last updated 12/2/2014

FINAL EXAM STUDY GUIDE

   The final exam will be composed of TWO parts:  A take-home essay based on the prompt listed below and an in-class exam of questions and topics taken from the material described below.

The take-home essay is due at the start of the exam period.

TAKE-HOME ESSAY PROMPT:  Present and justify your definition of a "good citizen."  Then go on to explain what elements of a Monmouth College, liberal arts education contribute to good citizenship and why.(Maximum length:  3 double-spaced pages, 12 point font (print on both sides)

The in-class exam will be open-book, open notes. You may take the exam on your tablet/laptop or on a computer in the COMM lab as at the mid-term exam.  Nothing will appear on the in-class test that is not mentioned on the study guide.

 There will be some terms to define (1. and 2.) and two or three essay questions. The essay questions (all questions below except # 1 and # 2) will appear on the exam in the exact form they are shown here.  Because of the fact you will have resources available, I will expect your answers will be well-organized, original and thoughtful - not mere regurgitation - and I will grade accordingly.  If you just repeat information that is on the web or in the texts you will not do very well.

In-class Exam- Potential Questons.

1. Terms to define (in one to three sentences).  Be able to give an example of each:  deliberation, information aggregation, information/news literacy, social networking, "satisficing," cascades, hidden profiles, common (shared) knowledge effect, amplifying errors, heuristics, framing, polarization/risky shift.

2. Be able to explain each of the following types of information biases (heuristics) and give an example of each:  availability bias, representativeness bias, confirmation bias, recency bias, backfire effect, excalation of commitment, illusion of control.

3.  Explain what Goupthink is.  Describe some of its causes and symptoms and discuss how and when this can effect political decision-making.  Suggest some possible preventative measures.

4.  Explain how the Condorcet Jury Theorem can account for both the fact that groups sometimes are more accurate than the average of the individual members of a group and the fact that groups are sometimes less accurate.  Use a concrete example to illustrate your explanation. Does this theorem undermine the effectiveness of decision-making in a democracy by voters who discuss issues with others?  How so?

5. Discuss how correct use of the "standard agenda" could compensate for the problems Sunstein and McGaan have identified when groups attempt to deliberate on serious problems. (Look at the major problems identified on the web page,  Problems of Deliberating Groups).  Can you find steps and actions recommended in the Standard Sgenda (esp. in the highlighted sections ) that might reduce the negative effects of the problems on that page?), Halo effect, risky perception bias,

6. Discuss and explain the key skills that make up News/Information/Media Literacy.  Conclude with an explanation of why those skills are important to effective citizenship.

7. Reflect on  your team's Information Evaluation presentation (on the assigned article).  What did your team do well and how could that project have been done better?

8. Reflect on your team's Media/News Literacy Program.  What did your team do well and how could that project have been done better?   Be sure to base your answer on how well the program would serve the needs of your target audience (e.g. HS Seniors/College Freshmen).