MALODOROUS THINKING

Eradicating Malodorous Thinking in College Students: Three Best Practices for Implementation of Critical Thinking

Abstract

There are many criteria that can be used in Eradicating Malodorous Thinking in College Students. These criteria must be explicit and can not favor any particular group of people. For example, someone can't be judged by how much they talk in class for a couple reasons. First a student could just talk garbage and get rewarded. Second, some people have a very hard time speaking in class. This is not fair for the people with that difficulty. A better solution to for that problem would be what a student contributes to the class. This could range from sharing opinions and feelings to merely paying attention and not disturbing others. Another criterion that should be judged is effort. This can be very hard to judge, but it is necessary.

Purpose: To analyze the students who adopt a performance goal orientation are motivated to maintain a sense of self-worth through performing well.

Research question: Does Critical thinking assist with malodorous thinking to improve attendance and grades, Critical Thinkers know the value of class attendance and passing grades that assist with increases in Student Achievement. 

Methodology: We used questionnaire survey to analyze the Eradicating Malodorous Thinking in College Students.

Results: The absent student cannot learn effectively and the rest of the class will probably lose learning time when the teacher slows the pace to allow them to catch up.

Conclusion: Their study found that communicating effectively about attendance with parents, providing a school contact person for parents to call, and rewarding students for improved attendance were three activities consistently associated with increased average daily attendance and reduced chronic absences.

Eradicating Malodorous Thinking in College Students: Three Best Practices for Implementation of Critical Thinking

Introduction

Malodorous Thinking is the negative approach of students towards class attendance. One method of identifying high differentiating in attend classes or missed classes classrooms involves asking students to describe their teacher's likely interactions with hypothetical high and low ability students (Weinstein et al., 1987). In those classrooms in which students perceive more differentiating teacher treatment to high and low ability students, teacher expectancy effects are larger and students' self-perceptions more closely match those of the teacher ([Brattesani et al., 1984] and [Weinstein et al., 1987]).

One might question the age at which higher ability level students are capable of reporting accurately about teacher practices in attend classes or missed classes classroom or about their own or other students' abilities. When interviewed individually with items that are concretely worded, higher ability level students as young as 4 years of age provide reliable and meaningful information about teachers' behaviors toward them (Montzicopoulos & Neuharth-Pritchett, 2003). Higher ability level students as young as first grade are aware of teacher differential behavior to high and low ability students (Weinstein et al., 1987), and their rankings of classmates' relative abilities align with teacher ratings ([Stipek, 1981] and [Stipek and Tannatt, 1984]). Weinstein et al. (1987) investigated developmental shifts between first and fifth grade in students' awareness of differential ...