Deliberation Log Assignment
Note: This assignment is the last in the series associated with development of ethical and effective advocacy skills (particularly those developed in Chapters Three through Six of the text).
Below is the complete text of the Deliberation Log Assignment.
Sections One and Two* (10 Points):
The opening sections of the Deliberation Log include the following elements:
• Key issues
• Commonplaces
• Key terms
• An overview of claims in support of diverse perspectives on each of
the issues
• An overview of evidence in support of diverse perspectives on each of
the issues
• Values and assumptions underlying key claims
Organizational Structure (See pages 206-223 in the text for a sample)
Section One:
• Statement of issues
• Statement of commonplaces
• Key terms with definitions
Section Two A:
1. Key claims in support of diverse positions on Issue One
2. Evidence (with citations) in support of key claims
3. Values and assumptions underlying key claims
Section Two B:
1. Key claims in support of diverse positions on Issue Two
2. Evidence (with citations) in support of key claims
3. Values and assumptions underlying key claims
Criteria for Assessment of Sections One and Two:
• Demonstrates thoughtful consideration of relevant research and class
discussions on the issues
• Provides a thoughtful and reasoned overview of key claims
• Provides credible, reliable, and adequate support for key claims
• Reflects sensitivity to diverse perspectives
• Flows logically
*: Sections One and Two of the assignment require collaboration between all Roundtable group participants. The group is asked to provide a statement from each participant regarding his or her contributions to the project. These brief personal statements should appear as an addendum attached to the deliberation log.
---------------------------------------------------
Section Three (Reflection Questions—5 Points)**:
This section of the deliberation log deepens the capacity for ethical and effective deliberation and advocacy. In this section, you are asked to respond to the following questions:
1. How might relevant perspectives on the subject be informed by individuals’ standpoints? And how might perspectives on the subject be informed by relationships with other standpoints and views? Be sure to use concrete examples to illustrate and support your claims.
2. In preparing for the roundtable and deliberation log assignments, to what extent did the group consider the relevant criticisms of members’ views? Be sure to use concrete examples to illustrate and support your claims.
3. How fully and effectively has the group considered the actual effects of relevant decisions on the lives of those affected? To what extent did the group construct a means of accountability for responding to critique and unintended consequences—both positive and negative—that allows for continued responsible action? Be sure to use concrete examples to illustrate and support your claims.
Criteria for Assessment of Section Three:
• Responds clearly and concisely to each of the reflection questions
• Provides reasoned assessment of beliefs, values, assumptions, and emotions
inherent to the deliberation process
• Demonstrates awareness of the role of standpoint and reflects critically
on its impact for group deliberations
• Demonstrates ability to identify all those who are affected by deliberation
on the subject and its potential outcomes.
• Provides concrete examples to illustrate and support key claims
**:
This section may be completed individually or as a group assignment.