Period 1 - Shivangi Vijaya Kumar

[CALIS]

Thank you for participating in TIRP service-learning outreach!

Your reports are the basis for academic credit.  Whether or not you are seeking a credit option, reports are required as a university record of service-learning efforts and impact in local schools.

Required Format:
Session 1 materials: [The first line of your report is the session number and full title of the database item(s).]
Focus Q: [On a new line, list your focus question from your TAP form. If you changed the question then add the new version after the TAP version.]
*** For the minimum of 3 student specifics, do not refer to students by name; instead call them Student A, B or C.
*** For the minimum of 500 words, guiding questions are here: https://www.forums.usc-calis.net/showthread.php?tid=297

Use clear paragraph structure. If you include too much focus on the step-by-step process of the lesson rather than substance, you may be asked to revise your report.
*** The webboard is public. If you include names, commentary or observations, you will need to revise your post.

To Post:
1. For each report, select Post Reply.  (Do not select New Topic)
2. Copy/paste from your Word file and save a copy until after the semester is over.
3. Before pasting, confirm that you have met the minimum of at least 500 words.
4. Each report must be submitted by midnight within 3 calendar days after each session.

A CALIS staff member will review your report each week and post a message below of the scoring for your performance evaluation.
We welcome any questions or concerns you have about scoring.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Session #1
On Time: 0/3
Substantive: 6/6
Student Specific: 6/6
Total: 12/15
Thank you for your report! Please try to turn in your report earlier for the next session.
-PS, 10/31

Session #2
On Time: 2/3
Substantive: 6/6
Student Specific: 6/6
Total: 14/15
Thank you for your report! It seems like the group activity really increased class engagement.
-PS, 10/31

[Shivangi Vijayakumar]

Session 1 Materials: Equality is an Ideal: Dimensions & Distinctions

Focus Q: How do we evaluate and apply the worlds of equality?

We introduced the students to five facets of equality: equal rights, equal treatment, equal political access, equal political influence, and equal opportunity, and had them think about on what level they believed these forms of equality existed in the United States on a scale of 1 to 10. We began by prompting students to reflect on how constitutional rights relate to these concepts. Notably, Student A referenced freedom of speech but couldn't identify the corresponding amendment. We clarified each form of equality and provided illustrative examples, such as wage inequality for equal treatment . Following this, students individually rated each equality dimension based on how well the United States upholds them, and they supplied examples of success or failure. We asked some students to share their top-ranked and bottom-ranked equality dimensions, and we used an interactive whiteboard to tally their responses.It was interesting how most students rated equal rights and equal opportunity on a lower scale, while they rated equal political access and political influence higher up the scale. It led me thinking of their day to day experiences and observations that might’ve influenced their choices, such as their parents experiences when it comes to employment, benefits, etc.

For the latter half of the session we introduced the 4 worlds activity by leading a discussion on the American dream. Although all the students were aware of the term and familiar with it, most students were unaware of what it meant. We briefly defined the American dream and gave perspective on it by providing examples of various backgrounds that stood at different levels of equity. Further explaining what each of the four worlds meant in context with equality and the american dream i think provided more clarity to the students on the definition and role of the american dream and equality in the american society. Student B was excited to receive a political leader card while Student C mocked student A for being social leader , upon further inquiry student C explained it was funny to him because student A was antisocial. I observed how immediately and sincerely the students took on these roles. However we did face resistance organizing the students into groups. As the activity unfolded, we circulated to monitor their progress. Students were initially puzzled, it was important to remind them that there were no right answers. Several students required defining what investment meant , we defined this for them in both a macro economic sense and on a household level. Within the group consisting of Students D, E, F, and G, D and E were dealing with a separate list from that of F and G. Consequently, we intervened to facilitate a group discussion involving all four students, where they discussed how they individually valued each world in comparison to the others and decided on the composition of their combined list. They were then asked to display their rankings on the whiteboard, grouped according to their respective teams.
To conclude the lesson, we assessed the commonalities and disparities between the lists and prompted them to reflect on how their evaluations of the worlds differed when considered as a single group and then as a unified group.

The resistance encountered when organizing students into groups during the activity revealed the importance of fostering a cooperative and inclusive learning environment. In the next session, we intended to implement strategies to facilitate smoother group formation and ensure that all students are actively participating and engaged.

[Shivangi Vijayakumar]

Session 2 materials : Cultural Relativism and Universal Human Rights
Focus Q: What are human rights and how do we evaluate which human rights takes priority over others?

The class session began with an ice breaker session, but I arrived late due to unforeseen circumstances and regrettably missed this part of the class. I observed a significant and positive change in the classroom atmosphere after the ice breaker session. The students, having participated in this initial activity, appeared more engaged, enthusiastic, and genuinely prepared to allow us to guide them and participate actively in the subsequent discussions and activities.
I arrived in time for the main activity, which was a marketplace exercise. In this activity, students were divided into "buyers" and "sellers" of human rights. Each seller had a set of human rights to sell, and each buyer had a specific budget to purchase these rights. The marketplace activity was engaging and had significant participation.
One of the points of interest during the marketplace activity was the varying success of the students in selling and buying rights. For instance, Student D, a seller, successfully sold all their rights, while Student E, a buyer, was only able to purchase one human right. This showcased the diversity of perspectives among the students and the complexities involved in prioritizing human rights.
I was concerned about student A who was not contributing, when i went up to him he had not bought any rights yet. I encouraged him to buy rights from student B who was sa seller, and ensured he bargained for the rights and participated in the conversation. He was a relatively reserved student and i noticed this from the previous session as well. He settled on the abolition of death penality, and we discussed this right in terms of its opposing views in different states.
One significant factor contributing to the effectiveness of the marketplace activity was the introduction of a reward-based system. In this system, students were assigned roles as buyers and sellers, and they had a budget (in the form of money) to work with. The sellers were tasked with selling human rights to the buyers, while the buyers aimed to purchase these rights with their allocated budget. This turned the exercise into a simulated marketplace where students exchanged money for goods, in this case, human rights.
The introduction of a reward-based system, with a tangible incentive in the form of a limited budget, created a heightened level of engagement among the students. It resonated with scenarios in real life where individuals engage in financial transactions to acquire goods and services. This approach made the concept of human rights more relatable and tangible for the students. It allowed them to put themselves in a situation where they needed to make choices based on their preferences and priorities, similar to how consumers make decisions in everyday life.
To further enrich the perspective of the students, we reconfigured the groups, ensuring that they had an opportunity to experience the activity from different viewpoints. This reshuffling generated a similarly vibrant and engaged atmosphere as before and encouraged them to consider the complexities of human rights issues from various angles.
In the final segment of the session, we conducted a wrap-up discussion, reinforcing the principle that every right should ideally be guaranteed. However, we also acknowledged that real-world scenarios may necessitate the restriction of certain rights in the name of security or stability, a topic that was initially discussed during the opening section of the class.