LINK to be WATCHED
Avoiding the “Echo Chamber”
Write an essay of two to six pages max. Do not limit yourself. some thoughts require more writing that others to express in full.
The essay should contain the following and meet the rubric criteria to receive full points:
1, Response successfully answers the assignment question(s);
It contains examples from assigned textbook and other literature.
Response exhibits strong higher-order critical thinking and analysis (e.g.. evaluation with evidence).
Sentences are clear. concise. and direct; tone is appropriate.
Grammatical skills are strong with almost no errors per page.
Organize the essay with headlines.
Your job in this assignment is to discuss how to avoid the “echo chamber” effect.
Forthis assignment use the SEEl steps (from introduction to Critical Thinking PP slides. page # 9):
o State the topic
o Elaborate by expanding on your explanation of the topic.
o Give a concrete Example such as an experience of something you did that is relevant and related to this concept: and
o Illustrate by giving a metaphor. a picture. to help others understand what you are writing about. Become more informed if you do not have enough
knowledge on the subject.
Before you write anything, open file and View the material below!
Some issues in our public discourse are too vexing. and often our emotions get in the way of reasonable dialogue preventing us from creating solutions that
address their complexity. The short video. and the article on how the media contributes to factual inaccuracies in the right, offer an alternative way to
approach difficult social issues while looking at both sides it. It is essential to do this to advance our understanding of ‘truth”. Only when we look at all parts
of an issue we can free ourselves from fantasy and illusion.
Dare to disagree: 2′ “Most people instinctively avoid conflict, but as Margaret Heffeman shows us, good disagreement is central to progress. She
illustrates (sometimes counter intuitively how the best partners aren’t echo chambers – and how great research teams, relationships and businesses allow
people to deeply disagree.