Buy Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Assignment 1

January 2, 2023

Buy Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Assignment

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

Instructions/Descriptions

Buy Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Assignment

Assignment 1.2: Conflicting Viewpoints Essay – Part II
Synthesizing and Writing
Due Week 4 and worth 100 points

When looking for information about a particular issue, how often do you try to resist biases toward your own point of view? This assignment asks you to engage in this aspect of critical thinking.

The assignment is divided into two (2) parts.
For Part I of the assignment (due Week 2), you read a book excerpt about critical thinking processes, reviewed the Procon.org Website in order to gather information, and engaged in prewriting to examine your thoughts.
* Remember that in the Week 2 Discussion, you examined the biases discussed in Chapter 2 of the webtext.

In Part II of the assignment (due Week 4), you will write a paper to synthesize your ideas.
Part II – Writing
Write at three to four (3-4) page paper in which you:
1. State your position on the topic you selected for Assignment 1.1.
2. Identify (3) three premises (reasons) from the Procon.org website that support your position and explain why you selected these specific reasons.
3. Explain your answers to the “believing” questions about the three (3) premises opposing your position from the Procon.org website.
4. Examine at least two (2) types of biases that you likely experienced as you evaluated the premises for and against your position.
5. Discuss the effects of your own enculturation or group identification that may have influenced your biases.
6. Discuss whether or not your thinking about the topic has changed after playing the “Believing Game,” even if your position on the issue has stayed the same.

Buy Conflicting Viewpoints Essay Assignment

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.