Fluent Essays

Week 5 Assignment: Journal Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity: · Textbook: Chapter 10, 11 · Lesson Introduction Remember – these journal questions require more thinking than writing. Think about exactly what you are asked to do, and then write as economically as possible.   Instructions For this journal assignment, briefly answer each of the following prompts. For all instances where you are required to provide a definition, do not copy definitions from the text. Use your own words. · Self-Regulation · The textbook mentions the skill of self-regulation. How do you define this term? You may want to review Chapter 2 (to review critical thinking skills) before your write out your definition. · Sytem-1 and System-2 · Define System-1 and System-2 thinking in your own words. · Give an example from your personal or work life where you would use each of them, explaining why each is appropriate to the situation in which you use it. · Heuristics · Define "heuristic" in your own words. · Give an example of a heuristic might be used in your personal or professional life and briefly show how it could have a positive or negative effect. · Do not use examples found in the text. · Dominance Structuring · Explain the term "dominance structuring" in your own words. · Is dominance structuring a positive or negative attribute of critical thinking? Explain. · Use examples if that is helpful to your explanation. · Cognitive Bias · Briefly examine what part you think mastery of facts and understanding of data have in avoiding cognitive bias in System-1 thinking. If you include references to outside sources (beyond the textbook), make sure you cite them properly. Writing Requirements (APA format) · Length: 1 ½ -2 pages (not including prompts, title page or references page) · 1-inch margins · Double spaced · 12-point Times New Roman font · Title page · References page (as needed) Grading This activity will be graded using the Journal Grading Rubric. Week 5 Course Project: Annotated Bibliography and Source Evaluation  Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity: · Textbook: review Chapter 6 · Lesson · Link (Word doc):  Source Evaluation Worksheet   Download Source Evaluation Worksheet(Download and save doc as "[your name] Annotated Bibliography") · Minimum of 5 scholarly sources (You may include sources you developed in Week 3 if they meet scholarly criteria). Introduction You have arrived at the third part of the Course Project. By this week, you should have collected the sources that you need to support, with relevant evidence, the position you have taken on the issue you chose, and the three aspects of the issue you will write about. This week you will submit a thesis statement and an annotated bibliography of at least five sources that you will use in your paper. Here is a brief breakdown of the project so that you can plan your time in the course: Week Task Week 1 Topic Selection Week 3 Issue Review (both sides) Week 5 Thesis & Annotated Bibliography (both sides) Week 7 Argumentative Paper Instructions This week, submit the following: · A thesis statement stating your opinion/conclusion on the issue, the supporting points you will offer and at least one relevant opposing view you will address. · An annotated bibliography with evaluation of at least five (5) sources you intend to use in your final paper to support your claim. · These are sources that provide evidence to support that your claim should be accepted by the reader. · Scholarly sources are preferred and should be used where available; due to the nature of some of the topics, authoritative articles in very high quality substantive journals may also be acceptable. Use the Source Evaluation Worksheet to determine the following: · If your source is current · If it is not current, explain why you think it is acceptable. · If your source is credible, reliable, and authoritative · How well your source supports your thesis · If the annotation does not make this obvious, explain to your instructor how you will use it. · If your support is popular · If it is, explain to your instructor why you think it is acceptable. Prepare a citation, annotation, and evaluation for each source. Click on the following link for an example: Link: How to Complete the Source Evaluation Worksheet   Writing Requirements (APA format) · Length: 100-150 words per source for Part 1; 50-80 words per source for Part 2 (not including title page or references page) · 1-inch margins · Double spaced · 12-point Times New Roman font · Title page · References page Grading This activity will be graded using the W5 Annotated Bibliography Grading Rubric. Week 5 Discussion: In My Opinion 2Required Resources Read/review the following resources for this activity: · Textbook: Chapter 10, 11 · Lesson · Minimum of 1 scholarly source (in addition to the textbook) Initial Post Instructions Consider one of the following current social issues – or one of your choice: · Opioid crisis · Legalization of recreational or medical marijuana · Vaping · Immigration · Elimination of the electoral college · Gun control For the initial post, address the following: · State your position on one of these issues – are you for, against, or neutral? Explain why. Avoid vagueness or ambiguity in your response. Make your position very clear. · Examine how you have formed that opinion. · How well do you think you know the facts? · Do you know and understand statistical information that applies to the issue? · Do you think you have formed your opinion using only System-1 thinking, or have you applied System-2? · What part have heuristics, cognitive bias, and dominance structuring played in how you have formed your opinions? The initial post is not about how "correct" your position is; it is about how you arrived at your position on the issue. This discussion requires application of metacognition – thinking about how you think. Follow-Up Post Instructions Respond to at least one peer. Further the dialogue by providing more information and clarification. In your responses, look for another student's post, either on the same or a different issue. Choose, where possible, a peer whose initial post has not yet been examined by another student, and examine it. Do you agree or disagree with your peer? · Is your initial reaction to your peer "So, right; you bet!" or is it "So wrong, you're all wet!" · Examine carefully your thinking in response to your peers: · What part, if any, have facts, heuristics, or dominance structuring played in your response? · What part, if any, has cognitive bias played in your response? You should also look at responses to your initial post: · Did your peer fairly evaluate you? Discuss this with your peer. You may find that just the minimum three posts are not sufficient to discover whether you can identify these elements. You will have to make a judgement call: do the minimum three and miss out on the deep thinking required by this exercise, or go beyond the minimum three and really begin to understand your thought processes and the concept of critical thinking. A very valuable final post would be to discuss your judgment call: perhaps you "got it" in three; perhaps you opted for more than three; perhaps other demands on your time did not allow you to exercise as much deep thinking as you would have liked to do. Perhaps you did not see much value in the discussion – a very valuable final post would be a brief statement of why you found it so. Do not be shy about critiquing the exercise. Look at “A Poorly Crafted Assignment” in section 11.1 of the text in which the authors critique a similar assignment. Writing Requirements · Minimum of 2 posts (1 initial & 1 follow-up) · Minimum of 2 sources cited (assigned readings/online lessons and an outside source) · APA format for in-text citations and list of references Grading This activity will be graded using the Discussion Grading Rubric. Please review the following link: · Link (webpage):  Discussion Guidelines