PURPOSE
Outlining your reading material is a beneficial method for demonstrating that you understand the material you have read. It is a great way to individually review your course material: readings, lectures, articles. Additional benefits of outlining your reading material include:
helps to develop a better understanding of the material you read by:
revealing the basic structure of the text;
distinguishing between main ideas and supporting ideas or examples;
improves your ability to remember what you have read;
provides a study guide for the material you have read.
Before diving deep into the reading, skim through the entire material to get an overview. Pay attention to chapter titles, headings, subheadings, and any summary sections. Identify the subtopics or supporting ideas that fall under each main point. Use capital letters (A, B, C, etc.) to designate these subtopics and indent them under the corresponding main points. There is no one-size-fits-all format for a reading outline, but the typical structure is hierarchical, with main points at the top, followed by subtopics, and supporting details. You can use bullet points, indents, or different font styles to differentiate between different levels of information. After completing each section or chapter of the reading, write a brief summary of what you learned or the key takeaways. This will help reinforce your understanding of the material.
STEPS TO CREATING AN OUTLINE:
Read the assigned chapters from the text (Timeline provided in your course calendar)
Skim the text for an overview of the content’s structure:
Title
Headings
Be able to answer the question: “What is the text talking about?”, in your own words.
What are the key phrases used in each paragraph?
What are the critical supporting details in each section?
Key concepts/definitions. Application beyond what is noted in the textbook
BEST PRACTICES
Do not use the text’s exact words when creating your outline. Use paraphrasing and summarizing to restate the topics and information.
For help paraphrasing and summarizing, visit Integrating Sources into your Paper
Review your outline by comparing it with the original text to insure that:
you followed the sequence of the reading;
no important information was missed.
HOW TO ORGANIZE
Logically organize information using Roman numerals, capital letters, and arabic numerals to represent the hierarchy of the levels. Papers should be submitted in Times New Roman, 12 point font, double-spaced. Examples of how to create outlines is noted below:
Level 1: Group Name (Subject Matter) of related Topic Sentences; label with Roman numerals (I, II, III, IV, V, …)
Level 2: Topic Sentences; label with capital letters (A, B, C, D, E, …)
Level 3: Supporting details; label with Arabic numbers (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, …), or bullet points.
EXPECTATIONS
The document should be uploaded as a PDF or Word document.
It should be written in Times New Roman, 12 point font, and double-spaced, and a minimum of 1-page long.
Your outline should be on one of the assigned chapters from Module 3, 2, or 1. Remember, it would only have to be a section of the chapter. For example, Social Research chapter has 3 sections: 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3. 2.2 in itself would count as one outline. You would then be tasked with selecting a section from a different chapter. Perhaps one of the sections under the chapter on culture?
Once you’ve completed the reading outline, review it to ensure it accurately reflects the content. Make any necessary adjustments or additions to improve its clarity and coherence.
Code of Ethics Lecture
The Code of Ethics (the Code) of the American Sociological Association (ASA or the Association)
sets forth the principles and ethical standards that underlie sociologists’ scientific and professional responsibilities and conduct. These principles and standards should be used as guidelines when examining everyday scientific and professional activities. They constitute normative statements for sociologists and provide guidance on issues that sociologists may encounter in their work.
Now, I don’t expect you to memorize the code. This is just an introduction course informing you that they exist.
The ASA Code of Ethics consists of the following six principles:
Professional competence
Integrity
Professional and scientific responsibility
Respect for people’s rights, dignity, and diversity
Social responsibility
Human rights
In addition to the six principles, there are nineteen ethical standards, covering the following topics: competence, representation and misuse of expertise, delegation and supervision, discrimination, exploitation, harassment, employment decisions, conflicts of interest and commitment, public communications, confidentiality, informed consent, research planning, implementation, and dissemination, plagiarism, authorship, publication process, responsibilities of reviewers, education, teaching, and training, contractual and consulting services, and adherence to the code of ethics.
The ethical standards that relate most to the research process itself are: confidentiality, informed consent, research planning, implementation, and dissemination. These principles require that researchers maintain objectivity and integrity in research, respect subjects’ rights to privacy and dignity, and protect subjects from personal harm. Researchers must also seek informed consent, preserve confidentially, and then when reporting on the research, acknowledge collaboration and assistance as well as any sources of financial support.
Each of these principles and ethical standards have detailed descriptions and parameters in the 2018 ASA Code of Ethics.
Unfortunately, when these codes of ethics are ignored, it creates an unethical environment for humans being involved in a sociological study.
Below are some of the most popular studies typically highlighted when it comes to ethics. Review the studies and be able to summarize what ethical standards were violated in each:
The Tuskegee Experiment: This study was conducted 1932 in Macon County, Alabama, and included 600 African American men, including 399 diagnosed with syphilis. The participants were told they were diagnosed with a disease of “bad blood.” The men were monitored by health workers but only given placebos such as aspirin and mineral supplements, despite the fact that penicillin became the recommended treatment for syphilis in 1947, some 15 years into the study. PHS researchers convinced local physicians in Macon County not to treat the participants, and instead, research was done at the Tuskegee Institute. In order to track the disease’s full progression, researchers provided no effective care as the men died, went blind or insane or experienced other severe health problems due to their untreated syphilis.
Henrietta Lacks: Ironically, this study was conducted at the hospital associated with Johns Hopkins University, where codes of the ethics originated. In 1951, Henrietta Lacks was receiving treatment for cervical cancer at John Hopkins Hospital, and doctors discovered that she had “immortal” cells, which could reproduce rapidly and indefinitely, making them extremely valuable for medical research. Without her consent, doctors collected and shared her cells to produce extensive cell lines. Lacks’ cells were widely used for experiments and treatments, including the polio vaccine, and were put into mass production. Today, these cells are known worldwide as HeLa cells (Shah, 2010). Henrietta’s story raises questions about ethics, race, and genetics. The book encourages the reader to think about the dark history of experimentation on African Americans, the birth of bioethics, and the legal battles over who owns and controls genetic material. Henrietta’s family lived in poverty and never received any of the financial benefits derived from their mother’s tumor cells.
Milgram ExperimentLinks to an external site.: In 1961, psychologist Stanley Milgram conducted an experiment at Yale University. Its purpose was to measure the willingness of study subjects to obey an authority figure who instructed them to perform acts that conflicted with their personal conscience. People in the role of teacher believed they were administering electric shocks to students who gave incorrect answers to word-pair questions. No matter how concerned they were about administering the progressively more intense shocks, the teachers were told to keep going. The ethical concerns involve the extreme emotional distress faced by the teachers, who believed they were hurting other people. (Vogel 2014). Milgram’s experiment demonstrated the power of authority and how someone in a position of authority can influence people to behave unethically and against their wishes.
Philip Zimbardo and the Stanford prison experiment:Links to an external site. In 1971, psychologist Phillip Zimbardo conducted a study involving students from Stanford University. The students were put in the roles of prisoners and guards, and were required to play their assigned role accordingly. The experiment was intended to last two weeks, but it only last six days due to the negative outcome and treatment of the “prisoners.” Beyond the ethical concerns, the study’s validity has been questioned after participants revealed they had been coached to behave in specific ways.
https://www.prisonexp.org/faq#google_vignette
