Over the three years of the Thought and Creativity (PiC) course, students will be introduced to six major works from our literary and philosophical tradition, through a reading program aimed at the integral development of the individual. During this first year, the program will focus on ethics; during the second year, on anthropology; and during the third year, sociopolitical issues will be addressed.
These readings will offer students the opportunity ofencountering fundamental problems of the human condition and with proposed solutions offered by our culture. Knowledge of the ideas that have shaped our world will allow students to approach the reality around them with greater resources for thinking and acting rigorously, since literary and philosophical examples will help them anticipate situations and problems they will encounter in their personal, professional, and civic lives. Thus, by drawing on cultural heritage, students will be able to freely shape their own thinking.
Language knowledge.
The objective of the course will be to raise awareness, through texts, of fundamental human problems and to develop the ability to take an argued position, both orally and in writing.
The Great Books sessions will be dedicated to reading and discussing selected readings and will be held on Thursdays. The Social Entrepreneurship sessions will be held on eight cross-sectional Wednesdays during the second semester (see the schedule in the Teaching Plan). These sessions are understood as putting holistic development into action and, in this sense, seek to raise awareness among students at the La Salle Campus about the Sustainable Development Goals set by the UN for 2030.
Great Books
1. Contextual and conceptual introduction to Seneca's Happy Life.
2. Reading and commentary sessions.
3. Practical analysis of a problem related to reading.
4. Basic structure of an argumentative text. Definition of the dilema and introduction to the thesis. Arguments in favor.
5. Contextual and conceptual introduction to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.
6. Reading and commentary sessions.
7. Practical analysis of a problem related to reading.
8. Basic structure of an argumentative text. Counterarguments. Conclusion.
Social Entrepreneurship
1. Introduction to Social Entrepreneurship and explanation of the project
2. Choosing the challenge
3. Market Research and Benchmarking
4. Ideation and Value Proposition Canvas
5. Business Model Canvas
6. Prototype and MVP
7. Improved product
8. Video delivery and pitch
Thought and Creativity will connect the texts worked on with current issues related to the student experience.
To this end, the Great Books sessions will be based on the methodology of reading and commenting on texts. This commented reading will be complemented by the Argumentation and Debate Workshop, based on the case study method and problem classes, which will encourage dialogue, cooperative work, and group reflection. Besides, following the practice of just-in-time teaching, the student will have to take notes (handwriting) in a notebook and read some texts at home in order to, once in class, think together about the practical problems raised by the works.
The Social Enterpreneurship sessions are based on a combination of theoretical classes and workshops in which students will use a learning approach based on the Candy Innovation Model methodology through practice. It aims to foster the understanding of social entrepreneurship projects through multidisciplinary teams. It encompasses an approach with teamwork activities, exercises, debates and individual and group assignments and presentations.
The Thought and Creativity course follows a continuous assessment. It consists of two parts: Great Books and Social Entrepreneurship (SDG’s Challenges).
Great Books carries a 70% share of the final grade, and Social Entrepreneurship carries a 30% share. However, to pass the entire course, you must have passed both parts. If you fail one of the two parts, your final grade will be a maximum of 4; if you fail one of the two parts, your final grade will be NP.
Great Books Evaluation
The Great Books assessment will primarily evaluate the student's ability to identify relevant issues or problems in the texts and to provide reasoned positions.
The score will be distributed in:
• Attendance and participation: 25% of the semester grade. Moderately significant activity.
o A roll call will be taken for each session. To achieve the highest grade for this section, regular attendance (fewer than three unexcused absences) and meaningful participation are required.
o The third unjustified absence will directly result in a 5 for this portion. The fourth unjustified absence will result in a 0 for this portion.
o The student will have to take notes (by hand) and keep track of the sessions in a notebook, which the teacher may request whenever he or she deems appropriate.
• Midterm Exam 1: 30% of the semester grade. Moderately significant activity.
o This will consist of a guided commentary with questions about a passage from the book in question. The argumentative quality and coherence of the writing will be assessed, as well as the acquisition of the content covered in class, the ability to identify the problem posed by the text, and the ability to present a reasoned position on the subject. This will take place in the regular classroom, mid-semester, and will last 50 minutes.
·Midterm Exam 2: 45% of the semester grade. Highly significant activity.
o It will consist of reading control questions and the writing of an argumentative text. Through this, students will have to take a position, using consistent arguments, on a problem related to both reading and the current world. The course will be held in the regular classroom on the last day of class each semester.
If the student has any specific educational support needs (due to ADHD, dyslexia, etc.) and requires more time to complete an exercise, they must notify their tutor and provide proof of this in advance, and inform the PiC1 teacher at least fourteen days before the assessment activity. In this case, the teacher will offer 25% extra time.
The final grade for Great Books will be the average of the first and second semester grades (50% + 50%). To calculate the average, the final grade for each semester must be equal to or higher than 4, and to pass this part of Great Books, the final grade (average of the two semesters) must be equal to or higher than 5. Otherwise, the subject will be failed and the student will have to take the extraordinary evaluation. If the student's grade is lower than 4 in one of the two semesters, the final grade for Great Books cannot exceed 4.
The extraordinary assessment for Great Books will be held at the end of June. There will be two options: resit the entire course or just a semester (either the first or second). It will consist of a test held on the date set for the extraordinary examination, in which the same aspects as the two midterm exams each semester will be assessed.
Every student who has taken the exam under the correct conditions has the right to a review. For both regular and extraordinary exams, a review must always be requested within one week of the grade being published.
Social entrepreneurship Evaluation
The following aspects will be taken into account in the evaluation of Social Entrepreneurship:
(1) Final submission and presentation: 30%
(2) Compulsory coursework deliverables: 30%
(3) Individual reflection: 10%
(4) Attendance and participation in class: 30%
Items (1), (2) and (3) are considered moderately significant activities.
It is necessary to obtain at least a 5 in Attendance and Participation to pass this part of the subject.
Attendance and Participation consist of 3 parts that count for 10%:
· Attendance: Students must attend all classes, complete any preparatory work set and actively participate in the session activities.
- If the student misses one of the eight sessions, he or she will receive a grade of 8.75.
- If the student misses two of the eight sessions, he or she will receive a grade of 7.5.
- If the student fails three of the eight sessions, he or she will receive a grade of 5.0.
- If the student misses four or more sessions, he or she will receive a grade of 0.
· Mentor evaluation - Group evaluation by the section mentor mid-project and on completion.
· Peer2Peer Assessment - Assessment by your team members mid-project and on completion.
Extraordinary evaluation
The extraordinary evaluation for Social Entrepreneurship will be held at the end of June. There will be two possible scenarios:
- If the student has a NP or has failed the project due to lack of attendance, s/he will be contacted by the project coordinators and assigned a group and a challenge similar to those of the project.
- If a student fails with a grade between 4.0 and 4.9 but has not completed the Individual Reflection, they may choose to submit a more elaborate version of this project assignment. In this case, their final grade will be recalculated with the same weight as the initial statement.
Other requirements
1. Punctuality
Students must arrive on time to class, as lateness can be distracting and disrupt the classroom atmosphere. If a student arrives more than five minutes late, they will be considered absent and will not be allowed to enter the classroom.
2. Stake
It doesn't just mean being present in class. Students will be evaluated on their willingness to work in a team, participate in activities, and their level of commitment to the project. This grade is calculated as 10% of the mentor's overall grade and 10% of the Peer-to-Peer assessment. The criteria for both evaluations are detailed in eStudy.
- If the student does not complete the Peer2Peer assessment, his/her grade will be 0.
It's very important to remember this, since participation accounts for a significant percentage of the overall grade, and it's something over which the student has complete control.
Midterm 1
MIDTERM EXAM 1 (10 POINTS) | ||||
INSUFFICIENT | SUFFICIENT | GOOD | EXCELLENT | Item |
Does not explain the required idea at all. | Refers to the idea, but in a mistaken, confused, or undeveloped way. | Explains the idea correctly, but incompletely or deviates at some point. | Contains a complete and well-adjusted explanation of the idea. | Overall explanation |
The word count is inadequate (+/- 30). | Deviates considerably from the required word count (+/- 20). | Approximates the required word count (+/- 10). | Uses the required word count. | Word count |
Language is poor, with many errors, unstructured: unintelligible. | Language is poor, with many errors and unstructured, but the meaning is understandable. | Language is considerably accurate, with appropriate concepts. | Language is grammatically and orthographically accurate, expressed with originality, with a rich and appropriate vocabulary. | Linguistic quality |
Clearly has not understood anything about the book. | Seems to know what the book is about. | Demonstrates knowledge of the book’s content. | Demonstrates having read and delved deeply into the book’s content. | Knowledge of the book |
Contradicts key interpretive elements discussed in class. | Makes no mention of what was discussed in class nor incorporates other references or sources. | Demonstrates awareness of what was discussed in class. | Coherently incorporates knowledge from class discussions or other sources. | Integration of other resources |
Midterm 2
MIDTERM EXAM 2: ARGUMENTATIVE TEXT (7 points) | ||||
INSUFFICIENT | SUFFICIENT | GOOD | EXCELLENT | Item |
Demonstrates not having understood the question and does not answer it. | Develops considerations about the question, but does not answer with a clear position. | Answers the question, but the response mostly drifts into secondary considerations. | Addresses the question directly and answers it adequately. | Response to the question |
The word count is inadequate (+/- 30). | Deviates considerably from the word count (+/- 20). | Approximates the required word count (+/- 10). | Uses the required word count. | Word count |
Does not provide any type of argument to justify their position. | Provides only one argument; the opposing position remains unjustified. | Provides at least one argument for and one against. | Provides several significant arguments for and against. | Number and quality of arguments |
Language is poor, with many errors, unstructured: unintelligible. | Language is poor, with many errors and unstructured, but the meaning is understandable. | Language is considerably accurate, with appropriate concepts. | Language is grammatically and orthographically accurate, expressed with originality, with a rich and appropriate vocabulary. | Linguistic quality |
Clearly has not understood anything about the book. | Seems to know what the book is about. | Demonstrates knowledge of the book’s content. | Demonstrates having read and delved deeply into the book’s content. | Knowledge of the book |
Contradicts key interpretive elements discussed in class. | Makes no mention of what was discussed in class nor incorporates other references or sources. | Demonstrates awareness of what was discussed in class. | Coherently incorporates knowledge from class discussions or other sources. | Integration of other resources |
· Seneca, Dialogues and Essays. Translated by John Davie and Edited by Tobias Reinhardt (2008).
· Mary Shelley, Frankenstein (The Originals)Paperback (2018).
None.