ICC402 Final case studies

Each group continues working on the same whistleblower to explore the case further. Since you have more time, you are expected to find a wider variety of documents (newspaper articles, interviews, reports on the overall case, academic articles, books, …)

Go further on:

  • How is the notion of truth used in the whistleblower’s speeches?
  • In the name of what did s/he blow the whistle?
  • Does the whistleblower display a form of courage ?
  • Does s/he fear retaliations and consequences?
  • Does s/he have any regrets? Would s/he do it again?
  • What kind of truth-teller is the whistleblower you studied?

Document:

  • Very precise on your references (authors, dates, link, pages or time in the video, …)
  • Again: produce a documented narrative with as many quotes as possible!
  • Powerpoint document in .pdf (including names and group letter)
  • Including the first work that was presented and the new develoments on truth-telling
  • By email: y.bazin@istec.fr
  • Deadline: Tuesday April 7 at 9.00

Feebacks:

  • Group A
    • First report:  Good job, slight lack on retaliations and reactions: (A)
    • Second report: Very good job: (A)
    • Final grade: A (17/20)
  • Group B
    • First report: Slight lack on inside signaling and reactions: (B)
    • Second report: well documented and good analysis: (A)
    • Final grade: A- (15/20)
  • Group C
    • First report: Slight lack on retaliation and consequences: (A-)
    • Second report: Very good work: (A)
    • Final grade: A (17/20)
  • Group D
    • First report: Very good overview of the case: (A+)
    • Second report: Too short and remains mostly on the surface, the notion of parrhesia is barely used: (D+)
    • Final grade: B- (11/20)
  • Group E
    • First report: Good overview but stay on the surface (C+)
    • Second report: Excellent work: (A+)
    • Final grade: B+ (14/20)
  • Group F
    • First report: Almost no quotes, very little information whistleblower: (D)
    • Second report: Very good work, much more precise than the first report – but extremely late!: (A -> B)
    • Final grade: C (10/20)
  • Group G
    • First report: Good overview of the case, slight lack on loyalty: (B+)
    • Second report: serious work but the analysis could have gone a little deeper: (B)
    • Final grade: B (12/20)
  • Group H
    • First report: Excellent job! that forgets to give quotes…: (B+)
    • Second report: Good work: (B+)
    • Final grade: B+ (14/20)