Discussion Replies on Source Reliability Evaluation
Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages:5-10 Instructions:
The first person to react was:
The first three distinct sources that came up when I googled “Marie Tharp” were Wikipedia, The Mariners’ Museum and Park, and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. I’d look at Wikipedia last of these three because I know it’s not the most credible source in general, and anyone can modify what’s written there. However, based on the appearances, I would depend more on the Mariners museum and park website; even a cursory glance reveals a
bibliography, indicating that this may be a reputable source of information. I’d also trust the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution because the website ends in.edu, indicating that it’s an educational site that should be able to
deliver trustworthy information.
When I read about Marie Tharp, I discovered that she helped to find plate tectonics by charting the ocean bottom and making observations. She was able to identify a Rift Valley, which led to her developing the hypothesis of
continental drift and/or seafloor spreading. It may be necessary to examine this historical knowledge on Marie Tharp’s contribution because she worked in a male-dominated business where women were not even allowed to be
aboard boats, and she managed to complete her work on mapping the ocean floor despite this.
Respond to the second person:
Science Magazine, The Mariner’s Museum and Park, and Wikipedia are three different sources that came up for Marie Tharp. Wikipedia, in my opinion, is an untrustworthy source of information. Wikipedia is a website where
anyone may correct information that is incorrect. Furthermore, Wikipedia is not a reliable source because it lacks an author or a date, making it untrustworthy. The Science Magazine, on the other hand, is a news site I discovered that may have factual and reliable information. Because the website describes Marie Tharp’s biography, The Science Magazine has factual and balanced information. I believe I can tell if a website is a reliable source by looking at the timeline, author, and website it was posted on.
Discussion Replies on Source Reliability Evaluation
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 Discussion Replies on Source Reliability Evaluation
Discussion Replies on Source Reliability Evaluation