Critical Thinking Assignment 3-4 Pages

User Generated

qbbqyrtey91

Business Finance

Description

Critical Thinking Assignment 3-4 Pages

***NO PLAGIARISM PLEASE.***

Assignment1.1_Critical Thinking.docx (Here is Part I that was already completed)

Assignment 1.2: Conflicting Viewpoints Essay – Part II
Synthesizing and Writing

When looking for information about a particular issue, how often do you try to resist biases toward your own point of view? This assignment asks you to engage in this aspect of critical thinking.

The assignment is divided into two (2) parts.
For Part I of the assignment (due Week 2), you read a book excerpt about critical thinking processes, reviewed the Procon.org Website in order to gather information, and engaged in prewriting to examine your thoughts.
* Remember that in the Week 2 Discussion, you examined the biases discussed in Chapter 2 of the webtext.

In Part II of the assignment (due Week 4), you will write a paper to synthesize your ideas.
Part II – Writing
Write at three to four (3-4) page paper in which you:
1. State your position on the topic you selected for Assignment 1.1.
2. Identify (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position   and explain why you selected these specific reasons.
3. Explain your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.
4. Examine at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position. 
5. Discuss the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.
6. Discuss whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue has stayed the same.

The paper should follow guidelines for clear and organized writing:

  • Include an introductory paragraph and concluding paragraph.

  • Address main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences.

  • Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling.

Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:

  • Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA Style format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.

  • Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.

*******GRADING RUBIC*********

Assignment 1.2: Conflicting Viewpoints Essay – Part II

Criteria

Unacceptable
Below 60% F

Meets Minimum Expectations
60-69% D

Fair
70-79% C

Proficient
80-89% B

Exemplary
90-100% A

1.State your position on the topic.
Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely stated your position on the topic.

Insufficiently stated your position on the topic.

Partially stated your position on the topic.

Satisfactorily stated your position on the topic.

Thoroughly stated your position on the topic.

2. Identify (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explain why you selected these specific reasons.
Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely identified (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explained why you selected these specific reasons.

Insufficiently identified (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explained why you selected these specific reasons. .

Partially identified (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explained why you selected these specific reasons.

Satisfactorily identified (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explained why you selected these specific reasons.

Thoroughly identified (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explained why you selected these specific reasons.

3. Explain your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.
Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely explained your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.

Insufficiently explained your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.

Partially explained your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.

Satisfactorily explained your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.

Thoroughly explained your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.

4. Examine at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position.
Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely examined at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position.

Insufficiently examined at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position.

Partially examined at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position.

Satisfactorily examined at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position.

Thoroughly examined at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position.

5. Discuss the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.
Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.

Insufficiently discussed the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.

Partially discussed the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.

Satisfactorily discussed the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.

Thoroughly discussed the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.

6. Discuss whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue has stayed the same.
Weight: 15%

Did not submit or incompletely discussed whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue stayed the same.

Insufficiently discussed whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue stayed the same.

Partially discussed whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue stayed the same.

Satisfactorily discussed whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue stayed the same.

Thoroughly discussed whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue stayed the same.

7. Follow APA Style requirements for format, in-text citation of quotes and paraphrases, and references page.
Weight: 10%

Did not complete the assignment or had more than 9 errors in following APA Style requirements.

Had 8-9 errors in following APA Style requirements.

Had 6-7 different errors in following APA Style requirements.

Had 4-5 different errors in following APA Style requirements.

Had 0-3 different errors in following APA Style requirements.

8. Follow guidelines for clear and organized writing: include an introductory and concluding paragraph; address main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences.
Weight: 10%

Did not submit or incompletely followed guidelines for clear and organized writing.

Insufficiently followed guidelines for clear and organized writing: did not include an introductory and / or concluding paragraph; did not address main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences.

Partially followed guidelines for clear and organized writing: included a partially developed introductory and / or concluding paragraph; partially addressed main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences.

Sufficiently followed guidelines for clear and organized writing: included an introductory and concluding paragraph; sufficiently addressed main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and supporting sentences.

Thoroughly   followed guidelines for clear and organized writing: included an engaging introductory and thoughtful concluding paragraph; thoroughly addressed main ideas in body paragraphs with a topic sentence and detailed supporting sentences.

9. Adhere to standard rules of English grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and spelling.
Weight: 10%

Did not complete the assignment or had more than 9 errors in grammar, punctuation, mechanics, spelling.

Had 8-9 errors in grammar, punctuation, mechanics, spelling.

Had 6-7 different errors in grammar, punctuation, mechanics, spelling.

Had 4-5 different errors in grammar, punctuation, mechanics, spelling.

Had 0-3 different errors in grammar, punctuation, mechanics, spelling.


Unformatted Attachment Preview

Assignment 1.1: Conflicting Viewpoints Critical Thinking - Assignment 1.1: Conflicting Viewpoints Part I 1 Assignment 1.1: Conflicting Viewpoints Fiscal reform has been the subject of tremendous debate since 2008. Ushered into public discussion by the collapse of financial institutions, corporate taxation was a very important issue to a select population long before Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy. It is my belief that a low tax rate on corporations does not create jobs. Few things lend so much gravitas to opinion like money, which is why a vast army of lobbyists exists to oppose my stance. Thus it is worthwhile to examine the evidence this army has helpfully gathered for Congress, especially as the United States is preparing for another war over a national budget. The most frequent quote in support of a lower tax rate is some variation of the following: the high US tax rate forces companies to move overseas. This is cited by the Procon.org website on the issue as one of the major reasons in support of a low corporate tax rate. As an example of circular reasoning, Procon.org cites Aon. Aon is a corporation that moved to London not specifically for lower tax rates, but if I were to believe the press release, the stated five percent reduction in theoretical tax savings would allow Aon to hire more employees. One cannot help but notice that Aon has never followed through with proof of this strategy, but one can see that theoretical savings could translate to free capital to hire workers. In order for this to contextually make sense, Aon would have to be unable to hire American employees by any other means than through a lower tax rate. A cynic would point out that a company unwilling to cut dividends to finance wages is unlikely to give savings to employees. Yet if I believe the claim to be true, I would expect wage expense to increase proportional to tax liability in the years following 2011. Following from first principles, those corporations unable to flee the draconian effective 27% tax rate must find other means to cope. To do so, Procon.org states that a higher tax rate means “lower wages”, and lower wages equals greater unemployment. It is interesting insofar as this viewpoint indicates the many expenses companies must consider. In order to believe this to 2 Assignment 1.1: Conflicting Viewpoints be true, one would also have to ignore the fact that employees are paid wages which are expensed to arrive at tax liability. The only worthy aspect of this particular “pro” is that lower taxes might mean increased capital for wages. If a corporation were otherwise producing a product with completely inelastic demand, costs could not be passed on to the consumer. In much the same vein as the previous pro, Procon.org lists as a pro for a lower tax rate more capital to invest and thus, more jobs. This idea is perhaps the most salient: it does not require the company receiving the tax break to hire more employees. It merely makes investment more likely, and thus there is the greatest increase in the probability that potential employees in any other field may benefit. Whatever “reinvestment” means in this scenario, money that is spent may help spur demand across all economic sectors. One must assume that a company investing capital generates more employment than the federal government doing so, which may very well be the case. This point is most interesting in that it forces one to actually consider which actor in an economy is better able to serve the public good. As we the people will soon be flooded with news of Congress arguing over budgetary concerns and how to tackle national debt, it is helpful to consider an opinion one disagrees with. It is near certain that a Congressional legislator will bring up one or many of the aforementioned points in debate. If one disagrees, playing The Believing Game is fantastic preparation to debate the inherent fallacies in finer detail. As noted by Peter Elbow, people very rarely change their opinions. If this is the case, the Believing Game is great way to plan a guerilla attack on very grounds from which people refuse to budge. 3 Assignment 1.1: Conflicting Viewpoints References: Does Lowering the Federal Corporate Income Tax Rate Create Jobs? (2014). [Graphic Illustration from Procon.org July 11, 2015). Pro & Con Arguments: "Does Lowering the Federal Corporate Income Tax Rate Create Jobs?" Retrieved from http://corporatetax.procon.org/#background. Elbow, Peter. (2006). The Believing Game and How to Make Conflicting Opinions More Fruitful. In Nurturing the Peacemakers in Our Students: A Guide to Teaching Peace, Empathy, and Understanding. Retrieved from http://www.procon.org/sourcefiles/believinggame.pdf. 4
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer


Anonymous
Really helpful material, saved me a great deal of time.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags