take this into account when figuring your participation grade. If I determine that someone
has not been doing a fair share of the work, this will be reflected in that person’s
participation grade. Note: you are graded individually for participation in this class – you
will not be ‘dragged down’ or ‘pulled up’ by what others in your group are doing.
V. What to write in your report
You should write 6-7 pages; you are welcome to write more if you wish. Your report
must include the following:
1. A description of what role you are playing and why this trial is important to your
‘character’ (about 1 page).
2. If you are with the prosecution or defense, briefly set out the main argument and
evidence that your group has assembled to make your case (This can also come
directly from your group’s collective work. You can add to it or describe why you
chose to use the evidence that you did, if you like). If you are with the
judges/jury, write the two questions you developed and explain WHY you thought
these were important questions: what motivated you to ask each one? The Chief
Justice should do this with his/her one question, and set out the detailed charges
against the book (about 2 pages).
3. Regarding the cross-examination you engaged in, or the questions you posed as
judges/jury – did you find the answers that people gave to your questions
convincing? Why or why not? (about 1 page).
4. If you are with the judges/jury, explain why you arrived at the verdict you did
(and did you agree with the majority opinion?). The prosecution and defense
should explain their response to the verdict (about 1 page).
5. What did you learn from this simulation? What could have helped to make it more
realistic? (about 1 page).
The report is due on MAY 10 at 3pm SHARP – either in my office (317 Maginnes Hall)
or in my mailbox in the Political Science department.
VI. General thoughts on the simulation
This is not a democracy. Nonetheless, let me be clear on one point: you may not directly
intimidate individual students in the class. However, you may insinuate or hint at
whatever you think realistically might be the consequences of certain types of actions.
For example, from Reading Lolita and from the hand-out for April 18, it is pretty clear
what might happen to reformers or intellectuals who step over the line. Beyond that, you
should use your imagination to come with ways of making your point.
Feel free to make use of e-mail, Blackboard discussion forums or chat rooms, phone
conversations, etc. Note: the Blackboard site will have private chatrooms for each the
prosecution, defense, and judges/jury shortly.
Feel free to subvert this simulation in any way that you believe is appropriate.
28
Convention