Helicopter Safety Op-Ed Revision
Order ID: 89JHGSJE83839 Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago Pages: 5-10 Instructions:
Counter argument
Acknowledge the opposition
Show a response
Refute: the counter argument is not valid
Grant validity up to a point/ valid but doesnt on the high benefit (not significant enough)
Grant validity but discuss another the solution
Desire and aversions
Engaging possible reader, obligation to interest readers
Hook, starting with some fact or news or detail
Flexible with tone, with direct address, ask question, make emotional appeal
How does it open
Background, or immediate or longer
Rhetorical question
Intriguing fact/ claim
Personal anecdote/ canecdate re someone else?
Counter- argument- involving expertise
Personal anecdotes
Other experts: people working in a field
Other media sources
Government agencies
Op-ed Citation
Use footnote, credit resource by name (example: a recent study at UCLA found that )
If you put authors name in it, put footnote behind authors name other than put at the end of the sentence
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 Helicopter Safety Op-Ed Revision
Helicopter Safety Op-Ed Revision