Rules are Arguments
Author Quotes
Meet the Ambassadors
- 8AM CLASS
- Adam Reim
- 930 CLASS
- Elijah Huey
Housekeeping
- Orientation Checklist
- Get up-to-date with your contact obligations, please.
Riddle
Housekeeping / Mechanics
Class Notes
What are Good Notes?
What you write in your daily Class Notes (recorded as Replies to the daily Agenda) is a report about What I Learned as contrasted with What Happened.
The difference between “What Happened” and “What I Learned”:
- What Happened: We got into groups to discuss the Island of Stone Money topic.
- What I Learned: Realized the importance of studying the source materials when they’re assigned, before coming to class. Found out some of my classmates are well prepared.
- What Happened: We went into detail about how the class will use certain features on the blog.
- What I Learned: Discovered that when I publish, I need to put my posts into categories (my Username, the name of the assignment).
- What Happened: Had class discussion on the topic of money.
- What I Learned: Instructor expects us to interact with the source material, not just summarize or cite it. “As much a thinking course as a writing course.”
Why Class Notes Matter
Later in the course, we’ll make a similar distinction between What the Author Talked About, and What the Author Claimed.
- What the Author talked about: The Author made several observations about the effect on the environment of burning huge amounts of fossil fuel.
(This summary wastes 18 words telling us nothing.)
- What the Author claimed: The Author blamed the continuing irresponsible burning of fossil fuel for the catastrophic rise in the temperature of the globe.
(This summary tells us in 20 words what argument the Author made.)
Class Discussion
- The Stanford Prison “Experiment”
- Start Now to take Class Notes that record NOT “that we talked about the experiment,” but what claims were made by you and your classmates, why you were right, why they were wrong, and what you learned during the discussion.
Today’s New Tasks
My Hypothesis
- First Draft due before class MON SEP 18 (11:59pm SUN SEP 17)
Stone Money
- Read and Listen to the Source Material before class WED SEP 13
- Listen to the Invention of Money podcast.
- Pod 1, Pod 2, Pod 3
- Read the accompanying brief source materials.
- Start with “Island of Stone Money” by Milton Friedman
- Be prepared for class discussion and 10-question quiz
- Listen to the Invention of Money podcast.
- First Draft of Stone Money task due midnight SUN SEP 24.
Looking for the Stone Money Material? Find it by scrolling the sidebar until you see this:
777sunflower777
babyyoda1023
bloguser246
Urbie
ANONYMOUS
coldice234
confusedpinky
coolraccoon318
davidbdale
eric cartman
gingerbreadman27
hdt1817
hockeyplayer
hotgirlsemester
hurtnowitzki
koolsaxophone
ichverdustehier
indigo143
jreggie20
kevinjames
ladybug122718
laflame
maxxpayne
millycain
nothingxtoxsay
planefan25
propel78
puffer
rebelpilot64
stoneharbor91
sunflower828
JetsFan2
thad711
thefirstmclovin
TheFrogSprog
thekidfrombrooklyn
tonysoprano44
chich_
youngthug03
Counterintuitive Fall 2023 
Theres no such thing as an empty bottle of Scotch because a bottle of Scotch contains Scotch, isn’t not empty, but if it were empty, it would just be a bottle. Or it could be a bottle that used to contain scotch but it cannot be considered empty if the bottle is using language considered to have contained something.
wrong part
I see the rest of your Daily Notes below, EC.
—DSH
when the bottle is empty is no longer a bottle of scotch it’s now an empty scotch bottle
Well said. Brief and clear. 🙂
—DSH
I think that Zimbardo went wrong in his experiment by using random people for the roles of guards and by leaving them unchecked by upper-positioned outside forces. The experiment was supposed to test the mentality of people in military prisons and society especially the military have rules and rules dictate what is allowed to happen. While this may not have been a real prison it was especially worse because there were no laws dictating what they were allowed and not allowed to do to the prisoners. The life-changing nature of the experiment has also affected everyone involved through their mentality as it changed the course of one man’s entire career as he chose to be a Prison guard after the fact. Many different better ways of going about the experiment were discussed such as how the sadism of the guards could have been curbed through the threat of their being potentially switched to the opposite positions.
These Notes are full of meaty content, FrogSprog.
May I suggest that a few weeks from now you might have a hard time figuring out what you meant by the last sentence. You say:
I think you mean:
Grade 3/3 —DSH
It went into detail how cruel and how unprofessional the experiment was. It was very flawed and how long the experiment went on for. The prisoners were completely mistreated and abused and the guards made very abusive mistakes and something interesting to talk about was that the volunteers thought they were an actual prison after just a couple hours.
These Notes are a little light, CoolRaccoon, and vague in their claims. A reader of your Notes would not be able to distinguish between mistreatment, abuse, and an abusive mistake, for example. Your statement about “how long the experiment went on for” doesn’t indicate whether you mean the experiment went on too long or was cut short.
Grade 2/3 —DSH
The class claims that the prisoners and guards both could have suffered mental long lasting effects from the treatment throughout the experiment. The idea of switching between guard and prisoner was brought up and if you were a prisoner at first, then would you go for revenge or would there have been a warning before hand so that they would all be able to adjust their behavior beforehand. Switching between guard and prisoner would lessen the effect of this particular experiment but there could be other uses for it.
I admire your technique of pointing out actual claims, KJ. You’ve identified a couple of interesting proposals that are worth noting and remembering. Your last sentence is confusing. By “this particular experiment” I think you mean the original Zimbardo flavor (not the “switching roles” version), but it could mean either. That confusion makes understanding what you mean by “other uses for it” harder to interpret. (Yes, I’m extraordinarily picky. I hope it helps and isn’t merely annoying.) Notes needn’t be lengthy, but if they’re short, they need to be crystal clear.
Grade 2/3 —DSH
I agree, the last part of my comment which refers to the the idea of switching roles for the prisoners as a different experiment, while “this particular experiment” does refer to the original experiment. I will be more specific in upcoming notes.
Class notes:
(Pre discussion)-We went over how to take good and bad notes and I realized how bad of a note taker I am. This then lead me to think about how I can go more in depth with any notes I take in the future.
-The effect would have been different with a study group with woman instead of men.
-He did prove that if you put people in a specific area and force something onto them, with enough time, they actually believe they are actually a part of whatever is going on.
-Zimbardo was assuming the roll of the prison superintendent and he knew exactly what was going on in the basement. He abused the power he had.
-The guards took a lot of advantage over the prisoners even though they were all the same and all just doing the experiment.
-The experiment actually changed people’s lives. One of the guards actually took that and made it his career when he was released.
-The prisoners and guards should have been switched randomly to give both parties that authority.
-I learned that dehumanization is a real thing and as soon as these people went into this experiment, they weren’t themselves anymore. They were known by their number, they were given harsh punishments and were starting to have mental breakdowns. More training with the guards would have been very beneficial to lessen the amount of physical and mental pain the prisoners endured.
From your Notes, a reader already familiar with the Zimbardo experiment would get a pretty good idea how the classroom conversation went. A reader unfamiliar with the experiment wouldn’t have a clue. You appear to be suggesting ways to “improve” the experiment without considering whether Zimbardo wanted a “better” or more humane outcome. What do you think? Did he want well-behaved guards, or was he hoping for brutality to prove his hypothesis (whatever that was)?
Grade 3/3 —DSH
You’re not obligated to respond, but I’d be happy if you did. 🙂
I honestly think he genuinely wanted well-behaved guards but, I also believe he was hoping for a little bit of brutality. I don’t think he wanted the guards to be AS aggressive as they were if that makes sense.
That’s a reasonable position. Maybe he thought raised voices and verbal humiliation would be quantifiable and prove his point. Which raises the question, “Can we trust an experiment when the experimenter has a point to prove?”
I believe the intensity of the experiment came unexpectedly quick, it shows how fast people can conform to their roles they are given. I liked that we discussed how different things could have gone based off gender, and I do believe the gender was partially the reason for the intense treatment. I liked how a student brought up that if they switched roles halfway through, If the prisoners would rebel against the guards, or would they act softer towards the new prisoners after experiencing such gruesome treatment? There are many factors playing into the guards behavior towards the prisoners. The age is a huge factor due to the immaturity level and typical lack of authority, many young people might get what they call a power trip, where they have more power than most peers their age causing them to take advantage of it.
Solid stuff, EC. Your sentence structure is messy; I could advise you on how to untangle the syntax problems and eliminate the run-ons if you want me to. Others might benefit, too, if they’re paying attention. Your call.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Thank you for the input, I agree I needed to layout my sentences better. I had the right Idea that just needed to be executed better. Any advice or tricks would help, I agree others may benefit.
I’ll drop a few observations here.
I believe the intensity of the experiment came unexpectedly quick, it shows how fast people can conform to their roles they are given.
—This is a “comma splice,” the type of run-on sentence that separates clauses with a comma. The fix is to recognize it’s really two sentences, which you can present several ways.
—I believe the intensity of the experiment came unexpectedly quickly. It shows how fast people can conform to their roles they are given.
—I believe the intensity of the experiment came unexpectedly quickly; it shows how fast people can conform to their roles they are given.
—I believe the intensity of the experiment came unexpectedly quickly, which shows how fast people can conform to their roles they are given.
Or revise:
—The rapid deterioration into violence shows how fast people can conform to their roles they are given.
I liked how a student brought up that if they switched roles halfway through, If the prisoners would rebel against the guards, or would they act softer towards the new prisoners after experiencing such gruesome treatment?
—You have two “if”s here. If they switched if they would rebel, would they act? The fix is to eliminate one.
—If the prisoners and guards switched roles halfway through, would the new prisoners rebel against the guards, or would the new guards act softer towards the new prisoners after experiencing gruesome treatment themselves?
You’ll recognize this as another comma splice:
The age is a huge factor due to the immaturity level and typical lack of authority, many young people might get what they call a power trip, where they have more power than most peers their age causing them to take advantage of it.
“Many young people” starts a new sentence. The fixes are the same as before. Or:
Immature young people who generally lack authority might go on a “power trip” and abuse their new positions.
(I do understand that, when writing Notes AND attending to the classroom discussion, it’s not possible to ALSO polish your sentences, which is why you’re still earning 3/3 for yours.)
– It was mentioned in class that the participants only participated to learn from the experiment and not to benefit from the incentive of money, I don’t believe this is true because money just makes everything more appealing so I’m sure their participation may not have been guaranteed if there had been no financial incentive.
– It was agreed upon in class that a different group of people for example, an all women group or a mixed race group would have had different results. It was even stated that women would not have shown such abysmal levels of cruelty and brutality.
– We discussed the strange nature of Zimbardo settling into his role and how it greatly affected the guards and prisoners by giving them the proclivity to settle into their roles and use whatever powers they have for extremely abusive measures.
– We discussed how modern prison systems torture inmates into compliance rather than rehabilitate prisoners to live better lives once they are released. Once you commit a crime it is statistically hard to not become a repeat offender so this experiment just goes to show how the power dynamic of guards vs. prisoners leads to a broken system.
– We discussed how this experiment permanently altered the lives of the participants, a classmate brought up an example of how one of the participants actually went on to become a prison guard. So we questioned, would any of the participants lives have turned out differently? Such as careers or the need for therapy or how many of the participants may still have PTSD to this day.
– We discussed how this experiment caused the distortion of reality and how fast the whole experiment became so real for every participant.
– We questioned what the experiment would be like if the prisoner/guard roles were reversed. Would the participants who were prisoners first become more lenient guards because they experienced torture or would they seek vengeance? There were answers on both sides of the argument from classmates.
– Someone suggested that if they were to switch roles that it should be mentioned to all participants before the experiment took place.
– Someone mentioned how switching roles from guard to prisoner wouldn’t necessarily make sense for the sake of the experiment because it sets a precedent on how to act rather than let the participants act how they normally would by participating in the experiment.
These are extraordinary Notes, HDT. I could quibble about some rhetorical shortcomings if you’re interested in inching closer to perfect. Otherwise, very nice work. Let me know if you want the red ink.
Grade 4/3 —DSH
Sure! Thank you!
The Stanford Experiment was something that was cruel and felt as if it was for the money.They treated inmates as animals ,less human than the guards.The guards abused their power over the inmates.Mental health was a big issue because you don’t know what is going through others mind and what their motives could be.They were volunteers with no experience and were left alone.It was supposed to last two weeks or so but it only lasted two days.
Nothing wrong with what you’ve said here, Reggie, but it’s light. See what you can pick up about better Notes from reading your classmates’.
Punctuation note: you need a word space to follow every period:
power over the inmates. Mental health
NOT
power over the inmates.Mental health.
Wordpress will warn you with a jaggedy red underline when you make that mistake.
Grade 2/3 —DSH
. Zimbardo’s prison experiment would have been different with a more diverse study group without handpicking people they thought would be better for the experiment to get what they wanted
. The experiment wouldn’t have escalated the way it did if the experiment
. When Someone tells you to do something and gives you and told you are supposed to use makes you want to use it
. Switching the prisoner and guard dynamics would change the experiment to its core and could have possibly lead to a circle of revenge or a cycle of passivity within the prison.
Intriguing if not always successful Notes, ANON.
• “different” is a very weak claim. What effect do you suggest the experimenters “wanted”?
• I have no idea what your second bullet is going for.
• I’m getting lost in the syntax here.
• “change the experiment” is another weak claim, but I love the music of “circle of revenge” and “cycle of passivity.”
Grade 2/3 —DSH
(Want to know the trick of creating bulleted lists in html?)
Thankyou for the feedback I will try to improve on my future notes
The consensus of the class was that Professor Zimbardo was completely unprofessional. The experiment was poorly conducted and there were no checks and balances. Using students was also a bad idea because they may not be considered fully mature to get accurate results. The experiment was funded by the US Navy, they should’ve had more people on the experiment to make sure it was done lawfully and more importantly humanely.
Brief but not bad, Keval.
PLEEEAASE create an anonymous username if you want any privacy at all regarding my feedback on the blog. I will be blunt in my assessments either way.
“Using students” is only a bad idea if you don’t want to demonstrate something about students, or young men. Are we clear on what Zimbardo wanted to demonstrate?
Grade 2/3 —DSH
Thank you Professor Hodges,
I appreciate the feedback, I think Zimbardo wanted to investigate whether the relationship between guards and prisoners was influenced by their environment or personality.
The Stanford prison experiment only proves how people react and adjust given their specific roles in a specific circumstance Someone in the class made a point that I really agree with, which is that if the whole experiment would have been setup in a way that would involve switching roles and they were told about it beforehand, the outcome would have been entirely different and last longer. The proper oversight was in utter absence and the fact that the professor himself got so much in his character, he could not differentiate between reality and made up prison scenario. That proves people will always use their power rush given the time, place and opportunity.
I agree with your claims, Maxx, but I can’t tell if you think Zimbardo had some sort of obligation to eliminate the chaos or rather that making the guards more humane would have violated the very setup and anticipated outcome? You don’t have to respond, but you could pick up another point if you want to engage here.
Grade 2/3 —DSH
I think Zimbardo had more of an obligation towards his role as the head of the experiment rather than his role as the prison superintendent. His reality had been distorted along with the participants, which he accepted himself. But the responsibility he had on his shoulders required him to be more self conscious in the whole experiment.
Thanks for the clarification, Maxx.
Grade Changed 3/3 —DSH
-We started with a discussion if all text is argument and we came to the conclusion that it is.
– Began to talk about Stanford Prison experiment, experiment was supposed to be two week long research of regular people being guards and prisoners. Phillip Zimbardo led the experiment, and we came to the conclusion that who was in the experiment really affected the outcome. Also how interesting it was that Zimbardo led the experiment and saw what was happening and failed to step in and end the madness. Discussed how guards took advantage of their power and let it get in their heads hence the horrible actions they took. Went over how it only took 36 hours for over half the prisoners to leave for a two week experiment, and how there were next to none outside influences. Some lessons we can take away from this were, there needs to be more outside influence and the mental health of both sides needs to be monitored.
Maybe we took away that lesson, but who’s to say how any experiment should be conducted? If my goal is to study how people react when they aren’t well supervised, then it would be counterproductive to plan well and train them better, wouldn’t it? You don’t have to respond, but you could pick up another point if you want to engage here.
Grade 2/3 —DSH
An experiment should have a minimum amount of safety involved which they failed to have here. And what I meant by training was to have the bare minimum knowledge, just so this tragic stuff don’t happen.
That’s much clearer. Thanks, HP!
Grade Changed 3/3 —DSH
My Takeaways: Today I learned how inflection and word order have importance to the meaning of a sentence. Applying this to the first image “All Text is Argument”, word choice and orientation can strengthen or weaken the persuasion of your statement. Another application was in the riddle. At first glance the riddle, “Why is there no such thing as an empty bottle of Scotch,” seems to be impossible, but once thinking through you realize that there is no such thing as an empty bottle of Scotch, but really an empty Scotch bottle.
Class discussion: I think there was a really interesting idea brought up in this discussion, the idea of how a woman was the one who had to end this experiment. Through the course of six days all participants assumed their roles as reality even the lead psychologist Zimbardo who knew the entire process still felt this shift in reality.
Another good point that I liked was how one of the participants ended up choosing their career potentially based on this experiment role. This shows the lasting effects of the experiment on participating individuals’ reality.
An idea that was discussed that I want to expand on was switching roles in the experiment. Two variations of this idea were discussed: random switching or scheduled switch. I think random switching was more influential than the scheduled switch. I believe this because not knowing when this would happen would most likely keep people in check. Unsure of who will be switched at what time both prisoners and guards would be more conscious about their actions towards the other participants.
I love that you’re wrestling with the subject matter here, pinky.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Thank you! I found this experiment really interesting and wanted to delve more into the what if.
In today’s class, we started off with 2 quotes, one being “all text is argument”, and “a writer is someone for whom writing is more difficult than it is for others”. When you think about it, all text is an argument in some way, an example being parking signs arguing that you can or can’t park somewhere. The second quote explains that people who are passionate about writing may have a harder time perfecting their work, whereas people who don’t care can write without caring about the outcome.
Next, a former student of Professor Hodges’ named Adam told us what to expect from the class. He let us know that we have 3 main essays and some other shorter essays about articles or other texts.
We then looked a riddle that asked “why is there no such thing as an empty bottle of scotch?” We discussed that if a bottle is a “bottle of scotch,” then it could not be empty.
We discussed that it’s important to take good notes about the claims made in class rather than just saying what was talked about. We should type in the notes what information was learned rather than just claiming “we talked about ____”.
Next, we discussed the Stanford Prison Experiment as a class. One claim that was made was that the experiment may have played out differently if the guards and prisoners were all women. One person said that the experiment proved that when put in certain roles, many will assume their roles. It also showed that when some people are given power, they will take advantage of it. Someone said that one of the “guards” ended up choosing a prison guard as his career later on. If the experiment hadn’t happened, this guard wouldn’t have become what he did. An idea that was brought up was if the prisoners and guards had been switched randomly. Would the prisoners who became the guards be less harsh because of what they went through, or would they get even more brutal to get revenge on the guards. If everyone was told that they would switch between guards and prisoners, the guards probably would be less brutal because they knew their actions would have consequences. Someone else argued that if they switched between roles, the whole point of the experiment would be lost, because real prison guards aren’t randomly put in prison.
Lastly, we went over due dates coming up this next week. Our hypothesis rough draft is due Monday, September 18th, and by Wednesday, September 27th, we must meet with Professor Hodges on a mandatory Zoom meeting. We looked at an experiment about ants, and testing whether or not ants count their steps to navigate. The scientists glued stilts to the ants and they overshot the distance, proving the hypothesis that ants count their steps to navigate. This relates to how we must find a way to argue or prove our own hypothesis in our writing.
Beautiful stuff, ColdIce!
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Notes:
-All text is argument
-Take notes here
-Take an idea and simplify it (Writing good drafts)
-Be careful with your writing and ensure that it makes sense. (Empty Bottle of Scotch example)
SPE
-Would people have caused more long term issues if the experiment continued?
-Would the outcome have been different if a different sex group was used? Would women have been more chill? Would Women have started different kinds of issues? Would people have had different relations?
-The power and evil took over and almost brainwashed them into thinking that this is their life.
-Lack of knowledge and experience took control and gave these guards ideas on punishments but there was no ruling in place to prevent them from this.
-How much of a different path could the experiment have taken if the guards and prisoners switched? I could see a lot of “revenge” taking place and it going very violent
Homework:
-First draft of hypothesis due next Monday. (make sure you test it as well)
-Complete “Stone Money” (Listen to podcasts)
Very nice, Puffer. But do be careful of vagueness. There’s no advantage to making a broad general claim that requires immediate clarification if you can be specific in the first case and eliminate the need to clarify.
Vague plus followup:
There was a reason the pilot wasn’t able to navigate the storm clouds successfully. He was not just hungover but still drunk from the night before.
Specific from the start
The pilot failed to navigate the storm clouds because he was drunk from the night before.
Vagueness(es) in your Notes:
-Would people have caused more long term issues if the experiment continued?
-Would the outcome have been different if a different sex group was used? Would women have been more chill? Would Women have started different kinds of issues? Would people have had different relations?
-The power and evil took over and almost brainwashed them into thinking that this is their life.
-Lack of knowledge and experience took control and gave these guards ideas on punishments but there was no ruling in place to prevent them from this.
-How much of a different path could the experiment have taken if the guards and prisoners switched? I could see a lot of “revenge” taking place and it going very violent.
Is that helpful?
Grade 3/3 —DSH
today notes class. (9/11/23)
. learn how to take notes in the right way.
. discuss a picture of a scotch bottle and a cup.
the big discussion in the class was about the Stanford prison experiment.
how they live
The power of the guards
The effect of the prison system on the prisoner
The group of students who did the research was the most surprising thing.
The difference between prisoners and prisoners they are not all the same.
the teacher mentioned what will be the feeling of guard after doing all that horrible action to the prisoner. (It was a good point to think about it)
We end the class with the teacher sharing the homework for next week
(homework My Hypothesis
First Draft due before class MON SEP 18 (11:59 pm SUN SEP 17)
(Homework for Wednesday Stone Money
Read and Listen to the Source Material before class on SEP 13
Listen to the Invention of Money podcast.
Pod 1, Pod 2, Pod 3
Read the accompanying brief source materials.
Start with “Island of Stone Money” by Milton Friedman
Be prepared for class discussion and a 10-question quiz.
Thank you for the work you put in on today’s Notes, Urbie, but you don’t appear to have followed the advice.
Bad Notes:
. learn how to take notes in the right way.
. discuss a picture of a scotch bottle and a cup.
the big discussion in the class was about the Stanford prison experiment.
how they live
The power of the guards
The effect of the prison system on the prisoner
These are all examples of “What Happened.” What you want to record instead is “What I Learned.”
These are better:
The group of students who did the research was the most surprising thing.
The difference between prisoners and prisoners they are not all the same.
the teacher mentioned what will be the feeling of guard after doing all that horrible action to the prisoner. (It was a good point to think about it)
Also not needed are these repetitions of what’s in the Agenda and the assignments themselves:
We end the class with the teacher sharing the homework for next week
(homework My Hypothesis
First Draft due before class MON SEP 18 (11:59 pm SUN SEP 17)
(Homework for Wednesday Stone Money
Read and Listen to the Source Material before class on SEP 13
Listen to the Invention of Money podcast.
Pod 1, Pod 2, Pod 3
Read the accompanying brief source materials.
Start with “Island of Stone Money” by Milton Friedman
Be prepared for class discussion and a 10-question quiz.
Grade 2/3 —DSH
thank you for your response and the example of how to write better notes Im going to make better notes each times after this comments
Stanford Prison Experiment notes
– A possibility people wanted to do it was for money -> $15 a day was a lot of money during that time period.
– Only white male people were included in this experiment… Possibly different outcomes could occur if the “prisoners” were female.
– The mental aspects really were severe and almost go under the radar -> the person actually chose to become a real prison guard.
– A student made a great point about how the chance of the coin could have changed the entire experiment -> would it have been worse if the “prisoners” were the “guards”
– Went into detail about previous note -> how would the new guards/ old prisoners react? Forcefully? peacefully?
– Zimbardo’s mindset -> he was watching, NOT participating, but he was so invested even he went blind
– Took a fresh eye to realize how out of control the experiment has gone.
You’re not obligated to write Notes as if they were supposed to explain everything to a non-classmate, JetsFan, but it helps to practice using just enough details to provide context. That skill will be invaluable for writing “Purposeful Summaries” in everything we do here.
So, when you’re writing about THIS episode . . .
– A student made a great point about how the chance of the coin could have changed the entire experiment -> would it have been worse if the “prisoners” were the “guards”
– Went into detail about previous note -> how would the new guards/ old prisoners react? Forcefully? peacefully?
. . . it’s clear a driveby reader would have no idea the topic was “guards and prisoners switching places.” Just a few words can supply enough context.
A student suggested that if, after a few days, prisoners became guards and vice versa on the basis of a coin flip, the brutality might have been worse. The “new guards” might want to revenge themselves with force for the way they were treated as prisoners.
I don’t truly expect you to compose rhetorically beautiful sentences all the way through your class Notes, JF, but the more you exercise on these little observations, the more skill you bring to your important posts.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
What would happen if the roles of the guards and inmates were switched? What if the inmates treat the guards the same way they treat them? Then the guards would know what it was like instead. The experiment not happening at all. The ad shows what they would be doing if they chose to partake in the experiment. The people who chose to do it were to blame even though they didn’t know what they were signing up for. Zimbro told the guards to ramp it up some more as they weren’t getting the results they wanted. Zimbro could have tampered with the experiment as he was seen as the warden in charge during the experiment. They could have punished them in a different way instead of dehumanizing them. If the roles had been switched in the prison, then it would have been worse as the inmates would treat the guards even worse than they did them as inmates. But it would have changed the experiment a lot even if they put some rules in place they would find a way around it.
These Notes engage nicely with the subject matter of the classroom discussion, Ladybug.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Thank You!
Class notes
– I learned no matter the person placed in the experiment the outcome wouldn’t have changed.
– When people are given power they are bound to misuse it no matter who it is.
– I learned an argument can be made that if the whole experiment was replaced with one gender, the outcome would change. (Experiment would be shorter)
– Men are more willing to put up with a deteriorated environment than women.
– If the roles were switched at random periodically the experiment would not find the results it was after. The guards would be more cautious at what they did to the prisoners and vice versa if there was a known switch.
– Guards would most likely feel guilt, and feel traumatic about the whole experiment with the prisoners.
The Notes are fine, Tony, but I have a question for you:
What’s WRONG about conducting an “experiment” that commits in advance to “the results it’s after”?
Won’t the experimenter be MUCH more likely to INTERPRET the outcomes AS IF they satisfied expectations or the “desired result”?
In other words, is it even an experiment if meeting expectations is considered a success and any less is failure?
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Thank you. The problem with conducting an experiment with hopes to find a specific outcome defeats the whole purpose of setting up and watching the experiment unfold. This causes the number of outcomes to drop, as parameters in the experiment might be set up for one desired goal.
🙂
Stanford Experiment Notes:
The college students that were the participants most likely needed money and 15$ back then was worth a lot more. Also something that may have took a wrong turn was maybe Zimbardo tampering with the experiment making it more serious and realistic. Although they didn’t punish them physically they use mental dehumanizing tactics to mess with the prisoners slowly turning them insane. Everyone in the experiment slowly started to go blind and think they were actually their parts in the prison even the head of the experiment believed he was the superintendent.
These are fine, Thad, but this is about the minimum amount of Note-taking that qualifies as complete engagement. The grade curve will get a little tougher as the semester progresses.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
my main takeaways of the day started off from when class started, and Professor Hodges tore up a piece of paper to show how unimportant first drafts are and how first drafts should be taken. we then had a guest speaker come in to talk about the class and what we should be expecting this semester. along with that he talked about what good note taking looks like and how we should use a “what happened- what I learned” mentality for taking notes throughout class. The next topic of discussion was the Stanford prison experiment. the main thing questioned was how humane the experiment was and mainly talking about how these people reacted and if we were put into that situation how we would react personally. another big question of the day was if the experiment was conducted with women, how would things have gone differently. some people believed that it could have gone much worse and could have caused more issues. at the end of the class, we talked about my hypothesis and that it needs to be in by next Monday for a rough draft. we are going to write a paper of three thousand words and ten pages. it will be split up into three different angles that will all be put together. we are going to write one thousand words on stone money in two days, listen to the podcasts.
I have absolutely no idea who you are, ojasndjbaid, and that’s not good.
Your Notes are thorough without being particularly satisfying. They describe lots of questions but no answers and your own point of view is missing almost everywhere. Your essays will all be written to showcase your own BOLD CLEAR CLAIMS. The daily Agenda Notes are where you practice that process. Say what you think!
Grade 3/3 —DSH
completely understandable I will make these changes in upcoming notes and essays to exclaim my own ideas better.
Todays Notes : 9/11/23
Professor opened up class ripping a piece of construction paper in efforts to display how worthless a first draft is. Implying that they have little to no significance to him. Later in the class we began a discussion about the validity of The Stanford Experiment. When I discussed the experiment with my nearby classmates all 3 we all pretty much had the same mindset that this experiment was a route for disaster all from the start. We all believed the moment that any dehumanizing or violent tactics were involved someone should’ve stepped in. Which led me to the question “Was this prison scenario the best route for the Professor to get the answer to his question?”
Well, that depends entirely on what the question was. Or, more accurately, it seems to me, it depends on what the professor SET OUT TO DEMONSTRATE. The difference is entirely relevant to this course. Zimbardo didn’t conduct an experiment, he set out to show that his view of humanity was correct and he got the result he hoped for. Agree?
You’ll face the same choice writing your Researched Position Paper. Do you gather and cherry-pick evidence to “prove” a thesis you had before you started? Or do you research to discover an unexpected truth you can share with readers? Only one has value.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
– Make sure notes describe what you learned and how the information impacted you, which allows for a deeper meaning and an explanation of what resonated with you to be revealed, making greater notes that you may not take in other classes.
– The difference between “what I learned” and “what happened” is that what I learned is something that follows a what happened statement, so there needs to be an explanation to follow providing information about your take away.
– The difference between men and women in the experiment was asked, and the conclusion was drawn within group conversation that women and men would not have been different since the situation and the guidelines and the experiments would have been the exact same and the power could have impacted the participants the same way.
– The theory of the Professor tampering the outcome of the experiment was proposed and other opinions were spoken about, exposing the pieces of evidence from the outside sources that mentioned the professor being the warden was what escalated the experiment.
– If the roles were reversed halfway through the experiment, the experiment would have been changed radically and the whole entire dynamic would have been different. The people who were prisoners first would treat the new group of prisoners with more violence as a form of “payback”.
– If asked about the experiment today, the participants most likely would have been ashamed of their behaviors and that may vary depending on who was asked (prisoner or guard).
Very nice, Sunflower, bordering on 4/3. The reason it doesn’t make that mark is complex and might require a conversation.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Thank you! I will be sure to touch base with you so I can achieve the 4/3 next time!
I must improve my notetaking. say what you learned. importance of studying source materials beforehand found some classmates are more prepared than me. be clear and brief and let the brilliant idea work for itself.
The Stanford Prison Experiment. Zimbardo had the research subjects roleplay being prisoners and guards but didn’t put any limits as to what the guards could do so it went to their heads almost immediately, guards became abusive and prisoners became psychologically submissive. dehumanization, no bed, no food, referred to as numbers. Zimbardo got so into it it needed an uninvolved person for him to see how out of control the experiment had gotten. question professionalism on Zimbardo, how much was $15 in 1971? $113.22 in today’s money. was the one prisoner that wanted to go back in it for the money?
I wonder what would’ve happened if no one had stepped in to stop it. How abusive would the guards have gotten? would it have eventually resulted in death? are there any lasting effects on the research subjects? did the participant who had a breakdown have any underlying mental health damages? if the roles had been reversed, would the former prisoners try to get revenge? would rules and limitations on behavior have prevented some of the cruelty? do the guards have any guilt or shame about what they did to this day? do the prisoners have trauma? etc.
1k words on stone money. discussion. listen to it.
Even in the asking of questions you demonstrate your engagement with the material, Ichverdustehier. An impressive first set of Notes.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
– how to take good notes and bad notes, What Happened vs. What I learned
– explains that when you have a good idea, just say it and write it down, no need to be fancy at first
– discussed what would have happened if the inmates were women instead of males, how it would affect each gender differently
– Zimbardo losing himself in the experiment and how it affected the prisoners and guards
– switching roles would have led to a different experiment and conclusion
– Guards might look back on the experiment and feel ashamed and embarrassed.
I am aware many of my notes are “what happened” but that is how I am used to taking notes. I know they are considered “bad notes” but they work for me somehow. I am learning how to take “What I learned” notes in real time.
My wife and I spend an hour discussing whether to adopt a third dog, wait until we have just two dogs to commit to another, or foster to see if we’re ready for a bigger “family.”
WHAT HAPPENED:
My wife and I talked about the dogs in our house, present and future.
WHAT I LEARNED:
I’m much more willing to commit to a third dog than my wife is.
There’s zero value to the first Note.
Grade 3/3 (because you’re learning). —DSH
I see what you are saying. Thank you for the suggestion. I will try and implement this on my following notes.
The Empty Bottle of Scotch Riddle
– It made me think about how the riddle’s primary purpose was to show how grammar is essential and for when you speak to mean what you say
The Class Ambassador – Elijah Huey
– I learned about how the professor navigates his class. How he grades, and how he’s always available when his students need help. Which was nice to know since the most challenging thing about language for me is grammar.
The Stanford Prison Experiment
-In the class, there were good comments about what would have happened if a person had not stepped in and pointed out what Zimbardo was doing.
– Speaking with my classmates I found out an interesting fact that the whole experiment was government-funded.
An interesting point made was where an opinion was expressed that the prisoners could have behaved. Which would have probably changed the result of the overall experiment.
– Food for thought- What if the roles were reversed? I believe that it would have gotten worse due to what the guards were doing to the prisoners.
-I learned about the different perspectives my classmates had about the Stanford Prison Experiment.
You’re clearly working hard on Notes here, HotGirl. I will gently suggest that both your Notes and your essay writing will benefit from greater specificity (less vagueness) and from brevity (less throat-clearing). I’d be delighted to describe both to you in more detail.
Grade 3/3 (for now; standards will stiffen) —DSH
Hi yes, thank you for noticing my effort on the notes. I do agree that my essays would benefit from going into more detail. Gave me something to work on when writing essays going forward.
Class notes:
-It is harder for a real writer to write because they actually care a lot more about how they do there writing.
-Todays riddle was very interesting. I had no idea what it was looking. The choice of wordplay is very cool and it brings a concept of deception.
-A guest speaker came in and really made me comfortable about this semester.
-Brevity, clarity, Brilliant idea are 3 things you need to make good writing happen.
-You should never give your first writing as your final paper. A good example the teacher did was he ripped up a piece of paper in the air.
-We also talked about the paper that we have to write by the end of the semester. I like how he splits up the work into 3 different sections. Most teachers would just give you one paper to finish.
Prison experiment
-We discussed an idea that what if the prisoners and the guards randomly switched half way through the experiment. I think that they would have been treated worse than the first group. If they knew beforehand the treatment of the prisoners would not have been that bad.
-If women were apart of the experiment then they probably wouldn’t have been treated as bad. But they also wouldn’t last as long as the men.
I like the running commentary about how you reacted to everything that happened in class, Kid.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
3/3 not so bad for the first class notes
not bad at all 🙂
-The value of taking good notes is not telling what happened but saying what you learned
-The Stanford prison experiment was only conducted with men and not woman, I feel like the outcome would have been different between men and women. Men tend to be more physical whereas women tend to be more emotional/attack emotions.
-The Stanford prison Experiment was a flawed experiment from the start just using men and not having any women involved.
-Zimbardo was suppose to observing the experiment but could have been influencing it by being the superintendent, possibly why the experiment got so out of hand because there wasn’t a clear set of eyes on the experiment
-Switching the roles of the guards and prisoners would have garnered different results, however that would have changed what the experiment was researching.
Good Notes, Breadman. Question, though:
—Would you describe a study designed to determine the effect of heavy smog on the flight patterns of bumblebees “flawed” because it ignored birds?
This Note has almost no content: “—Switching the roles of the guards and prisoners would have garnered different results, however that would have changed what the experiment was researching.”
Grade 3/3 —DSH
I wouldn’t consider it flawed, that would definitely effect the flight pattern. However, the original experiment was to determine the effect of smog, sure the birds would effect them but they would effect the bee regardless. I suppose there is a case to argue that the information wouldn’t be useful but what information need to test your original hypothesis.
I see I wasn’t clear enough myself. I should have said: “Would you describe a study designed to determine the effect of heavy smog on the flight patterns of bumblebees ‘flawed’ because it ignored the effect of smog on birds?”
Riddle:
Why is there no such thing as an empty bottle of Scotch?
An empty bottle is just an empty bottle and is not a bottle of scotch anymore.
Note-taking:
Notes should be taken on what was learned compared to what happened.
I am discovering effective ways to take notes and how to use the new information I have learned, to have efficient notes that will be helpful.
Stanford Prison experiment:
I realized that the prisoners must still have lasting effects that still affect them today.
I agreed with my peers that if women were a part of the experiment, they would have not lasted as long as the men.
Zimbardo was too much investing into the experiment, which caused him to alter the experiment, and this is why the experiment still till this day has not been able to be recreated.
If halfway through the experiment the guards and prisoners had changed roles, I feel as if that would have made the situation much worse because I believe that they would have taken their anger from the ways they were treated by them before.
Few others have been so thorough in sharing THEIR OWN VIEWS on the content of the class, YoungThug. You’ve managed to convey WHAT WAS SAID and WHAT YOU LEARNED in sentences that combine the content AND your take. It’s a really strong technique that will serve you well in your essays. Very nice.
Grade 4/3 —DSH
Thank you! I will try my best to use these techniques in my essays.
class note
– learned how to take proper notes and take good notes that will be beneficial
The discussion in the class about the Stanford prison experiment was about the condition these students were treated. The participants were paid 15 dollars a day and all the subjects were white males. The prisoner’s mental health decreased because of how poorly they were treated and also being locked behind bars had to have some effects on their mental health. There were 24 people in the experiment and they were split into two groups of 12. In the video, they showed ways of dehumanizing acts like not giving them proper food rations taking away the prisoners’ beds, and also other dehumanizing acts like hitting them and just restricting them of there moral rights. Zimbardo’s mindset throughout the experiment was that he was playing the role of the supervisor and was just watching not participating in the actual experiment. Most if not all people in the experiment play their role like it was their life. If the guards and prisoners switched roles halfway through the two-week experiment I feel like the guards would not have done some things the prisoners because when they became the prisoner they would also get treated well.
My hypothesis the first draft is due Monday the 18th I am also aware that the paper that is due is 3000 words and 10 pages and is broken up into three different writings 1000 words each. stone money we will have to listen to the podcast and all the resources where the professor has all the stone money site and we have to write 1000 words on this. Just listen to the podcast you do not have to write anything.
You blend both weak and strong comments here, Propel.
This Note is really confusing:
If the guards and prisoners switched roles halfway through the two-week experiment I feel like the guards would not have done some things the prisoners because when they became the prisoner they would also get treated well.
A recommended edit, not just for your Notes, but for anything else you will write:
—One way: If the guards and prisoners knew they were going to switch roles halfway through the two-week experiment, I believe the guards would have treated the prisoners humanely in the hope of being treated well themselves.
—Another way: If the guards knew they were going to switch roles with the prisoners halfway through the two-week experiment, they would have avoided abusing the prisoners out of fear of reprisal.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Thank you for the feed back I know my notes are really confusing its something I struggle with the recommendation that you suggested I will start using to better my writing and class notes
Monday, September 11th Class Notes:
-All text can be considered an argument in some way. Even parking signs can be considered arguments that the township is arguing that you should not park in a location, or there will be consequences. I thought of instruction manuals and how even those are arguing that a task should be completed in a certain way.
-There cannot be an empty bottle of scotch, just an empty bottle. There can be an empty scotch bottle however.
-Completely ditching a first draft is a necessary part of good writing.
-The Class Notes are to be posted under the agenda tab of that day.
-Is there way for the Stanford Prison Experiment to be recreated accurately? The complete lack of rules would most likely not fly today.
-Switching the roles between prisoners and guards would most likely lead to even worse results. The guards would most likely act unnaturally to avoid repercussions when they became prisoners.
-In order to improve the experiment, someone should have been there to stop the emotional abuse from the guards. Also, Zimbardo should have been strictly an observer and should not have had a role in the prison.
-A hypothesis is developed when a question is asked. An experiment is developed from the hypothesis to try to answer the question.
Wonderful Notes, Milly.
You don’t waste language to narrate what was discussed or who said what. You just categorically state your own point of view.
Very impressive.
Grade 4/3 —DSH
I appreciate the kind grade and will try to replicate this style of notes throughout the semester. For my COMP I class last semester we had to write summaries of the class which focused on the ‘what happened’ rather than the ‘what I learned’, so this style of class note-taking is new for me and I’m glad I’m off to a good start.
That is fascinating, actually. Our focus in this class is to summarize everything “for a purpose” because ANY summary is subjective and usually intentional and we’ll be citing the works of others for the ways in which we claim they support our thesis.
Both sermons and instruction manuals tell us how to behave, and, not coincidentally, they’re the only documents where it’s appropriate to address the audience as “you.”
Learned how everything can be an argument. For example, no parking zones. You always have the choice to park there, but you will have to face the consequences and then argue about whether you think you should be able to park there or not.
In the opening of the class instructor provided a riddle about scotch. Learned the importance of word placement and grammar. There can’t be an empty bottle of scotch, but there can be an empty scotch bottle.
Learned expectations of the class, especially papers. You always have the option to rewrite and edit papers. First drafts are always disposable and worthless (instructor related it to shredded up pieces of paper).
The instructor explained the importance of note taking in class and how it will be part of our grade. I realized that I summarize what happened rather than discuss what I learned/ took away from the class.
I learned that most others in the classroom believed women would last a shorter amount of time in the experiment. I disagreed because I feel like majority of women are more sensitive, therefore, they would not act this way to pretend to be a guard.
A student mentioned whether the prisoner wanted to return to the experiment, even after the stress put on him, for the money or because he actually believed he was a prisoner. I did not consider this prior to the discussion because I just thought he was mentally unstable at this point; this addition to the conversation made me see the situation differently.
Class discussion also brought up switching the roles of the guards and the prisoners randomly in the experiment. We concluded that this could have made everything more chaotic because the new guards would want to get “revenge” for what happened when they were the prisoners.
Discussed our hypothesis drafts. The instructor said that this is a very rough, disposable draft but is due strictly by Monday prior to class.
I also learned that if you leave this page before posting your comment, it will not save and everything you wrote deletes.
Homework:
Pods 1-3 prior to class on Wednesday. Be prepared to discuss and for a short quiz.
Hypothesis draft due Monday.
Ouch about the lost Notes, BlogUser.
What you re-wrote, though, is very strong, borderline 4/3.
You could easily achieve better brevity and clarity by eliminating the “stage directions” about who said what and when and to whom and what you thought before during and after the conversation. I don’t mean to dictate precisely how you should write, but consider these versions:
—A student mentioned whether the prisoner wanted to return to the experiment, even after the stress put on him, for the money or because he actually believed he was a prisoner. I did not consider this prior to the discussion because I just thought he was mentally unstable at this point; this addition to the conversation made me see the situation differently.
—Perhaps the “prisoner” who considered returning to the experiment after he left wasn’t mentally unstable after all. He just regretted losing the paycheck.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
I appreciate your feedback Mr. Hodges. I do see how I can be more concise while typing out my notes by taking out the stage directions. I will aim to do this in the next class to have quality notes.
The best way to take notes is to make your idea brief and clear. Looking at the Stanford prison experiment, Zimbardo wanted to demonstrate the dark nature of individuals when given any amount of power. The power of dehumanization created a traumatic world for each volunteer: guard and inmate. Regardless if the genders were reversed the experiment would still fail due to the physical environment creating this psychological change within everyone, including Zimbardo, characterizing themselves within each role, and embracing it.
While your Notes are brief, BabyYoda, there are meaty and clear. You’ve more than adequately responded to my requirement that you share in Notes what you Learned, not just What Happened.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Thank you I will try to keep my notes clear and brief, and demonstrate what we do in class clearly as well.
Today when we talked about the Stanford Prison Experiment, I realized that when people are given a little power, they seem to take advantage of it and start treating others like they are not equal to them. I was also impressed by the fact that the experiment didn’t stop till a woman said something which shows that my classmates were right about thinking that if the guards and prisoners were females, they would’ve been nicer to each other. I definitely believe that if the gender of the groups would’ve been female that experiment would’ve played out differently. Some classmates also believed that if the groups would’ve been switched out randomly without telling them that they were going to they would’ve been less cruel, but I disagree. I believed that if they were switched out randomly without heads up the prisoners who get to be guards now will take revenge on the guards who torture them.
Thorough and thoughtful.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Personal Collective Thoughts
I love the science behind Zimbardo’s poorly designed experiment. His strike in interest to learn how power influences and changes people yet he didn’t have an idea of how brutal it could get? I personally am also intrigued with this main idea of this experiment, along with the study of psychology behind it. Why do we do the things we do? Why does our environment influence us even if we have separate morals?
Are these participants concealed psychopaths?
Personally, If I was given the opportunity to be a guard I would never be able to bring myself to hurt another individual accompanying wounding words.
In class discussion
In discussion the topic of switching roles was spoken upon. Would the prisoners have remorse when switching roles after the dehumanizing acts they were put through or would they charge back with the same brutality? We live in a world of pettiness and anger. Empathy is something surprisingly a lot of us lack. I believe that the prisoners would strike back. If the experiment was designed to switch roles would setting boundaries and rules take away from the experiment? Overall, the experiment was to study the judgment of power. But without these boundaries how much pain psychologically would these people suffer?
Different ways to punish people than dehumanizing factors. Was this treatment influenced by television or underlying fantasies?
Another topic that was spoken upon in class was if the experiment would have gone differently if all the participants were women. Women (research based) are more emotionally wired than men. Women uphold nurturing motherly characteristics naturally. I think the experiment 100% wouldn’t have been as intense.
If we were to have a one on one interview with the participants who played the roles as the guards, would they lie about their behavior? I could guarantee you that they would tell you they never did any of the actions. Their behavior in the experiment was not only embarrassing but horrifying. Therefore, lying would give the individual a motivator to avoid punishment.
I’d prefer more bold claims than Rhetorical Questions (and I want to see NO Rhetorical Questions in your essays), but I have to award you the extra point on the basis of your thoroughness alone, StoneHarbor.
Grade 4/3 —DSH
Thank you for the feedback, noted on no rhetorical questions!
For this class, we firstly discussed about how every text could be an argument. It took me time to think about this concept, but as I realize it could be true for most situations. Most text is either ‘for’ or ‘against’ an issue or subject, or presents the case for both sides. Secondly, professor tore a piece of paper over and over again. Just to show us that the first draft doesn’t matter at all, and what matters is finished product, with everything edited and fixed.
When it came to the Standford Prison Experiment, one of the first things someone mentioned was having a prison experiment with college kids instead of actual prisoners or grown ups. With this statement, I think that there could’ve been a different outcome with the experiment with people acting more mature to situations. I also learned that the government was the one paying for this experiment, which is interesting I always thought it was Zimbardo’s money. Someone also mentioned the idea of switching roles of the guards and the prisoners. In my opinion, it would just create unfairness and ruin the whole experiment. Lastly, There isn’t such thing as an empty bottle of scotch because an empty bottle is just an empty bottle.
I have no idea who you are, chich (and that’s not a good thing).
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Thank you professor, next time I will try and make my notes more complete and get more important details.
This class we discussed how almost every text can be argumentative. The Standford prison experiment shed light on the experiment that was supposed to last 2 weeks which only lasted 6 days due to the inhumanity. I found that very abusive and a abuse of power.
For Notes turned in late, you’ll need to provide a lot more evidence of your engagement with the material, McLovin.
Grade 1/3 —DSH
Thank you professor moving foward I will used those guidelines to be more engaged.
Class Notes!
* Notes should be direct and informational. There is no need for extra language like “Today we……” but phrases like “I learned….” Or “ My thoughts are….” Can be useful because they encourage effective thinking. When you write good notes you digest the information better than if you just wrote the agenda today because it challenges your thinking.
* Our discussion of the Stanford prison experiment revealed we all agree that people take advantage of power. This was proved when guards abused the prisoners and broke down their mental. One main point of our discussion was if we switched the roles midway through. My thoughts are dependent on if the study group knew they were going to switch beforehand. I believe if they knew they were going to switch they would have thought about their actions more towards the prisoners and it would change the whole study. Zimbardo’s original goal was to see how quickly they got violent so if they made the guards aware of the switch there would have been too much interference. But switching the guards and prisoners unexpectedly would have been extremely interesting because they could have seen how regretful the previous guards were while also getting the raw data of their violence before the switch.
I see here that you spent the time between taking Notes and publishing them here, you organized them into more of a structured presentation, PlaneFan. If you plan to do more of that technique, we can work out some practice exercises that will build writing skills.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
In class we learned about the Stanford Prison experiment. It was when people could volunteer as a prisoner or a guard. It was supposed to last for two weeks but it only lasted for six days. The prisoners got arrested like any other prisoner. Once they got there they were stripped of their identity and were to only be called of their number and not their name. The prisoners were treated harshly and Dr. Zimbardo allowed the guards to treat them that way. The guards abused them, hurt them and humiliated them. The prisoners were forced to do push ups, not eat enough food, got whipped by the guards, and were forced to have their face covered up when they went to the bathroom. If they wanted to use the bathroom at night, they had to use it in a bucket. The prisoners would wake up at 3:30 in the morning and do a head count. Some of the prisoners rebelled after only the first day. Because of that they were put in solitary confinement. One of the Prisoners broke down and started having mental health issues and Dr. Zimbardo told him that this wasn’t even real. This just shows that due to the harsh conditions, he almost forgot who he was.
This is certainly an effective summary of what happened in the experiment, Rebel. It doesn’t much indicate the takeaways from class. If you give yourself extra time to post Notes, try to craft them into a short argument. It’s great practice.
Grade 3/3 —DSH
Class Notes
During this class we learned about the Stanford Prison Experiment. We had to watch a video on what the experiment was about and how it was conducted. The experiment was conducted with a set of college kids having roles as “prisoners” and as “guards”. The experiment was laid out to see how the power of the “guards” could play with the “prisoners” mindset. It was really cool and yet creepy to see the phycological impacts this experiment had on the “prisoners”. This experiment was supposed to last for two weeks with each kids making fifteen dollars a day but only ended up lasting six days because of the harsh conditions. During class we also learned on why note taking is important and how it should be conducted. The students were also introduced to when our first hypothesis is due. We were also introduced to “stone money” and knowing there is going to be a quiz next class. This is what we learned and went over in class today.
OK
Grade 3/3 —DSH