Please type (double-spaced, Times New Roman 12 pt font or equivalent) separate responses to each of the two discussion prompts below. You should number your responses -- no need to weave your question answers into a "paper." I anticipate that your entire paper will be a total of 6-7 pages. Please provide independent responses for each prompt. (That is, when answering #2, you cannot write "see #1" or assume I've read anything in #1.)
Note, your responses will require careful organization and thoughtful analysis. Each of the two discussion prompts should be treated, essentially, like a brief paper.
I will be looking for explicit references to the concepts
and studies you read about in your text and in the articles. Your
responses
should be firmly grounded in (based on) social psychological research.
Give
details of studies where you think those details might be useful to aid
in understanding or illustrating a concept. (I anticipate that you will
provide detail for at least one of the studies you mention.) Feel free
to bring in concepts we learned earlier in the course, but note that I
expect you to make substantial use of this unit's readings.
Cite your sources
properly. In addition to any paragraph breaks you put within
your answers, you should consider each new question a new paragraph and
cite sources accordingly. Include a references page. Staple your pages. No paperclips or folders please.
Your work will be graded on the following criteria: form (following instructions, grammar, etc.), appropriate detail, quality of opinions and claims, use of accurate and appropriate evidence.
Prompt #1:
Comparing
today's America to the America of the 1960's, there appears to be a great
deal of equality and less explicitly expressed
prejudice. Many Americans believe that discriminatory hiring
or college admissions practices are a thing of the past; that there is
now equal opportunity for everyone. This perception is frequently a product of
a person's belief that he or she (and all of his or her friends) is
clearly not prejudiced. In fact, people often deny that race has any role in their perceptions, beliefs or actions and they believe this is the way it should be (i.e., colorblind ideology).
Integrating the information you learned about contemporary prejudice, provide a clear and
well-organized social psychological analysis that addresses this perception that most people are entirely non-prejudiced, and that endorsing a colorblind ideology is an appropriate way to become non-prejudiced.
Prompt #2:
Sometimes people argue that members of underrepresented groups (e.g., Blacks, Latinos,
gays) are just over-reacting when they claim they see prejudice
every day, often in their interpersonal interactions. For example, in the reaction
papers about campus presenters I read, students sometimes suggest the
presenter was "overly sensitive" about issues of
prejudice, or was deliberately interpreting innocent acts as prejudice in order to promote his or her cause. Muhlenberg students are also often surprised and skeptical when they hear their fellow students say that they face frequent prejudice on this campus.
Integrating
the information you learned about the treatment
and perspectives of members of stigmatized groups, provide a clear and
well-organized social psychological analysis addressing this skepticism about reports of prejudice. Try to write your response from the perspective of the person with the stigmatized identity. That is, this question is asking primarily about the experiences of
stigmatized individuals (but you do not have to limit your response to
such research).