KIC

KOGAKUKAN　KO201

English

Note: No language support is offered in the course. This course discussed issues of global justice from a philosophical perspective. The ideas are difficult and the language requires precision and nuance. Students
are strongly advised not to take this course with the primary purpose of practicing their English.

This course is a theoretical and applied investigation of issues in global justice. Traditionally, justice has been theorized in terms of the obligations that exist between citizens and the state. Global justice by contrast is the study of what individuals are owed as they are affected by activities and relationships that cross state lines and which cannot be resolved by states alone or independently of non-state agents and institutions. The course will investigate different frameworks of global justice and how they apply to major global issues. Topics for discussion may include poverty and economic disparity; humanitarian intervention and universal human rights; environmentalism and climate change; immigration and citizenship; and national and cosmopolitan democracy.

Classes will be conducted through a combination of teaching styles and active learning strategies, including but not limited to lectures, class debates, discussions and small group activities.

Feedback on assignments is primarily provided by written comment, which may also be discussed in person with the instructor. Students are expected to take comments seriously and to incorporate feedback into subsequent discussions and assignments.

Course Objectives:
Upon successful completion of this course, students will have developed skills essential to academic study. More specifically, they should have met the following content and critical thinking objectives:

Content objectives: Upon completion of this course students should be able to discuss central topics in global justice by means of a variety of theoretical frameworks. They should be able to evaluate different arguments about global issues and have developed reasoned positions on these issues. Students should also have developed their ability to identify, analyze, and criticize philosophical arguments, and have developed their understanding of diverse issues of philosophical inquiry. They should have also developed their ability to communicate their ideas in a clear and cogent manner.

Critical thinking objectives: Upon successful completion of this course, students will have developed their critical thinking abilities. They will have improved their ability to do the following:
 Read texts analytically and understand different lines of argument;
 Interpret responses to identified philosophical questions;
 Analyze and assess the consistency and plausibility of ideas;
 Compare, contrast and evaluate diverse philosophical positions.

Lecture/Instructor（When there are multiple instructors)	Theme
	Keyword, References and Supplementary Information
Week 1	Introduction
	Introduction to the course, review of the syllabus and course expectations, and initial discussion of issues in global justice.
Week 2	Global Justice & Poverty
	A discussion of 'the duty to aid' and the question of our obligations to address or reduce poverty around the world.
Week 3	Key Concepts of Justice
	An introduction to key ethical concepts that will guide and structure our discussions throughout the course.
Week 4	Human Rights: Relativism & Universalism
	A discussion of moral relativism and universal moral claims.
Week 5	Theories of Global Justice: Egalitarianism
	An introduction to egalitarianism as a theory of global distributive justice and a critique of its strengths and weaknesses.
Week 6	Global Justice & Migration
	A discussion of the justice of open and closed borders, and whether and to what extent states have the right to limit who may come into their territory.
Week 7	Theories of Global Justice: Minimalism
	An introduction to minimalism as a theory of global distributive justice and a critique of its strengths and weaknesses.
Week 8	Writing Workshop
	A workshop on academic writing in English and reference and citation expectations.
Week 9	Global Justice & Natural Resources
	A discussion of whether and why states can be said to own the resources that lie within their territory, and whether and to what extent 'resource privilege' creates obligations for resource distribution.
Week 10	Global Justice & Climate Change
	A discussion of the ethical responsibility to address climate change and of different models of how mitigation and adaptation costs ought to be distributed.
Week 11	Peer Editing Workshop
	Peer editing of the second class assignment.
Week 12	Global Justice & Health
	A discussion of global health inequalities with a special focus on ‘vaccine nationalism’.
Week 13	Global Justice & Indigeneity
	A discussion of claims to indigenous belonging and whether such claims deserve moral recognition.
Week 14	Global Justice & Reparations
	A discussion of when and under what conditions nations can be responsible for making reparations for past injustices.
Week 15	Global Justice & Reparations
	A continuation of the discussion from week 14, with connections drawn to other topics covered in the course.

If the BCP Level is 1 or 2 at the time of commencement of the semester all classes will be conducted in person.
 
If the BCP Level is 3 or higher at the time of commencement of the semester all classes will be delivered online.

If the BCP Level changes to 3 or higher in the middle of the semester all classes will be delivered online

※For more information on Ritsumeikan University's BCP Level, please refer to the following URL, Point No.1 “The Ritsumeikan Trust Crisis Response Task Force” (http://en.ritsumei.ac.jp/news/detail/?id=475)

This course requires that students study about four hours a week outside of class. Out-of-class work includes class preparation, post-class review, research, and group and individual assignments along with any work assigned by course instructors who facilitate learning in the course. All readings listed in Class Schedule are compulsory: it is the students’ responsibility to keep up with readings and discuss them in class.

Regular and punctual attendance and participation is expected in this class. Student performance in the course will be assessed based on material discussed in lecture as well as on material from course readings and ideas that arise through discussion. Should a student experience any difficulty participating in discussions or have any concerns about the way discussions are conducted, they should email the instructor privately to discuss the situation. Students should also email in case of difficulty viewing lectures or otherwise engaging in course material.

Students are expected to complete all reading assignments before class and to be familiar with the material for classroom discussions.. It is possible that the order of topics may be altered, or that some readings may be cancelled or supplementary materials added. Modifications to the reading schedule will be announced in advance.

Kind	Percentage	Grading Criteria etc.
Final Examination (Written)
Report Examination (A report to be submitted by the unified deadline)
Exams and/or Reports other than those stated above, and Continuous Assessment　 (Evaluation of Everyday Performance in Class)	100	Individual Reflections (x3) - 20% Review Quizzes (weekly) - 15% Written Assignment #1 (short) - 15% Written Assignment #2 (long) - 30% Final Exam - 20%

Marking Rubric: Dr. Christopher Johnson

(As adapted from Elizabeth Anderson)

A+ Outstanding 90-100
A Excellent 80-89
B Good 70-79
C Meets Requirements 60-69
F Fail 0-59

Grading scheme as per the Ritsumeikan University Regulations, Article 35-2
(http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/acd/cg/ir/ir_link/ir_rishu/ir_rishugaido_2014/text/c_en08.pdf)


B: Good (70-79)
A baseline grade of good work. Papers are graded relative to these baseline ‘B’ criteria. The paper:

- addresses all parts of the paper topic
- offers consistent, coherent arguments for a clearly articulated position
- considers significant objections to that position
- replies to those objections in a reasonable way
- makes relevant use of course readings and lectures, displaying a grasp of, without merely repeating, their content
- is generally well-written and well-organized, with few or no grammatical, punctuation and spelling errors
- does not contain significant misunderstandings

C: Meets Requirements (60-69)
The paper meets the requirements to pass the course, but falls short of ‘B’ standard by (for example):

- correctly stating the main idea, but misunderstanding supporting philosophical points
- distinguishing different philosophical positions, but not demonstrating understanding why they diverge
- failing to articulate a consistent position
- offering arguments to support a position, but failing to consider serious objections to the position
- considering objections to a position, but failing to consider reasonable responses to those objections
- discussing issues that are not pertinent to the paper topic
- interpreting readings or cited texts tendentiously or without much insight

 
A: Excellent (80-89)
The beginnings of distinction. An ‘A’ paper meets all of the standards for a ‘B’, but in addition:

- offers an original, striking, or powerful idea, argument, or illustration/application – something beyond what an undergraduate would be expected to consider who has been exposed to the topic for the first time.
- any of the following can mark a paper as being of ‘excellent’ quality: an unusually appropriate analogy that illuminates an obscure aspect of a problem; a clever counterexample to a seemingly persuasive claim; a sharp distinction that does real philosophical work; a subtle point drawn from a close reading of a text; a compelling illustration or application of a principle
- alternatively, the paper might work out ordinary ideas to a greater depth than usual (for example, by offering multiple significant objections and replies, which help to deepen the idea), or develop relevant arguments that demonstrate genuine mastery of the course readings


A+: Outstanding (90-100 – 4 Quality Points)
An ‘A+’ paper meets all of the standards for a ‘A’, but in addition:

- works out the original, striking, or powerful idea, argument, or illustration/application fully and deeply, with outstanding execution that demonstrates a firm grasp of the underlying concepts, principles, facts, and argumentative strategy
- alternatively, the paper might offer an unusually comprehensive survey of possible moves by both sides, and clearly and systematically evaluate them, coming to a closely reasoned conclusion. The survey must be systematic, not scattershot: it must develop the alternatives logically and to substantial depth, not just assess a random mix of ad hoc considerations. Moreover, it must consistently display an understanding of the underlying point of different arguments: it must understand what they are really getting at, and not just superficially canvas them
- alternatively, for a paper based on a text, the paper might offer an unusually close, systematic, and sophisticated reading of a philosopher's texts, paying attention to tensions and contradictions in the author's work, alternative interpretations of passages (offering persuasive arguments for preferring one interpretation to another), and interpretations that bring out philosophically significant points, especially if they offer fresh, unconventional readings

F: Fail (59 or less – 0 Quality Points – may not be removed by repeating the course)
This grade is reserved for serious intellectual failings, such as:

- failing to answer significant parts of the paper topic
- substantially misunderstanding important philosophical points, or confusing different positions
- defending a position that is seriously internally inconsistent
- offering seriously fallacious arguments that fail to address the main question
- lacking organization or structure so much that the paper is incoherent

This grade is also reserved for moral failings, such as:

- plagiarism
- significantly late submissions without extenuating reasons or granted extensions

Submitting Assignments: Assignments must be submitted to the instructor as per the instructions of each assignment.

Feedback on Assignments: Students are expected to read all comments provided on returned course assignments and to use that feedback to improve their course performance. Failure to consider and incorporate feedback on subsequent assignments may be penalized.

Late Policy: Papers will be considered late if they are submitted after the end of class on their due dates, unless otherwise specified or arrangements have been made beforehand. Late work will be penalized by 5% per day, including weekends. The instructor reserves the right not to accept an assignment submitted more than 1 week late without good reason. Papers submitted late may receive fewer comments as feedback.

Recording or Distribution of Lectures: Audio or video recording of lectures and discussions, and any distribution of said recordings, is allowed only with the prior consent of the instructor and all other parties involved in the session concerned. Any recording once approved is to be used solely for the purpose of personal study, and is not to be used or distributed for any other purpose without prior written consent from the instructor.

Academic Misconduct & Plagiarism: Academic misconduct is taken seriously in this course. Students are responsible for understanding what constitutes academic misconduct and plagiarism and are responsible for avoiding it. Suspected cases of misconduct will be investigated, and findings of violation will be penalized and reported to the Dean of the student’s College.

All readings will be made available by the instructor.

Learning Management System （manaba+R）,Talk with Students,Other (Separate instructions will be provided)

Students may contact the instructor via email as provided in the PDF version of the syllabus, available on Manaba under 'Resources'.

【科目ナンバリング・カリキュラムマップはこちらから/Click here to see the Curriculum-Map and Course-Numbering】
URL:http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp//students/pathways-future/course/curriculum.html