CRT205 Discussion Questions

Week 2 DQ 1 - Due Tuesday July 21, 2009

Directions:

Each Read and Discuss week we will examine select concepts from your reading. Your participation will be graded on the substantive posts that you add to the conversation (check the course materials room if you are unsure about what constitutes a substantive post). Remember your original DQ response is separate from your required participation posts. You are to post at least 2 substantive messages each day for 3 out of 7 days this week in addition to your initial answers to the discussion questions.

Click Reply and post a 150-300-word response to the following discussion question AFTER YOU HAVE COMPLETED THE MAPP ASSESSMENT AND POSTED YOUR SCREEN SHOT INTO YOUR IF –To get full credit for DQ1 you must complete the MAAP and show proof by posting a screen shot in your IF.

Discussion Question 1

Many online assessments, such as personality tests, skills assessments or IQ tests, base their results on a comparison between an individual’s score and the average score of others. How do you feel about being compared to the average of other test scores? Do you think a standardized test is a good assessment of individual knowledge? What are the benefits and challenges of using standardized tests to determine individual knowledge and abilities?

I do not mind being academically compared to other tested individuals as I usually have high scores.  I do not think a standardized test is a good assessment of an individual’s knowledge.  Standardized tests can be a good way to assess a group of students and then used to compare with other schools.  In this way you would be comparing schools, teachers or a specific geographical area.  The challenges you face with using standardized tests to compare individuals is that some individuals perform badly under pressure of a timed test.  Some are even stressed when hearing the word “Test”.   Taking a test under duress will not yield the correct assessment of an individual’s knowledge or skill set.  Between the pressures of tests being timed and the importance put on tests, even intelligent people can have lower test scores than they should when compared to their actual knowledge.   I find Axia’s approach to testing very stress free.  There is no huge exam at the end of class.  You use what you learned in class to complete a final project that is the culmination of all you learned.  In addition, the project is only twenty-five percent of the overall grade.  All lends to having a stress-free testing method.  

Week 2 DQ 2 - Due Thursday July 23, 2009

Please post a 150-300-word response to the following discussion question by clicking on Reply.

Discussion Question 2

 Read the discussion question response written by Owen, a fictional Axia student on page 9 in your syllabus under week 2. Identify areas of vagueness and ambiguity and discuss how you could clarify the e-mail’s message using the writing principles addressed in the text.

Hi Class,

I don’t have a lot of time to explain but off the top of my head answer is as a reader critical thinking affects me all ways. Not just reading but writing too. Sometimes what I read I must write about later like this discussion question so clearly I have to read. Clear writing is the hardest thing in the world.

Though I don’t the average writer has to write business rapports which can build report and be inter personal. In critical writing, writers construct sentences with clear intentions.

Business people write fast because the business people I know are always in a hurry.

Business reading is reports, memos and articles. My aunt is a university professor and she writes articles for journals. She is smart and better writer than my uncle who is a businessman. So critical writers are better than business writers. But critical writing like argumentative essays have structure, so business writing has structure too. It’s not a mater of one kind of writing being harder than the other it’s that the structure is harder.

Thanks,

First of all, beginning a post by saying “I don’t have a lot of time to explain” just shows the student is not taking the time to think critically or even well.  Owen demonstrates this throughout his post with misspelling (such as ‘mater’ instead of ‘matter’), incomplete sentences (such as “So critical writers are better than business writers), and the incorrect use of homophones (such as ‘rapports’ instead of ‘report’ and ‘report’ instead of ‘rapport’).  He failure to use inclusive language when writing about his aunt and uncle’s writing ability caused him to make a serious transgression and appears sexist.  His post was even difficult to read due to his failure to include correct punctuation. 
My first suggestion for Owen would be to make the time to think about what he is writing, even read his post out loud to himself before sending.  Second, run the post through a spell checker.  The University’s Center for Writing Excellence has a wonderful WritePoint tool which would examine his post for misspelling, punctuation and word usage errors.  I would also recommend taking some basic English classes in order to better understand punctuation, spelling and other basic language errors and how to fix them.

1.     Discussion Question 1

• Resource: McGraw-Hill companion Web site
• Due Date: Day 2 [Main forum]
• Revisit the PowerPoint Presentation section of the McGraw-Hill companion Web site at http://www.mhhe.com/criticalthinking8 for Ch. 4. Examine the examples of rhetorical devices and choose one that either makes an emotional impact on you or sparks your interest.
• Copy and paste the example into the body of a forum message and include your response to this question: Why does the example affect you, and what is the statement’s persuasive motive? Comment on the examples provided by your classmates by stating whether and why their examples affect you.

The example ”Who was that young woman with the Senator last night? His niece?” probably sparked my interest the most.  It is an example of innuendo.  I actually use innuendo a lot, whether it is to persuade or just for a laugh.  I find innuendo an easy and effective method of persuasion.  The persuasive motive is to insult subtly and still leave the speaker a way out through denial.  “Well, I did not mean it that way.”  Very often, innuendo can be very personal.  Innuendo allows you in some situations to insult while in the presence of others without the notice of the others in your group. 

Week 4 DQ 2 - Due Thursday August 6, 2009

Discussion Question 2

According to Moore and Parker (2007), “Even definitions by example can slant a discussion if the examples are prejudicially chosen…If one wants to see all sides of an issue, one must avoid definitions and examples that slant a discussion” (p. 121). This rule also applies to the use of rhetorical explanations.

Consider the following prejudicial rhetorical devices:     

·       SUVs are apartment homes on wheels (a rhetorical definition).

·        Said by a student who is new to honors classes and struggling with them, “I would have aced that test if I weren’t in a class full of brainiacs. They studied too much and ruined the curve!” (a rhetorical explanation)

Post your response to the following: How can a person distinguish between the prejudicial and nonprejudicial use of rhetorical devices? Provide an example of each and comment on the examples posted by your classmates.

Prejudicial rhetoric uses stereotyping or incorrect definitions with little or no use of factual evidence. 

One prejudicial rhetorical statement I have heard is that “Uneducated white people live in trailer parks, while uneducated black people are in the projects.”  This statement not only hits home with me, but is grossly inaccurate.  It is prejudicial because it assumes trailer parks can only have white individuals with no education.  Also, the projects, which are low-income apartment buildings, can only house African American individuals with little or no education.  All of the above is untrue. 

A non-prejudicial rhetorical statement would be “Individuals with little or no formal education are more likely to live in low-income housing.”  This is a statement with a more accurate assessment of the correlation between education and low-income housing. 

1.     Discussion Question 1

• Resource: Vacuum Sales digital story
• Due Date: Day 2 [Main forum]
• View the Vacuum Sales digital story located on the Materials tab of your student web page for Week Six.
• Post your response to the following: Of the two arguments provided in the digital story, which is valid and which is sound? When you are building an argument for an issue that is significant to you, do you think it is more important to be valid or sound? Explain your answer.

The statement “Anyone who wants a comfortable, clean home needs this amazing vacuum cleaner. You certainly look like someone who likes having a really clean home. So, you definitely need this vacuum cleaner!” is a valid argument, while the statement “Honey, our carpets are clean and we already have a working vacuum cleaner. We don’t need a new one!” is the sound one.

I would rather have a sound argument when speaking about an issue that is significant to me.  A sound argument is truth based on truth, while a valid argument is true at the end it is based on false information. 

1.     Discussion Question 2

• Due Date: Day 4 [Main forum]
• Resource: Ch. 7 (pp. 219–226) of Critical Thinking
• Imagine your child is trying to prove that she did not steal chocolate chip cookies from the cookie jar, so she makes this argument: “There are no chocolate stains on my hands, so I couldn’t have stolen the cookies.”
• Post your response to the following: Does this example require deductive or inductive logic? What are the premises? Are the premises stated or unstated? What is the argument’s conclusion? In your opinion, is this a convincing argument? Why or why not?

            This is an example of inductive logic, the child starts with a specific example and moves toward a general conclusion.  One premise that was stated was “There are no chocolate stains on my hands”.  There is another premise that is unstated which the child apparently believes, ‘you cannot eat chocolate chip cookies without receiving chocolate stains’. The conclusion is that the child “could not have stolen the cookies.” 

            This, in my opinion, is not a convincing argument.  There are other conclusions that could be drawn from the premise.  Such as, the child washed their hands, or perhaps the child was careful when eating the cookies as to not get chocolate stains.  This one statement is not enough evidence to reach the conclusion given.

 Discussion Question 1

 Describe a time when your moral values influenced the way you responded to an issue. What differences did you notice between your logical reasoning process and your moral reasoning process? What were the possible consequences or outcomes of your decision?

This moral decision may seem simple but it is one we have all faced and probably even falling on both sides of the fence when making this decision.   Waking up in the morning, not really wanting to go into work on that particular day, but you know if you do not go in, your coworker will be screwed.   You know you could call off because you almost never call off, but is it right to do so just because you do not feel up to going to work on that particular day.   Often times my logic and moral values are often side by side.  For me, the logic and moral reasoning in this case were the same.  Logically and morally there is no reason to skip work.  Also morally, it isn’t right to make a coworker work harder just because you did not feel like going into work.  Calling off when you have no reason could undermine your relationship with your coworkers, cause tension in the workplace, and you could lose respect from your employer.  

Discussion Question 2

State your stance on the Terri Schiavo case, and identify the moral value judgment that influenced you to choose your stance.

An example of a stance is, “Terri Schiavo should have been allowed to live, despite her persistent vegetative state.” An example of a moral value judgment is, “No person’s death should be decided by another—people should die naturally.”

An example of moral relativism could be that American culture accepts many religious standpoints, making it difficult for its citizens to agree on the religious morality of the issue brought to light by Terri Schiavo and her family.

Moore and Parker (2007) define utilitarianism as the belief that “…if an individual can feel pleasure and pain, then he or she deserves moral consideration” (p. 425). Consider that many proponents of both sides of the Shiavo case thought they had Terri’s best interests in mind—a moral consideration.
Discuss with your classmates how moral relativism and utilitarianism apply to this issue.

I have to admit, outside of hearing Terri’s name a few years back and that there was some controversy over whether she should live or die, I had no knowledge of what happened.  There are a two ways I can interpret the question “State your stance on the Terri Schiavo case” One being, whether I would allow the husband or the parents to be guardian.  The other being, whether I would have removed her feeding tube. 

After reading about the case, I believe the husband was right in his pursuit to remove her feeding tube.  I know of no individual that would want to live that way.  I challenge anyone to say they would want to continue living while in a Permanent Vegetative State. It is clear he did not come to his decision quickly.  He spent 8 years with his wife in that state before he start petitioning the court to have her tube removed.  He trying many ways to bring her back, and consulted dozens of professionals.  I feel for her parents, and as a parent myself, I know parents are never objective about their own children.  The seven year struggle by the parents to remove the husband’s rights was wrong.  Especially in light of the numerous appeals brought before the court and then denied.  So many appeals were brought that the case attracted even the President of the US to get involved along with Congress and the House of Representatives.