations for a specific assignment or exam, ask.
Statement regarding
sexual harassment
University policy prohibits sexual harassment as defined by the University of Minnesota Regents' policy: http://www1.umn.edu/regents/policies/humanresources/SexHarassment.pdf
Accessibility
It is University
policy to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. All course materials can be made available to
persons with disabilities upon request.
Please contact the Disability Services Office (6178) in room 362 Briggs
Library to discuss accommodation needs.
IS 3208H: Apocalypse Now? Class Schedule
|
Date |
Topic |
Readings (Additions and subtractions are to be expected) |
Disaster Cinema Series |
|||
|
1 |
Jan. 23 |
Fun with actuarial charts |
1. Posner (2004), ch 1 |
|
||
|
2 |
Jan. 28 |
Western Cultural Visions of doom |
1. Book of Revelations http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/revelation-asv.html 2. Background: http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/revelation/intro.htm http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/apocalypse/explanation/ |
|
||
|
3 |
Jan. 30 |
How do we think about risk? |
1. Slovic (2004).
Risk as analysis and risk as feelings. Risk Analysis 24,
311-322. 2. Sunstein (2004) Thinking about risk. Risk and Reason. p. 28-52 |
|
||
|
4 |
Feb. 4 |
How does society thing about catastrophic risk? |
1. Kingdon (2003). Processes: origins, rationality
and garbage cans. Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policy, p. 71-89. 2. Posner (2004), ch 2. |
|
||
|
5 |
Feb. 6 |
The garbage can model |
1. Kingdon (2003). Problems. Agendas, Alternatives
and Public Policy, p. 90-115. |
|
||
|
6 |
Feb. 11 |
Case #1: The nuclear threat |
1. Schelling (2006). An astonishing 60 years. PNAS
103: 6089-6093. |
|
||
|
7 |
Feb. 13 |
Nuclear policy |
1. On MAD: a. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/Ning/archive/archive/133/dustbin.pdf, p40 b. Fairbanks 2004 (http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pdffiles/PUB585.pdf) chapter |
Dr. Strangelove (1964) |
||
|
8 |
Feb. 18 |
Discussion of The Doomsday Scenario |
1. Keeney (2002) |
|
||
|
9 |
Feb. 20 |
Nuclear Energy |
1. Williams (2006).
Too soon for a final diagnosis. Nature 440: 993-994. 2. IAEA “50 years of nuclear energy” |
|
||
|
10 |
Feb. 25 |
Nuclear terrorism |
1. Coll (2007) The unthinkable: our shield against
nuclear terrorism. The New Yorker (12 March issue) |
|
||
|
11 |
Feb. 27 |
Case #2: Epidemics and pandemics |
|
Outbreak (1995)/ 28 Days Later (2002) |
||
|
12 |
Mar. 3 |
Bioterrorism |
1. Preston (1999).
Demon in the freezer. The
New Yorker 2. Relevent passages from Posner (2004) |
|
||
|
13 |
Mar. 5 |
Discussion |
1. Martin, W. (2004) Legal and Public Policy Responses of States to Bioterrorism.
American Journal of Public Health 94( 7): 1093-1096 http://www.ajph.org/cgi/reprint/94/7/1093 2.. Wynia, M. (2004) Ethical challenges in preparing
for bioterrorism. American Journal of Public Health 94( 7):
1096-1102 |
|
||
|
14 |
Mar. 10 |
Discussion/ Exam Review |
|
|
||
|
15 |
Mar. 12 |
Exam 1 |
|
Deep Impact (1998) |
||
|
|
|
Spring Break |
|
|
||
|
16 |
Mar. 24 |
Case# 3: Big rocks from space |
1. Spotts (2005). An asteroid, headed our way. CSMonitor
(26 July) 2. Relevant passages from Posner (2004) |
|
||
|
17 |
Mar. 26 |
Contrarians bring the good news |
1. Lomborg (2001), The skeptical environmentalist
(part II). |
|
||
|
18 |
Mar. 31 |
Environmental Collapse |
1. Peterson and Haug (2005). Climate and the collapse of Maya
civilization. American Scientist
93:322-329 2. Diamond (2005). Collapse (excerpt) |
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
19 |
Apr. 2 |
More collapse… |
1. Faris (2007) The real roots of Darfur. The Atlantic (April issue) 2. Kaplan (2008) Waterworld: is Bangladesh going
under? The Atlantic (January
issue) |
|
||
|
20 |
Apr. 7 |
Case #4: Climate change |
1. Excerpts from IPCC 2007 |
|
||
|
21 |
Apr. 9 |
The state of the science |
|
The day after tomorrow (2004) |
||
|
22 |
Apr. 14 |
|||||