17.309/ESD.082/STS.082  Science, Tech, & Public Policy

GENERAL QUESTIONS

 

Q:  How much time will we have?

A:  You will have three hours for the exam. 

 

Q: How much choice will we have on the exam?

A: You should prepare five questions.    We are likely to present three questions on the exam and ask you to answer two of the three.   We may provide a bit more choice by providing two pairs of questions and ask you to answer one question from each pair. 

 

Q: How many short answers questions will appear on the exam?

A: You will be asked to answer four out of five short answer questions that appear on the exam. Some of the short answer questions may be based on sections of long answer questions that do not appear.

 

Q: Will all short answer questions be from the second part of the class?

A:  Most will be from the second part of the class, some may be integrative.

 

Q: Who will be grading? 

A:  Grading will be done by your TA, with calibration of standards across recitations.

 

Q: Can we use the same case for multiple answers?  

A:  It is unlikely that the same case will be best for different questions.   If you do choose to use the same case twice, you need to demonstrate sufficient understanding of the case and its relevance to specific questions to justify your choice.  

 

 

QUESTIONS ON SPECIFIC QUESTIONS

 

Exam Q 1

 

Q:  Please explain parts b and c.

A:  Part b asks how individuals in the roles of public research funder, scientist seeking funding, and journalists trying to evaluate research (or others facing that problem like public officials) would take account of the correlation between funding sources and research results in what they do to achieve their objectives.  Part c asks how differences in the specific mechanisms that may account for that correlation affect the strategies of those actors.

 

Exam Q 2

Q: The questions asks “Discuss whether MIT can play the role of honest broker and is seen as playing the role of honest broker on the issue or issues of your choice.  Then discuss what role you believe MIT should play in national and international debates on that issue.”   In discussing what role MIT should play, should we discuss how MIT should play the role? 

A:  Yes – please discuss how MIT should act as you discuss MIT’s role.

 

Exam Q 3

Q: One can answer this question by picking a preferred approach (adversarial, technocratic or mixed) or by specifying conditions that determine when each approach works well or badly.   How many examples are we expected to provide?

A: If you are providing an unconditional defense of one approach, then provide two examples, one of that approach working really well and one of that approach working less well. If you are specifying conditions, then provide examples of each approach working well and working badly to support your argument on conditions.  

 

Exam Q 4

Q:  Should this essay be written on the assumption that all leaks should be stopped?

A:  No.  There is controversy over whether leaks are good or bad and of what the optimal leakage rate might be are.

 

Exam Q 5

Q:  Does the Iraq WMD case fit this question? 

A:  The Iraq WMD case is complex.  Jervis presents this as an acting-on-a-false-positive-on-WMD-case.   Others suggest that the decision to go to war preceded the generation of WMD as a rationale for war.

 

Exam Q 6

Q:  For part A, should we provide examples of planned adaptation and of a situation where the absence of adaptation led to a problem?

A: Yes.

 

Q: How is Q6 differ from Q 5?

A: The questions have areas of overlap and have differences.   Q 5 does not necessarily require a focus on planned adaptation.  It could be framed with reference to static policies with fixed tradeoffs across types of error.   Q 6 could focus on planned adaptation and Type I and Type II error or on other problems.

RECITATION QUESTIONS
1. Should the US liberalize admission of S&T students and immigration? Should India and China seek to control S&T international study and migration? How?
2. How could college presidents improve US News and World Report rankings?
3. Looking back at implicit or explicit indicators in cases treated earlier in the term.
* Provide examples of intervening, consummatoryand behavioral indicators.
* What has worked well? Badly? Does setting up sequences of indicators make sense?
4. What can be done to improve anticipation? To address the tendency of early warning signs and models to be ignored? could processes and institutions for climate change assessment be improved? How?

REVIEW SESSIONS

Fri    12/12  11-12  in E40 4th Floor Center for International Studies Pye Room

Mon 12/15  12-1    in E40 4th Floor Center for International Studies Pye Room

We will have a two lecture session today, with a special lecture from 3:30 to 5:00 PM.  This is in lieu of our regularly scheduled class on Wednesday 11/26.   If you cannot attend, please email Phiona Lovett at phiona@mit.edu for information on alternative arrangements.  As usual, class lectures and discussions are for the use of class members and are off the record.