(This tutorial is derived from material originally prepared by Prof Ann Zimmerman)
我们总结了Essay代写中，多伦多代写的经典案例，如果你有任何加拿大代写的需求，请随时联络我们。CoursePear @ 2009.
Access to news and information has never been easier requiring only a few taps on our electronic devices. However not all this information is of equal value and we must learn to better sort fact from fiction, and the credible from the mis- or disinformation. The past decade has seen the proliferation of such terms as: misinformation, disinformation, fake news, alternative facts, and the evolution of the information ecosystem.
To help you navigate these terms, some basic definitions as found on various university library websites (U of Michigan – https://guides.lib.umich.edu/fakenews; U of Toronto – https://guides.library.utoronto.ca/c.php?g=705826&p=5021875) are provided below:
Misinformation – false or inaccurate information that is mistakenly or inadvertently created or spread.
Disinformation – false information that is deliberately created and spread in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth.
Fake news – news stories that are false: the story itself is fabricated, with no verifiable facts, sources or quotes.
Alternative facts – an alternative interpretation of a fact that is typically used in order to serve one’s political or ideological purposes – regardless of whether the interpretation is valid or not.
Information ecosystem – complex organizations of dynamic social relationships through which information moves and transforms in flows.
Assessing the credibility of information can be even more confusing when it comes to scientific information. Most people who are not scientists are presented with scientific issues and advances through avenues like the internet, newspapers, radio/TV, or in conversation with friends. In this tutorial, we will concentrate on digital & print media, but much of what we look for in terms of credibility in scientific reporting applies to any media outlet or any information source towards which we should maintain a healthy skepticism.
With respect to science, print media fall into three general types:
(1) The “primary” scientific literature is where scientists first publish the results of their research. These are reports that are “peer” reviewed, meaning the information in the article has been reviewed by 2-3 other scientists who are experts in the field. If in their and the journal editor’s opinions, the information is credible and represents an advance of the field, the article is published, otherwise it is rejected. In general, the peer reviewed literature is not intended for a general audience as it assumes a familiarity with the discipline and a relatively specialized vocabulary-often unique to the field. Two of the most influential peer-reviewed
pg. 1
journals are Nature and Science, as they publish important new advances across all fields of science. Each discipline in science will also have its own specific journals.
(2) There are several secondary or “derivatory” sources of scientific information like Scientific American, American Scientist, National or Canadian Geographic, which are not “peer” reviewed but have proven reputations for accuracy and whose articles are often written by working scientists for general audiences. Such articles are often highly informative and are useful to both the interested public and professional audiences.
(3) Newspaper and magazine articles run the gamut of reliability as many of them report with a media bias. Newspapers such as The Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star employ science journalists and are generally reliable, although the respective political sympathies of the editors/publishers sometimes seem to influence the sorts of topics they cover.
Increasingly people have direct access to scientific information through the Internet, however, this information should be reviewed with a critical eye. An advantage of the Internet is that information is available in a completely uncensored format, but this can also be a disadvantage. Often, we do not have sufficient experience with Internet based information to make informed judgments. However, we should at least learn to look at URL’s (.com sites are trying to sell something to someone; .org sites are usually advocating a point of view, but often we simply can’t discern motivation from a URL. We should even be skeptical of university sites that represent the personal views of university associated individuals rather than course or research-based sites). There are credible peer-reviewed “journals” on the Web, but “scientific” information accessed via newsgroups, discussion boards, discord, blogs, tweets or Tik Tok can range from correct to patently fraudulent. This makes it difficult to decide what is factual from fiction. Increasingly our information-based society will require its citizens to act as their own assessors of information.
Should we believe something just because it is replete with facts, figures and theories? How reliable are the figures? Is it a single number? Are the uncertainties associated with the measurement reported? Even if the material was the best available information at the time the text was written, data change, as we have repeatedly experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Every day we are inundated by a flood of information and misinformation. Competing claims and contradictory ideas battle for our attention, bombarding us with more information and choices than we can possibly manage.
How can we know what to believe when the facts are confusing and even experts disagree? Critical thinking is a set of skills that can help us evaluate information in a systematic, purposeful manner. Critical thinking is sometimes compared to formal logic but it also includes context, attitude and disposition.
Richard Paul, then chair of the National Council for Critical Thinking, breaks the process into eight steps:
- What question do I want to answer with this information?
- Do I already have a point of view?
- Am I picking and choosing among the available information?
- How am I interpreting different/contrary information?
pg. 2 - Am I reinforcing what I believed when I started my research?
- What assumptions am I making?
- What are the implications of accepting one conclusion versus another?
- What would the consequences be of putting my conclusions into action?
These are self-reflective, self-correcting questions. For that reason, critical thinking has been called “thinking about thinking.” It is a plan for a rational analysis of a problem. Critical thinking does not necessarily find fault, but it makes a conscious, disciplined effort to be aware of hidden motivations and assumptions, to uncover bias and to recognize reliability (or unreliability) of data.
Half the information now current in most fields will be obsolete in 5-7 years. How can you plan for uncertainty around information? Learning to think critically will help you adapt to a rapidly changing world.
Tutorial Objective:
To evaluate a media report on a commonly divisive scientific issue and gain appreciation for how to assess the credibility of an article that purports to be about a scientific issue. To practice critical thinking! We want to be able to discriminate between legitimate scientific presentations and those which may be framed in a “scientific” context but are really pseudoscientific or in the worst cases out and out fraud.
An issue that contributes to uncertainty around environmental issues is whether a new idea might be testing the envelope at the frontiers of science to eventually be either accepted or rejected. It is important to remember that legitimate disagreement is part of the process of science. However, we have to be able to decide when a scientific consensus has been reached and it is time to move on.
Tutorial Assignment:
Due: Sun Jan 28th, 2024, submit through assignment link on Quercus
Read through Carl Sagan’s Baloney Detection Kit at:
https://www.inverse.com/article/30845-carl-sagan-baloney-detection-kit-fake-news
Visit the University of Toronto’s Scarborough libraries website on Thinking Critically About Sources at: https://guides.library.utoronto.ca/c.php?g=705826&p=5021876
Review A Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science at: https://www.compoundchem.com/2014/04/02/a-rough-guide-to-spotting-bad-science/
Find a recent article (either hard copy or from the web is acceptable) published within the past year (2023/24), reporting on one of the following scientific issues:
o climate change;
o COVID19;
o infectious diseases;
pg. 3
o vaccines;
o renewable and alternative energy o evolution
o nutrition
It should not be a peer reviewed article from a reputable science journal, since the whole purpose of this exercise is to ask you to critically think about information that is being shared in more popular ways. You can choose to select a piece of writing that is not strictly an article published in a journal, magazine, newspaper, etc., but you should ensure that your chosen piece of writing is substantive enough to allow you to carry out the assignment objectives in a meaningful way. For example, a 250 word rant on a social media platform is likely not a good choice for this exercise. As a guideline, your chosen article or piece of writing should be a 5-minute read minimum. You may have to look through several sources to find an article that is appropriate for this exercise. Note, your article must fall within the 2023/24 period, or you risk it being assigned a zero.
Using a maximum of 1000 words, prepare a critical assessment of the credibility of your chosen article incorporating as many of the relevant criteria (minimum 5 criteria) as outlined in the variety of resources provided, particularly the Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science source. You should clearly state in your thesis statement and in your conclusion your final assessment on the authenticity or credibility of your chosen article. You will likely have to carry out additional research to address some of the criteria appropriately. Common practice is half truths, so your analysis may involve identifying sections that may be accurate as well as other sections that may be inaccurate and need to be debunked. Overall you need to provide a clear analysis of whether you accept or reject the article’s credibility.
Remember that critical thinking in this context does not necessarily simply mean to find only fault with your chosen article. Within your minimum five criteria used in your assessment, you should also be identifying and including areas in which it excels or does well to support the article’s credibility.
Your assessment should be written in an essay format with an introduction, body and conclusion, in full sentences with paragraphs.
Within your assignment you should:
Include a brief summary of your article, including its full citation within the
assignment itself.
You should attach or append a copy of your article to the back of your
assignment or submit as a separate file when you upload on Quercus. A
penalty of -50% if the article is not attached.
Use APA in-text citation method if appropriate.
Try to incorporate as many of the criteria as relevant (minimum 5) in making
your final assessment and be as explicit as possible to clearly identify how you came to your conclusion on the article’s scientific credibility.
pg. 4
Your thesis statement and conclusion should clearly state your informed assessment of the scientific credibility of your chosen article. Additional research may be required.
Grading Rubric for Tutorial Assignments
Each assignment will be graded based on 5 major criteria:
Purpose:
Clearly present your “thesis” and arguments.
Development of Ideas:
Arguments/main points are backed up by examples, citations, etc., and they are explained effectively.
Logic and Organization:
Ideas presented in an organized and logical manner. Clear and specific introduction and conclusion.
Clarity and Completeness:
Assignment components are comprehensive and addresses the major questions asked within the assignment. The writing is essentially error-free in terms of spelling and grammar and words and sentences are used effectively.
Research and Referencing:
Appropriate references and in-text citations are used appropriately to enhance arguments.
Submission of assignments:
We will be using a plagiarism detection program within the online assignment function in Quercusforsubmissionofthewrittenassignmentsinthiscourse. Normally,studentswillbe required to submit their course essays to the University’s plagiarism detection tool website for a review of textual similarity and detection of possible plagiarism. In doing so, students will allow their material to be included as source documents in the University’s plagiarism detection tool reference database, where they will be used solely for the purpose of detecting plagiarism. The terms that apply to the University’s use of the University’s plagiarism detection tool service are described on the Centre for Teaching Support & Innovation web site (https://uoft.me/pdt-faq).
If a student does not wish to submit to the online plagiarism tool, the student MUST advise the head TA immediately as alternate arrangements for screening the assignment must be arranged.
To avoid late penalties, assignments must be submitted to the Quercus Assignment function before midnight on the posted due date.
When submitting your assignment on Quercus, the file should be saved in a single file, with an extension of .doc, .docx, .rtf, or .pdf.
pg. 5
In formatting your assignment it should:
Include the following information on the front page: the assignment title (feel free to
be creative, but representative), the course title and number, the instructor’s name, the TA’s name, your name and student number
Late penalties
The late penalty on all assignments will be 2.5% of the assignment grade per day late, including weekends and will only be waived with the Absence Declaration Tool on ACORN.
Please note the declaration must cover the period of time you missed, e.g. the week before the assignment/essay is due, etc.
Requests for extensions or queries about assignment should be sent no later than Friday @ 5pm before the due date on Sunday.
Assignments will NOT be accepted one week past the due date even if accompanied by an absence declaration form unless prior approval has been obtained from your TA, the head TA, or the course instructor.
Academic Integrity
The following is taken from the Faculty of Arts and Science Academic Integrity website
(http://www.artsci.utoronto.ca/osai/students):
Academic integrity is fundamental to learning and scholarship at the University of Toronto. Participating honestly, respectfully, responsibly, and fairly in this academic community ensures that the U of T degree that you earn will be valued as a true indication of your individual academic achievement, and will continue to receive the respect and recognition it deserves.
Familiarize yourself with the University of Toronto’s Code of Behaviour on Academic Matters (http://www.governingcouncil.utoronto.ca/policies/behaveac.htm). It is the rule book for academic behaviour at the U of T, and you are expected to know the rules. Potential offences include, but are not limited to:
In papers and assignments:
Usingsomeoneelse’sideasorwordswithoutappropriate
acknowledgement.
Copyingmaterialword-for-wordfromasource(includinglectureandstudy
group notes) and not placing the words within quotation marks.
Submittingyourownworkinmorethanonecoursewithoutthepermission
of the instructor.
Makingupsourcesorfacts.
Includingreferencestosourcesthatyoudidnotuse.
pg. 6
Obtainingorprovidingunauthorizedassistanceonanyassignment including
o working in groups on assignments that are supposed to be individual work,
o having someone rewrite or add material to your work while “editing”. Lendingyourworktoaclassmatewhosubmitsitashis/herownwithout
your permission.
On tests and exams:
Usingorpossessinganyunauthorizedaid,includingacellphone. Lookingatsomeoneelse’sanswers
Lettingsomeoneelselookatyouranswers.
Misrepresentingyouridentity.
Submittinganalteredtestforre-grading.
Misrepresentation:
FalsifyingoralteringanydocumentationrequiredbytheUniversity,including
doctor’s notes.
Falsifyinginstitutionaldocumentsorgrades.
The University of Toronto treats cases of academic misconduct very seriously. All suspected cases of academic dishonesty will be investigated following the procedures outlined in the Code. The consequences for academic misconduct can be severe, including a failure in the course and a notation on your transcript. If you have any questions about what is or is not permitted in this course, please do not hesitate to contact me. If you have questions about appropriate research and citation methods, seek out additional information from me, or from other available campus resources like the U of T Writing Website. If you are experiencing personal challenges that are having an impact on your academic work, please speak to me or seek the advice of your college registrar.
See also the handout “How Not to Plagiarize,” Margaret Proctor, 2009, available online at
http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/using-sources/how-not-to-plagiarize
CoursePear™是一家服务全球留学生的专业代写。
—-我们专注提供高质靠谱的美国、加拿大、英国、澳洲、新西兰代写服务。
—-我们专注提供Essay、统计、金融、CS、经济、数学等覆盖100+专业的作业代写服务。
CoursePear™提供各类学术服务，Essay代写，Assignment代写，Exam / Quiz助攻，Dissertation / Thesis代写，Problem Set代做等。