Role of Debate Critiques on Critical Thinking

December 6, 2022

Role of Debate Critiques on Critical Thinking

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Role of Debate Critiques on Critical Thinking

[Order Now]

Debate critiques are not meant to be summaries of course material. Rather, they are intended to encourage critical thinking about specific topics, debates, and conversations in the study of sex and gender. You will notice that each chapter of your textbook includes an overview of a debate that is relevant to the respective chapter’s content.

These debates appear in highlight boxes titled, “Debate” (there is one per chapter). Following an overview of the debate, both sides are then briefly discussed. For each unit of the course, you must choose any one debate from a chapter that is assigned in the respective unit.

So, for Unit 1, you may choose a debate from Chapters 1 through 4; for Unit 2, from Chapters 5 through 9; and for Unit 3, from Chapters 10 through 14. Then you must ‘pick a side’ of the debate you choose and support your position in a brief write- up/critique on Canvas. Each debate critique must be between 250 and 500 words.

Debate critiques must involve more than simply stating your opinion. Rather, the goal should be to demonstrate critical thinking and reasoning about the particular debate in order to support the side you have chosen.

Support can be provided based on intellectual reasoning and logic, expert consensus (in any field), or scientific evidence (either new or cited in the textbook or lectures).

While research findings can be helpful, support can also be provided in the form of logical reasoning alone (it all depends on your approach, and it is not necessary that you bring in outside sources at all). Ideas or literature from neighbouring disciplines is very much welcome.

When referring to any literature or outside sources in your critique, simply cite the information by including the author’s last name and year of the specific publication in text or in parentheses [e.g., “Smith (2019) found…” or “…these conclusions (Smith, 2019).”]. The full reference or citation can then be included at the very bottom, following your critique.

Full references will NOT be included in your word count. Remember, many debates can be approached using logic and reason alone, so outside sources are not always necessary. Whatever your approach, you must argue and/or support your stance!

In matters of intellectual discourse and debate, I tend to adopt the perspective that you are not simply “entitled to your opinion.” Instead, you are “entitled to what you can argue for.” This means that when approaching a debate or controversy through an academic or scientific lens, it is important to be able to defend your opinion or stance.

Otherwise, the discourse becomes meaningless in the first place, and people’s opinions become so personal that even continuing to engage in discourse is interpreted as being offensive. Simply put, you need to support your perspective. I recommend reading the following article (by a university professor) for some perspective on this: https://theconversation.com/no-youre-not-entitled-to-your-opinion-9978.

[Order Now]

chap 1 ：First, read the debate on pp. 24-25 in your textbook before you respond!

Then, pick a side, and support it: A. Yes, Feminist Movements Overlook Men B. No, Feminist Movements Do Not Overlook Men

chap 2: First, read the debate on pp. 42-43 in your textbook before you respond! Then, pick a side, and support it: A. No, Psychologists Should Not Study Sex Differences B. Yes, Psychologists Should Study Sex Differences

chap 3: First, read the debate on pp. 91-92 in your textbook before you respond! Then, pick a side, and support it: A. No, They Should Not Be Allowed to Compete B. Yes, They Should Be Allowed to Compete

chap 4: First, read the debate on pp. 122-123 in your textbook before you respond! Then, pick a side, and support it: A. Yes, Toy Marketing Should be Gender Neutral B. No, Toy Marketing Need Not Be Gender Neutral

Role of Debate Critiques on Critical Thinking

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.