 Sure, first I should explain what the Community Action Project is. It is a nationwide program in which introductory anthropology students are given the facts of the matter in an ethical debate that is current in anthropological practice. So, for example, this year the debate had to do with the ethical use of blood samples that were drawn 20 years ago on an indigenous population and are being repurposed now without permission from the original donors. Students read about a 100-page booklet which lays out the history and the competing arguments for ethical use of those materials. And they must then write a letter of their own to one of the decision makers in the controversy, arguing a position, arguing a point of view, a course of action. Those letters are submitted to the national pool and each student who participates then receives four blind copies from the peer pool. And through an electronic winnowing process they evaluate these until the highest scoring five letters nationally are selected. Those five letters then are posted so that students who did not take one of the first five spots can affix their electronic signatures and then those letters are actually sent to the decision makers. For example, this fall there were approximately 2,000 students across the country who were participating and the decision makers could see that 500 aspiring anthropology students favored a particular course of action as a resolution to the ethical dilemma. Why do I like this? I like this for so many reasons. The very first topic that we address in my teaching of the course is ethics. And so they become aware that there is a code of ethics with the general outlines of such a code are and as the quarter progresses, I point out ethical dilemmas in research situations and encounters with the ethnographic other. What I like about this project is it makes them take a stand. They have to logic out for themselves what they think the proper course of action would be. They have to argue it logically. They are subjected to the evaluation of their peers. I don't have to grade anything in this large project. I take the evaluation of their peers as the grade for the project. And it reinforces for them the centrality of ethical decision making in not just anthropology, but in any of the professions and the methods by which ethical reasoning is done. They enjoy it because it is sent to real people making real decisions in this world. So it isn't just an exercise seen only by the TA and the professor that I hand back and they file in the drawer. Students report a high level of satisfaction with this program even though it's extra work and even though there is a modest but nonetheless there is a fee to participate. And the pride at being successful in this endeavor was just very clear. We did have a national winner this fall. Last spring we had two national winners out of Western Washington University. I've been very proud of them as well. But you didn't have to be a national winner to be proud of your result. Students who were probably earning a C, a B minus in the class, had their letters judged to be sometimes in the 95% range. And they report to me that having had that one solid success did more for their own view of themselves as being developing scholars than any other activity.