The first two steps in evidence-based practice are to identify knowledge gaps and formulate relevant questions. In this writing exercise, you will be doing just that, across three types of inductive reasoning. In addition, you will be applying evaluation techniques to determine how credible, authoritative, and reliable the arguments are.
Imagine your boss has asked you to evaluate four ideas that she is thinking of using to implement programs. You must evaluate whether these are good ideas that she can safely and immediately green-light or whether further evidence is needed. She is anxious to move forward, so she will be unhappy if you reject a good idea; however, if you approve a bad idea, she will be equally as unhappy. She has specifically directed you not to do any outside research. You must evaluate the ideas strictly on the brief passages available. She also wants to know what specific kind of reasoning is used in each passage
Using everything you have learned from the text, as well as any other information you have gathered from your searches related to this week’s discussion, evaluate the following four arguments:
Save your time - order a paper!
Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlinesOrder Paper Now
CH 8 (7,10)
CH 9 (1)
CH 10 (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 she move 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 be considered in evaluating each type of argument and how well the argument meets the criteria.