Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
From the knowledge graph that you are developing in several other assignments for this course, pick one relationship that relates to the course topics and create a short video explaining it. For example, using the Knowledge Graph Assignment 1 sample knowledge graph, you could create a video describing the process of turning coffee beans into coffee. Select a relationship from your graph that you are confident is correct, and that you find interesting. Your video must include 50-60 seconds of content, as well as credits for all sources used in its creation. Your credits must appear after the video’s content and do not count towards the video’s 50-60 second limit. The credits can be a static list of references, or a rolling credits like in movies. This page’s video on Fair Use is a good example.
Articles, papers, and other scholarly texts: these are essentially evidence that supports what you say or describe. They MUST be directly related to the video.
Images: if you use images that you did not create, you must credit them here.
List any videos you use that you didn’t make.
If you use audio that you didn’t make, list it here.
People: List anyone you interview or appear in your video.
In each of these sections, list references in chronological order.
Make sure your work follows the guidelines for copyright and fair use in student videos.
References Format Any format as long as it is consistent. You can use our style or any other major format. For example, NRC. 2012. Sustainable Computing Research The National Academies Press.
It’s best if you post your video publicly (e.g., on YouTube) and submit a link to it. You can also upload a “unlisted” video to YouTube or another platform and share the link with the teaching staff.
Please submit your link in the text box below by the deadline.
Some Inspiration For this assignment, we encourage you to be creative with your video to engage your audience. Here are some examples of engaging videos from the teaching staff: Vi Hart https://www.youtube.com/watch? Minute Physics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahXIMUkSXX0 Joy Buolamwini https://www.youtube.com/watch? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdCPbyDJtK0 Sabrina and Friends https://www.youtube.com/watch? Veritasium https://www.youtube.com/watch? emmymade https://www.youtube.com/watch? CGP Grey https://www.youtube.com/watch? Numberphile https://www.youtube.com/watch? How Stuff Works https://www.youtube.com/watch? Vsauce https://www.youtube.com/watch? Cooking with Dog https://www.youtube.com/watch? hbPLsZvvo (Links to an external site.)
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 |
Relationship to the course’s topics