Systematic Consumer Fraud at Wells Fargo

COURSE PAPER PROSPECTUS                                                                                                    

FORMAT.(1) Title Page.  On the first page of the outline, identify the specific option you have selected from those listed on the paper assignment guidelines in the course syllabus.   Don’t copy all the words from the guideline, just enough to specify what you have in mind.   You can also tailor these a bit for your own purposes.

For example, suppose you select option one,“Organizational Culture and White Collar Crime.”  You might entitle this, “Systematic Consumer Fraud at Wells Fargo.”   Then you might add a subtitle indicating you wish to focus on a particular cause of the violations.   For example, “Incentives and Threats in the Workplace.”    You should place this title about a third of the way down the title page, in bold, capital letters, and center it.   Then place your name about two-thirds of the way down the page, in bold capitals, centered.

Or you might pick option four,”Resolution of White Collar Cases.”Here you might discuss the penalties imposed on Volkswagen and Audi for their falsification of test data regarding emissions from their diesel vehicles.   Your title might be, “How to Deal with ‘Defeat Devices,’ and your subtitle, “Prosecution and Regulatory Action Against Volkswagen and Audi.”

(2) Research Sources.  On the next page, insert the heading RESEARCH SOURCES  in bold capitals, at the top of the page, and center it.   Then list separately each of at least six (7) sources  you intend to use, numbering each along the left hand margin.   Give the author, title, date and place of publication (including web addresses for online sources).  For each, briefly indicate why you think the source is appropriate and helpful.   For example, if you selected the Wells Fargo case, you might say about a particular source: “This article provides an in-depth report of testimony at a congressional hearing about Wells Fargo.   It appears in a respected outlet, the New York Times.   It also offers several different perspectives on the issue.”  Or, “This source is a report from a respected, non-partisan watchdog group that has been following the Wells Fargo controversy.   It is a source that experts consult.”  Our textbook should NOT BE included among the six sources.

(3) Initial Thoughts.  On the third page, insert the heading INITIAL THOUGHTS, in bold capitals, at the top of the page, and center it.   Then briefly sketch out the major sections of the paper as you think they will develop.  For example, re the Edward Snowden controversy, you might divide the paper as follows:

(1) Introduction.   “In this part of the paper, I will briefly sketch the controversy over Edward Snowden’s release of classified government information, including major facts about the type of information released and the charges brought against Snowden.  I will also briefly sketch Snowden’s career.”

(2) In Support of Snowden.  “This section will summarize the views of those who believe that Snowden is a courageous whistleblower whose efforts and self-sacrifice have benefited the country.  I will quote supporters from both the government and the academic spheres, and present their reasons for their positive stance, including the specific ways in which Snowden has served the country.”

(3) Against Snowden.  “This section will summarize the views of those who believe that Snowden is a white-collar criminal, rather than an admirable whistleblower, and that his actions have seriously harmed the United States.  I will again cite both government officials and academic scholars, and sum up their reasons for taking a negative stance, including the types of harm they believe Snowden has done.”

4) Conclusion: My Response.  “In this section I will compare and contrast key points from the preceding two sections, and then present my own point of view which is pro/anti Snowden.”

GRADING.  The outline is worth 50 points.   Outstanding papers will receive a grade in the range of 45 to 50.   Very good, but not outstanding papers will receive a grade in the range of 40 to 44.   Good, but less strong papers will receive a grade in the range of 35 to 39.   Acceptable but relatively weak papers will receive a grade in the range of 30 to 34.   Unacceptable papers will be returned for revisions, and will not receive an immediate grade.   Those that are not revised will not receive points.

Criteria of grading = originality, thoughtfulness, thoroughness, clarity, adherence to assignment guidelines.