Module Overview: In this module you will apply your understanding of learning, attention, memory, and critical thinking to a developmental process that you are all currently engaged in: college education. First, you will watch watch/listen to 2 brief segments from public t.v./radio on the issue of vaccine denial/refusal. You will consider the consequences for all of us when college educated adults do not think critically about issues of great importance. Next, you will watch 2 segments of a talk given by sociologist of education Richard Arum on his work with his colleague Josipa Roksa. In their research they explored three "generic" skills: critical thinking, higher order reasoning and writing skills. Their findings show that these vital "generic" skills are developed best when: 1) faculty hold high expectations for students, 2) students are given challenging reading and writing assignments and 3) students spend greater study time alone, NOT in groups. (The latter finding should remind you of the brief talk by Geoff Colvin who described how "deliberate practice" could lead to extreme growth in skill). Arum and Roksa also followed students over time to illuminate the very real consequences of inadequate college education for their futures and for our entire society. After the successful completion to this learning unit, you will be able to: 1. Identify the likely presence (or evidence) of "pre-reflective" and "quasi-reflective" judgment among college educated parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated. 2. Identify how critical thinking, higher order reasoning and writing skills can be reliably measured and what happens when students fail to develop these generic skills. (Note: Arum will use the term "quintile." This means 20%. So the "top quintile" would be the top 20%, etc.). Before you Begin:The graph below presents the results of a study by King and Kitchener (review Reflective Judgment in your text, Ch. 7) that compared the Reflective Judgment scores of students who were enrolled in high school (10th grade), college (freshmen to seniors), and graduate school (early post-college and after years of Ph.D. training).You will see that, on average, 10th grade students and new college students scored slightly above 3 or at the pre-reflective stage; college seniors and new graduate students scored between 4-5 or within the quasi-reflective stage, and only advanced Ph.D. students scored closer to 6 in the reflective judgment (i.e., critical thinking) stage. The implications of this are clear: on average, college graduates have NOT learned how to think critically and regard the “truth” of particular claims as largely a “matter of opinion.” Said differently, they have not learned how to evaluate evidence to arrive at a more accurate position. Other researchers have reported results that are similar to those above. This leaves us with at least 2 important questions. First: What impact does this have on our society’s ability to deal with issues of critical importance to our nation and our planet? Second: Why do so many college students fail to learn to think critically during college? For example, consider the case (also in Ch. 1 of your text) of parents who insisted that their children’s autism had been caused by the MMR vaccine despite that fact that empirical evidence does not support that claim. As a result of an inability to think critically, some parents have refused to vaccinate their children and diseases, mostly unseen for decades, are now on the rise. As you will hear/see in the Public Radio/T.V. pieces below, outbreaks have occurred in areas with relatively high levels of education. Given the work of King and Kitchener, that should actually not be all that surprising. After teaching for many years I've come to the conclusion that many students do not learn how to think critically for the same reason chronic multi-taskers overestimate their abilities to multi-task and poorly performing students overestimate their test grades: We don't know what we don't know. That is, before they learn how to think critically, most students do not realize that they are not thinking critically. I've made it a point to try to convince my students that most of them have not yet learned to think effectively. You might guess that this would make me pretty unpopular. But that is not what has happened. Instead, many (many!) of my students have made it their mission to learn to think critically and then they do!STEP 1: To successfully complete this learning unit, first review Reflective Judgment in Ch. 7 of your text. Then listen to/watch 2 segments from Public Radio/T.V. Note: At the start of the Marin video, listen very carefully to what the doctor advises about the flu vaccine and how the mother replies. Also, listen carefully to the mother's reasoning behind her resistance to the Chicken Pox vaccine.Marin County Vaccine Refusal (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. and Santa Monica Vaccine Refusal (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. STEP 2: watch 2 segments of a lecture given by sociologist Richard Arum on his studies (with Josipa Roksa) of the causes and consequences of inadequate college educations. Watch the video from: 8:28 until 39:34 and then from 54:45 until the end.Richard Arum Video (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. STEP 3: Write a 250-350 word (maximum) brief report on the issue of inadequate critical thinking/reasoning among college educated persons. In your brief report, address both questions below. Address the following questions: 1. Identify the likely presence (or evidence) of "pre-reflective" and "quasi-reflective" judgment among college educated parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated. What did the parents say that lead you to that conclusion? 2. Identify how critical thinking, higher order reasoning and writing skills can be reliably measured and what happens when students fail to develop these generic skills. (Note: Arum will use the term "quintile." This means 20%. So the "top quintile" would be the top 20%, etc.). Make sure to refer to information presented throughout the audio/videos, that is, your report should make clear that you listened to/watched the audio/video assignments in their entirety. Please don't plarigism.

In this discussion, you will demonstrate your mastery of the following course learning objectives: Compare, contrast, and apply the basic theoretical paradigms of sociology (Structural-Functional, Social-Conflict, and Symbolic-Interaction) and analyze two or more phenomena in society using the three perspectives.  Explain social stratification using theoretical perspectives to analyze economic, racial/ethnic, and gender inequality in a societal context. Task Perform the assigned Internet activity and answer the following discussion prompts in a minimum of 250-500 words: Go to the interactive website, Inequality.is/personal to see how your income might vary depending on your age, sex, race, and educational attainment. For the purposes of this assignment, you may stop when you find the income for each of your people. You may choose to keep following through the scenarios to learn more about other social factors that impact income.  Create three different fictional people and assign them each an age, race, gender, and education level.  Enter the characteristics of each of your fictional people into the website and write down their income. Be sure to write down the characteristics that you use for your three examples as you do the activity so you are prepared to write your post. You will be prompted to see how your fictional person's income would change if one of their personal characteristics changed. Note these changes so you can discuss them in your post.  Be sure to watch the video at the bottom of the website on how economic inequality was created, as it can help inform your post. In three separate paragraphs in your post, Describe your three fictional people and summarize how any differences in income might be based on their characteristics. Who had the highest income? The lowest? What characteristics seemed to cause the change in income?   Explain your findings using the concept of intersectionality. Be sure to explain intersection theory! Compare and contrast two of the three basic theoretical perspectives (Structural-Functionalism, Social-Conflict, and Symbolic-Interactionism) to analyze your findings in a societal context. Define, cite, and apply as many terms as applicable from the lesson and course content to your analysis. Ask your classmates a question at the end of your initial post to stimulate discussion