Dangers of Feeding on Wild Game Question
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
Dangers of Feeding on Wild Game Question
Food for Thought Discussion
77 unread replies.77 replies.
Clams and Oysters are often eaten raw. The diner cuts the adductor muscles and slurps the live animal. As you now know clams and oysters are filter feeders, why is a potentially dangerous meal?
Add your response then respond to at least one student.
Yummy Barbecue
55 unread replies.55 replies.
If you were offered a generous serving of wild boar that was only singed on the barbecue so that the center was raw, why should you refuse it?
What other types of food might you also refused based on the way it is cooked
Comparison between Homo Sapiens & Homo Erectus Worksheet
Goal
Compare modern humans (Homo sapiens) to one other species of recent hominin and identify the features that make both of us “humans”. You get to emphasize the traits you think matter most in defining us a human, and you get to pick which species you think is the first to qualify as being enough like us that you would call them humans, too. There isn’t a right or wrong answer to this question. I just want to know what you think and to see you use evidence from the class to support your argument.
Prompt
What are the key traits of Homo sapiens that you think makes us “human”? Which hominin species from the genus Homo do you think first qualifies as “human”? The hominin species you select as the first “human” must be a member of the genus Homo (1.5 mya or more recent), and you must focus on a single species to compare to Homo sapiens. (If you think only Homo sapiens can be called human, then compare them to Homo neanderthalensis, arguing why their traits differ enough that you don’t consider Neanderthals human yet.) You will need to include anatomical, behavioral, and cultural traits in your argument.
Instructions
Use the tables, readings, and diagrams in the module and Explorations chapter to fill out the What makes us Human? chart. Pick one species to compare to Homo sapiens and for each, describe the form and function, and the evidence for each of the traits as laid out in the chart. You may pick Homo erectus, Homo heidelbergensis, or Homo neanderthalensis to compare to Homo sapiens. IF you think ONLY Homo sapiens qualify as humans, then compare us to Homo neanderthalensis and be clear where you think the differences matter and make us human and them not quite human.
Be sure to explain the comparison – are the traits identical? how do they differ? does this difference matter in showing the species as “human” or not? Are they enough like us that you consider them “human” or “people”?
Dangers of Feeding on Wild Game Question
RUBRIC
Excellent Quality
95-100%
Introduction 45-41 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Literature Support
91-84 points
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Methodology
58-53 points
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
Average Score
50-85%
40-38 points
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
83-76 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
52-49 points
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
Poor Quality
0-45%
37-1 points
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
75-1 points
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
48-1 points
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow