TOPIC ; Praise, rather than punish, to see up to 30% greater focus in the classroom

https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?p=GCCO&u=tihsho_b&id=GALE|A613466722&v=2.1&it=r&sid=GCCO&asid=c9a1df19

Instructions

Respond to at least two of your peers' posts in a substantive manner. "I agree" or "Good point" are not accepted as substantive responses to your peers.

1. Determine the credibility of the source used. Is it a reputable source? How can you tell?

As a group, we determined that the source was not credible because the publisher of this article was NewsRX LLC, upon investigating this publisher we found out that there are no journalists and that they gather their articles and news via artificial intelligence. The use of AI can be a great tool to help gather information but it can be flawed in the type of information it brings.

A well-rounded argument should include research that supports the authors' main claim and those of any counterarguments. Examine the article for counterarguments. In your opinion, do the authors include any? If so, do they provide evidence in support of these counterarguments? If not, does the argument seem unbalanced in terms of research? Explain.

The research is not well-rounded, they only observed students from kindergarten to sixth grade, and they did not observe students from seventh to 12th grade. The main claim was not supported by enough data from credible sources. we also noticed that the article did not have any counterarguments, which makes the researcher's article unbalanced. A balanced research article requires exploring all sides of the issue. A well-rounded argument requires all three types of appeals, which are: Logos, Pathos, and Ethos. Unfortunately for this article, it is missing both ethos and pathos.

2. The article, Praise, rather than punish, to see up to 30% greater focus in the classroom, comes from a reputable source called "Gale College Collection". Gale is under the company known as "Cengage", where this site is intended as a search engine for peer-reviewed articles. Although, the author of this specific article is questionable for their credibility. The author is "NewsRx Science", which is a research company that monitors and reports on scientific findings. Whereas, our group finds the author credible due to the article's acceptance on the Gale search engine.

We were unable to identify counterarguments regarding the author's main claim, where teacher's should praise students for good behavior. The article independently supported the main claim with backing from the news study in Education Psychology. The argument appears as unbalanced due to the one-sided position and the lack of research that exists regarding the main claim. The argument fails to analyze the outcomes of both reprimand and praise, where the article mentioned, " ... praise to reprimand ratio was lowest" (NewsRx Science, 2020).