Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 3.0.) in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5226
http://schema.org/Product" id="product-510" class="product post-510 type-product status-publish product_cat-eng-106 product_tag-eng-106-complete-class product_tag-eng-106-gcu-complete-course product_tag-eng-106-grand-canyon-entire-course product_tag-eng106gcucompletecourse product_tag-eng106grandcanyonentirecourse first instock downloadable virtual purchasable product-type-simple">
Placeholder
Notice: id was called incorrectly. Product properties should not be accessed directly. Backtrace: require('wp-blog-header.php'), require_once('wp-includes/template-loader.php'), include('/plugins/woocommerce/templates/single-product.php'), wc_get_template_part, load_template, require('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/content-single-product.php'), do_action('woocommerce_before_single_product_summary'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, woocommerce_show_product_images, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/product-image.php'), do_action('woocommerce_product_thumbnails'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, woocommerce_show_product_sale_flash, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/sale-flash.php'), wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/loop/sale-flash.php'), WC_Abstract_Legacy_Product->__get, wc_doing_it_wrong Please see /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5226

Notice: id was called incorrectly. Product properties should not be accessed directly. Backtrace: require('wp-blog-header.php'), require_once('wp-includes/template-loader.php'), include('/plugins/woocommerce/templates/single-product.php'), wc_get_template_part, load_template, require('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/content-single-product.php'), do_action('woocommerce_before_single_product_summary'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, woocommerce_show_product_images, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/product-image.php'), do_action('woocommerce_product_thumbnails'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, woocommerce_show_product_sale_flash, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/sale-flash.php'), wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/loop/sale-flash.php'), WC_Abstract_Legacy_Product->__get, wc_doing_it_wrong Please see
/home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5226

Notice: id was called incorrectly. Product properties should not be accessed directly. Backtrace: require('wp-blog-header.php'), require_once('wp-includes/template-loader.php'), include('/plugins/woocommerce/templates/single-product.php'), wc_get_template_part, load_template, require('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/content-single-product.php'), do_action('woocommerce_before_single_product_summary'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, woocommerce_show_product_images, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/product-image.php'), do_action('woocommerce_product_thumbnails'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, woocommerce_show_product_sale_flash, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/sale-flash.php'), wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/loop/sale-flash.php'), WC_Abstract_Legacy_Product->__get, wc_doing_it_wrong Please see

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Entire Course


Notice: id was called incorrectly. Product properties should not be accessed directly. Backtrace: require('wp-blog-header.php'), require_once('wp-includes/template-loader.php'), include('/plugins/woocommerce/templates/single-product.php'), wc_get_template_part, load_template, require('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/content-single-product.php'), do_action('woocommerce_single_product_summary'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, yit_single_page_nav_links, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/nav-links.php'), WC_Abstract_Legacy_Product->__get, wc_doing_it_wrong Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 3.0.) in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5226

Notice: id was called incorrectly. Product properties should not be accessed directly. Backtrace: require('wp-blog-header.php'), require_once('wp-includes/template-loader.php'), include('/plugins/woocommerce/templates/single-product.php'), wc_get_template_part, load_template, require('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/content-single-product.php'), do_action('woocommerce_single_product_summary'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, yit_single_page_nav_links, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/nav-links.php'), WC_Abstract_Legacy_Product->__get, wc_doing_it_wrong Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 3.0.) in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5226

$185.00

Quantity:

Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 3.0.) in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5226
510" />

Deprecated: WC_Product::get_categories is deprecated since version 3.0! Use wc_get_product_category_list instead. in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 4774
Category: .
Deprecated: WC_Product::get_tags is deprecated since version 3.0! Use wc_get_product_tag_list instead. in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 4774
Tags: , , , , .

Description

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Entire Course

ENG106

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 1 Discussion 1

Throughout this course, you will be researching, discussing, and writing about the donation and sale of human organs. To assist you in the research, the lectures and supplemental readings provide different perspectives on this complex and controversial topic. Please use the “Resource List” document to find and read articles about the sale of human organs.

After you have read about this topic, identify and discuss in 100-125 words one potential cause for this phenomenon.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 1 Discussion 2

Your text and lectures discuss the importance of enthymemes in writing arguments. Create enthymemes (claims and reasons) that are appropriate for each of the essay genres (i.e., causal argument, ethical argument, and proposal argument).

Here is an example of an enthymeme:

Proposal essay: Should school cafeterias be required to offer only nutritionally balanced meals?

CLAIM: School cafeterias should exclusively serve nutritionally balanced meals.

REASON: Because obesity rates among school age children are increasing.

Causal argument essay: What is one cause of the sale of human organs?

CLAIM:

REASON:

Ethical argument: Is the sale of human organs right or wrong?

CLAIM:

REASON:

Proposal argument: Should the sale and purchase of human organs be made legal?

CLAIM:

REASON:

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 2 Discussion 1

After reading Christian Longo’s essay in Chapter 13, please consider the following:

A potential definition argument centers on whether a prisoner can voluntarily donate organs. Prisoners and human rights advocates might disagree about what voluntary donation means: Is organ donation voluntary if prisoners receive the same counseling as donors outside of the prison system, or is it only voluntary if a person is not facing death (in this case, not on death row)? If someone were to develop this argument, they would define voluntary and then explain how a particular case such as Christian Longo’s matches their definition of voluntary. What do you think about this issue? What does voluntary mean to you, and under what circumstances would inmates in our prison system be voluntarily offering to donate their organs? At what point do you think they would be involuntarily signing up to donate organs?

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 2 Discussion 2

Read “Legalizing the Organ Trade?” by Ritter, located on the Time website.

.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1833858,00.html”>http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1833858,00.html

As noted in Peter Ritter’s (2008) “Legalizing the Organ Trade?”, Singapore’s health minister, Khaw Boon Wan, argued that “We may be able to find an acceptable way to allow a meaningful compensation for some living, unrelated kidney donors, without breaching ethical principles or hurting the sensitivities of others” (Ritter, 2008). You might ask yourself: What constitutes “meaningful compensation” for an organ donor, especially if the donor is poor and the recipient is wealthy? What examples of human organ sales can you find that match or do not match your definition of “meaningful compensation”?

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 3 Discussion 1

Dr. Francis Delmonico believes that even a regulated human organ trade would be exploitative because “It’s the poor person who sells” (Meckler, 2007). Do you agree that allowing a poor person to sell an organ is an exploitative practice? Why or why not? What examples from real-life organ donors can you provide that help you demonstrate how a regulated human organ trade would be (or not be) exploitative?

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 3 Discussion 2

Do you think the human organ trade should be legal or illegal, depending on your perspective? How do human organs compare (or not compare) with other types of commodities especially those that have some degree of legal restrictions such as prescription medicine?

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 4 Discussion 1

As you have learned in the lectures in Topics 1 and 4, a causal claim argues that one thing leads to another (e.g., “Increasing levels of acidity in sea water are harming the oceans’ coral reefs.”). A causal chain links causal claims together as links in a chain. There is an excellent example of how to use direct explanation in the creation of a causal chain on page 262 in your textbook.

Summarize the causal chain used by the writer in the article from The New York Times. Was the argument persuasive? Why or why not?

What has caused the growth of selling human organs, a concept unthinkable 100 years ago? What has caused the growth of selling human organs on the black market?

What are the causes you will write about in your draft?

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 4 Discussion 2

As the lectures for this topic indicate, there are two ways to argue effectively that one phenomenon causes or influences another: causal chains and inductive reasoning. The most common and persuasive approach is the former, in which each step in the cause-and-effect process is itemized and explained. There is an excellent example of how to use direct explanation in the creation of a causal chain on page 262 in your textbook.

Develop a causal chain showing how the invention of the automobile led to changes in sexual mores (Ramage, Bean & Johnson, 2012, p.260).

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 5 Discussion 1

Please read the summary of religious views on organ donation in “Religious Views on Donation.” http://www.organdonor.gov/about/religiousviews.html

Select one religion about which you are knowledgeable and develop a causal chain connecting the religion’s core beliefs with its stance on organ donation. If you are not knowledgeable about any religion, please research a religion of your choice to complete this activity.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 5 Discussion 2

Use the STAR criteria described in your textbook in Chapter 5 and the lecture to evaluate the sources you are planning to use. How well do your sources meet these criteria? Explain your reasoning.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 6 Discussion 1

To whom will you address your proposal? Remember: This person (or group) will be skeptical of your views. Will it be a friend or family member with different beliefs and values related to health care and/or the human body? Are there individuals in the medical community who hold different values than you do? How about a politician or one of the authors of our readings?

What are their views on the issue of selling human organs, and what do they think should be done about it? Summarize the views of your skeptical audience as fairly and accurately as possible.

During the week, review your classmates’ summaries of their skeptical audiences’ views. How well do you think they did? Were the summaries fair, or did they seem biased? How can you tell? Give them some pointers on revising their summaries.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 6 Discussion 2

Use the following questions to develop ideas for your proposal.

  1. What do you think is the most significant problem regarding the sale of organs?
  2. Why do you think it is a problem?
  3. Who has the power to solve this problem?
  4. Why has it not been solved up to this point?
  5. How can the problem be solved?
  6. What are the benefits and costs related to your solution?

Using previous strategies for argumentation discussed in class, develop some arguments for your proposal that you could use for your skeptical audience. (Use arguments from consequence, arguments from principle, arguments from category, and arguments of resemblance as you see fit.)

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 7 Discussion 1

In the lecture, Rebekah Taylor’s argument in “A Letter to Jim” follows a particular arrangement of ideas. Your proposal should do the same thing. In other words, your proposal should follow this outline:

  1. Open cordially and introduce the issue
  2. Summarize the opposing view fairly and accurately while recognizing their importance
  3. Summarize your own view of the issue without arguing that the opposing views are wrong
  4. Find common ground on which to build a compromise
  5. Argue in favor of a perspective that both you and your skeptical audience can agree on
  6. Propose a compromise

To what extent did you arrange your letter to follow this organizational pattern? To what extent does it deviate from this organizational pattern? How do you plan to fix the pattern of arrangement in your letter?

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 7 Discussion 2

In the lecture, we discussed how the Rogerian style of argument requires a conciliatory style. How does Rebekah Taylor show Jim that she means no harm and that she does not wish to pursue a heated debate? How well does your own letter follow Rebekah Taylor’s example? What did you do well? How could you improve? Provide some examples.

During the week, respond to your classmates’ posts and comment on their use of a conciliatory style.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 1 Assignments

Assignment 1

Details:

Continue to improve and hone your persuasive writing skills by completing the following assignment. Studying these techniques will help you incorporate them into your own writing.

  1. Complete the “Claim, Warrant, and Grounds Worksheet.”
  2. GCU style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
  3. Submit the completed worksheet to your instructor.

 

Assignment 2

Details:

Skilled writers use a variety of argumentative strategies to help them write persuasively. Studying these techniques will help you incorporate them into your own writing.

  1. Complete the “Argumentative Strategies Worksheet.”
  2. GCU style is not required, but solid academic writing is expected.
  3. Submit the completed worksheet to your instructor.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 2 Peer Review Assignment for the Definition Argument

Peer Review Worksheet: Definition Argument

Part of your responsibility as a student in this course is to provide quality feedback to your peers that will help them to improve their writing skills. This worksheet will assist you in providing that feedback.

Name of the draft’s author:

Name of the peer reviewer:

Reviewer

After reading through the draft one time, write a summary (3-5 sentences) of the paper that includes your assessment of how well the essay meets the assignment requirements as specified in the syllabus and the rubric.

After a second, closer reading of the draft, answer each of the following questions. Positive answers will give you specific elements of the draft to praise; negative answers will indicate areas in need of improvement and revision. Please be sure to indicate at least three positive aspects of the draft and at least three areas for improvement in reply to the questions at the bottom of this worksheet.

Definition Argument Content and Ideas

How effectively does the thesis statement identify the main points that the writer would like to make in this definition argument?

How successfully does the argument focus on explaining and justifying a specific definition? If the writer uses resemblance arguments, how successfully were they used?

How persuasively is evidence used to justify ideas and enrich the essay?

How effectively does the essay incorporate supporting strategies such as the criteria-match pattern described in Chapter 11 of Writing Arguments?

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 2 Assignment Definition Argument First Draft

(This assignment is adapted from Chapter 11 of Writing Arguments: A Rhetoric with Readings.)

Write a 1,500-1,750-word essay using five to seven academic resources in which you argue that a borderline or contested case fits (or does not fit) within a given category. To do so, first select a controversial case (which you might find in the news). Decide what category you think your case belongs in, with the understanding that others may disagree with you about the definition of your category, and/or whether your chosen case matches your category.

In the opening of your essay, introduce the borderline or contested case you will examine and pose your definition question. To support your argument, define the boundaries of your category (criteria) by using a commonly used definition or by developing your own extended definition.

In the second part of your argument (the match), show how your case meets or does not meet your definition criteria. Use resemblance arguments, perhaps by comparing your controversial case to other cases, to develop your argument.

Follow one of the organization plans for definition arguments in chapter 11 of the textbook.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.

Submit this assignment to your instructor and you must also post this draft as an attachment in the Week 2 Peer Review forum by Day 3 of Week 2.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 2 Assignment Peer Review Forum: Definition

After submitting the first draft of your Definition Argument essay in Topic 2, post the first draft as a reply to this thread. You should label your paper and the subject line of your reply with your first name and last name (e.g., Karen Palmer’s Paper).

Review the draft of the person who posted his or her response directly below yours in the Peer Review forum. If your draft is the last posted, review the first draft posted.

Complete the “Peer Review Worksheet: Definition Argument.” Copy and paste the completed Peer Review to the peer review forum as a response to the initial post of your peer’s first draft. Do not post the worksheet as an attachment.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 3 Assignment Definition Argument Essay Final Draft A Grade

Revise the draft you have written, utilizing the feedback from your peer review. Complete your revision in conjunction with the guidelines for the first draft assignment given in Week 2.

This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 4 Assignment Peer Review Forum: Causal

After submitting the first draft of your Causal Argument essay in Topic 4, post the first draft as a reply to this thread. You should label your paper and the subject line of your reply with your first name and last name (e.g., Karen Palmer’s Paper).

Review the draft of the person who posted his or her response directly below yours in the Peer Review forum. If your draft is the last posted, review the first draft posted.

Complete the “Peer Review Worksheet: Definition Argument.” Copy and paste the completed Peer Review to the peer review forum as a response to the initial post of your peer’s first draft. Do not post the worksheet as an attachment.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 4 Peer Review Assignment for the Causal Argument

Review the “Rubric Peer Review” media piece for information on effective peer reviews.

Perform a peer review of the draft of the classmate who posted his/her response directly below yours in the Week 4 Peer Review forum. If your draft is the last posted, review the first draft posted.

Use the “Peer Review Worksheet: Causal Argument” to guide your review of a classmate’s paper.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

Copy-and-paste your completed peer review into a Reply to the classmate whose draft you reviewed no later than Day 7 of Week 4. Do not post the worksheet as an attachment.

Submit your completed Peer Review for grading by the end of Week 4.

Use the feedback you received from the Peer Review to revise your own essay. Begin to construct the final draft of your essay.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 5 Causal Argument Final Draft (Benchmark)

Revise the draft you have written utilizing the feedback from your peer review. Complete your revision in conjunction with the guidelines for the first draft assignment given in Week 4.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 6 Peer Review Assignment for the Proposal

Part of your responsibility as a student in this course is to provide quality feedback to your peers that will help them to improve their writing skills. This worksheet will assist you in providing that feedback.

Name of the draft’s author:

Name of the peer reviewer:

Reviewer

After reading through the draft one time, write a summary (3-5 sentences)of the paper that includes your assessment of how well the essay meets the assignment requirements as specified in the syllabus and the rubric.

After a second, closer reading of the draft, answer each of the following questions. Positive answers will give you specific elements of the draft to praise; negative answers will indicate areas in need of improvement and revision. Please be sure to indicate at least three positive aspects of the draft and at least three areas for improvement in reply to the questions at the bottom of this worksheet.

 

Proposal Content and Ideas

How effectively does the thesis statement identify the main points that the writer would like to make in this proposal?

How successfully does the paper focus on presenting a well-reasoned proposal?

How persuasively is evidence used to justify ideas and enrich the essay?

How effectively does the essay incorporate strategies that support proposals (e.g., categorical, resemblance, ethical claims, and causal claims)?

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 6 Proposal Argument First Draft

Choose ONE of the following two assignments:

(Assignments adapted from chapter 14 of the textbook.)

Option 1: A Practical Proposal Addressing a Local Problem

Write a 1,500-1,750 word practical proposal using five to seven academic resources that offers a solution to a local problem. Your proposal should have three main sections: (1) description of the problem, (2) proposed solution, and (3) justification.

Proposals are usually accompanied by a letter of transmittal—a one-page business letter that introduces the proposal to its intended audience and provides background about the writer.

Document design is important in practical proposals, which are aimed at busy people who have to make many decisions under time constraints. An effective design helps establish the writer’s ethos as a quality-oriented professional and helps make the reading of the proposal as easy as possible. Refer to Megan Johnson’s argument on pages 330–333.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a grading rubric that can be viewed at the assignment’s drop box. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.

 

Option 2: A Policy Proposal as a Guest Editorial

Write a 1,500-1,750 word policy proposal using five to seven academic resources that is suitable for publication as a feature editorial in a college or city newspaper or in a publication associated with a particular group, such as a church newsletter or employee bulletin. The voice and style of your argument should be aimed at readers of your chosen publication. Your editorial should have the following features:

The identification of a problem. Persuade your audience that this is a problem that needs solving; give it presence.

A proposal for action that will help alleviate the problem

A justification of your solution; the reasons why your audience should accept your proposal and act on it.

Chapter 14 includes an outline you can follow to complete your proposal argument.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a grading rubric that can be viewed at the assignment’s drop box. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 6 Peer Review Forum: Proposal

After submitting the first draft of your Proposal in Topic 6, post the first draft as a reply to this thread. You should label your paper and the subject line of your reply with your first name and last name (e.g., Karen Palmer’s Paper).

Review the draft of the person who posted his or her response directly below yours in the Peer Review forum. If your draft is the last posted, review the first draft posted.

Complete the “Peer Review Worksheet: Proposal Essay.” Copy and paste the completed Peer Review to the peer review forum as a response to the initial post of your peer’s first draft. Do not post the worksheet as an attachment.

 

ENG 106 Grand Canyon Week 7 Proposal Argument Final Draft

Revise the draft you have written, utilizing the feedback from your peer review. Complete your revision in conjunction with the guidelines for the first draft assignment given in Week 6.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the GCU Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.

This assignment uses a grading rubric. Instructors will be using the rubric to grade the assignment; therefore, students should review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center. Only Word documents can be submitted to Turnitin.

There are no reviews yet.

Add your review


Deprecated: WC_Product::get_upsells is deprecated since version 3.0! Use WC_Product::get_upsell_ids instead. in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 4774

Deprecated: WC_Product::get_related is deprecated since version 3.0! Use wc_get_related_products instead. in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 4774

Notice: id was called incorrectly. Product properties should not be accessed directly. Backtrace: require('wp-blog-header.php'), require_once('wp-includes/template-loader.php'), include('/plugins/woocommerce/templates/single-product.php'), wc_get_template_part, load_template, require('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/content-single-product.php'), do_action('woocommerce_after_single_product_summary'), WP_Hook->do_action, WP_Hook->apply_filters, call_user_func_array, woocommerce_output_related_products, woocommerce_related_products, wc_get_template, include('/themes/nielsen/woocommerce/single-product/related.php'), WC_Abstract_Legacy_Product->__get, wc_doing_it_wrong Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 3.0.) in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5226

Deprecated: WC_Product::get_related is deprecated since version 3.0! Use wc_get_related_products instead. in /home/tutogpcg/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 4774