3A Anti-Confucian Team Discussion and Paper: (Team assignment) Even though Confucianism had not yet become the official state doctrine, several philosophers attacked Confucian ideas, among them representatives from the Legalist, the Mohist and the Daoist groups. Imagine you were a group of contemporary Confucian scholars and as a Team discuss this topic and then write a (2-2.5 page) response to briefly defend yourselves against these anti-Confucian statements! You do not have to respond to all accusations, but make sure that you are responding to at least one critical statement from each of these groups! Please try to edit your Team paper so that it sounds as if it had been written by Confucian scholars over 2,000 years ago! (No references to modern technology or pop culture icons :-), and your paper should use arguments that Confucians did or might have used at that time.) Remember, this is your first team paper, please help each other by having the team leaders give clear deadlines for submissions at the beginning of the week, and by all team members doing their very best to honor the deadlines. If you can't make the established deadline, please let your team captain and team leaders know. Also: please have some fun impersonating worthy Confucian scholars of the remote past - imagine living without technology, electricity, and modern scientific knowledge and still, gazing at the stars at night, trying to understand the working of the universe, and establishing what constitutes a good life, individually, and in community. Unless your team has decided on a different rotation, the two Team leaders for this assignment will be the persons with the 2nd and 3rd last names alphabetically. Together, and with feedback from the team, they will write the final product to submit into the Assignment drop box. Teams who submit a strong first paper will receive bonus points! Continue the library tutorial

Learning Goals 1, 3 Students analyze and synthesize anti-Confucian arguments and respond with a Confucian counter-argument that demonstrates their understanding of both the nature and style of Confucian reasoning. This is a team assignment, requiring both informal communication and the creation of a formal document.

Metacognition

Engaging Preconceptions

the problem

Learning to complete a whole task involves 4 levels of instruction (preferably modeled):

First Principles of Instruction

Acknowledging prior learning

Metacognition activities in support of metacognitive practices

Formative Assessment

Community Centered

It has become common practice to state learningobjectives at the beginning of module or lessonmaterial. These objectives are usually some formof: “The learner will be able to . . . .” Objectivesof this form are abstract and often only under-stood following the instruction. Most theoristssuggest that a specific demonstration of the par-ticular whole task similar to those the learnerswill be able to do following instruction providesa better orientation to the instructional materialto follow than a list of abstract objective state-ments. Van Merriénboer (1997) recommendedthat the first problem in a sequence should be aworked example that shows students the type ofwhole task that they will learn to complete.

When learners think that they already knowsome of the material to be taught, then their ex-isting experience can be activated by an ap-propriate opportunity to demonstrate what theyalready know.

Learningto complete a whole task involves four levels ofinstruction: (a) the problem, (b) the tasks re-quired to solve the problem, (c) the operationsthat comprise the tasks, and (d) the actions thatcomprise the operations. Effective instructionshould engage students in all four levels of per-formance: the problem level, the task-level, theoperation-level, and the action-level.

Toomuch traditional instruction is topic based,teaching all the prerequisites before introducingthe real world whole task or problem.

Van Merriénboer (1997) recommendedthat the first problem in a sequence should be aworked example that shows students the type ofwhole task that they will learn to complete.

FIRST PRINCIPLES OF INSTRUCTION

Much instructional practice concentratesprimarily on the demonstration phase and ig-nores the other phases in this cycle of learning.

Many current instructional models suggest thatthe most effective learning products or environ-ments are those that are problem-centered andinvolve the student in four distinct phases oflearning: (a) activation of prior experience, (b)demonstration of skills, (c) application of skills,and (d) integration of these skills into real-worldactivities.

Star Legacy by the Vanderbilt LearningTechnology Center, 4-Mat by McCarthy,instructional episodes by Andre, multipleapproaches to understanding by Gardner,collaborative problem solving by Nelson,constructivist learning environments byJonassen, and learning by doing by Schank.

Principle 1—Problem-centered: Learning ispromoted when learners are engaged in solvingreal-world problems.

             * Authentic context
             * Complex problems  
             * Real stakeholders
             * Authentic feedback from real stakeholders 

Five firstprinciples are elaborated: (a) Learning ispromoted when learners are engaged insolving real-world problems. (b) Learning ispromoted when existing knowledge isactivated as a foundation for new knowledge.(c) Learning is promoted when new knowledgeis demonstrated to the learner. (d) Learning ispromoted when new knowledge is applied bythe learner. (e) Learning is promoted whennew knowledge is integrated into the learner’sworld.

decontextualized truths, repeated falsehoods, and leaps of logic to create a fundamentally misleading view of the world. “Fake news,” which implies made of whole cloth by politically disinterested parties out to make a buck of Facebook advertising dollars, rather than propaganda and disinformation, is not an adequate term. By repetition, variation, and circulation through many associated sites, the network of sites make their claims familiar to readers, and this fluency with the core narrative gives credence to the incredible.

While mainstream media coverage was often critical, it nonetheless revolved around the agenda that the right-wing media sphere set: immigration. Right-wing media, in turn, framed immigration in terms of terror, crime, and Islam, as a review of Breitbart and other right-wing media stories about immigration most widely shared on social media exhibits. Immigration is the key topic around which Trump and Breitbart found common cause; just as Trump made this a focal point for his campaign, Breitbart devoted disproportionate attention to the topic.

Coverage of Clinton overwhelmingly focused on emails, followed by the Clinton Foundation and Benghazi. Coverage of Trump included some scandal, but the most prevalent topic of Trump-focused stories was his main substantive agenda item—immigration—and his arguments about jobs and trade also received more attention than his scandals.

veryone outside the Breitbart-centered universe forms a tightly interconnected attention network, with major traditional mass media and professional sources at the core. The right, by contrast, forms its own insular sphere.

The primary explanation of such asymmetric polarization is more likely politics and culture than technolog

the number of sites in the clearly partisan right increases, and indeed exceeds the number of sites in the clearly partisan left.

these asymmetric patterns of attention were similar on both Twitter and Facebook suggests that human choices and political campaigning, not one company’s algorithm, were responsible for the patterns we observe. These patterns might be the result of a coordinated campaign, but they could also be an emergent property of decentralized behavior, or some combination of both.

The Breitbart-centered wing, by contrast, is farther from the mainstream set and lacks bridging nodes that draw attention and connect it to that mainstream.

Our analysis challenges a simple narrative that the internet as a technology is what fragments public discourse and polarizes opinions, by allowing us to inhabit filter bubbles or just read “the daily me.” If technology were the most important driver towards a “post-truth” world, we would expect to see symmetric patterns on the left and the right. Instead, different internal political dynamics in the right and the left led to different patterns in the reception and use of the technology by each wing. While Facebook and Twitter certainly enabled right-wing media to circumvent the gatekeeping power of traditional media, the pattern was not symmetric.

internally coherent, relatively insulated knowledge community, reinforcing the shared worldview of readers and shielding them from journalism that challenged it.

many of the most-shared stories can more accurately be understood as disinformation: the purposeful construction of true or partly true bits of information into a message that is, at its core, misleading.

pro-Trump audiences paid the majority of their attention to polarized outlets that have developed recently, many of them only since the 2008 election season.

a right-wing media network anchored around Breitbart developed as a distinct and insulated media system, using social media as a backbone to transmit a hyper-partisan perspective to the world. This pro-Trump media sphere appears to have not only successfully set the agenda for the conservative media sphere, but also strongly influenced the broader media agenda, in particular coverage of Hillary Clinton.

I think the consistent, if you look at these Cabinet appointees, they were selected for a reason and that is the deconstruction

economic nationalism

he's probably the great public speaker in those large arenas since William Jennings Bryan

administrative state.

Administrators : A Democratic Ruling Class. Rise of the "Ad- ministrator." The Businessman as Administrator. Recruitment and Training. The Claim to Power: Shadow or Substance? The Voice of Dissent.

hich was approved in principle only, iVas to be a sustained, slo"ldy escalating air campaign