HUM101 Chamberlain College of Nursing Critical Reasoning Evaluating Arguments

Introduction
Thefirst two steps in evidence-based practice are to identify knowledgegaps and formulate relevant questions. In this writing exercise, youwill be doing just that, across three types of inductive reasoning. Inaddition, you will be applying evaluation techniques to determine howcredible, authoritative, and reliable the arguments are.
Scenario
Imagine your boss has asked you toevaluate four ideas that she is thinking of using to implement programs.You must evaluate whether these are good ideas that she can safely andimmediately green-light or whether further evidence is needed. She isanxious to move forward, so she will be unhappy if you reject a goodidea; however, if you approve a bad idea, she will be equally asunhappy. She has specifically directed you not to do any outsideresearch. You must evaluate the ideas strictly on the brief passagesavailable. She also wants to know what specific kind of reasoning isused in each passage
Instructions
Using everything you have learnedfrom the text, as well as any other information you have gathered fromyour searches related to this week’s discussion, evaluate the followingfour arguments:
Chapter 8 Exercise 8.9 Examples 7 and 10
Chapter 9 Exercise 9.9 Example 1
Chapter 10 Exercise 10.9 Example 1
For each exercise, address the following:
Identify the type of inductive argument and any features of the way the argument is constructed that you find relevant.
Explain how convincing you think the argument is.
Does it have sufficient evidence to allow you to suggest that shemove forward with the idea or does the argument have knowledge gaps?
What questions need to be answered to close these gaps?
Does the argument contain any information that adds to its authority, credibility, or reliability?
You need to show your boss that you know what factors have to beconsidered in evaluating each type of argument and how well the argumentmeets the criteria.
Writing Requirements (APA format)
Length: 100-150 words per exercise (not including title page or references page)
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page
References page
Grading
This activity will be graded using the Argument Analysis (W6) Grading Rubric.
Course Outcomes (CO): 3, 5
Due Date: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday
Rubric
Argument Analysis (W6) Grading Rubric – 75 pts
Argument Analysis (W6) Grading Rubric – 75 pts
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTimeliness of Submission
7.0ptsAssignment submitted by due date
0.0ptsAssignment not submitted by due date
7.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExercise Identification
20.0ptsType of argument correctly identified for all 4 exercises.
15.0ptsType of argument correctly identified for 3 exercises.
10.0ptsType of argument correctly identified for 2 exercises.
5.0ptsType of argument correctly identified 1 exercise.
0.0ptsNone are correct, fully developed, or present.
20.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeEvaluation of Criteria
12.0ptsEvaluates argument according to correct criteria for that type of argument for all 4 exercises.
9.0ptsEvaluates argument according to correct criteria for that type of argument for 3 exercises.
6.0ptsEvaluates argument according to correct criteria for that type of argument for 2 exercises.
3.0ptsEvaluates argument according to correct criteria for that type of argument for 1 exercise.
0.0ptsNone are correct, fully developed, or present.
12.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeValue of Evidence
12.0ptsProvides full discussion of probative value of evidence (strength of evidence) for all 4 exercises.
9.0ptsProvides full discussion of probative value of evidence (strength of evidence) for 3 exercises.
6.0ptsProvides full discussion of probative value of evidence (strength of evidence) for 2 exercises.
3.0ptsProvides full discussion of probative value of evidence (strength of evidence) for 1 exercise.
0.0ptsNone are correct, fully developed, or present.
12.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuestions
12.0ptsForms pertinent question to fill information gaps for all 4 exercises.
9.0ptsForms pertinent question to fill information gaps for 3 exercises.
6.0ptsForms pertinent question to fill information gaps for 2 exercises.
3.0ptsForms pertinent question to fill information gaps for 1 exercises.
0.0ptsNone are correct, fully developed, or present.
12.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAuthority, Credibility, Reliability
12.0ptsFull discussion of authority, credibility and reliability of passage for all 4 exercises.
9.0ptsFull discussion of authority, credibility and reliability of passage for 3 exercises.
6.0ptsFull discussion of authority, credibility and reliability of passage for 2 exercises.
3.0ptsFull discussion of authority, credibility and reliability of passage for 1 exercises.
0.0ptsNone are correct,