Are microaggressions, as a construct, vague and inconsistent?

Please download and read the

argument analysis instructions

very carefully. This document includes instructions for the argument analysis paper and the argument analysis discussion post

An

example of a argument analysis

paper can be found here.

The articles you will read this week are below:

Lillienfeld

Williams

Rubric Argument Analysis Paper Argument Analysis Paper Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Identified and described main claims 15 pts Good (relevancy described, no inaccuracies, thorough 13 pts Satisfactory (relevancy implied, minor inaccuracies, too broad) 11 pts Problematic (relevancy vague, major inaccuracies, lacking completeness) 9 pts Unacceptable (inappropriate, incorrect, incomplete) 15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Identified and described supporting evidence (at least 3 pieces of evidence) 20 pts Good (relevancy described, no inaccuracies, thorough 17 pts Satisfactory (relevancy implied, minor inaccuracies, too broad) 15 pts Problematic (relevancy vague, major inaccuracies, lacking completeness) 13 pts Unacceptable (inappropriate, incorrect, incomplete) 20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Evaluated the supporting evidence 20 pts Good (relevancy described, no inaccuracies, thorough 17 pts Satisfactory (relevancy implied, minor inaccuracies, too broad) 15 pts Problematic (relevancy vague, major inaccuracies, lacking completeness) 13 pts Unacceptable (inappropriate, incorrect, incomplete) 20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Interpretation and integration 15 pts Good (relevancy described, no inaccuracies, thorough 13 pts Satisfactory (relevancy implied, minor inaccuracies, too broad) 11 pts Problematic (relevancy vague, major inaccuracies, lacking completeness) 9 pts Unacceptable (inappropriate, incorrect, incomplete) 15 pts