https://padlet.com/kloh627/utn6n4i64j30 Argue about the evidence as a class! You can post your MEL matrix and discuss every piece of evidence, or you can post about individual pieces of evidence in their own discussion posts. Your discussion posts should include evidence quality and linking of evidence to both models. Consider discussing your answers to the formative assessment questions in your HIV Student Handout. Post to the Padlet at least 3 times. en-us 2019-04-25 19:49:22 UTC 2026-01-01 15:59:29 UTC hello@padlet.com kloh627 https://padlet.com/kloh627/utn6n4i64j30/wish/354504390 EXAMPLE Discussion Post: Evidence 1 was poor quality evidence, and I rated it as a zero. This piece of evidence is based in opinion, and has no basis in science (i.e., there was no study to support the claim). This piece of evidence should be ignored. Evidence 1 supports Model 1: Attack-and-Destroy. This piece of evidence is irrelevant to Model 2: HIV can't get in. ]]> 2019-04-26 15:55:17 UTC https://padlet.com/kloh627/utn6n4i64j30/wish/354504390 ekfitzpatrick17 https://padlet.com/kloh627/utn6n4i64j30/wish/355979378 I agree that evidence 1 deserved a 0 rating.]]> 2019-05-01 21:00:46 UTC https://padlet.com/kloh627/utn6n4i64j30/wish/355979378 https://padlet.com/kloh627/utn6n4i64j30/wish/355982294 I think evidence 3 is a 1 rating - it's a blog, not a scientific journal.  It supports Model 2.]]> 2019-05-01 21:14:37 UTC https://padlet.com/kloh627/utn6n4i64j30/wish/355982294