As you may know, some studies are done poorly but can be persuasive to the reader nonetheless. False news abounds, especially on the Internet. Much of what is “fed” to the public is often believed too readily and “swallowed” without any critical thought. This assignment requires that you think critically about the information being offered to you as logical thought or “scientific data.”

Read the following statements and evaluate them for their weaknesses. When critiquing the statements, be sure to explain why you have concerns about the ideas and/or techniques, provide alternative, theoretical, and/or logical arguments for your comments, and explain why your concerns matter in regards to the conclusion of the research findings being offered. Be thorough in your writing; do not assume we share common beliefs about human nature. For full credit, back up your comments with “evidence;” if you refer to a study or theory, be sure to explain enough of it to support your position.

Be sure to read Instructions for PA 6 for hints on how to score well (found in the next link).

You are still in your “Sept” groups. Click on the Reply link to automatically join your group.

Here is the prompt:

Below you will find 4 statements purporting to claim some truth about human behavior. These statements have been created by your instructor or taken from unprofessional sources.

• Choose two of the statements to critique (7.5 points each), and
• Critique these two statements
  • each critique should have two (2) thoroughly explained criticisms/problems.
    • for example, you choose Statement 1, so you should discuss 2 problems in the content of Statement 1
    • and then you decide to choose Statement 4, and you should discuss 2 problems in the content of Statement 4
  • do not offer more than two problems per Statement; save some problems for your colleagues so that they can complete their response postings.

For your response postings, find a writer who used a statement that you didn’t choose, and add another criticism to the writer’s ideas.

• You can add two criticisms to one writer (2 response postings), or
• You can add one criticism to one writer and one criticism to another writer (2 response postings)
• Do not repeat anything you’ve read in the forum; repeated criticisms will be scored 0.

Show us your critical thinking skills! Here are the four statements:

Statement 1. The records of 337,000 juvenile offenders in the U.S. were analyzed. These records were from communities representing 98% of the juvenile courts in the nation. The data reflect formally handled cases; cases disposed of informally (approximately 20%), without ever reaching the court, were not included. For race, Hispanics were counted as White. Thus, the category “non-White” primarily refers to Blacks, although it also includes unknown (and likely small) numbers of American Indians, Orientals, Pacific Islanders, etc. These records showed that Black youth were twice as likely as White youth to be convicted of a crime. The results were statistically significant.*

Statement #2. One of the reasons we should change the admissions policy of City College of San Francisco is because most of the students are not motivated. Most students who attend CCSF are in school because they don’t know what else to do with their lives, not because they are interested in learning or making a better life for themselves. If we consider the GPAs of CCSF students, we would see that they are earning GPAs that are 30% below the GPAs of schools such as SF State University or UC Berkeley (College Statistics of California, 2011). In addition, CCSF students take 25% fewer units than students at any college in California (College Statistics of California, 2011). These findings tell us that the expenses of this college (paid by taxpayers) far outweigh the benefits (for the students). While it is true that there are some students at CCSF who are clearly motivated and hardworking, we would save taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars each year by limiting CCSF admissions only to students who have good GPAs in high school, or good SAT scores – just like any college. They should also be required to take at least 12 units – just like any other college; these are the students who truly want a college education. Not everyone is meant to go to college.

Statement #3. One thousand women between the ages 18-25 were recruited from St. Mary’s College, a small private university located in Marin county. These women were asked to complete a survey regarding their exposure to racism, either seeing racism directed towards others, or experiencing racism directly. The women received no compensation for their completion of a 1-hour questionnaire which detailed racist, neutral, and non-racist scenarios. The women were asked to rate how often in the past 6 months they had experienced or witnessed the scenarios described.

Examples of the scenarios included:

1. When at a store, a person of color was first in line, but the clerk turned to the White customer.

Never Once or twice 3 to 5 times 6-10 times more than 10 times

2. At my college, the students are respectful to everyone.

Always Usually Didn’t Notice Rarely Never

3. At my college, the faculty is respectful to everyone.

Always Usually Didn’t Notice Rarely Never

The study showed that the St. Mary’s students experienced or witnessed few racist situations, suggesting that the progressive attitude of the Bay Area has been successful in combating racism. The results were statistically significant.*

Statement #4. Two hundred school-age children (between the ages of 5-10) and their families were recruited from public elementary schools throughout San Francisco. Families received a $15 gift card from Safeway or Lucky for their participation in a 2-hour study that explored the relationship of parenting style to test scores. Most of the participants came from the Tenderloin, Chinatown, Western Addition, and Mission areas, providing a wide representative mix of ethnic minorities. The studies were conducted in the language of the participants’ choice and were done in face-to-face interviews with the parents in their homes, when the children were away at school. The study found an inverse correlation between parents who reported using physical punishment as part of their parenting styles and their children’s standardized test scores, suggesting that physical punishment may be tied to poorer academic performance. The results were statistically significant.*

*“Statistically significant” means that the study showed a clear trend in the direction being noted; it suggests that the findings are strong. Do not question this phrase.