Author: admin

Critical Thinking of Science in the Media (Essay)
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 assignment, 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.
Assignment 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:
– Find a recent article (either hard copy or from the web is acceptable) published within
the past year (must be 2023/24), reporting on one of the following scientific issues:
o climate change
o COVID19
o infectious diseases
o vaccines
– 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 750 ~ 950 words, prepare a critical assessment of the credibility of
your chosen article incorporating as many of the relevant criteria (minimum 6
criteria) as outlined in the variety of resources provided, particularly the Rough Guide
to Spotting Bad Science source. Review A Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science at:

A Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science

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 six 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. 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 6) 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.
– 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 the Assignment
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.