Use Paul and Elder’s (2012) intellectual standards to find a topic or problem that is clear, relevant, significant, and precise. Select an issue that you wish to investigate critically (social, professional, or personal). Examples of topics: How can I secure a job in accounting when I have no experience in the field? What proposals has the city of Denver made to reduce water consumption? How might this impact individual consumers? What financial changes do I need to make to retire at the age of 62? Should wolves be reintroduced to Rio Blanco County? How can I manage my children’s cell phone usage? How can the pay gap between men and women best be addressed in my company? What are the most effective ways to address anxiety and depression? How can I use these to better my health? IMPORTANT: The Final Portfolio is not a traditional “term paper.” Your final portfolio submission should include the following sections: Title page Introduction Engagement with issue or problem using scholarly sources and the intellectual standards proposed by Paul and Elder (2012): What is the issue? Why is it significant? Why is this issue relevant to you (and/or your community)? What have you learned about the depth and breadth of the issue or problem from scholarly sources? Engagement with your own assumptions or thinking about the issue. What assumptions do you bring to this subject? What concepts are "at work" in your mind as you investigate this issue? Why is this subject of interest to you and how might this skew your investigations? These questions constitute some of the issues covered by Paul and Elder (2012) in their "elements of reason.” Engagement with scholarly sources: How do the scholarly sources aid you as you think about the issue fair-mindedly and with depth? What have you learned from the scholarly sources that have helped you analyze the issue? Conclusion: Reflect on your issue or problem and how the sources informed your thinking. What have you learned? How can you apply the intellectual standards and elements of reason to this issue or problem to come to creative solutions? What critical questions remain? References Page

One or Two Aspects of Communication in the Scientific Environmentby Charles Zalabak*In desperation, I begin this essay with the hope that once the writing is finished, I will again be able to eat and drink without ulcerative tendencies, that I will be able to breathe without palpitations. To free myself of the anxiety over getting it done prompts me to action. I am sure that by doing so, those who are awaiting the completion will no longer point an accusing finger and I will recover a modicum of self-respect.† After all, I feel that a few of my experiences may be noted, with benefit, by a student interested in communication in the technical world.Graduating with a bachelor’s degree in engineering physics (communication requirement: one semester of public speaking) I went to work for the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) as a research scientist. When the NACA became a part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASA), I was more concerned with product development. The working conditions were very good by my evaluations. Resources were adequate (a researcher will almost always claim a better job could be done with more money and what it can buy in simulations, manpower, supplies, and time), the environment was stimulating (exciting fields of inquiry, capable and generally compatible people), and a review process by which the research projects were maintained was consistent with needs.To examine the process of communication as I experienced it at NASA, let me describe several assignments and leave the details of communication analysis to the student and to those better qualified than I.As a new employee just out of school, one might expect to do menial tasks, of course. One of my first assignments in the research environment was the plotting of curves, whereby it is possible to deduce a mathematical relationship or to check how closely the experimental data fit the theoretical curve. Today, of course, electronic curve plotters eliminate the tedium, except as it applies to the programmer. Whether an assignment is individually completed or performed with sophisticated technology, the scientist is concerned with determining what are meaningful data. What should be accepted and what should be rejected? How accurate are the standards we use for judgment? I have frequently asked myself the questions: What about data that were rejected on the basis of such situations as instrument error or nonstable set point? Were some of those data also meaningful? If so, what was the impact of discarding those data?As in most research environments, we were constrained in design by a variety of limitations. I was assigned to create mechanical designs to convey concepts, materials, and dimensions for needed equipment such as a furnace capable of high-temperature materials testing. Did the need for limitations provide equipment (and resulting data) that could be misused by persons not fully understanding the limitations?Report writing—formal communication—was the culmination of a research effort. After progress and findings had been reviewed by supervisors and agreement had been obtained that the results merited distribution, a draft report was prepared for supervisor approval. Corrections made, the report was submitted to an editorial committee that included a checker (responsible for accuracy of formulas, calculations, and references), a co-worker or two (not directly on the project), and a person attempting to ensure the report would be comprehensible to technical persons not in the same specialty area (described as a mean intelligence). The author of the report could expect sessions with the editorial committee to be lengthy and somewhat combative. Following additional corrections/approvals, the grammarians made their recommendations. Final corrections, duplication, distribution, and cataloguing were the responsibilities of the author(s). Communicating the results was part of the research assignment.The communication examples, questions, and concerns I have described were basic to most of my assignments. Additionally, technical reviews as presenter or participant were common at various levels in both group and interpersonal settings. Again, the responsibility to examine and critique was as much a part of the job as actual manipulation of data.Throughout, I found an honest, ethical relationship pervasive among people, a sincere attempt to present findings with full disclosure of the limitations. And yet, we have witnessed a space-mission failure resulting in death. And digressing to other areas of science, we remember Nobel felt compelled to fund a commemoration of peace efforts because his discovery of dynamite was so devastating. We note the pollution of air, water, and land due to accidents arising from nuclear fission and the potential pollution from fission residues that require disposal. Disposal of toxins from manufacturing processes poses increasing problems, as does the use of toxins by inadequately informed people. The list can be continued. However, the point is that in each case the initial product was to improve the lot of the human race—from dynamite as a source of concentrated energy to pesticides that improve agricultural productivity and facilitate distribution.So what about communication (besides the fact that a lack of communication contributed to the above-cited problems)? I see work being done to advance the discipline. As cause and effect become better defined, the potential for abuses grows. Can the student of communication help establish a course of action to forestall these abuses, as well as guide the technical community so they may better convey the totality of information?1. How does Zalabak see human communication influencing scientific progress?2. Can you identify other examples of scientific problems related to human communication?3. How should scientists be trained in human communication?