Critical Reasoning - Assignment - Week 4

User Generated

ybxrl1000

Other

Description

Submit Portfolio Topic

Be sure to indicate which of the two Portfolio Project options you have decided to complete and provide a one paragraph write-up briefly explaining why you selected this option. 
Refer to the various fallacies featured in the Module 4 lecture pages for terms and concepts to use to ensure your topic will be logically and objectively presented. 
You may cite additional references to support your choice of topic position. Need some more assistance with your writing mechanics or with APA style? 
Be sure to back up your feedback with concrete facts and insights based on research. 
Remember that critical thinking is not just your opinion--rather, it is a claim that provides evidence that helps you prove an argument.

==========================================================================

Week 8 Portfolio Options

For your final Portfolio Project, you have two options. Do only one; do not do both. Indicate your selection in the file name of your project.

Begin the process of constructing your project by choosing a particular issue or problem. It could be related to your personal life or career path. The goal is then to align this problem or issue with a specific logic model from the text and/or other critical thinking tools you have been learning throughout the course. As you construct your project, utilize critical thinking tools to evaluate your data and your credible research, interpret this data, and understand your specific problem or issue from a broader, deeper and more focused perspective.

Portfolio Project Option # 1 - Essay

Becoming a college student means that you have a responsibility to apply knowledge to advance your field and to make the world a better place. Through practicing critical thinking skills, we learn not only to avoid being manipulated in our thinking, but to fully support and provide evidence for our ideas. Your Critical Thinking Journal, if you kept one, will help inform your final project.

Option #1: Write an 8 to 10 page essay (not counting required title or reference page).

Instructions:

Begin the process of constructing your project by choosing a particular issue or problem. It could be related to your personal life or career path. The goal is then to align this problem or issue with a specific logic model from the text and/or other critical thinking tools you have been learning throughout the course. As you construct your essay, utilize critical thinking tools to evaluate your data and your credible research, interpret this data, and understand your specific problem or issue from a broader, deeper and more focused perspective.

In constructing your essay, utilize and integrate the Elements of Thought from Chapter 5, pp. 104-122.

Your paper must:

  • Cite at least 6 scholarly peer-reviewed sources that are not required or recommended readings for this course. You may include a credible website 
  • Incorporate terms and concepts from the class readings and lecture pages.
  • Be formatted according to  APA Requirements 

Keep in mind the following preliminary deliverables throughout the course that will go toward completing your project:

  • Week 4: Submit Portfolio Topic
  • Week 6: Submit Portfolio Outline

Refer to the Portfolio Project grading rubric found in the Module 8 folder to understand how you will be graded.

PortfolioProjectRubric.pdf 

Portfolio Project Option # 2 - Presentation

Becoming a college student means that you have a responsibility to apply knowledge to advance your field and to make the world a better place. Through practicing critical thinking skills, we learn not only to avoid being manipulated in our thinking, but to fully support and provide evidence for our ideas. Your Critical Thinking Journal, if you kept one, will help inform your final project.

Option #2: Construct a power point or prezi presentation of at least 10 slides (not counting title slide or reference slide).

Instructions:

Begin the process of constructing your project by choosing a particular issue or problem. It could be related to your personal life or career path. The goal is then to align this problem or issue with a specific logic model from the text and/or other critical thinking tools you have been learning throughout the course. As you construct your presentation, utilize critical thinking tools to evaluate your data and your credible research, interpret this data, and understand your specific problem or issue from a broader, deeper and more focused perspective. Accessing and implementing credible research from the CSU Global Library is vitally important in the process of constructing your final presentation as it will also be important in all your future coursework.

In constructing your presentation, utilize and integrate the Elements of Thought from Chapter 5, pp. 104-122.

Your paper must:

  • Cite at least 6 scholarly peer-reviewed sources that are not required or recommended readings for this course. You may include a credible website (The CSU-Global Library is a good place to find these resources. You may cite the textbook, but that does not count as one of the scholarly peer-reviewed sources.)
  • Incorporate terms and concepts from the class readings and lecture pages.
  • Be formatted according to APA Requirements

Keep in mind the following preliminary deliverables throughout the course that will go toward completing your project:

  • Week 4: Submit Portfolio Topic 
  • Week 6: Submit Portfolio Outline 

Refer to the Portfolio Project grading rubric found in the Module 8 folder to understand how you will be graded.

PortfolioProjectRubric.pdf 

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Critical Reasoning Module 4: Mastery of the Process of Thinking Module Introduction Readings Required Chapters 4 & 7 in Critical Thinking Buckle Henning, P., & Chen, W. (2012). Systems thinking: Common ground or untapped territory? (https://search­ebscohost­com.csuglobal.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx? direct=true&db=bth&AN=83405324&site=ehost­live) Systems Research & Behavioral Science, 29(5), 470­483. doi:10.1002/sres.2155 Viator, M. (2012). Developing historical thinking through questions. (https://search­ ebscohost­com.csuglobal.idm.oclc.org/login.aspx? direct=true&db=pbh&AN=77508957&site=ehost­live) Social Studies, 103(5), 198­200. doi:10.1080/00377996.2011.606438 For Your Success Welcome to Week 4. This week we examine how to analyze intellectual critical thinking and to recognize and avoid fallacies in our reasoning. In this module we study the relationship of ideas, theories, assumptions, claims, and facts to how we critically think. The art of critical thinking pertains to the process of reasoning where you come to a conclusion and justify it with reasons. The art of critical thinking also includes asking questions. How can you apply what you are learning about the different components of critical thinking to your success as a college student? Is it enough to understand subjects through critical thinking or can you become a creative critical thinker? How School Kills Creativity (Source: http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity?language=en) Description: Sir Ken Robinson (2006) makes an entertaining and profoundly moving case for creating an education system that nurtures (rather than undermines) creativity. An evaluation of the parts of critical thinking are discussed to highlight how your purpose will influence the questions you ask. To guide you in your professional and personal life an evaluation of the process of how you interpret, conceptualize, and understand is presented, as is a discussion of the possible implications that follow from your reasoning. Note: Keep in mind the creative element of critical thinking. Reflection Questions: How you determine if your reasoning is valid: What is your purpose, goal, or objective? Have you identified the essential questions about the problem or issue? How have you collected your information: data, facts, observations, research, or experiences? How have you interpreted or evaluated the information to infer conclusions or solutions to your problem? Are you basing your thinking on theory, hypothesis, claims, assumptions, laws, principles, models or definitions? What facts, axioms or assumptions have you taken for granted? What are the implications and consequences of your thinking when you put it into action? What world view or perspective are you filtering your thought process through: religion, politics, or a specific social issue you feel strongly about? Filmed July 2011 at TEDGlobal 2011 Allan Jones: A map of the brain A Map of the Brain (Source: http://www.ted.com/talks/allan_jones_a_map_of_the_brain ) Description: In this Ted Talk, Allan Jones asks, how can we begin to understand the way the brain works? The same way we begin to understand a city: by making a map. In this visually stunning talk, Allan Jones shows how his team is mapping which genes are turned on in each tiny region, and how it all connects up. This week you have a Portfolio Milestone Assignment. Review it early in the week to understand what is required of you and to allot your time appropriately. The activity requires time and analysis, so don’t wait until the end of the week to begin. Submit your Portfolio Topic, which is worth 20 points to your final Portfolio Project score. Be sure to review the complete Portfolio Project assignment description and the Portfolio Grading Rubric found in the Module 8 folder. Optional: Keep a Critical Thinking Journal – Take time to reflect on your readings, class discussions, theories, models, definitions of critical thinking and jot down your thoughts, feelings, ideas, and questions. This journal is for your use and you are encouraged to keep writing in it after the course ends. It will document how you think today and your growth to become an advanced critical thinker. HUM101 Module 4 (Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyDgqfGF0kI) Learning Outcomes 1. Analyze elements of strategic thinking, logic and reasoning, and deductive and inductive arguments. 2. Apply methods to separate out bias from content: concepts, logic, and reasoning. 1. Recognize How the Brain Functions Neuroscientist Daniel Wolpert starts from a surprising premise: the brain evolved, not to think or feel, but to control movement. Watch this entertaining, data­rich talk he gives us with a glimpse into how the brain creates the grace and agility of human motion. Filmed July 2011 at TEDGlobal 2011 Daniel Wolpert: The real reason for brains (Source: http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_wolpert_the_real_reason_for_brains?language=en ) The Development of Thinking Advancement of intuition, insights, reasoning, and critical thinking. Intellectual skill development takes practice, as in learning how to play a musical instrument. Choice of self­centered or fair­minded thinking. How the brain produces creativity Watch the Ted Talk video by Charles Limb to discover what he and his team found to have deep implications about our understanding of creativity. Filmed November 2010 at TEDxMidAtlantic Charles Limb: Your brain on improv (Source: http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_limb_your_brain_on_improv?language=en) Description: Musician and researcher Charles Limb wondered how the brain works during musical improvisation — so he put jazz musicians and rappers in an MRI to find out. What he and his team found has deep implications for our understanding of creativity of all kinds. Reflect on the possibilities of the brain to think artistically, musically, literature, and not just as a tool for decision making, problem solving, or critical thinking. Watch this video with Simon Sinek and discover how great leaders inspire action. Simon Sinek, TEDx Puget Sound Speaker, 2009. Start with why ­ how great leaders inspire action. (Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4ZoJKF_VuA&index=1&list=PL150F0D1C78036B46) Description: Simon Sinek discusses how great leaders inspire action – start with why in this TEDx video. 2. Evaluating Fallacies in Reasoning We now progress in our study of critical thinking to examine fallacies in reason, which influence beliefs, behavior, and attitudes in a misleading manner. We study fallacies in order to learn how critical thinking­based arguments may "go wrong"­­ that is, how the basis for a claim fails to defend a claim. Appeals to emotion are ubiquitous in arguments and are often hard to disconnect from the argument itself (and from the arguer, for that matter). However, the purpose of identifying fallacies is not to destroy someone’s argument, but to help all parties sort out strong critical thinking from weak critical thinking and thus improve our understanding of an issue. Essentially, fallacies are mistakes of reasoning rather than mistakes based on evidence. We know that good, sound arguments provide justification for accepting a claim. Fallacies are likely to have some connection to a legitimate claim that they are trying to support; however, they do not support the claim. Categories of Fallacies Overall, the study of fallacies is an application of the principles of critical thinking. Being familiar with typical fallacies helps us to avoid making them in our own critical thinking and reasoning as well as helping us to explain other people’s reasoning. The Long Reach of Reason (TED 2012) (Source: http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_and_rebecca_newberger_goldstein_the_long_reach_of_reason?language=en) Description:An animated Socratic dialog by Steven Pinker and Rebecca Newberger Goldstein. In a time when irrationality seems to rule both politics and culture, has reasoned thinking finally lost its power? Watch as psychologist Steven Pinker is gradually, brilliantly persuaded by philosopher Rebecca Newberger Goldstein that reason is actually the key driver of human moral progress, even if its effect sometimes takes generations to unfold. The dialog was recorded live at TED, and animated, in incredible, often hilarious, detail by Cognitive. Four broad categories of fallacies Click on the category of fallacy to learn more about each one. Fallacies of Inconsistency Fallacies of Inappropriate Presumption Fallacies of Relevance Fallacies of Insufficiency (Source: http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/nn 152/t0mbston3/seakari.jpg ) Something inconsistent or self­defeating has been proposed or accepted. Example: Believing that pigs can fly There is a distinction between arguments that aim to motivate us to action and those that aim to convince us to believe something. Appeals to emotion are rarely appropriate when others try to influence our beliefs, but are often reasonable when they motivate us to act­­for example, think about a natural disaster and motivational appeals for volunteers. Irrelevant information is typically about a natural disaster and motivational appeals for volunteers. Irrelevant information is typically introduced as the "truth" of the claim in order to engender an emotional response that leads one to assume mistakenly that the argument is valid. To identify “pseudo” reasoning: 1. Identify the motivation to which the argument is appealing. 2. Ask whether the reasoning pertains to the question at hand. Within the broader categories there are many (far too many to list here) specific fallacies. The following is a list of common types of fallacies using emotional tactics: Guilt Fallacy Pity Fallacy Scare Tactics Fallacy Envy Fallacy Rationalization Fallacy Vanity or Apple­Polishing Fallacy Two Wrongs Make a Right Fallacy Desire for Social Approval or Group Think Fallacy Would­be Argument Fallacy Scapegoating Fallacy Popularity, Tradition or Common Practice Fallacy Click here for more information about Fallacies. (http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/fallacies/) 3. Evaluate Ideas, Concepts, and Data We learned that there are several fallacies designed to appeal to our emotions. The fallacies we focus on now are those that are constructed in the manner of a sound argument, but in which some element of the argument is distorted and misleading. These fallacious arguments resemble good reasoning, but when we look at their conclusions, we see they are examples of poor reasoning. It is therefore essential that we examine additional fallacies, which distort ideas, concepts, and data. We’ll begin with the most common type of fallacy (ad hominem) and look at its subcategories before moving to the next type of fallacy, the ad ignorantiam (appeal to ignorance) and its subcategories. Ad Hominem Fallacies (Latin meaning "to the person") The most common example of poor reasoning is the ad hominem fallacy. Ad hominem in Latin means "to the person." This fallacy often attempts to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting a claim. This fallacy takes on many forms and is designed to skew the claim using a contradictory claim. Ad Hominem The following list provides the common ad hominem arguments. Click on the tabs to reveal the definition. Personal attack ad hominem In this argument the tactic is to malign a person in order to dismiss that person's beliefs. An individual’s personal failings have nothing to with deciding or proving that the individual is making a false claim. Example: “What Senator Barney Frank says about air pollution is a joke! That clown will say anything to get attention!” Inconsistency ad hominem In this argument the tactic is to take a self­defeating approach or propose or accept something inconsistent with the claim. This may include a more personal attack or a contradiction of claims. Example: “You say that eggs are loaded with cholesterol, but I notice you eat them every morning!” morning!” Circumstantial ad hominem In this argument the tactic is to reduce the argument to an abusive attack on someone's beliefs or the group to which they may belong. Example: “Your physician says he doesn't believe in homeopathic cures, but that is what they drill into students in medical school!” Poisoning the well (circumstantial ad hominem) In this argument the tactic is to reduce an argument by attacking one's personal character. Example: “Ron Paul is providing us with his tax reform plan today. Well, it's just going to be more rhetoric. He will say anything to get a vote!” Genetic fallacy (circumstantial ad hominem) In this argument the tactic is to reject a claim purely on the grounds of its source. Example: “Labradoodles are not a legitimate breed of dog; that is why they are not recognized by Westminster Kennel Club!” Ad Ignorantiam (appeal to ignorance) As with the nature of the ad hominem fallacies, ad ignoratiam fallacies are constructed like arguments but use poor reasoning skills. Let’s look now at some of these types of fallacies. The following list provides common ad ignorantiam fallacies. Click on the tabs to reveal the definition. Personal attack ad hominem The basis of the truth of a claim is established only on lack of evidence against it. A simple The basis of the truth of a claim is established only on lack of evidence against it. A simple obvious example of such a fallacy is to argue that unicorns exist because there is no evidence against such a claim. At first sight it seems that many theories that we describe as scientific involve such a fallacy. Ad populum (appeal to popularity) The basis of the truth of a claim is established on its popularity and familiarity. This is the fallacy committed by many advertisements. You have seen ads, for example, that suggest you buy a certain product because it is selling well or because the brand is the city's "favorite." Example: “This is London’s favorite night cream, and it will make you look years younger.” Affirming the consequent This means implying that X is true solely because Y is true, and it is also true that if X is true, Y is true. This type of reasoning ignores the possibility that there are other conditions apart from X that might lead to Y. Example: If there is a traffic jam, a student may be late for class. But if we argue from the position that the student is late because of that traffic jam, we are guilty of this fallacy ­ the student may be late due to other reasons, such as getting out of bed too late. However, if we have evidence showing that the traffic jam is the only or most likely condition that led to the student being late, then it would be true (not a fallacy). Begging the question (petito principia) The argument for a claim is already assumed in the premise. Example: "God exists because this is what the Bible says, and the Bible is reliable because it is the word of God." Loaded question or complex problem This is a question presented in such a way that a person, no matter what answer he or she gives to the question, will inevitably commit himself/herself to some other claim, which should not be presupposed in the context in question. The common tactic is to ask a yes­no question that tricks people to agree to something they never intended to say. Example: "Are you still as much of a perfectionist as you used to be?" In this case, no matter whether you answer "yes" or "no," you are bound to admit that you were a perfectionist in the past. The same question would not count as a fallacy if the question about one's perfectionism was indeed accepted in the conversational context. For example: “To get this job done in a high­ quality manner it requires attention to all the details. Are you still as much of a perfectionist as you used to be?” Composition (opposite of division) The whole is assumed to have the same properties as its parts. Example: Anne might be humorous and fun­loving and, thus, be an excellent person to invite to the party. The same might be true of Ben, Chris and David when considered individually. But it does not follow that it will be a good idea to invite all of them to the party. Perhaps they have reason to avoid each other, and having all four in the same room could ruin the party. Denying the antecedent Inferring that Q is false just because if P is true then Q is also true­­but P is false. This fallacy is similar to the fallacy of affirming the consequent. Again the problem is that some alternative explanation or cause might be overlooked. Although P is false, some other condition might be sufficient to make Q true. Example: If there is a traffic jam, a colleague may be late for work. But it is not logical to argue that if there is no traffic jam, the colleague will not be late. Again, his alarm clock may have stopped working. False dilemma This argument assumes that only two alternatives exist in a given situation. Thus, anyone who does not agree with the first alternative has to accept the second. Example: “Either we balance our checking account or we will starve.” Obviously, the conclusion is too extreme because you may have plenty of money in your checking account. Whether it is balanced or not does not lead logically to starvation. Gambler’s fallacy An assumption is made that an independent statistic is dependent. Example: The mind untrained in argument and reasoning might tend to think, for example, that if a fair coin is tossed five times and each time comes up heads, then the next toss will more likely come up as a tail. This is not true, however. If the coin is fair, the result for each toss is completely independent of the others. Notice the fallacy hinges on the fact that the final result is not known. Had the final result been known already, the statistic would have been dependent. Non sequitur A conclusion is drawn that does not follow from the premise. This is not a specific fallacy but a very general term for a bad argument. Many of the examples in this exercise can be said to be non sequitur. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc, or false cause (literally, “after this, there because of this”) This argument is based on the false idea that correlation always implies causation. You find that a Dilbert cartoon (http://www.dilbert.com/) provides a perfect example of post hoc, ergo propter hoc. Slippery Slope This argument uses the tactic of predicting that if one thing happens, or is permitted to happen, another thing (always undesirable) will be the result. This implies when arguing that if an opponent were to accept some claim M(1), then he or she has to accept some other closely related claim M(2), which in turn commits the opponent to a still further claim M(3), eventually leading to the conclusion that the opponent is committed to something absurd or obviously unacceptable. This style of argumentation constitutes a fallacy only when it is inappropriate to think if one were to accept the initial claim, one must accept all the other claims. Example: “The state government should not prohibit drugs. Otherwise the government should also ban alcohol or cigarettes. And then fatty food and junk food would have to be regulated, too. The next thing you know, the state government would force us to brush our teeth and do exercises every day.” Straw man The tactic in this argument is to argue against a distorted or simplified version of what someone has said, and treating the argument you give as if it is true. It often is attacking an opponent by attributing to him or her an implausible position that is easily defeated when this is not actually the opponent's position. In many ways, it is used to change the topic, almost like a smokescreen fallacy. Example: “The U.S. should send more troops to Iraq.” An individual might reply to this, “That is not warranted because Iraq does not supply oil to the U.S.” or say it is not warranted because Iraq will never become democratic. In either case, the fact remains that there is a war in Iraq that the U.S. is involved in, and whether Iran supplies oil or becomes democratic are distorting and simplifying (straw man fallacy) the claim. Tautology (unconditional truths that are always valid) or circular reasoning or begging the question. These are a series of self­reinforcing statements that cannot be disproved because the These are a series of self­reinforcing statements that cannot be disproved because the statements depend on the assumption that they are already correct. These types of arguments use a tactic of starting with the conclusion to try to get a person to accept the premises that is most desirable. However, it defeats the purpose of an argument. Example: “It's impossible to believe that space goes on infinitely, because that's inconceivable.” Word Bank: two wrongs make a right popularity fallacious reasoning smokescreen argument from outrage nationalism apple polishing tradition scare tactics argument by force guilt trip peer pressure group think appeal to pity scapegoating Instructions: For each question, select the best answer from the following word bank. “Flip” the card to see if you are correct Check Your Understanding Click Here to Begin References Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2012). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. your life (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. HUM101: Portfolio Project Rubric Criteria Meets Expectation Content, Research, and Analysis 33-40 Points Preliminary Delivered the portfolio topic Deliverables in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required. Requirements Content Analysis Synthesis and Evaluation Critical Analysis Sources Application of Source Material 49-60 Points The Portfolio includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 57-70 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of critical thinking theories and applications; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources. 25-30 Points Provides strong or adequate thought, insight and analysis of concepts and applications regarding critical thinking skills. 25-30 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate synthesis and evaluation of course concepts in critical reasoning. 25-30 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate critical analysis of critical thinking theories and applications. 13-15 Points Cites and integrates 5-6 credible sources. 13-15 Points Sources well or adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue; knowledge from the course linked properly to source material. Approaches Expectation Below Expectation Limited Evidence 25-32 Points Delivered the portfolio topic in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required with a significant omission or error. 37-48 Points The Portfolio includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 17-24 Points Delivered the portfolio topic in Week 4 OR the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required, but not both. 25-36 Points The Portfolio includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 29-42 Points Major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 9-16 Points Did not deliver the portfolio topic in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in thought, insight and analysis. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in thought, insight and analysis. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate thought, insight and analysis. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in synthesis and evaluation. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in synthesis and evaluation. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate synthesis and evaluation. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in critical analysis. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in critical analysis. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate thought, insight and analysis. 10-12 Points Cites and integrates 3-4 credible sources. 10-12 Points Some significant but not major problems with selection and linkage of sources. 7-9 Points Cites and integrates 1-2 credible sources. 7-9 Points Major problems with selection and linkage of sources. 4-6 Points Cites and integrates no credible sources. 4-6 Points Source selection is seriously flawed; no linkage to knowledge from the course. 43-56 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 13-24 Points The Portfolio includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 15-28 Points Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials. HUM101: Portfolio Project Rubric Mechanics and Writing Organization Grammar and Style Demonstrates proper use of APA style 17-20 Points Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper essay format including an introduction, body, and conclusion. Conforms to project requirements. 13-16 Points Small number of significant but not major flaws in organization and writing; is in proper essay format. In a minor way does not conform to project requirements. 17-20 Points Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few or no minor errors in grammar and spelling; appropriate writing style; clear and concise with no unsupported comments. 13-16 Points Small number of significant but not major errors in grammar and spelling; generally appropriate writing. 17-20 Points Project contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with no more than one significant error. 13-16 Points Few errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with no more than two to three significant errors. Total points possible = 350 9-12 Points Major problems in organization and writing; does not completely follow proper essay format. In a significant way does not conform to project requirements. 9-12 Points Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; work needed on grammar and spelling; does not meet program expectations. 9-12 Points Significant errors in APA formatting, according to the CSUGlobal Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with four to five significant errors. 5-8 Points Project is not well organized or well written and is not in proper essay format. Does not conform to project requirements. 5-8 Points Poor quality; unacceptable in terms of grammar and/or spelling; inappropriate writing style that interferes with clarity. 5-8 Points Numerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSUGlobal Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with more than five significant errors. HUM101: Portfolio Project Rubric Criteria Meets Expectation Content, Research, and Analysis 33-40 Points Preliminary Delivered the portfolio topic Deliverables in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required. Requirements Content Analysis Synthesis and Evaluation Critical Analysis Sources Application of Source Material 49-60 Points The Portfolio includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 57-70 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of critical thinking theories and applications; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources. 25-30 Points Provides strong or adequate thought, insight and analysis of concepts and applications regarding critical thinking skills. 25-30 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate synthesis and evaluation of course concepts in critical reasoning. 25-30 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate critical analysis of critical thinking theories and applications. 13-15 Points Cites and integrates 5-6 credible sources. 13-15 Points Sources well or adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue; knowledge from the course linked properly to source material. Approaches Expectation Below Expectation Limited Evidence 25-32 Points Delivered the portfolio topic in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required with a significant omission or error. 37-48 Points The Portfolio includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 17-24 Points Delivered the portfolio topic in Week 4 OR the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required, but not both. 25-36 Points The Portfolio includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 29-42 Points Major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 9-16 Points Did not deliver the portfolio topic in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in thought, insight and analysis. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in thought, insight and analysis. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate thought, insight and analysis. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in synthesis and evaluation. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in synthesis and evaluation. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate synthesis and evaluation. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in critical analysis. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in critical analysis. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate thought, insight and analysis. 10-12 Points Cites and integrates 3-4 credible sources. 10-12 Points Some significant but not major problems with selection and linkage of sources. 7-9 Points Cites and integrates 1-2 credible sources. 7-9 Points Major problems with selection and linkage of sources. 4-6 Points Cites and integrates no credible sources. 4-6 Points Source selection is seriously flawed; no linkage to knowledge from the course. 43-56 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 13-24 Points The Portfolio includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 15-28 Points Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials. HUM101: Portfolio Project Rubric Mechanics and Writing Organization Grammar and Style Demonstrates proper use of APA style 17-20 Points Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper essay format including an introduction, body, and conclusion. Conforms to project requirements. 13-16 Points Small number of significant but not major flaws in organization and writing; is in proper essay format. In a minor way does not conform to project requirements. 17-20 Points Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few or no minor errors in grammar and spelling; appropriate writing style; clear and concise with no unsupported comments. 13-16 Points Small number of significant but not major errors in grammar and spelling; generally appropriate writing. 17-20 Points Project contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with no more than one significant error. 13-16 Points Few errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with no more than two to three significant errors. Total points possible = 350 9-12 Points Major problems in organization and writing; does not completely follow proper essay format. In a significant way does not conform to project requirements. 9-12 Points Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; work needed on grammar and spelling; does not meet program expectations. 9-12 Points Significant errors in APA formatting, according to the CSUGlobal Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with four to five significant errors. 5-8 Points Project is not well organized or well written and is not in proper essay format. Does not conform to project requirements. 5-8 Points Poor quality; unacceptable in terms of grammar and/or spelling; inappropriate writing style that interferes with clarity. 5-8 Points Numerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSUGlobal Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with more than five significant errors. HUM101: Portfolio Project Rubric Criteria Meets Expectation Content, Research, and Analysis 33-40 Points Preliminary Delivered the portfolio topic Deliverables in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required. Requirements Content Analysis Synthesis and Evaluation Critical Analysis Sources Application of Source Material 49-60 Points The Portfolio includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 57-70 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of critical thinking theories and applications; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources. 25-30 Points Provides strong or adequate thought, insight and analysis of concepts and applications regarding critical thinking skills. 25-30 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate synthesis and evaluation of course concepts in critical reasoning. 25-30 Points Demonstrates strong or adequate critical analysis of critical thinking theories and applications. 13-15 Points Cites and integrates 5-6 credible sources. 13-15 Points Sources well or adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue; knowledge from the course linked properly to source material. Approaches Expectation Below Expectation Limited Evidence 25-32 Points Delivered the portfolio topic in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required with a significant omission or error. 37-48 Points The Portfolio includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 17-24 Points Delivered the portfolio topic in Week 4 OR the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required, but not both. 25-36 Points The Portfolio includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 29-42 Points Major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 9-16 Points Did not deliver the portfolio topic in Week 4 and the portfolio outline in Week 6 as required. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in thought, insight and analysis. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in thought, insight and analysis. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate thought, insight and analysis. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in synthesis and evaluation. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in synthesis and evaluation. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate synthesis and evaluation. 19-24 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in critical analysis. 13-18 Points Major errors or omissions in critical analysis. 7-12 Points Fails to demonstrate thought, insight and analysis. 10-12 Points Cites and integrates 3-4 credible sources. 10-12 Points Some significant but not major problems with selection and linkage of sources. 7-9 Points Cites and integrates 1-2 credible sources. 7-9 Points Major problems with selection and linkage of sources. 4-6 Points Cites and integrates no credible sources. 4-6 Points Source selection is seriously flawed; no linkage to knowledge from the course. 43-56 Points Some significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 13-24 Points The Portfolio includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 15-28 Points Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials. HUM101: Portfolio Project Rubric Mechanics and Writing Organization Grammar and Style Demonstrates proper use of APA style 17-20 Points Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper essay format including an introduction, body, and conclusion. Conforms to project requirements. 13-16 Points Small number of significant but not major flaws in organization and writing; is in proper essay format. In a minor way does not conform to project requirements. 17-20 Points Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few or no minor errors in grammar and spelling; appropriate writing style; clear and concise with no unsupported comments. 13-16 Points Small number of significant but not major errors in grammar and spelling; generally appropriate writing. 17-20 Points Project contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with no more than one significant error. 13-16 Points Few errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with no more than two to three significant errors. Total points possible = 350 9-12 Points Major problems in organization and writing; does not completely follow proper essay format. In a significant way does not conform to project requirements. 9-12 Points Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; work needed on grammar and spelling; does not meet program expectations. 9-12 Points Significant errors in APA formatting, according to the CSUGlobal Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with four to five significant errors. 5-8 Points Project is not well organized or well written and is not in proper essay format. Does not conform to project requirements. 5-8 Points Poor quality; unacceptable in terms of grammar and/or spelling; inappropriate writing style that interferes with clarity. 5-8 Points Numerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSUGlobal Guide to Writing and APA Requirements, with more than five significant errors.
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
Great! 10/10 would recommend using Studypool to help you study.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags