Analysis of Dr. Jim Cullen’s Syllabus: “Empire as a Way of Life”
One of the most heavily utilized learning instruments in academia, the syllabus functions as a means for teachers to communicate knowledge to their students in a given discipline, while at the same time establishes and satisfies a clear and explicit course objective. The purpose of this essay is to determine how effectively a chosen syllabus satisfies its function, using Aristotle’s definition of effective rhetoric. According to Aristotle, effective rhetoric contains ethos, which is the credibility of the rhetor on the subject and how he presents himself through literature (in this case, the syllabus); it contains pathos, which is the use of emotion to achieve a desired result from the audience (in this case, the students); lastly, it contains logos, which is the feasibility of the rhetor’s objectives and expectations. (Losh et al. 44)
The syllabus I am examining is written by Dr. Jim Cullen, a teacher at The Ethical Culture Fieldston School, in the class “Empire as a Way of Life” – a history discipline. The objective of the course is outlined explicitly by the syllabus, “To help students understand the transhistorical forces that govern their lives as well as an appreciation of the way contingency shapes the fate of human experience.” (Cullen 1) Additionally, “The long-range hope is to foster participation in civic life with an understanding of the challenges they face and a sense of humility, decency, and determination to improve the lives around them.” (Cullen 1) The syllabus successfully connects the students to the course knowledge because the rhetor possesses a strong ethos: he has a P.h.D, is the history department chair of the school, and has over 20 years of teaching experience, giving him credibility and authority on the field of study. The syllabus contains pathos, as the rhetor motivates students by having them pity those less fortunate around them, establishing a moral imperative to learn the class material in order to better understand what needs to change in contemporary American society. Finally, the syllabus also possesses logos, as the audience is expected to learn facts from readings, discuss those facts in class discussion, and develop an understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of empires past and present, which are feasible expectations. Dr. Cullen’s syllabus meets all three aspects of Aristotle’s criteria of effective rhetoric, and in so doing, successfully persuades students to connect with the course knowledge.
In regards to Dr. Cullen’s ethos, his degree, title as chair of the history department, and teaching experience make his rhetoric more appealing to his students (his credentials make the audience more willing to receive what he is teaching). This is perhaps one of the most persuasive aspects in the syllabus, as before the students even pick up and read the syllabus, they already know that Dr. Cullen is a knowledgeable and credible teacher. In addition to his credibility, however, Dr. Cullen also presents himself as one who has a complete understanding of history, a masterful command of the English language, and one who cares about his students. Evidence of a complete understanding of history is in the first paragraph of the course description, when Dr. Cullen transcends the notion that empires are solely oppressive states:
“…We think of empires that take away liberty — oppressive states… [but] they have guaranteed the rights of beleaguered minorities as well as taken them away; they have promoted artistic expression as well as suppressed it. Empires have been governed as dictatorships, but they also have been republics and even democracies.” (Cullen 1)
Here, it can be seen that Dr. Cullen acknowledges both the good and the bad of empires, showing that his perception of history is not black and white, but comprehensive. This further gives his students confidence that he is knowledgeable, persuading his students to connect with the course knowledge. Also evident in this excerpt is Dr. Cullen’s ability to not only write in a manner that is knowledgeable, but also avoid elements of condescension. This makes him seem more relatable to his audience, connecting them with his knowledge. Thirdly, it is clear that Dr. Cullen displays care for his students. This is displayed both by the above excerpt and by the course objective, which is to have his students make the world a better place. This display of care by Dr. Cullen allows his students to trust him.
In addition to Dr. Cullen’s ethos, another important aspect of the syllabus that connects students to knowledge is pathos. Using pity, Dr. Cullen motivates students to learn the course knowledge in order to improve the quality of life for the underprivileged, and to understand the challenges that contemporary societies face today. Unlike many class syllabi, which lack an appeal to students’ emotions, Dr. Cullen’s syllabus gives the class purpose and meaning, which in turn gives students a reason to connect with the course knowledge, excel in the class, and hopefully, change society for the better. The pathos displayed is consistent with the teacher’s character, as it is line with not only the care he displays toward his students, but to the underprivileged as well.
Lastly, regarding the logos present in the syllabus, Dr. Cullen expects the audience to learn facts from the prescribed readings, discuss those facts to develop critical thinking, and understand the strengths and weaknesses of empires in history to know what needs to be improved or avoided in contemporary societies. In other words, the role of the audience is to both learn in and teach the class under the guidance of the teacher. These expectations are feasible, and thus allow students to easily connect with the course knowledge and each other’s knowledge. Although the process by which knowledge is constructed is present in the syllabus, however, Dr. Cullen purposefully leaves out the rules and guidelines that accompany that process. There is neither a section where he addresses a plagiarism or citations policy nor a section where he discusses the possible repercussions of not doing the nightly homeworks, absences, or latenesses. This indicates that the teacher expects his students to be experts in these fields — he assumes that they are educated on and disciplined enough to follow the rules outlined by the history department, which he sees no need to repeat on the syllabus. This neither helps nor hurts the students’ connection with course knowledge, but instead teaches them self-reliance: an important skill in life and academia. The logos presented in the syllabus is in line with Dr. Cullen’s character, as it is further evidence that he cares about his students and wants them to be independent and capable of changing the circumstances of their environment.
Taking this analysis of Dr. Cullen’s syllabus into account, it can be seen that the construction of knowledge in this field is primarily done through class discussions and interactions, known to many as the Socratic method. Dr. Cullen assigns readings to the students, who then discuss the facts and identify both the strengths and weaknesses of the studied empires. This phase of knowledge construction is enacted nearly every class, commanding a solid understanding from students and allowing them to learn from both the teacher and each other. In addition to discussion, knowledge is also constructed through another phase: writing. The students write essays examining each empire using a comparative and analytical lens, which upon submission, are critiqued by the teacher. The final phase of this course’s knowledge construction is reading factual material and historians’ evaluations of the empires studied. These three phases in the syllabus, speaking, writing, and reading, compose the knowledge construct that the students can use to make modern society a better place.
Citations:
Losh, Elizabeth M., Jonathan Alexander, Kevin Cannon, and Zander Cannon. Understanding Rhetoric: A Graphic Guide to Writing. P.44 Print.
Cullen, Jim. Empire as a Way of Life Syllabus.
Word Count: 1,296