Standard approaches to teaching philosophy tend to focus on teaching aspects of philosophy that are important to doing professional philosophy. This paper suggests an alternative to this approach by preparing college students to teach philosophy to elementary school children. After arguing that classics in children’s literature ought to be the primary vehicle for initiating philosophical discussion in elementary school children, an upper-level seminar for undergraduates at Mount Holyoke College that takes this alternative approach is described. Finally, the paper evaluates this alternative approach, contending that this method is more effective than the traditional approach due to the fact that it provides a multi-dimensional learning experience for college-level students.

This paper describes a grading grid (rubric) for argumentative essays consisting of three sections: requirements, content, and mechanics. The first section of the grid verifies whether the student met the minimum requirements of the assignment, e.g. not being plagiarized, being an argumentative essay, etc. The second section of the grid evaluates the content of the essay, looking at parameters concerning whether the thesis is clear, the extent to which it is supported, whether it considers any objections or possible replies, etc. The third and final section of the grid evaluates the mechanics of writing, evaluating parameters like grammar, appropriate length, etc. Finally, the paper details a number of pedagogical benefits to using grading grids and details how best to employ them in the classroom.

This paper describes a ten-year experiment aimed at stopping cheating in the philosophy classroom. In addition to evaluating a number of common approaches to dealing with cheating in the classroom (e.g. punishing students, preventative measures), the author argues that combating cheating requires fostering a rational appreciation of right conduct while acknowledging that such conduct cannot be policed. One way that this conduct is instilled is through “contract grading”, a type of grading where students are graded on how much time they tell the instructor they have spent on the course. After describing and dealing with objections to contract grading, the author argues that its use has a number of important pedagogical benefits, e.g. reducing cheating, enhancing student reading, increasing an appreciation in philosophy, and encouraging dialogue in the classroom.

In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Daubert charged Merrell Dow with creating a drug (Bendectin) that caused birth defects in two infants. In charging Merrell Dow, Daubert relies upon the testimony of a scientific expert who “reanalyzed” a number of studies to show that Bendectin was the cause of said defects. Merrell Dow objected, contending that the “reanalysis” method was not based upon reliable science, to which the judge agreed. Upon appeal, the United States Supreme Court was charged with determining what scientific testimony is reliable enough to be admitted as evidence in court. This paper describes, not only the legal and definitional issues surrounding the Daubert cases but how the Daubert case could be used to prompt discussion about a variety of “what is X?” questions, e.g. “what is science?”, “what is an expert?”, “what is knowledge?”

If one interprets Plato’s dialogues using the dialogical mode, then the principal philosophical significance of the work is not exhausted by the arguments put forward by its characters. Integral to the dialogical mode involves a consideration of the purpose of investigating a philosophical issue in the form of a dialogue rather than a treatise. But Plato’s dialogues should not only be understood in a dialogical mode but instructors should also teach (and students should examine) using this mode of interrogation. This paper describes a new way Plato’s Euthyphro might be taught to students, focusing less on its use as a logical primer and more on the character of Euthyphro.