UNIVERSITY OF KENT - CODE OF PRACTICE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE
MODULE SPECIFICATION TEMPLATE
•
•
•
•
5
6
7
8
9
10
The title of the module: Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence
The Department which will be responsible for management of the module: SECL
(Philosophy)
The Start Date of the Module: Spring 2009
The number of students expected to take the module: up to 40 students.
Modules to be withdrawn on the introduction of this proposed module and consultation with
other relevant Departments and Faculties regarding the withdrawal: PL562 Philosophy of
Artificial Intelligence
The level of the module (eg Certificate [C], Intermediate [I], Honours [H] or Postgraduate
[M]): H
The number of credits which the module represents: 30 credits
Which term(s) the module is to be taught in (or other teaching pattern): the module will
normally be taught in the Spring Term.
Prerequisite and co-requisite modules: There are no prerequisite or co-requisite
modules. The module may be taken by any student registered for Part II Philosophy or
Artificial Intelligence. This module will complement (but does not require) PL533
Sciences of the Mind.
The programmes of study to which the module contributes: all Philosophy BA
programmes (both Single and Joint Honours), Computer Science with Artificial
Intelligence, Computer Science.
11
The intended subject specific learning outcomes and, as appropriate, their relationship to
programme learning outcomes:
Students who successfully complete the module will have:
• Gained an understanding of some of the major arguments concerning the possibility of
machine intelligence. (c.f. Philosophy Programme Specification 11.iii, 12.A.ii)
• Through their study of these arguments, students will have engaged critically with some of the
central philosophical issues in this area concerning the nature of intelligence, understanding
and consciousness. (PPS 12.A.ii, 12.A.iv)
• Through their study of these arguments, students will enhance their understanding of various
architectures for machine intelligence and their relative strengths and weaknesses. (PPS
12.A.iv)
• Acquired the ability to engage in a close critical reading of some of major texts in the
philosophy of artificial intelligence (PPS 11.ii, 12.A.i)
The module will thus contribute to the aims and objectives of the Part II Philosophy programme by
enabling students to acquire familiarity with themes in a major area of philosophy, to gain
knowledge of some of major works in the history of philosophy and to engage critically with them.
12
The intended generic learning outcomes and, as appropriate, their relationship to
programme learning outcomes:
Students who successfully complete the module will have (PPS 12.B, 12.C):
• Developed their skills in philosophical analysis
• Acquired the ability to engage in a close reading of some major texts of the philosophy of
artificial intelligence.
• Engaged in philosophical argument, both oral and written
• Developed their skills in critical analysis and argument through their engagement with these
texts, through their reading, writing and discussion with others in seminars.
• Shown ability to work alone and to take responsibility for their own learning
• Developed their ability to clarify complex ideas and arguments, to develop their own ideas and
arguments, and to express them orally and in writing.
The module will thus contribute to the aims and objectives of the Part II Philosophy programme by
enabling students to develop their analytical and critical skills and their skills in oral and written
argument.
UNIVERSITY OF KENT - CODE OF PRACTICE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE
13
A synopsis of the curriculum
The module will study some of the major works in the history of modern philosophy of artificial
intelligence. Texts to be studied will be drawn from a list which includes works by philosophers
such as Turing, Searle, Dreyfus, etc. The approach will be philosophical and critical, and will
involve the close reading of texts. Students will be expected to engage critically with the works
being studied and to formulate and argue for their own views on the issues covered.
The lectures will cover a range of topics such as:
AI and its Development
The Turing Test
Symbolic AI
The Chinese Room Argument
Connectionism
Machine Learning
Arguments from Godel's Theorems
The seminars will cover a range of topics such as:
Alan Turing
Hubert Dreyfus
John Searle
Consciousness
Free Will
Creativity
Emotions
Artificial Life
The ethics of AI
14
Indicative Reading List
The module will focus on selections from works such as:
Margaret A. Boden(ed.)[1990]: `The philosophy of artificial intelligence', Oxford University Press;
Jack Copeland[1993]: `Artificial intelligence: a philosophical introduction', Blackwell;
Donald Gillies[1996]: `Artificial intelligence and scientific method', Oxford University Press;
Margaret Boden[1990]: `The creative mind, myths and mechanisms', London: Abacus;
Stan Franklin[1995]: `Artificial minds', MIT Press.
W.S. Robinson[1993]: `Computers, minds and robots', Temple University Press.
15
Learning and Teaching Methods, including the nature and number of contact hours and the
total study hours which will be expected of students, and how these relate to achievement of
the intended learning outcomes
Teaching will take the form of 3 hours of classes per week. Classes will include lecture and
seminar material. The lectures will provide students with the overall framework and an
understanding of the central issues to be covered. Seminars will involve class discussion focused
on a close reading of primary texts. This will enable students to engage in in-depth analysis of
texts and arguments and will help students to develop their skills in philosophical analysis.
Students will be expected to study for approx. 16 hours per week on the module in addition to
contact hours.
Total study hours 300
16
Assessment methods and how these relate to testing achievement of the intended learning
outcomes
The module will be marked by continuous assessment only, there will be no final examination.
Students will be required to write one essay of up to 3000 words, which will account for 80% of
their total marks. The remaining 20% will be an assessment of seminar performance. The essay
will normally be single marked and moderated. The module will also include some formative
assessment: students will be given the opportunity to hand in an essay plan; this will receive
feedback but will not be marked.
UNIVERSITY OF KENT - CODE OF PRACTICE FOR QUALITY ASSURANCE
The essay will assess students' knowledge and understanding of the material as well as their
ability to engage in critical analysis and argument, and to present independent ideas. The mark for
seminar performance will reflect students' ability to engage clearly and effectively in oral
discussion and argument.
At the end of the course students will be asked to complete the standard course evaluation
questionnaire. On the basis of the replies, and of comments from the external examiner, a report
on the module will be contributed to the Annual Monitoring and Evaluation Report for the
Philosophy programme.
17 Implications for learning resources, including staff, library, IT and space
Staffing will be provided from the existing resources of the Philosophy Section of SECL.
The library will need to order further copies of key course books. No special implications for new IT
or space resources are anticipated.
18 A statement confirming that, as far as can be reasonably anticipated, the curriculum, learning
and teaching methods and forms of assessment do not present any non-justifiable
disadvantage to students with disabilities
As far as can be reasonably foreseen, there will be no non-justifiable disadvantages that students
with disabilities will experience on this course. People with special needs will be asked to make
themselves known to the teacher, by indicating on their essays, or by contacting the teacher in
other ways, and to discuss with the teacher how best to meet their needs. For example, by making
special provisions when setting deadlines, marking written work, by allowing extra time and special
conditions in which to complete examinations, etc. Attempts will be made to ensure access in case
of problems, and that communications are not problematic for students with sensory impairments.
It is thus confirmed that, as far as can be reasonably anticipated, the curriculum, learning and
teaching methods and forms of assessment do not present any non-justifiable disadvantage to
students with disabilities.