I have formulated my own questions (listed on top). If you could point out the main arguments, premises, conclusion of those main arguments. Basically, I need help answering those questions that ive listed at the top as detailed as possible as it help me out.© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 25, 2018, 3:56 am ad1c9bdddf
Hello. The solution below should get you started. If you have any questions regarding the solution, you can let me know via the feedback section and I'll try to clarify them for you. Good luck and thank you for using Brainmass.
OTA 105878/Xenia Jones
Article 1: The Ed D. and Other Certification Charades
1. The article discusses the problem of the disconnect between highly qualified certification and actual teacher skill/capacity/effectiveness in teaching. The article draws from the personal observation of the writer relating how certifications do not present the true picture of teacher quality and that, in the 'charade' of certification, schools and students lose out on talented teachers who are unjustly terminated or chose to leave because of what the writer sees as the absurdity of the disconnect between 'fully certified' and 'highly qualified' teachers.
2. There are a number of fallacies that can be spotted in this article. One of them is the 'appeal to authority'. The writer claims to be an authority on the subject (s) (i.e. good, quality and effective teachers) and makes a claim about the subject in relation to the disconnect between quality teachers & the 'charade' that is certification (c), and because of (s), he thus concludes that (c) is true. The logical fallacy committed here is all about establishment of authority. The article, while registering the views and name of the writer does not prove the writer's true expertise without doubt. Another fallacy displayed is that of 'questionable cause' the writer claims that good teachers are not in schools anymore (a) primarily due to the certification charades (b), suggesting that (a) & (b) go together. This is a fallacy because there are varied other reasons that lead to (b) and not (a) alone. The problem here is adequate justification based on one's personal observation without considering other factors ...
The solution is a 1,173-word review of 2 articles (see attachment) in relation to the fallacies it contains as well as the arguments, the premises and conclusions presented in the articles. Questions answered for each article reviewed include:
1. formulate the problem discussed.
2. Decide, what are the main arguments used in each of the papers. Indicate their premises and conclusions. Check for the possible arguments' fallacies in each of the papers (if present).
3. Whose position is the most convincing and why(of the two). Give reasons to support your choice
4. Evaluate the importance of the subject discussed.
5. Formulate your position about the subject and offer an argument in its support.
References are listed to allow students room for further research. A word version of the solution is attached for easy printing and digital use.
Analyze Article - Alcohol and Teens
Identify any examples of bias presented by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
Identify any areas that are vague or ambiguous. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
Identify and name any rhetorical devices used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
Identify and name any fallacies used by the author. If none exist, explain how you determined this.
State one argument made by the author.
Identify the premises and conclusion of the argument.
Is the author's argument valid or invalid, sound or unsound, strong or weak? Explain how you determined this.
Does the author use moral reasoning? If not, explain how you determined this.View Full Posting Details