Democracy & Inequality

Taught by: Dr Joel Chow

Reviews

AY 23/24, Sem 1

Name: Fang Yiyang @fangyiyang

Content (Structure/Organization): 2

A bit haphazard frankly - at a session-to-session level, you can tell the course starts with some general conceptual questions on the value of democracy and inequality, then moves to more specific issues like meritocracy and poverty, then ends on more economic and policy issues like UBI. But sometimes the progression doesn't always appear clear or smooth, and the links between the early and later parts of the course not clearly established. The sequencing of the content does make sense but you just don't feel the progression.

Within each session, the content sometimes feels overloaded - Prof Joel has a lot of slides and content which he just skips through to make time for class discussion; slides are not structured so you have no idea what direction he is bringing the class towards. On the whole it feels like in each class we are just briefly discussing one thing after another without progressing towards a main point. But it still does cover enough content for you to synthesise on your own for assignments, and if you are the free-flowing type you might not mind the delivery. But it did struck me as just a bit too lacking in direction.

That being said, the overall content is comprehensive and spans philosophy, policy, a bit of economics (no graphs or math - just economic issues like UBI and poverty), sociology, education, etc. So there is something for everyone, and you come away with a versatile range of knowledge.

Accessibility and Assessment: 5

Very accessible; the first few lessons may be a bit tougher as they lean towards philosophy but the second half of the course is much more case study and policy oriented. Some economic-related topics are discussed (UBI, tax, capital vs income, etc.) but NO math or graph or economic knowledge is needed, it is very basic economic knowledge that a regular news reader, for example, would be able to grasp.

That being said, this means that students with a background in the topic might find things too shallow and slow. Such a student would be a poor fit for the course delivery, which necessarily has to cater to students of different backgrounds.

Manageability of Workload: 4

A lot of low-weightage small assignments (forum posts, creative exercises, two short group essays), but all are quite easy so on the whole manageable, it's just that after the first few weeks you'd probably not be able to block out say an entire month to have no assignments for the course - there is always some small thing you have to do.

Readings are ok, a bit dense in the first few weeks but also the lessons don't always require knowledge of the readings so it's ok if you didn't do the readings once or twice (but don't make it a habit, because you do need to use one for your response paper and likely have to draw on them for the presentation and final paper). Slides are very dense but you don't have to know everything in them; he skips most of the slides anyway.

Prof Joel has a 2-day deadline extension, no questions asked policy. Can do it for any assignment, no restriction on how often you can use it. Very useful.

Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:

Should be easy enough - as long as you demonstrate a reasonable grasp of the course content you should do ok. Most of the assignments are straightforward and easy (forum posts, creative exercises, participation, etc.). The differentiating ones are the mid-term response paper, final paper and group presentation. But you can choose your own topic for the response paper and final project so play to your strengths. The mid-term response paper can also be re-written for a better grade. Prof Joel is also not pedantic on things like formatting so you won't be bumped down a grade for mistyping a citation or heading or running a minute over time for the presentation. Deadline extensions are generous. Basically, as long as you try you can defintely get a decent grade. I was told that most people get A- and B+ (a fact which of course no one can officially confirm or deny, but wink wink).

Learning Value/Recommendation: 4

I already had some background in this topic, so it felt a bit repetitive and slow for me, but that is of course my problem, not the course's - but anyone else with a background in the topic already might want to take this into account before deciding whether or not to enroll.

Nonetheless, I still managed to learn a good range of issues ranging from philosophy to social policy, and the readings were interesting. Many students also found the content very impactful, as it relates to our everyday lives.

About the Instructor:

Prof Joel is knowledgeable and friendly, able to give good feedback and advice. Sometimes his explanations in class are not entirely clear, but it could also be due to the fact that the concepts taught were not always the most straightforward. After every class he posts a very long and informative summary of the class on Canvas, which is very useful. His advice on written work and group presentation was also incredibly detailed, extensive and informative, and always very fair and sensitive. I have the sense that he is a better communicator in writing than verbally - you might want to take this into account when seeking consult from him.

Additional Comments/Word of Advice:

I don't think this course will be offered any more, but if it is offered again it is definitely worth it to those interested in the topic - content spans a wide range of issues and workload and assignments are manageable, the grading is also quite kind. However, a student with significant prior knowledge of the course might find the content too slow.

AY 21/22, Sem 2

Content (Structure/Organization): -

Quite structured in terms of content, but Prof is very flexible when it comes to deadlines. He also tweaks the amount of content he covers depending on how the class is doing (e.g. whether we look stressed out because of deadlines). Overall, he has three overarching themes which he covers throughout the semester: democracy, inequality, and Universal Basic Income. 

Accessibility and Assessment: 5

Very accessible because it builds on concepts that are relevant to our everyday life, drawing from examples from Singaporean society. 

Manageability of Workload: 4

There are only two main individual assignments, an evaluative summary near the start of the semester and a final project due in exam week (which is very rare and gives us a lot of time to spend on it). The rest of the assignments are group assignments, which makes it a lot more manageable because we usually just need to write a short reflective response to a prompt. There is also a group student-led discussion but that is manageable as well because you can discuss with your groupmates and also look for Prof for consultations. Weekly readings can be a bit long sometimes but he doesn't really expect everyone to read them thoroughly, perhaps just to get the gist of it. Outside of class, I would say I spend about 4h-ish on this module (including skimming through readings and working on group assignments). Forum posts are encouraged but not necessary. 

Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:

I think it's quite achievable to do well in this module, Prof also always gives encouraging comments so that's a plus. 

Learning Value/Recommendation: 3

I wouldn't say that it's related to my field of study but it opened my eyes to a very real problem in Singapore and made me reflect on my past experiences deeply, which I am grateful for. 

About the Instructor:

20/10 would recommend. Prof truly understands the woes of a university student: he gives a liberal 2 day deadline extension, no questions asked, for an assignment of your choice. He is also very approachable and non-judgemental. Perhaps due to the nature of the subject, his lessons may be a bit hard to follow through sometimes but after you get the gist of it, you'll realise that Prof is very knowledgeable and he knows what he's doing. This really shone through during group consultations for our student-led discussion, where he was able to make connections between different concepts that we didn't think were related and helped us paint a clearer picture of what was going on. 

AY 21/22, Sem 2

Content (Structure/Organization): -

Very clear organisation as you will know what you will be learning and how it is linked to democracy and inequality. There were lessons on democracy, inequality, meritocracy and UBI and the links between these topics. 

Accessibility and Assessment: 4

Quite accessible actually, even to a science student like me. Although Prof Chow is a philosopher by training, he does cover theories from economics, sociology, philosophy etc. and he makes those topics easy to understand for those without a background in these topics. Then again, I have always been interested in learning about democracy and inequality and I have been reading books on these topics by Michael J Sandel, so the some of the module content was still understandable. 

Manageability of Workload: 3

The module workload is as follows:

(i) Class Participation (17.5 %): in-class activities and 3 group assignments

(ii) Student-led Discussions (25 %): in groups of 4, students will teach the class about either a) A text about social and economic inequality, b) The relationship between social equality and a public policy area, c) A specific debate about Universal Basic Income or any other related policy

iii) Evaluative Summary (20%): 2 page paper to examine any of the readings for the module (up to Week 4/5), whether the paper made implicit assumptions; have logical or rhetorical fallacies etc. Due on Wednesday of Recess Week.

iv) Final Project (37.5%): 5% Proposal (1 page) , 32.5% Final Project (2k-2.5k words).

The format of the final project is either a) Final Paper, b) Reflective Report (relating to social equality), c) Policy Memo (related to UBI). Due on Wednesday of Exam Week 2.

I do think that the workload is ok, Prof Chow does gives 2-day extensions (without question) if you need them! If you need a longer extension, just explain to him and he will understand your situation. For the readings, some of them may be quite difficult to understand, but not to worry. Prof Chow will go through the concepts in class, and his slides are more often than not sufficient enough to understand the readings. 

Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:

In my class, Prof Chow had admitted that he does not really believe in the bellcurve system (if my memory never fails me, but I am pretty certain that he said something along the lines of this), so he is very liberal in handing out good grades in class. By liberal, I mean giving out scores that were mostly above 80%. However, he did mentioned that the overall module grade will be moderated by NUS, so don't feel demoralised if you didn't do up to your expectations. I could see that he is already very nice and understanding of students' struggles and he is trying to do his best to help students. Based on my conversations with my classmates and students who had taken his module before, it seems that the determining factor for your overall grade will be final project (which totals up to 37.5%). Try writing a paper which you strongly believe in/have many thoughts about it, so that it is easier to write and score too. I came into this module ready to write a paper on meritocracy, a topic very close to me, and I end up getting a grade better than I expected, so it is important to choose the correct topic to score. 

Learning Value/Recommendation: 5

The module is very interesting if you have an interest in the module content! For me, since I already had an interest in these topics and had read books relating to the topics, it was an enjoyable process. It was this module where I understood the privileges I have (and did not have) that brought me to where I am today, what we should do (as people of privileged positions) to help those in need, and also to ensure social cohesion not only in Singapore, but in the world.  

About the Instructor:

I already had a good impression of Prof Chow from his USS2105 module as well as his Brainfood+, and after taking USE2325, he still meets my expectations haha. He is really one of the best profs I had in USP apart from my WCT prof. He is really very understanding and patient too. If you do not understand the concepts, you can just Telegram him (very convenient) or email him about it and he will explain them again! He may take some time to reply instead of his usual speedy replies, but I guess it is mainly due to NUSC things.

The only thing is, I was in the online class (for context, USE2325 in this semester had 2 classes, one is physical and the other online class) for his module, and since it was in the evening, there were times where I almost zoned out. I zoned out mainly because of his monotonous voice coupled with my difficulty to focus in an online class (but Prof Chow isn't really boring). Although he looks a bit sian and aloof, if you get the chance to talk to him, he does have a lot of ideas and is quite friendly! He does have a sense of humour too, but I think is because my group's name that he made those lame references. I can see he is genuine in helping the community too; he made each group choose an initiative to donate money to (like to foodbanks or the marginalised). Which prof does this on behalf of the students??? 

Additional Remarks:

Tl;dr: Module will be interesting if you are interested in democracy, inequality, meritocracy and/or UBI! Did learn a lot from the module and I do recommend this module if you are interested in these topics! 

AY 21/22, Sem 1

Name: Lim Xin Yi (Telegram Handle: @xinnnnnyi)

Content (Structure/Organization): -

The module was organised very well. We started by learning about different perspectives on democracy and inequality, before learning about the link between the two with an emphasis on the UBI. Every class flowed well into the next, which helped with my understanding of the bigger picture and connect the concepts. Democracy and inequality are big concepts, but Prof structured it well so that we tackled different aspects in a digestible manner. 

Accessibility and Assessment: 4

Most of the concepts taught were new, but Prof Chow broke them down very clearly and gave many examples to help us understand them better. The readings for the module were also short and accessible, though some were slightly more difficult to unpack. However, Prof did spend more time going through them in class with us.  

Manageability of Workload: 4

Prof Chow was realllyyyy understanding and adjusted the workload according to the module’s objectives. He ensured that readings were not too long (less than 25 pages) and gave us deadline extensions without question. This relieved me of a lot of pressure and I appreciated it so much. Group assignments were also manageable (about 800 words) and we had a few weeks to complete them. 

Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:

As long as you do your readings, listen in class, and organise your notes well, it is possible to get an A in the module. Prof’s slides are also very clear and all the content is available online. Just do consistent work and I’m sure a decent grade will be possible! 

Learning Value/Recommendation: 5

The module was very eye-opening and helped me understand wider social issues and policies. Definitely one of the most useful and applicable modules I have taken so far! 

About the Instructor:

REALLY the best prof I have ever gotten for a module!!! He explained all the concepts really clearly and had a good balance of student participation and him lecturing. He was also really really encouraging and built on everyone’s responses. Felt very reassured and excited for lessons! 

AY 21/22, Sem 1

Content (Structure/Organization): -

Tbh very flexible, sometimes too flexible and assignments/deadlines can get changed pretty often. 

Accessibility and Assessment: 4

Quite accessible.

Manageability of Workload: 2

Heavy workload.

Ease/Difficulty of Attaining Grades:

I think the frustrating thing is that Prof is very liberal in handing out good grades in class, but be forewarned that it doesn't translate to your final grade AT ALL. I scored no lower than an A- for all my assignments but got a B+ in the end :)) 

Learning Value/Recommendation: 3

~ ok.

About the Instructor:

Knowledgeable.