Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
Presentation by the Public Perception Task Force
You are a police officer who has been chosen to join a public relations task team to handle a developing problem: the public’s poor impression of police officers.
The media has been harsh on police departments across the city, and the chief of police wants to address the issue hard on. You’ve just finished the first task force meeting, and the facilitator has asked you to offer data and recommendations on how to influence public image.
Create an 8- to 10-slide Microsoft® PowerPoint® presentation that includes the following elements:
Explain how a fallacy of induction (e.g., generalizations, weak comparison) or a linguistic fallacy (e.g., misleading explanations) may affect public opinion of the police.
Make a categorical claim about the public’s bad image of the police.
Create a picture depicting a bad categorical relationship between the police and the general populace.
Give suggestions and examples of what the department could do to:
Change people’s minds
Establish a positive rapport with the general public.
Include detailed speaker notes.
To back up your claim, cite at least one source.
Following APA criteria, format your citations.
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
Presentation by the Public Perception Task Force |
Presentation by the Public Perception Task Force