Nick Seaver's course materials
Overview Schedule Assignments Grading Policies
Nick Seaver nick.seaver@tufts.edu Office Hours
Here’s the idea: It seems obvious, maybe especially obvious these days, that attention is important. We worry about our ability to pay attention, we worry about other people’s ability to pay attention, and companies make a lot of money by attracting, and maybe abusing, their users’ attention. Some people argue that many of our Big Problems—from climate change to political extremism—can be explained by the shape of human attention. Attention seems intuitive, universal, and good, but also fragile, elusive, and under threat.
The point of this class is to undermine that idea. How has attention come to seem like an all-purpose explanation for why things happen? What is attention anyway? How might our ideas about attention’s goodness work against us? We’ll critically examine attention by considering it in particular social, cultural, and technical contexts: we pay attention, value attention, and measure attention in a world full of other people and goals. Attention—the concept, the symbol, the mental phenomenon itself—is always tangled up in this world. That tangle is what we’ll study in this class.
By the end of the semester, you should be able to:
Everything you need to know about this course, including schedule, assignments, policies, and so on, can be found on this site. You should look through it all at least once at the start of the semester, though we’ll mostly live in the Schedule. We’ll only use our Canvas page for submitting certain assignments, keeping track of grades, and sharing PDFs of readings that aren’t available through the library.
9/8: Everyone Knows
In one of the most famous definitions of attention, from the beginnings of modern psychology, William James wrote: “Everyone knows what attention is.” On this first day, we’ll introduce ourselves, get familiar with class tech (bring your computer!), share what we already know about attention, and read the following pieces together.
9/15: No One Knows
But some philosophers and cognitive scientists who study attention have argued that we don’t really know what it is, that it doesn’t really exist, or that it actually refers to many different things. Today, we’ll learn about these arguments that suggest that attention may be essentially fragmentary. [Note that these are rather technical papers, concerned mostly with how scientists use “attention”; you don’t have to understand everything in them, but make sure you get a sense of what exactly their main arguments are. These are probably the hardest readings of the semester, so I’m putting them early, before things get too busy.]
9/22: Driving
This is the first of three weeks dedicated to particular settings of attention measurement and discipline. Up first: driving a car. How are drivers supposed to pay attention?
9/29: Work
Up next: your boss (or professor) surveilling your computer while you work. There are two pieces by me in here, which you should use as examples of the kind of thing I want you to try with your research projects.
10/6: Trick Questions
Survey designers now hide “attention check” questions in their surveys. What’s that about? [These readings are mostly primary sources. Read them with a critical eye.]
[There are fewer readings than usual today because we’ll be spending half the day starting research together.]
10/13: The Attention Economy
You have probably heard that we live in an “attention economy.” What does that mean? Is it true? What consequences does it have?
10/20: Attention Is All You Need
The recent explosion of large language models is typically traced back to the invention of an “attention mechanism” in artificial neural networks. How does that work, and why is it called “attention”?
10/27: The Textpocalypse
AI is related to attention in another way: people worry that an avalanche of AI-generated slop (a “textpocalypse”) will overwhelm human-created texts, changing the way we read and find information. What might AI do to our attention?
11/3: The New Tech Humanism
A popular critique of social media, coming from current/former Silicon Valley insiders, suggests that by harming our ability to pay attention, these systems are eroding what it means to be human. How is attention related to ideas of the human?
11/17: The Manosphere
Online influencers trying to build audiences of men have a lot to say about attention. How do their ideas about what it means to be a man and the value of attention relate to the ideologies of attention we’ve discussed so far? [Note that some of the material for today discusses and presents rank misogyny and sexually explicit text; our goal for the day is to think about how discourses of attentional control travel. Listen for resonances with the tech humanism week.]
11/24: Looking at Art
Today we’ll meet in the Tufts Art Gallery for a guided looking exercise, and for a discussion about how the ability to look at art meaningfully and for a long time has been associated with attentional skill in other domains (like medicine and counterterrorism!).
12/1: ADHD
This is our ADHD day. We’ll focus in particular on the vagaries of diagnosis: How do people come to understand themselves or others as having ADHD? How do those ideas fit within broader cultural ideas about attentiveness, its desirability, and its settings?
12/8: Presentations!
This last day is for sharing your research projects with the group and getting some feedback from each other.
| Assignment | Percentage | Deadline |
|---|---|---|
| Participation | 20% | weekly |
| Commonplace Board | 20% | weekly |
| Phase 1: Substance | 15% | 10/16 |
| Phase 2: Subjects | 15% | 11/30 |
| Phase 3: Subterfuge | 15% | 12/8, 12/16 |
| Phase 4: Submission | 15% | 12/16 |
A typical week includes four article or chapter-length readings. Sometimes these slots will be occupied by other media or by exercises that I expect to take about as long as reading an article. These pieces are loosely connected around a given topic; in some cases, the connection will not be obvious. Thinking about connections among the readings while you read is an important part of your role in this class.
You are responsible for accessing readings yourself; everything should be available using library resources. (If something is not, I’ll put a copy in the class files on Canvas.) Sometimes this will be as simple as clicking a hyperlink at the end of a reference, but in some cases you may need to use the library search. (Access problems can usually be resolved by using the on-campus network, or by using the Tufts VPN, if you know how.) If you have trouble accessing readings, let me know, and I can help you figure it out. Learning how to find readings this way is a skill, and it also helps the library accurately track our usage, so they can better argue against efforts to cut their resources.
These readings can be hard. I expect you to spend enough time reading to be able to make at least some sense of them. Most of the time, students who have issues with understanding the reading are simply not spending long enough on it.
You should read everything for a given week (and complete any exercises) before we meet, including preparation for discussion on your Commonplace Board.
The reading list is roughly based on chapters from the book I’m currently writing, Attention Fragments, which is a collection of short essays about the many meanings of attention today, with particular interest in attention’s technological mediation, measurement, and management. I’m planning to work on the relevant chapters alongside the corresponding weeks of the course, so I may bring in some of that material for you to work with. You’ll see some examples of this overlap on the reading list already (like the pieces about mouse jigglers on the week about “work”).
This is a highly interactive, discussion-based class. You need to come to class to participate meaningfully, and therefore attendance is part of your grade. (I have experimented with much more lax attendance policies in this class, and I learned that some students stop showing up for one reason or another and find it basically impossible to get back into the flow, to their detriment and ours.)
Showing up is the first half of participation. You should also be prepared to contribute to our discussion (i.e., you’ve read the texts for the day and you have thoughts about them, questions to ask each other, and so on). If you are keeping up with your Commonplace Board, this should not be an issue.
I am not shy about calling on people who have not been contributing or pushing you to refer back to passages from the readings in detail. Conversely, if you find yourself talking a lot more than everyone else, you should try to hold back a bit to make space for your fellow students. (No shame; your professors were often this person when we were in seminars.)
Here are some suggestions for ways to participate:
Each week you’re in class and participate substantively in discussion (see list above), you’ll get a point. Each week you’re absent, or present but do not participate substantively, you won’t. I hope you’ll fly beyond bare minimums in this class, but the bare minimum here is sharing something you saved to your commonplace board. You can even just read directly from your board. This policy includes our first class meeting during the first week of school.
13 meetings x 1 point = 13 points. Since participation is 20% of your grade, that means that each day is about 1.5% of your final grade (or enough to move you from a B to a B- or B+).
Stuff happens, and you can’t always make it to class. Here’s what to do if you need to miss a day. Some things to keep in mind:
So, informed by that, this is the make-up policy:
The first time I taught this class, back in 2017, I had students keep a physical journal to record notes, plan their final projects, and collect thought-provoking materials. (See the marvelous Syllabus, by Lynda Barry.) Inspired by a version of this assignment made by Ryan Cordell, I’m bringing it back, in altered form. (Some of this page is adapted from his assignment to maintain a course “commonplace book”—a traditional way of gathering meaningful quotations, memories, and other textual or flat materials. Here’s a nice blog post about analog commonplace books, which you may find inspirational.)
This time, we’re going digital, using Kinopio—a weird and opinionated little mind-mapping/conspiracy wall-making platform. I’m a long-time fan of the site and its small-scale ethos, and I’ve used it successfully in a few prior iterations of this course. If you’ve used collaborative canvas-editing platforms like Miro or Jamboard, you’ll be familiar with the general idea, though Kinopio is a bit distinctive. Basically, you can make cards with text or images and connect them. Here’s an example board I made to demonstrate some of the site’s features. I’ve collected more boards for inspiration in a list at the bottom of this section.
You don’t need to sign in to use Kinopio, but it will be easier to manage our collaborative boards in a group (and to see who’s doing what) if you make a free account, so please do that, ideally using your Tufts email address. Free accounts are only limited by the number of cards they can make on their own boards. Because I have a paid account, I’ll be making boards for you; you can place unlimited cards on these for class purposes. By default, I’m making these boards private to the class; if you want to share your board more widely, I can change the permissions.
If you really don’t want to work digitally, you can do all of the commonplace board stuff in a physical notebook. Here are the parameters:
Here’s what you should be doing on your boards (at minimum—feel free to go beyond this and to use your board, or to create more, to capture anything you like that’s relevant to class).
Before each class meeting, you should pick out at least one quotation from each of our readings and put it on your board. (You can copy the text, screenshot the PDF, or whatever you like to get it in there—just make sure you include a reference with enough detail to find it again in the original source.) That will usually be about four quotes. On days that have exercises in addition to the readings, there will be instructions about how to document it on your board.
For each required quote, you should also write down one question or observation that you would like to discuss about it. You can (and should!) draw on these during class discussion. Thanks to this, I will assume that everyone in the room will be ready with at least one thing to share about everything we read, and I will call on you to share accordingly.
Some advice about what makes satisfactory discussion questions/observations:
During class, you can use your board to capture things that interest you. (You can arrange stuff and do more formatting after class.) You’re not required to take notes directly in Kinopio, but after each class meeting, you should update your board with material from our discussion. You may also want to draw connections between different weeks at this point. You should visually distinguish this post-class revision from the earlier stuff. (If you miss class, there’s a make-up assignment under Participation that you can use to take the place of this, once during the semester.)
We will decide on a deadline cadence for these together in class, but that will be no later than Friday of the same week.
I’ll expect you to document your work and gather materials for the research projects on a dedicated board (to keep things from getting too unruly). Details about how to do that are in the Research Project section.
Every week, after our agreed-upon deadline for post-class board updates, I’ll look at your boards and see what you’ve done. If you’ve done the bare minimum outlined above (one quote + comment/question per reading, anything required by an exercise, and some post-class revision), then you’ll get credit. If you’ve done none of it, you’ll get no credit. If you’ve done something but it’s not satisfactory, I’ll let you know and give you a week to revise. (I’ll do that once; after the first time, unsatisfactory work won’t get credit.)
12 meetings x 1 point = 12 points. (No board on the last week, but there is one on the very first week.) Since the commonplace board is 20% of your grade, that means that each week is about 1.7% of your final grade (or enough to move you from a B to a B- or B+).
Here are some examples of public Kinopio boards that you can look at to get a sense of what the features are and how you might arrange your own:
The major assignment in this course is a multi-phase research project, in which you’ll find an attention measurement system and study it in excruciating detail. In the first phase, you’ll identify candidates, choose one, and amass a lot of information about it. In the second phase, you’ll focus on the kinds of attentional subjects your system is meant to manage. In the third phase, you’ll come up with a technique to fool your attention measurement system, informed by what you’ve learned about it and its contexts of use. At the end, you’ll aggregate all this research into a summative report. The phases have multiple internal deadlines, listed below as well as on the Schedule above, for easy reference. Each numbered component is specs graded separately (so, you’ll get 5 points or nothing for your list of candidate systems, 10 points for information gathering, and so on).
In this first phase, you’ll choose an attention measurement system to study over the course of the semester and learn about how it works.
First, you’ll collect a set of 3–5 candidate systems. Search around online, think about your own encounters with attention measurement, talk to me and your classmates, riff on the examples we’re talking about in class. Put your candidate topics on your Kinopio project board, with some notes about them. On the day they’re due, we’ll talk about them in small groups in class, which may help you refine your ideas. (Or, if one of your classmates has a cool idea they’re not going to use, you might pick up a new topic!)
Here are some criteria to help you choose good topics (“good” here means that you’ll have a lot to write about and your project won’t be unnecessarily hard to do):
Within a week after you share your candidate list in class, you should pick one and email it to me. If it needs to be more specific, I’ll offer some suggestions about how to get there. Be sure to look ahead to the future phases to ensure that you’ve got something you think will work for the whole semester. No points for this stage, but you have to do it before you can move on. (And we’re going to start in on the research during class time on the due date. You’re welcome to send your choice to me earlier.)
Now, I want you to gather as much information as you can about your system. This might include formal documentation, websites or forums where people talk about it, scientific papers about the theory behind it, explainer videos, news coverage, or anything else. This step is supposed to be quite expansive, so give yourself plenty of time to go down rabbit holes, keeping in mind that you may discover new subtopics of interest as you go.
It’s hard to put a minimum specification on this one—I mostly want you to find a lot. But, in the interest of specs, here are some areas that you should look into; if you’ve got information related to all of these areas on your project board, then you’ll meet the minimum specifications:
My list of questions here is loosely inspired by a similar exercise designed by Joe Dumit. You might look at his (much longer) list of questions for further inspiration (but it’s not required):
These questions are lifted directly from Joe Dumit’s “implosion” project, which is based on the teaching work of Donna Haraway. You’re invited to read the original article, if you’re interested in the scholarly context for asking questions like these. (You’ll find some intriguing attention-related framing in there.)
Dumit suggests a multi-stage process for going through these: First, go through the questions and try to answer them based on what you already know—skip questions you don’t know how to answer. This braindump may take more than one session, as it’s a long list. At the end, you’ll have a sort of map of your current knowledge of the object, which is also a map of the things you don’t know, in reverse. Where are your gaps? Why are they where they are? If you feel defensive about things you don’t know, why is that? What explanations do you reach for to explain the shape of your knowledge?
Second, think about how you might learn about the things you don’t yet know (or find information that might contradict or deepen what you think you already know). Go out and gather materials, paying attention to what kinds of things are harder for you to find out than others. Why is that? Are things kept secret? Not broadly discussed? Or do you just not yet know where to find the discussions?
Once you’ve done this, you’ll know a lot more about your object and how it relates to the broader world.
That will result in (hopefully) a glorious mess of a project board, and maybe some PDFs saved to a folder on your computer. You don’t need to tidy it up too much, but you should use the Kinopio “boxes” feature to mark out where you deal with each of the bullet points above, so I can check off the specs, keeping in mind that you don’t have to be limited to just those questions.
At this point, it is a good idea to look ahead to the final report. I’d suggest starting up a document in the word processor of your choice now. You may want to start roughing out some sections while this is fresh.
Different people are expected to pay attention in different ways in different situations. We can call these various kinds of people “attentional subjects”: Benedictine monks, tweens, college students, call center workers, Spotify users, and Uber drivers all live with expectations about how they’re supposed to pay attention. Over the course of the semester, we’ll encounter a lot of these.
In this phase of the research project, you’ll identify an attentional subject associated with your attention measurement system and explore ideas about how they ought to pay attention.
Drawing on the previous phase, you first need to figure out whose attention is being measured by the measurement system. What kind of person is this? No need to overthink this part (that’s for later). Are they truck drivers? High school students? Surgeons? People have lots of qualities—for now, focus on the ones most clearly involved in the relationship with your system. This will likely be something like a job, but not necessarily! We’ll share these in class.
Keep in mind that, while you chose your subject based on the measurement system from Phase 1, we are interested in them in their own right, not only in relation to that system. (So, for instance, if you picked out a system that is used to measure the attention of teenage girls in the US, then this phase of the project can be interested in ideas about how teenage girls are supposed to pay attention in general, not just in the setting of your system.) Depending on the system you chose in phase 1, you may end up going a bit more or less generic in this phase to give you something to think about. Also remember that, while this phase of the project is information gathering, you will need to write this up into a report at the end of the term.
Once you’ve identified your general type of attentional subject, you’ll need to figure out where you can learn more about them. You may have started to make progress toward this during phase 1, but now, you should look for sources of information and appraise them. For example: You might find forums where users of a VR headset talk and complain; you might find a little subfield of academic literature about people who take online surveys. Alternately, you may not find easily available digital sources. (If you’re interested, say, in brainwave measuring headbands used on Chinese schoolchildren, you probably won’t find those kids talking about their situations somewhere you can read it.) Possible sources will generally be either about the subjects in question or by them. If you can, try to balance these out with each other—it’s interesting to know how people subjected to attention measurement think about their situations, but also how people in their position are imagined by others, since we’re looking at ideas about how they should pay attention. But, you may be constrained by what exists out there.
Produce a list of 3–5 major sources (by “major source,” I mean something at the scale of a subreddit, or a blog, or a subfield of academic literature—i.e., not just individual research papers or blog posts, if you find such things). For each source, write a few sentences about whose point of view it typically represents (maybe more than one?) or other limitations, and what you think it would be useful for (e.g., does it capture some workers’ points of view? does it inform how the people who implement the systems think about their usefulness?).
Drawing on your list of sources, you should gather information about the attentional subjects who are subjected to your attentional measurement system. Keep in mind that we are both interested in them as actual people (with perspectives of their own, internal variety, and other things going on in their lives than just the part we’re talking about here) and as a kind of ideal type, who have ways they’re supposed to behave, stereotypes about tendencies and motivations, and so on. You should be trying to capture both sides of this, as best you can, though depending on your choice, some details will be easier to get than others.
This phase is a bit more diffuse than the last one, but here are some questions/topics to consider and answer on your board. (You don’t have to directly address all of these, if you don’t find them all relevant to your particular topic, but you should replace any you don’t think fit with something else that does, so you’re writing about the same amount.) Do remember that we’re interested in your attentional subjects for their own sake in this phase, not strictly in relation to the measurement system from Phase 1, even though that’s how you identified your subjects.
In addition to your own words, you should try to gather direct quotations from the sources identified above that strike you as relevant or interesting as you think about these questions. (See the quotes in my “Jiggling Against the Machine” article for an example of what this might look like.)
Inspired by our weeks on attention measurement and subterfuge, you should try to come up with a technique that you think would successfully fool your attention measurement system. This would be something like hanging an ankle weight on a car steering wheel or using a mouse jiggler to maintain an active status on Microsoft Teams.
You’ll need to present about this on the last day of class, but it doesn’t have to be complete until you submit the final report. Because this is the last phase, the project board and summative report components are due at the same time; you’ll probably want to work on the board first, though.
Given the range of possible systems and subterfuge techniques, these are more a set of potential considerations than guidelines you must follow. Feel free to contact me if you want to brainstorm a bit or run a possibility by me. In general, you should be making the decision that makes the project more interesting to you rather than worrying about whether it fits some narrow set of expectations.
[Note that this deadline is later than the presentation deadline below. This is on purpose, so you can present something more work-in-progress.]
On the last day of class, you’ll make a 5-minute presentation about your attention measurement system, focused primarily on your simulation technique, but reaching forward toward the final report, which you should be starting to work on by now. You do not need to present with slides (unless you want to), but your presentation should be polished enough that you can actually say everything you want to in your five minutes. Presentations should clearly describe the system, how it works, who it works on, and how you think it might be defeated. You’ll be able to ask each other questions and make suggestions that will help in constructing the final report.
To culminate your research work over the course of the semester, you should compile your findings into a summative report. You have some flexibility in how this is formatted and delivered. You might imagine, for instance, that you’re writing a competitive analysis for a company that’s interested in entering this space; or for investors who want to understand how it works; or for a regulatory body of some sort. (Don’t spend too much time role-playing here—I just want you to think about this as a kind of bureaucratic report, rather than an essay, per se.) Depending on what caught your interest, the emphasis of your report may vary.
This is less of an argument than a very detailed description of many aspects of your system, informed by the work you’ve done over the whole semester. You can make different sections as you see fit and as are appropriate to the information you’ve gathered over the course of the semester. If you want to run possible outlines by me, feel free.
You do not have to do any new research for this phase—you’re just entextualizing things that you’ve already found from earlier phases, though you may discover that you’d like to follow up on something from earlier, and you are welcome to do some more digging. (I expect you’ll need to revisit some of the sources you’ve gathered on the project boards so far.) The amount of work this is will likely depend on how detailed you were in the earlier phases.
I’ve set the deadline for your report to the first day of finals period. This is so that I can look at them and let you know, quickly, whether you’ll need to revise. In my experience, students often ask for extensions at this point in the term. That is fine. But, because we’re bumping up against the end of the term, extensions will shorten the time you have to revise, if necessary, which can make them troublesome. Request extensions at your own risk!
I do not like assigning grades in courses like this, where the point is to collaboratively explore an area of interest and intellectually engage each other. Too much concern with grades tends to stifle creativity, as students who might go out on a limb and try something new instead play it safe so that they don’t risk dropping to a B+. The point of the assignments in this course is not to be great, but to practice, and practicing is easier and more effective without the burden of trying to squeeze out every last point from a rubric.
So I’ve adopted a system called specifications grading, or “specs grading,” which I’ve used across my classes for the past several years with some success. The idea is that every assignment is graded pass/fail (more or less, see details below), according to whether you’ve met the specifications laid out in the assignment description. If you don’t meet the specs, you usually have one chance to revise—generally within about a week from receiving your work back—informed by comments from me. (Details about specific revision timelines, including some constraints on revisions, are in the assignment descriptions.) All those pass/fail assignments are ultimately aggregated up into a letter grade, which will be your final grade in the course.
If you’re the kind of student who worries about the difference between an A and an A-, this style of grading should free you up to take more risks. If you’re the kind of student who just wants to know what needs to get done, then you can find that in the specifications and be confident that meeting the specs will get you full credit. (If you’re taking this course pass/fail, then you should be able to easily calculate how many assignments you need to do to pass the cutoff.)
If you have any questions about the specifications for a given assignment (I try to be as clear as I can, but there are always possible points of confusion), let me know ASAP. Your classmates will thank you.
There are a few ground rules about participating in this course:
As you’ll notice, I’m expecting you to use a computer in the classroom this semester. This is counter to a lot of current ideas about how to manage the attention of students, but I think it is worth the tradeoff to have materials ready at hand. (Also, you may guess that I have some opinions about how people talk about managing student attention.) You should only be using your computer for course-related work during class time. I may ask you to close the laptop if it seems like a distraction for you, and if we don’t need the computers for something, I’ll ask everyone to shut them.
In general, it’s nice to look at other people while they’re speaking and to not bury yourself in the computer. Let’s see if we can pull off constructive computer use in the seminar room this semester.
You should not be using your phone during class, unless it’s your main computer.
The point of a class like this is to use your brain—to learn new ways of thinking that you can take with you when you graduate and to practice thinking so that you can get better at it. The way that the recent generation of AI tools has been marketed and designed typically works against that: having ChatGPT generate a summary of a text instead of reading it yourself, generating a paper using Gemini, or having Claude answer discussion questions are all analogous to bringing a forklift to the gym. This is not a necessary fact of large language models, but it is a problematic (for our purposes) feature of how they exist right now.
I work under the assumption that you’re here to learn and that the forklifts only come out when other pressures push you away from that goal. To continue over-extending this metaphor, I am like your personal trainer: I cannot lift the weights for you, but I’ve designed a program to help you build your capacities over the semester, and I will give you feedback and advice to hone your form as we go. I discourage the use of LLMs for any aspect of this course, but if you do use them, you should use them in ways that make things more challenging for you, not less. Figuring out what that means is your job. (Here’s some inspiration from the world of poetry.)
And, for my sake, do not submit computer-generated text as your own writing. (For related guidance, see the academic integrity policy below.) I’m not here to evaluate the output of machines, and you will be wasting both of our time. If you submit work that is obviously AI-generated (e.g., it includes hallucinated citations or quotes, or framing text like “as a large language model…” or “sure, I can write that for you…”), I will return it to you ungraded and you will receive a 0 on that assignment. If you submit work that seems like it is AI-generated (e.g., it is formulaic, does not seriously engage course materials, or reaches for obvious, perfunctory conclusions), then I will return it to you with the expectation that you will revise it to make it better (which is what I would do if you had generated such a submission with your own brain, too). AI-detection tools do not reliably work, and I do not use them.
Your success in this class is important to me. If there are any circumstances (personal, health-related, family-related, religious, etc.) that affect your ability to participate, please let me know as soon as possible so that we can work together to come up with reasonable accommodations for you. The sooner I know about any issues, the better. Any such discussion will remain confidential.
For disability-related accommodations, I encourage you to consult with the StAAR Center, which can arrange for formal accommodations across your classes. But you do not need to register with them or provide documentation to me in order to request accommodations in this course.
Following university expectations, this course is designed to meet in person; in some situations, I may move meetings online. Please check your email before we meet in case I’ve had to make a last-minute change.
I try to be a responsive emailer; you should expect a reply within 24–48 weekday hours of emailing me. (Please don’t use the Canvas inbox thing to message me—it’s hard enough to stay on top of one inbox.) If you don’t get a reply in that window, you should feel free to follow up with me as your message may have gotten buried in my inbox. I generally don’t answer emails over the weekend or after 5 pm.
I hold regular office hours to meet with students. Currently, these are held via Zoom, a few days per week. I use an online sign-up sheet to make sure that there’s enough time for everyone who wants it and to spread you out through the hour. This time is reserved for you, and you should feel free to use it to talk to me about anything: the course, your academic program in general, or whatever you’re interested in. You don’t need to have a specific problem to sign up, and I enjoy talking with you outside the classroom, so feel free to make use of office hours as often as you like.
As a rule, I tend to be flexible about deadlines, guided by a few principles: I do not want to make your life hard for no reason; I value my own time as well as yours; and extensions are not always in your best interest. If you need an extension and ask for one before a deadline (and not just the night before), we can usually work something out that balances your needs with mine and does not inadvertently make your life harder later on. I will not automatically deduct points for late work (though in some cases, especially for small assignments, I will simply not accept late work). You can find information about any assignment-specific late policies in the assignment descriptions.
No matter what, if you find yourself in a situation that requires flexibility, you should let me know. This is much more effective and results in much better outcomes than the alternatives. (Look ahead and take note of weeks where you might have many due dates clustered together—these are not unforeseeable situations, usually, and you can resolve them through planning in advance.)
Like all your courses, this one is predicated on the idea that it’s you who’s doing the work. If you don’t do your own work, you don’t learn, and there’s little point in you being enrolled in the class. Academic integrity issues usually arise when students feel overwhelmed by work and panic. If you start to feel overwhelmed, talk to me early so we can find better ways to manage the situation.
I encourage you to take an expansive view of what academic integrity means, grounded in a practical understanding of the point of being in college (to learn). Humans communicate with words and concepts, and in genres and situations, that are never entirely original. Communication always involves combining existing materials in meaningful ways. Different groups of people have different norms that govern these combinations: DJs, poets, programmers, lawyers, and physicists all abide by different sets of rules about what counts as “original,” what kinds of copying are okay (and when), and how you should relate to the materials that you draw from. Sometimes, these rules change. In this class, we’ll practice the norms of citation and attribution currently shared by social scientists (and, more generally, by undergraduate students).
Rather than expending your energy worrying about originality, I suggest that you think instead about what kind of citational network you are locating yourself in and how your emerging thinking relates to the sources you’re working from. What thinkers are you thinking with? Where do they come from? How might their positions in the world inform their thoughts? What is your position relative to them? How might you re-shape your citational network to better reflect your priorities or ideals?
Failure to abide by these norms is considered plagiarism, as laid out in the Tufts Academic Integrity Policy, which you should be familiar with. If I suspect that you’ve violated this policy, I am required by the university to report you to the Dean of Student Affairs, at which point the consequences are out of my hands. I do not spend much effort on detective work, but I do not recommend testing those limits. I also do not use plagiarism detection services like Turnitin (which make money by sucking it out of academic institutions, appropriating your work, and cultivating hostile relationships between students and instructors).
Everything in this syllabus, from the readings, to the grade breakdown, to the details of assignments, is subject to change as the term unfolds. I encourage you to let me know how the class is working for you via email, during class, or, if you’d rather stay anonymous, via the feedback box linked on Canvas. Changes may result from your comments or my assessment of how things are working. Any potential changes will be discussed in class and announced via email.