IEP SCHEDULE
TU -- IEP3 RCOMP 12:30-4:15 (12:30-1:30, 1:45-2:45, 3:00-4:15)
IEP2 CONVERSATION/SPEECH 12:30-4:15
TH --IEP4 GRAMMAR 9-12:35
IEP5 -- VOCABULARY 1:10-4:50 (1:10-2:10, 2:25-3:25, 3:40-4:50)
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
IEP Program Schedule
Monday, August 24, 2009
Friday, July 31, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Links -- Deductive Logic
Link for Venn Diagrams illustrating deductive logic: http://illuminations.nctm.org/LessonDetail.aspx?ID=L384
LINKS FOR STUDENTS
Tim van Gelder’s ‘Critical Thinking on the Web’ is a massive website that catalogs scores of links to just about everything related to critical thinking—from argument-mapping to online logic tutorials:
http://www.austhink.org/critical
Argument mapping (diagramming) can also be found on Tim van Gelder’s Critical Thinking on the Web: http://www.austhink.org/critical/pages/argument_mapping.html
The entry on ‘Informal Logic’ in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy gives an overview of the subject, which overlaps and intersects with the topic of critical thinking: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-informal/
‘A List of Fallacious Arguments’, from the Don Lindsay Archive, includes fallacies with definitions and examples:
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html
‘A Mini Guide to Critical Thinking’ by John Lau at the department of philosophy, Hong Kong University. This ‘more-than-a-mini’ guide covers many key concepts in critical thinking. http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/project/miniguide.pdf
A two part article (in Scientific American) discusses ten ways to use critical thinking to distinguish between dubious and credible claims:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D743A-CC5C-1C6E-84A9809EC588EF21&pageNumber=1&catID=2 (Baloney Detection Part 1)
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=13&articleID=000ADC77-B274-1C6E-84A9809EC588EF21 (Baloney Detection Part 2)
Entries for various fallacies are found at http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/index.html, ‘A Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Names’.
‘The Fallacy Files’ is a website with an alphabetical listing of fallacies, and includes a number of discussions and examples: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/
Basic information about causal reasoning can be found at ‘Mission: Critical’, an interactive website devoted to critical thinking: http://www2.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/induc/causal.html
Interactive exercises on fallacies can also be found:
http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/main.html
A short tutorial on categorical syllogisms can be found on ‘The Philosophy Pages’ at http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e08a.html
‘The Philosophy Pages’ includes a brief entry for analogical reasoning at http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e13.html
‘Ethics Updates’ provides a thorough, categorized compilation of resources pertaining to ethics and ethical theory: http://ethics.sandiego.edu/index.htm
LINKS FOR STUDENTS
Tim van Gelder’s ‘Critical Thinking on the Web’ is a massive website that catalogs scores of links to just about everything related to critical thinking—from argument-mapping to online logic tutorials:
http://www.austhink.org/critical
Argument mapping (diagramming) can also be found on Tim van Gelder’s Critical Thinking on the Web: http://www.austhink.org/critical/pages/argument_mapping.html
The entry on ‘Informal Logic’ in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy gives an overview of the subject, which overlaps and intersects with the topic of critical thinking: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-informal/
‘A List of Fallacious Arguments’, from the Don Lindsay Archive, includes fallacies with definitions and examples:
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html
‘A Mini Guide to Critical Thinking’ by John Lau at the department of philosophy, Hong Kong University. This ‘more-than-a-mini’ guide covers many key concepts in critical thinking. http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/project/miniguide.pdf
A two part article (in Scientific American) discusses ten ways to use critical thinking to distinguish between dubious and credible claims:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D743A-CC5C-1C6E-84A9809EC588EF21&pageNumber=1&catID=2 (Baloney Detection Part 1)
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=13&articleID=000ADC77-B274-1C6E-84A9809EC588EF21 (Baloney Detection Part 2)
Entries for various fallacies are found at http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/index.html, ‘A Dictionary of Philosophical Terms and Names’.
‘The Fallacy Files’ is a website with an alphabetical listing of fallacies, and includes a number of discussions and examples: http://www.fallacyfiles.org/
Basic information about causal reasoning can be found at ‘Mission: Critical’, an interactive website devoted to critical thinking: http://www2.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/induc/causal.html
Interactive exercises on fallacies can also be found:
http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/main.html
A short tutorial on categorical syllogisms can be found on ‘The Philosophy Pages’ at http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e08a.html
‘The Philosophy Pages’ includes a brief entry for analogical reasoning at http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e13.html
‘Ethics Updates’ provides a thorough, categorized compilation of resources pertaining to ethics and ethical theory: http://ethics.sandiego.edu/index.htm
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Links
Twain --
http://grammar.about.com/od/60essays/a/twowaysessay.htm
Student example response
http://carolinanavy.com/fleet2/f2/zkilldevilhill/MarkTwainhall/cas/145.html
Argumentative / Persuasive Essay:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/685/05/
http://grammar.about.com/od/60essays/a/twowaysessay.htm
Student example response
http://carolinanavy.com/fleet2/f2/zkilldevilhill/MarkTwainhall/cas/145.html
Argumentative / Persuasive Essay:
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/685/05/
Monday, February 23, 2009
The “Is of Identity” Test
The “Is of Identity” Test
1. A statement is either true or false.
2. Mules are stubborn.
3. A pig is a dirty animal.
4. God is everywhere.
5. A boy who won’t fight is a coward.
6. Snake is an ugly word.
7. College graduates earn more than other people.
8. The word dog is a four footed animal.
9. A person who kills another person is a murder.
10. Women are mothers.
11. A boy who never lies is good.
12. Teachers think they’re smarter than other people.
13. Neighbors are nosey.
14. Pretty girls are stuck up.
15. Seeing is believing.
16. Adam and Eve were the first human beings.
17. It takes two to make a bargain.
18. He that believeth not shall be damned.
19. The good die young.
20. There is one basic cause for all effects.
21. The wildest colts make the best horses.
22. Humans can talk.
23. No one wants to die.
24. Barking dogs don’t bite,
25. Death is not forever.
26. Americans are not communists.
27. Dreams often foretell our lives.
28. Everything comes if only a man will wait.
29. Anything believed by most of the people must be true.
30. What goes up must come down.
31. Water flows downhill.
32. A wool skirt is warm.
33. A circle is round.
34. Iron is strong.
35. An orange is not green.
36. A leaf is green.
37. A knife is sharp.
38. A pencil is round.
39. Feathers are soft.
40. The sky is blue.
41. Needles are sharp.
42. One sits in a chair.
43. A pitcher holds water.
44. A piece of iron is heavy.
45. A house is either frame or brick.
46. A drunkard is a sinner.
47. Ministers are good men.
48. Everything that is true can be proved.
49. Big boys are bullies.
50. It is never all right to kill,
51. Children should always obey their parents.
52. Children are born bad.
53. Plants grow in soil.
54. Questions have no answers.
55. No one gets by with anything bad without getting caught.
56. Telling dirty jokes is bad.
57. A good soldier is a patriot.
58. Women movie stars are beautiful.
59. People are just naturally mean.
60. Cats hate dogs.
61. Flowers are pretty.
62. Health is Wealth.
63. Love is holy.
64. Money is evil.
65. The smartest people are the most successful
66. Select ONE of the following five statements which you feel is most characteristic of you:
a. I like almost everyone.
b. I am very careful in choosing my friends.
c. I like more people than I dislike.
d. I make no friends until they prove worthy of me.
e, I like and dislike about the same number of people.
1. A statement is either true or false.
2. Mules are stubborn.
3. A pig is a dirty animal.
4. God is everywhere.
5. A boy who won’t fight is a coward.
6. Snake is an ugly word.
7. College graduates earn more than other people.
8. The word dog is a four footed animal.
9. A person who kills another person is a murder.
10. Women are mothers.
11. A boy who never lies is good.
12. Teachers think they’re smarter than other people.
13. Neighbors are nosey.
14. Pretty girls are stuck up.
15. Seeing is believing.
16. Adam and Eve were the first human beings.
17. It takes two to make a bargain.
18. He that believeth not shall be damned.
19. The good die young.
20. There is one basic cause for all effects.
21. The wildest colts make the best horses.
22. Humans can talk.
23. No one wants to die.
24. Barking dogs don’t bite,
25. Death is not forever.
26. Americans are not communists.
27. Dreams often foretell our lives.
28. Everything comes if only a man will wait.
29. Anything believed by most of the people must be true.
30. What goes up must come down.
31. Water flows downhill.
32. A wool skirt is warm.
33. A circle is round.
34. Iron is strong.
35. An orange is not green.
36. A leaf is green.
37. A knife is sharp.
38. A pencil is round.
39. Feathers are soft.
40. The sky is blue.
41. Needles are sharp.
42. One sits in a chair.
43. A pitcher holds water.
44. A piece of iron is heavy.
45. A house is either frame or brick.
46. A drunkard is a sinner.
47. Ministers are good men.
48. Everything that is true can be proved.
49. Big boys are bullies.
50. It is never all right to kill,
51. Children should always obey their parents.
52. Children are born bad.
53. Plants grow in soil.
54. Questions have no answers.
55. No one gets by with anything bad without getting caught.
56. Telling dirty jokes is bad.
57. A good soldier is a patriot.
58. Women movie stars are beautiful.
59. People are just naturally mean.
60. Cats hate dogs.
61. Flowers are pretty.
62. Health is Wealth.
63. Love is holy.
64. Money is evil.
65. The smartest people are the most successful
66. Select ONE of the following five statements which you feel is most characteristic of you:
a. I like almost everyone.
b. I am very careful in choosing my friends.
c. I like more people than I dislike.
d. I make no friends until they prove worthy of me.
e, I like and dislike about the same number of people.
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
Assumptions Glossary
| Glossary | |
| Chapter 5 | |
| Accommodation | Accommodation is achieved when we can do the thinking needed to create a new schema or modify an old schema in order to explain a new experience. |
| Assimilation | Assimilation is achieved when we can integrate new experiences into existing schemas. |
| Assumption | Assumption is an idea whose truth can be taken for granted. |
| Assumption Layers | Assumption layers can appear beneath simple assertions. Such layers consist of multiple hidden and unexamined assumptions influenced in turn by one or more value assumptions beneath the whole. |
| Counter claim | Counter claim is a response to a claim with a defense or with another claim. |
| Disequilibrium | The confusion and discomfort felt when a new experience cannot be integrated into existing schemas. |
| Equilibrium | A stable inner feeling of well being that we feel when our thinking enables us to modify or create a new schema that better explains our world. |
| Hidden Assumption | A hidden assumption is an unclear and unstated idea assumed to be true that is integral to a line of reasoning. In an argument, it is a hidden premise that cannot be examined for truth and validity. Blind acceptance of a hidden premise can lead to the acceptance of a false or invalid conclusion. |
| Infer | To use imagination and reasoning to fill in missing facts. To connect the dots. |
| Lateral thinking | Lateral thinking solves problems by reviewing options, overcoming assumptions, and inventing new solutions. Vertical thinking follows more conventional step-by-step logic. |
| Principal claim and reasons | These are the two parts of an argument. The principal claim is the thesis or conclusion. The reasons support this claim through evidence or other claims. A claim is an assertion about something. |
| Schema | Schemas are the mental files in which we store our explanations of experiences. |
| Thesis | A thesis is a short summary statement of an idea that an essay intends to prove. It is also called the thesis statement and controlling idea. |
| Thinking | Purposeful mental activity such as reasoning, deciding, judging, believing, supposing, expecting, intending, recalling, remembering, visualizing, imagining, devising, inventing, concentrating, conceiving, considering. |
| Value or Belief Assumption | Value assumption is a belief that we take for granted, one that rarely questioned or even articulated. Remaining hidden and unexpressed, a value assumption can nevertheless shape a chain of reasoning. |
| Working Assumption | A working assumption is a trial idea, theory, strategy, or hypothesis assumed to be true in order to further an investigation. It is a conscious assumption. |
Assumptions Web Links
| DEFINITION OF ASSUMPTION |
| This entry at wordreference.com explains the many meanings of the word assumption. |
| http://www.wordreference.com/definition/assumption |
| HYPOTHESIS DEFINED - American Heritage Dictionary |
| Compare the definitions of the word hypothesis given at the Merriam-Webster and American Heritage dictionaries. |
| http://www.bartleby.com/61/3/H0370300.html |
| HYPOTHESIS DEFINED - Merriam-Webster Dictionary |
| Compare the definitions of the word hypothesis given at the Merriam-Webster and American Heritage dictionaries. |
| http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/hypothesis |
| JEAN PIAGET |
| This site is available for learning more about Jean Piaget and his theories on cognitive development. |
| http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/piaget.html |
| THESIS |
| "How to Write a Thesis Statement." A useful discussion prepared at Indiana University. |
| http://www.indiana.edu/~wts/pamphlets/thesis_statement.shtml |
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Narrative Essay Writing
Narrative Essays
As a mode of expository writing, the narrative approach, more than any other, offers writers a chance to think and write about themselves. We all have experiences lodged in our memories which are worthy of sharing with readers. Yet sometimes they are so fused with other memories that a lot of the time spent in writing narrative is in the prewriting stage.
As a mode of expository writing, the narrative approach, more than any other, offers writers a chance to think and write about themselves. We all have experiences lodged in our memories which are worthy of sharing with readers. Yet sometimes they are so fused with other memories that a lot of the time spent in writing narrative is in the prewriting stage.
In this stage, writers first need to select an incident worthy of writing about and, second, to find relevance in that incident. To do this, writers might ask themselves what about the incident provided new insights or awareness. Finally, writers must dredge up details which will make the incident real for readers.
Principles of Writing Narrative Essays
Once an incident is chosen, the writer should keep three principles in mind.
- Remember to involve readers in the story. It is much more interesting to actually recreate an incident for readers than to simply tell about it.
- Find a generalization which the story supports. This is the only way the writer's personal experience will take on meaning for readers. This generalization does not have to encompass humanity as a whole; it can concern the writer, men, women, or children of various ages and backgrounds.
- Remember that although the main component of a narrative is the story, details must be carefully selected to support, explain, and enhance the story.
Conventions of Narrative Essays
In writing your narrative essay, keep the following conventions in mind.
- Narratives are generally written in the first person, that is, using "I." However, third person ("he," "she," or "it") can also be used.
- Narratives rely on concrete, sensory details to convey their point. These details should create a unified, forceful effect, a dominant impression.
- Narratives, as stories, should include these story conventions: a plot, including setting and characters; a climax; and an ending.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Student Blogs
Carrie's Blog: http://clk-wcom.blogspot.com/
Pear's Blog: http://keddypear.blogspot.com/
Zaid's Blog: http://www.zaidwc.blogspot.com/
Kamdeen's Blog: http://kamdeen.blogspot.com/
Ugur's Blog: http://uzunsoy.blogspot.com/
Upakar's Blog: http://upkshrestha.blogspot.com/
Yalcin's Blog: http://e77cavocabblogspotcom.blogspot.com/
Farruh's Blog: http://farruhi777.blogspot.com/
Mardoche's Blog: http://mardoche-wcom.blogspot.com/
Tochi's Blog: http://tochiopara.blogspot.com/
Fah's Blog: http://tofahja.blogspot.com/
Pear's Blog: http://keddypear.blogspot.com/
Zaid's Blog: http://www.zaidwc.blogspot.com/
Kamdeen's Blog: http://kamdeen.blogspot.com/
Ugur's Blog: http://uzunsoy.blogspot.com/
Upakar's Blog: http://upkshrestha.blogspot.com/
Yalcin's Blog: http://e77cavocabblogspotcom.blogspot.com/
Farruh's Blog: http://farruhi777.blogspot.com/
Mardoche's Blog: http://mardoche-wcom.blogspot.com/
Tochi's Blog: http://tochiopara.blogspot.com/
Fah's Blog: http://tofahja.blogspot.com/
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Course Syllabus
| Syllabus Instructor | Written Communication I (Eng 82A) Dr. Sylvia Y. Schoemaker Rippel Profs360@gmail.com | |
| Course Title | WRITTEN COMMUNICATION I | |
| Course Number | ENGLISH 82A | |
| Instructional Contact Hours/Credits | 3 Units | |
| Prerequisite(s) | None | |
| Co-requisites | None | |
| Instructional Materials and References | Required Text: VanderMey et al. The College Writer. 2nd Edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2007. ISBN: 0 618 74253 0 | |
| Recommended Texts: Clouse, Barbara Fine. A Troubleshooting Guide for Writers: Strategies & Process.4th Ed. Boston: Mc-Graw-Hill, 2005. | ||
| Adams, Katherine H. and Michael L. Keene, Research and Writing across the Disciples 2nd Ed. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company, 2000. | ||
| Dictionary, thesaurus | ||
| Description | ENG 82A & 82B - WRITTEN COMMUNICATION I & II | |
| First term: A thorough study of grammar and the fundamentals of composition. Practice in writing themes, book reviews and other short papers is given. Particular attention is directed toward sentence structure, syntax, and general rhetorical principles. Second term: Critical reading and evaluation of selected texts and writings; composition of well-organized expository papers; a careful consideration of methods of research, organization in a clear, logical manner and other elements involved in writing research papers. (3 + 3 units) | ||
| Course Objectives | Students will develop their writing skills for academic, professional, and socio-cultural purposes, in context-centered essay writing. Students will learn editing, documentation skills, use of online and other resources | |
| University learner goals 1 -6, and specifically in English: To develop basic academic and professional skills (1); to develop the ability to communicate effectively in English, orally and in writing, and to read with understanding (1.1) and institutional goals, especially 1, (1.1-1.4), 2.4 | ||
| Students will demonstrate written communication skills in writing and presenting their essays for personal, peer and instructor evaluation based on established rubrics, including competencies in planning, drafting, editing, and documentation skills. | ||
| Topical Outline | Overall Schedule | |
| English 82A covers the aspects of composing well-organized written communications. The core of the course will emphasize practice in organizing ideas in a clear, logical manner and other elements involved in writing papers in descriptive, narrative, analytical and persuasive rhetorical contexts. | ||
| Assignments Overview | Students will complete the following: Essays for 3 Units, 2 to 3 weeks each, midterm and final exams, ePortfolios/blogs/wikis, due weeks 8 and 15, notes and maps for each unit and text assignment, including reference data, in-class presentations, readings and exercises | |
| Course Outline | ||
| Date | Unit | Assignments |
| Each chapter contains an Intro, an Overview, Guidelines, Example Readings, and Writing Checklist/Activities. | ||
| 1/15/2009 | 1 Intro | I. A Rhetoric: College Student's Guide to Writing |
| 1/22/2009 | Brief Overview Chapters | I. A Rhetoric: College Student's Guide to Writing Reading, Thinking, Viewing, and Writing 1. Critical Thinking Through Reading, Viewing, and Writing The Writing Process 2. Beginning the Writing Process 3. Planning 4. Drafting 5. Revising 6. Editing and Proofreading 7. Submitting, Writing, and Creating Portfolios The College Essay 8. One Writer's Process |
| 1/29-2/12 | Unit I Weeks 3-5 | Narrative, Descriptive, and Reflective Writing |
| 1/29/2009 | Chapter | 9. Forms of College Writing Narrative, Descriptive, and Reflective |
| 2/5/2009 | Chapter | 10. Narration and Description |
| Selected Reading | "Mzee Owitti" by Jacqui Nyangi Owitti | |
| Selected Reading | "That Morning on the Prairie" by James C. Schaap | |
| Selected Reading | "A Hanging" by George Orwell | |
| Selected Reading | "Sunday in the Park" by Bel Kaufman | |
| Selected Reading | "Northing" by Annie Dillard | |
| 2/12/2009 | Chapter | 11. Description and Reflection |
| Selected Reading | "The Stream in the Ravine" by Nicole Suurdt | |
| Selected Reading | "Call Me Crazy But I Have to Be Myself" by Mary Seymour | |
| Selected Reading | "None of This Is Fair" by Richard Rodriguez | |
| Selected Reading | "Who Shot Johnny?" by Debra Dickerson | |
| 2/12/2009 | Unit I (Narrative, Descriptive, and Reflective Writing) Paper Due | Presentations |
| 2/19-2/26 | Unit II Weeks 6-10 | Unit II -- Analytical Writing |
| 2/19/2009 | Chapter | 12. Cause and Effect |
| Selected Reading | "Adrenaline Junkies" by Sarah Hanley | |
| Selected Reading | "The Legacy of Generation N" by Christy Haubegger | |
| Selected Reading | "Our Tired, Our Poor, Our Kids" by Anna Quindlen | |
| 2/26/2009 | Chapter | 13. Comparison and Contrast |
| Selected Reading | "A Fear Born of Sorrow" by Anita Brinkman | |
| Selected Reading | "Two Views of the River" by Mark Twain | |
| Selected Reading | "Shrouded in Contradiction" by Gelareh Asayesh | |
| Selected Reading | "Like Mexicans" by Gary Soto | |
| 3/5/2009 | Chapter | 14. Classification |
| Selected Reading | "Three Family Cancers" by Kim Brouwer | |
| Selected Reading | "Four Ways to Talk About Literature" by John Van Rys | |
| Selected Reading | "No Wonder They Call Me a Bitch" by Ann Hodgman | |
3/12/2009 3/12/2009 | MIDTERM Chapter | 15. Process Writing |
| Selected Reading | "Wayward Cells" by Kerri Mertz | |
| Selected Reading | "Downloading Photographs from the MC-150 Digital Camera" (from WFB) | |
| Selected Reading | "Hair Today, Gone Tomorrow" by Verne Meyer | |
| Selected Reading | "Campus Racism 101" by Nikki Giovonni | |
3/19/2009 3/26/2009 | SPRING RECESS Chapter | 16. Definition |
| Selected Reading | "The Gullible Family" by Mary Beth Bruins | |
| Selected Reading | "Understanding Dementia" by Sarah Anne Morelos | |
| Selected Reading | "Deft or Daft" by David Schelhaas | |
| Selected Reading | On Excellence by Cynthia Ozick | |
| 3/26/2009 | Week 10 Unit II (Analytical Writing ) Paper Due | Presentations |
| 4/2-4/30 | Unit III Weeks 11-15 | Persuasive Writing |
| 4/9/2009 | Chapter | 17. Strategies for Argumentation and Persuasion |
| 4/16/2009 | Chapter | 18. Taking a Position |
| Selected Reading | "An Apology for Ms. Barbie D. Doll" by Rita Isakson | |
| Selected Reading | "In Defense of the Animals" by Meg Greenfield | |
| Selected Reading | "Apostles of Hatred Find It Easy to Spread Their Message" by Leonard Pitts Jr. | |
| Selected Reading | "Pornography" by Margaret Atwood | |
| Selected Reading | "Demystifying Multiculturalism" by Linda Chavez | |
| 4/23/2009 | Chapter | 19. Persuading Readers to Act |
| Selected Reading | "To Drill or Not to Drill" by Rebecca Pasok | |
| Selected Reading | "Soul of a Citizen: Living with Conviction in a Cynical Time" by Paul Rogat Loeb | |
| Selected Reading | "I Have a Dream" by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. | |
| Selected Reading | "The Media's Image of Arabs" by Jack G. Shaheen | |
| 4/30/2009 | Chapter | 20. Proposing a Solution |
| Selected Reading | "Preparing for Agroterror" by Brian Ley | |
| Selected Reading | "Uncle Sam and Aunt Samantha" by Anna Quindlen | |
| Selected Reading | "The Media and the Ethics of Cloning" by Leigh Turner | |
| Week 15 Unit III (Persuasive Writing) Paper Due | Presentations Final Exam (Objective) Last class day | |
| 5/7/2009 | Week 16 | ePortfolio /essays/final materials (maps, summaries, written work, exercises, etc.) (Email all materials by midnight 5/7) |
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Where Do You Stand?
Where do you stand with regard to critical thinking?
FEET: What do I stand for as a foundation of critical thinking?
STOMACH: What upsets me about critical thinking?
HEART: What do I love about critical thinking?
HANDS: What do I feel about critical thinking?
EARS: What do I hear about critical thinking?
EYES: What do I see about critical thinking?
BRAIN: What do I think about critical thinking?
FEET: What do I stand for as a foundation of critical thinking?
STOMACH: What upsets me about critical thinking?
HEART: What do I love about critical thinking?
HANDS: What do I feel about critical thinking?
EARS: What do I hear about critical thinking?
EYES: What do I see about critical thinking?
BRAIN: What do I think about critical thinking?
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
From The Foundation for Critical Thinking
The Thinker's Guide to Fallacies: The Art of Mental Trickery and Manipulation
By Dr. Richard Paul and Dr. Linda Elder
"Most people deeply believe in -- but are unaware of -- the following premises:
1. It's true if I believe it
2. It's true if we believe it
3. It's true if I want to believe it
4. It's true if it serves my vested interest to believe it"
From http://www.criticalthinking.org/
44 Foul Ways to Win an Argument (which include the following):
By Dr. Richard Paul and Dr. Linda Elder
"Most people deeply believe in -- but are unaware of -- the following premises:
1. It's true if I believe it
2. It's true if we believe it
3. It's true if I want to believe it
4. It's true if it serves my vested interest to believe it"
From http://www.criticalthinking.org/
- Appeal to Authority
- Appeal to Experience
- Appeal to Fear
- Appeal to Popular Passions
- Appeal to Tradition or Faith ("the tried & true")
- Assume a Posture of Righteousness
- Attack the person (and not the argument)
- Beg the Question
- Call For Perfection (demand impossible conditions)
- Create a False Dilemma (the great either/or)
- Question Your Opponent's Conclusions
- Create Misgivings: Where There's Smoke, There's Fire
- Create A Straw Man
- Deny or Defend Your Inconsistencies
- Demonize His Side Sanitize Yours
- Evade Questions, Gracefully
- Flatter Your Audience
- Hedge What You Say
- Ignore the Evidence
- Ignore the Main Point
- Attack Evidence (that undermines your case)
- Insist Loudly on a Minor Point
- Make Much of Any Inconsistencies in Your Opponent's Position
- Make Your Opponent Look Ridiculous
- Oversimplify the Issue
Monday, December 1, 2008
F A L L A C I E S
F A L L A C I E S
Fallacies of Distraction
Fallacies of Distraction involve the misuse of logical operators--or, not, if-then, and--which distract the reader away from realizing an apparent falsity within the text. Each of the following examples contains links to web pages that further elaborate their meaning.
False Dilemma (misuse of "or")
Argument from Ignorance (misuse of "not")
Slippery Slope (misuse of "if-then")
Complex Question (misuse of "and")
Appeals to Motives in Place of Support
The fallacies in this category are without reasons for belief and tend to appeal to the emotions or other psychological factors of their readers.
Appeal to Force
Appeal to Pity
Appeal to Consequences
Prejudicial Language
Appeal to Popularity
Changing the Subject
The fallacies in this category target the person making the argument rather than the issue being argued.
Attacking the Person
Appeal to Authority
Anonymous Authorities
Style over Substance.
Inductive Fallacies
The fallacies in this category are assumptions about a whole from properties of a part. Although statistical sampling is a means of reasoning the composition of a whole, no sample is a perfect representation of its whole.
Hasty Generalization
Unrepresentative Sample
False Analogy
Slothful Induction
Fallacy of Exclusion
Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms
The fallacies in this category are assumptions about a part or even a whole that are made from statistical syllogisms, such as "most," as in "Most teachers know how to teach," or "generally," as in "Students are generally good learners." However, no syllogism is actually necessary to engage in this fallacy. For example, "People like to get haircuts."
Accident
Converse Accident.
Causal Fallacies
The fallacies in this category are assumptions about conclusions that are based on their causes. In other words, we can make a mistake in assumming that if cause A occurs, conclusion B will occur also--such as if students are handed textbooks, then they will read them.
Post Hoc
Joint Effect
Insignificant
Wrong Direction
Complex Cause
Missing the Point
The fallacies in this category are false assumptions that fail to prove that a conclusion is true.
Begging the Question
Irrelevant Conclusion
Straw Man
Fallacies of Ambiguity
The fallacies in this category involve using a word or phrase unclearly (ambiguously or vaguely).
Equivocation (Using the same term in two different ways)
Amphiboly (Two different interpretations)
Accent (what is actually said isn't what is actually meant)
Category Errors
The fallacies in this category occur when one thinks the sum of all the parts fits into a gestalt.
Composition (The whole does not necessarily have the properties of its parts)
Division (The parts do not necessarily have the properties of the whole)
Non-Sequitur
The fallacies in this category occur as a result of invalid arguments.
Affirming the Consequent
Denying the Antecedent
Inconsistency
Syllogistic Fallacies
The fallacies in this category occur as a result of invalid categorical syllogisms.
Fallacy of Four Terms: a syllogism has four terms
Undistributed Middle
Illicit Major
Illicit Minor
Fallacy of Exclusive Premises: a syllogism has two negative premises
Fallacy of Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise
Existential Fallacy: a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises
Fallacies of Explanation
The fallacies in this category refer to errors in making explanations.
Subverted Support (The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist)
Non-support (Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased)
Untestability (The theory which explains cannot be tested)
Limited Scope (The theory which explains can only explain one thing)
Limited Depth (The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes)
Fallacies of Definition
The fallacies in this category refer to errors in defining words or concepts.
Too Broad (The definition includes items which should not be included)
Too Narrow (The definition does not include all the items which shouls be included)
Failure to Elucidate (The definition is more difficult to understand)
Circular Definition (The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition)
Conflicting Conditions (The definition is self-contradictory)
Fallacies of Faulty Reasoning
false analogy
compares two things that are not alike in significant respects or have critical points of difference
hasty generalization
draws a conclusion about a class based on too few or atypical examples
false cause
post hoc
mistakes temporal succession for causal sequence
single cause fallacies
occurs when an advocate attributes only one cause to a complex problem
slippery slope
assumes, without evidence, that a given event is the first in a series of steps that will lead inevitably to some outcome.
Fallacies of Distraction
Fallacies of Distraction involve the misuse of logical operators--or, not, if-then, and--which distract the reader away from realizing an apparent falsity within the text. Each of the following examples contains links to web pages that further elaborate their meaning.
False Dilemma (misuse of "or")
Argument from Ignorance (misuse of "not")
Slippery Slope (misuse of "if-then")
Complex Question (misuse of "and")
Appeals to Motives in Place of Support
The fallacies in this category are without reasons for belief and tend to appeal to the emotions or other psychological factors of their readers.
Appeal to Force
Appeal to Pity
Appeal to Consequences
Prejudicial Language
Appeal to Popularity
Changing the Subject
The fallacies in this category target the person making the argument rather than the issue being argued.
Attacking the Person
Appeal to Authority
Anonymous Authorities
Style over Substance.
Inductive Fallacies
The fallacies in this category are assumptions about a whole from properties of a part. Although statistical sampling is a means of reasoning the composition of a whole, no sample is a perfect representation of its whole.
Hasty Generalization
Unrepresentative Sample
False Analogy
Slothful Induction
Fallacy of Exclusion
Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms
The fallacies in this category are assumptions about a part or even a whole that are made from statistical syllogisms, such as "most," as in "Most teachers know how to teach," or "generally," as in "Students are generally good learners." However, no syllogism is actually necessary to engage in this fallacy. For example, "People like to get haircuts."
Accident
Converse Accident.
Causal Fallacies
The fallacies in this category are assumptions about conclusions that are based on their causes. In other words, we can make a mistake in assumming that if cause A occurs, conclusion B will occur also--such as if students are handed textbooks, then they will read them.
Post Hoc
Joint Effect
Insignificant
Wrong Direction
Complex Cause
Missing the Point
The fallacies in this category are false assumptions that fail to prove that a conclusion is true.
Begging the Question
Irrelevant Conclusion
Straw Man
Fallacies of Ambiguity
The fallacies in this category involve using a word or phrase unclearly (ambiguously or vaguely).
Equivocation (Using the same term in two different ways)
Amphiboly (Two different interpretations)
Accent (what is actually said isn't what is actually meant)
Category Errors
The fallacies in this category occur when one thinks the sum of all the parts fits into a gestalt.
Composition (The whole does not necessarily have the properties of its parts)
Division (The parts do not necessarily have the properties of the whole)
Non-Sequitur
The fallacies in this category occur as a result of invalid arguments.
Affirming the Consequent
Denying the Antecedent
Inconsistency
Syllogistic Fallacies
The fallacies in this category occur as a result of invalid categorical syllogisms.
Fallacy of Four Terms: a syllogism has four terms
Undistributed Middle
Illicit Major
Illicit Minor
Fallacy of Exclusive Premises: a syllogism has two negative premises
Fallacy of Drawing an Affirmative Conclusion From a Negative Premise
Existential Fallacy: a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises
Fallacies of Explanation
The fallacies in this category refer to errors in making explanations.
Subverted Support (The phenomenon being explained doesn't exist)
Non-support (Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased)
Untestability (The theory which explains cannot be tested)
Limited Scope (The theory which explains can only explain one thing)
Limited Depth (The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes)
Fallacies of Definition
The fallacies in this category refer to errors in defining words or concepts.
Too Broad (The definition includes items which should not be included)
Too Narrow (The definition does not include all the items which shouls be included)
Failure to Elucidate (The definition is more difficult to understand)
Circular Definition (The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition)
Conflicting Conditions (The definition is self-contradictory)
Fallacies of Faulty Reasoning
false analogy
compares two things that are not alike in significant respects or have critical points of difference
hasty generalization
draws a conclusion about a class based on too few or atypical examples
false cause
post hoc
mistakes temporal succession for causal sequence
single cause fallacies
occurs when an advocate attributes only one cause to a complex problem
slippery slope
assumes, without evidence, that a given event is the first in a series of steps that will lead inevitably to some outcome.
TFY C12 Web Links
ARGUMENTS AND INFERENCES
Tie together what you have learned about inferences and argument by reading this article taken from Philosophy Pages.
http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e01.htm
DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Explain how this document represents a deductive argument.
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE
These exercises help you understand the differences between inductive and deductive reasoning. Prepared by San Jose University, Mission Critical.http://www2.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/7/part2/ind-ded.html
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.Here is a biography of Martin Luther King, Jr.
http://nobelprize.org/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html
THOMAS JEFFERSON
Review the life and writings of Thomas Jefferson.
http://www.pbs.org/jefferson/
VALID AND INVALID
Learn more about valid and invalid deductive reasoning prepared by the Rhodes Writing Center.
http://www.rhodes.edu/writingcenter/group_b/deductive_reasoning.html
VENN DIAGRAMS
Past editions of this text have included Venn diagrams: a useful visual approach to logic.
http://www.wadsworth.com/cgi-wadsworth/course_products_wp.pl?fid=M42&product_isbn_issn=141301772X&chapter_number=12&altname=Web+Links&resource_id=5##
Tie together what you have learned about inferences and argument by reading this article taken from Philosophy Pages.
http://www.philosophypages.com/lg/e01.htm
DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Explain how this document represents a deductive argument.
http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html
DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE
These exercises help you understand the differences between inductive and deductive reasoning. Prepared by San Jose University, Mission Critical.http://www2.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/7/part2/ind-ded.html
MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.Here is a biography of Martin Luther King, Jr.
http://nobelprize.org/peace/laureates/1964/king-bio.html
THOMAS JEFFERSON
Review the life and writings of Thomas Jefferson.
http://www.pbs.org/jefferson/
VALID AND INVALID
Learn more about valid and invalid deductive reasoning prepared by the Rhodes Writing Center.
http://www.rhodes.edu/writingcenter/group_b/deductive_reasoning.html
VENN DIAGRAMS
Past editions of this text have included Venn diagrams: a useful visual approach to logic.
http://www.wadsworth.com/cgi-wadsworth/course_products_wp.pl?fid=M42&product_isbn_issn=141301772X&chapter_number=12&altname=Web+Links&resource_id=5##
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)