Instructions:

1.      After reading chapter 3 write-up your responses to prompts below.
2.      Submit your reading reflection as a .pdf or .docx file in Moodle.
Reflection questions:
What was the most meaningful, interesting, or significant thing you learned from this chapter?
2.    What types of fallacies do you most often see (in the classroom, in interpersonal relationships, in advertisements, etc.)? 
3.    From what type of classroom interactions (i.e. “banking,” problem-posing, etc.) do you learn best? What do you appreciate and find objectionable about each method for learning?
Communication
A Critical/Cultural Introduction
Deanna L. Fassett | John T. Warren | Keith Nainby
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
COMMUNICATION
A Critical/Cultural Introduction
•
CHAPTER 3: PUBLIC ADVOCACY: COMMITMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITY
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
Overview
• Identify what public advocacy
means
• Describe the role of power in
communication, in general,
and in advocacy, in particular
• Identify the responsibilities of
speakers and listeners
• Identify common errors in
reasoning and how to avoid
them
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
What is Public Advocacy?
Public Advocacy is the engaging
the public through careful,
thoughtful, and responsible
communication.
Based on two central truths
about engaging in
communication:
1. All communication with others has
effects (whether or not we know
what these effects are).
2. It is our ethical responsibility to
advocate with others for the world
as we wish it to be, a world that
desires the best of us all.
Copyright © BettyTkao (CC BY-SA 4.0) at
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flash_Collective%27s_cultur
e_jam_activism_sticker_art,_project_mentored_by_Avram_Finkelstein
_of_Gran_Fury.jpg.
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
A Model for Advocacy: Paulo Freire
1) Problem Posing approaches
to teaching and learning that
help us develop our sense of
agency—that sense that we
can, in fact, change our lives,
our communities, and our
worlds
Copyright © Slobodan Dimitrov (CC BY-SA 3.0) at
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Paulo_Freire.jpg.
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
A Model for Advocacy: Paulo Freire
2) Reflexivity a type of reflection
and insight that helps each of us
understand how we participate,
consciously and unconsciously,
in social systems that both help
and harm us; and
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fi
le:Painel_Paulo_Freire,_detalhe_1.jpg
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
A Model for Advocacy: Paulo Freire
3) Praxis as “reflection and action on the world in order
to transform it” (Paulo Freire, 1970)
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Painel.Paulo.Freire.JPG
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
Engaging Others as Public Advocacy
• Hegemony
– Social theorist Antonio Gramsci described it as
domination by consent
– a process of granting some group with more
power and privilege the ability to shape our
worldviews, attitudes, beliefs, expectations, and
actions
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
Engaging Others as Public Advocacy
• Dialogic Communication
– Dialogue theorist Martin Buber (1970/1996)
emphasized the relationship between speaker and
listener as “I-Thou,”
• meaning an ethical, respectful engagement between
two people who must consider the other’s perspectives
carefully but not necessarily agree.
– This is not to be confused with the phrasing “Let’s
agree to disagree.”
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
Engaging Others as Public Advocacy
Two dimensions of critical thinking
1. Identifying the flaws or problems in a given situation
2. Hope, with possibility for change
As critical thinkers, we are:
• generous and cautious,
• open-minded but wary, and
• appreciative of intent but willing to hold
ourselves and others responsible for the effects
of our communication.
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
Public Advocacy: Integrity in Argumentation
Toulmin’s Model
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
Public Advocacy:
Integrity in Argumentation
• Interrogating Reasoning
– Deductive Reasoning, a “top-down” approach
where someone makes a larger claim that must be
supported through a series of hypotheses.
Theoryà Hypothesisà Evidenceà Confirmation
– Inductive Reasoning, a “bottom-up” way by
moving from specific instances to broader
conclusions.
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
Toward Praxis
• Reflection: Where have you
witnessed or experienced
unearned privilege? How
did it make you feel? What
role did/do you play in
social systems that privilege
some at the expense of
others? How can reflection
on these experiences
translate into action?
• Discussion: View or read and
discuss a current media
account of a socially
significant issue. This could
include a segment from your
local nightly news, an article
from your campus
newspaper, or the opening
remarks on The Daily Show.
Outline how the reasoning
develops in this account. Is it
well-structured and sound?
How so?
Copyright © 2018 Cognella, Inc.
READING REFLECTION CHAPTER 3
Instructions:
1.
2.
After reading chapter 3 write-up your responses to prompts below.
Submit your reading reflection as a .pdf or .docx file in Moodle.
Reflection questions:
1.
What was the most meaningful, interesting, or significant thing you learned
from this chapter?
2. What types of fallacies do you most often see (in the classroom, in
interpersonal relationships, in advertisements, etc.)?
3. From what type of classroom interactions (i.e. “banking,” problem-posing,
etc.) do you learn best? What do you appreciate and find objectionable
about each method for learning?

attachment