Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
Ethics Case Study Assignment Phl203 38
Some environmentalists believe that the methods we use to raise and harvest animals and fish for food are unethical. They point to animal suffering in the factory farming industry, pollution from untreated animal waste, the use of hormones and antibiotics, the extinction of fish populations, and the fact that current farming practices are ultimately unsustainable in terms of environmental impact. Making the changes that these environmentalists claim are necessary, on the other hand, would be devastating to the agricultural and fishing industries, as well as the chemical and biochemical companies that support them and millions of people’s way of life. These changes may also lead to higher food prices and a reduction in the amount of food available to the world’s growing population.
What do you think the best way to strike a balance between the moral claims on this issue is?
Should environmentalists’ and animal rights activists’ concerns stifle your desire to eat as you please?
Is it true that the preservation of jobs and communities takes precedence over environmental concerns? Why do you think that is?
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
Ethics Case Study Assignment Phl203 38 |
Ethics Case Study Assignment Phl203 38