Critical Solution and Critical Thinking

In this assignment, you will identify soundness, bias, and reliability in statements.

Step 1: Consider the scenario:

You are a speechwriter for the mayor of Oakland. This is an election year and already the mayor’s opposition is out in force. Henry Levine, the leading GOP candidate, recently aired an advertisement on local television blasting the mayor for his handling of the city’s recent demonstrations, most of which are aimed at overturning the current financial structure of Oakland:

We know that Mayor Brooks, a graduate of Johns Hopkins Business School, is an intelligent man. He graduated first in his class and received the 1997 Young Economists’ Essay Award, becoming the youngest recipient in history to do so. Why then do we, the upstanding residents of Oakland, find our streets littered with young and disgruntled vagrants calling for anarchy as a solution to the status quo? We need look no further than the house of cards built by our current mayor. Oaklanders deserve better than what this mayor can offer. They deserve what I, Henry Levine, can offer each and every Oaklander next year.

Step 2: Assess the candidate’s speech.

Before you can begin writing the mayor’s rebuttal, you must first analyze the qualities present in Henry Levine’s initial argument. In a two-page (minimum) letter to Mayor Brooks, address the following as it pertains to Levine’s speech:

  • When does Henry Levine’s speech consist of primarily cognitive content? When is it primarily emotive?
  • What are the primary benefits of using primarily cognitive content within this political context? What are the benefits of emotive content?
  • Identify any occurrence of bias within Levine’s speech. How can bias influence reliability?
  • Evaluate the soundness of Henry Levine’s message. Do you believe his ideas are being clearly conveyed? Why or why not?

Step 3: When you have completed your assignment, save a copy for yourself in an easily accessible place.

Cite any sources in APA format.

See rubrics Download rubricsfor grading details

Rubric

Week 8 Assignment Rubric

Week 8 Assignment Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCognitive and emotive content

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Correctly determines the cognitive and emotive content of the speech.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat determines the cognitive and emotive cognitive content. A few details may be missing.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally determines the cognitive and emotive cognitive content or there are inaccuracies.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not accurately determine the cognitive and emotive cognitive content.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBenefits of cognitive and emotive content in a political context?

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly and accurately explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not adequately explain the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBias and reliability

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Correctly identifies any occurrence of bias within the speech and thoroughly explains how bias can influence reliability.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Correctly identifies occurrences of bias within the speech and somewhat explains how bias can influence reliability.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Identifies occurrences of bias within the speech but there may be inaccuracies; minimally explains how bias can influence reliability.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not correctly identify occurrences of bias within the speech and does not explain how bias can influence reliability.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSoundness and clarity of the message

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not adequately evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message or the information is inaccurate.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics and Grammar

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

No errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Easy to read and understand.

4 to >3.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Minor errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling do not interfere with reading/understanding

3 to >2.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Some errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling may interfere with reading/understanding.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Numerous errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling which interfere with reading/understanding or is limited in development.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Citation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

No errors in APA format: in- text citation(s); reference page.

4 to >3.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Minor errors in APA format: in- text citation(s); reference page.

3 to >2.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Some errors in APA format: intext citation(s); reference page.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Numerous errors in APA format: in-text citation(s); reference page.

5 pts

Total Points: 50

PreviousNext

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Critical Solution and Critical Thinking

In this assignment, you will identify soundness, bias, and reliability in statements.

Step 1: Consider the scenario:

You are a speechwriter for the mayor of Oakland. This is an election year and already the mayor’s opposition is out in force. Henry Levine, the leading GOP candidate, recently aired an advertisement on local television blasting the mayor for his handling of the city’s recent demonstrations, most of which are aimed at overturning the current financial structure of Oakland:

We know that Mayor Brooks, a graduate of Johns Hopkins Business School, is an intelligent man. He graduated first in his class and received the 1997 Young Economists’ Essay Award, becoming the youngest recipient in history to do so. Why then do we, the upstanding residents of Oakland, find our streets littered with young and disgruntled vagrants calling for anarchy as a solution to the status quo? We need look no further than the house of cards built by our current mayor. Oaklanders deserve better than what this mayor can offer. They deserve what I, Henry Levine, can offer each and every Oaklander next year.

Step 2: Assess the candidate’s speech.

Before you can begin writing the mayor’s rebuttal, you must first analyze the qualities present in Henry Levine’s initial argument. In a two-page (minimum) letter to Mayor Brooks, address the following as it pertains to Levine’s speech:

  • When does Henry Levine’s speech consist of primarily cognitive content? When is it primarily emotive?
  • What are the primary benefits of using primarily cognitive content within this political context? What are the benefits of emotive content?
  • Identify any occurrence of bias within Levine’s speech. How can bias influence reliability?
  • Evaluate the soundness of Henry Levine’s message. Do you believe his ideas are being clearly conveyed? Why or why not?

Step 3: When you have completed your assignment, save a copy for yourself in an easily accessible place.

Cite any sources in APA format.

See rubrics Download rubricsfor grading details

Rubric

Week 8 Assignment Rubric

Week 8 Assignment Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCognitive and emotive content

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Correctly determines the cognitive and emotive content of the speech.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat determines the cognitive and emotive cognitive content. A few details may be missing.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally determines the cognitive and emotive cognitive content or there are inaccuracies.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not accurately determine the cognitive and emotive cognitive content.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBenefits of cognitive and emotive content in a political context?

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly and accurately explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not adequately explain the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBias and reliability

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Correctly identifies any occurrence of bias within the speech and thoroughly explains how bias can influence reliability.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Correctly identifies occurrences of bias within the speech and somewhat explains how bias can influence reliability.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Identifies occurrences of bias within the speech but there may be inaccuracies; minimally explains how bias can influence reliability.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not correctly identify occurrences of bias within the speech and does not explain how bias can influence reliability.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSoundness and clarity of the message

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not adequately evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message or the information is inaccurate.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics and Grammar

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

No errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Easy to read and understand.

4 to >3.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Minor errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling do not interfere with reading/understanding

3 to >2.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Some errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling may interfere with reading/understanding.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Numerous errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling which interfere with reading/understanding or is limited in development.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Citation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

No errors in APA format: in- text citation(s); reference page.

4 to >3.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Minor errors in APA format: in- text citation(s); reference page.

3 to >2.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Some errors in APA format: intext citation(s); reference page.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Numerous errors in APA format: in-text citation(s); reference page.

5 pts

Total Points: 50

PreviousNext

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Critical Solution and Critical Thinking

In this assignment, you will identify soundness, bias, and reliability in statements.

Step 1: Consider the scenario:

You are a speechwriter for the mayor of Oakland. This is an election year and already the mayor’s opposition is out in force. Henry Levine, the leading GOP candidate, recently aired an advertisement on local television blasting the mayor for his handling of the city’s recent demonstrations, most of which are aimed at overturning the current financial structure of Oakland:

We know that Mayor Brooks, a graduate of Johns Hopkins Business School, is an intelligent man. He graduated first in his class and received the 1997 Young Economists’ Essay Award, becoming the youngest recipient in history to do so. Why then do we, the upstanding residents of Oakland, find our streets littered with young and disgruntled vagrants calling for anarchy as a solution to the status quo? We need look no further than the house of cards built by our current mayor. Oaklanders deserve better than what this mayor can offer. They deserve what I, Henry Levine, can offer each and every Oaklander next year.

Step 2: Assess the candidate’s speech.

Before you can begin writing the mayor’s rebuttal, you must first analyze the qualities present in Henry Levine’s initial argument. In a two-page (minimum) letter to Mayor Brooks, address the following as it pertains to Levine’s speech:

  • When does Henry Levine’s speech consist of primarily cognitive content? When is it primarily emotive?
  • What are the primary benefits of using primarily cognitive content within this political context? What are the benefits of emotive content?
  • Identify any occurrence of bias within Levine’s speech. How can bias influence reliability?
  • Evaluate the soundness of Henry Levine’s message. Do you believe his ideas are being clearly conveyed? Why or why not?

Step 3: When you have completed your assignment, save a copy for yourself in an easily accessible place.

Cite any sources in APA format.

See rubrics Download rubricsfor grading details

Rubric

Week 8 Assignment Rubric

Week 8 Assignment Rubric

CriteriaRatingsPts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeCognitive and emotive content

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Correctly determines the cognitive and emotive content of the speech.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat determines the cognitive and emotive cognitive content. A few details may be missing.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally determines the cognitive and emotive cognitive content or there are inaccuracies.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not accurately determine the cognitive and emotive cognitive content.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBenefits of cognitive and emotive content in a political context?

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly and accurately explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally explains the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not adequately explain the benefits of using primarily cognitive or primarily emotive content within a political context.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeBias and reliability

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Correctly identifies any occurrence of bias within the speech and thoroughly explains how bias can influence reliability.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Correctly identifies occurrences of bias within the speech and somewhat explains how bias can influence reliability.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Identifies occurrences of bias within the speech but there may be inaccuracies; minimally explains how bias can influence reliability.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not correctly identify occurrences of bias within the speech and does not explain how bias can influence reliability.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSoundness and clarity of the message

10 to >8.0 pts

Excellent

Thoroughly evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

8 to >6.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Somewhat evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

6 to >4.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Minimally evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message.

4 to >0 pts

Poor

Does not adequately evaluates the soundness and clarity of the message or the information is inaccurate.

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMechanics and Grammar

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

No errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling. Easy to read and understand.

4 to >3.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Minor errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling do not interfere with reading/understanding

3 to >2.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Some errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling may interfere with reading/understanding.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Numerous errors in usage, capitalization, punctuation, and spelling which interfere with reading/understanding or is limited in development.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Citation

5 to >4.0 pts

Excellent

No errors in APA format: in- text citation(s); reference page.

4 to >3.0 pts

Need Some Improvement

Minor errors in APA format: in- text citation(s); reference page.

3 to >2.0 pts

Need Significant Improvement

Some errors in APA format: intext citation(s); reference page.

2 to >0 pts

Poor

Numerous errors in APA format: in-text citation(s); reference page.

5 pts

Total Points: 50

PreviousNext

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top