State of Science Report Assignment Help
Order ID: 89JHGSJE83839 | Style: APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages: 5-10 |
Instructions:
State of Science Report Assignment Help
Public Understanding of Science Report
Now that you have a good sense of the types of writing leading up to publication, we want to look beyond the field, and examine what happens once results are released. You must write a report on the state of your particular phenomenon in science and how it was represented differently in the public sphere. This assignment will let you trace the origins of science and understand how that is translated and changed to present that information to the public.
You may use either your main science journal article from the beginning of the term, the science journal article you were working with for the Poster Presentation, or a new science journal article of your choice. This is not a collaborative piece. If you are using the same article as someone else, you cannot share ideas.
Alongside the science journal article, find one non-academic article (popular press, newspaper) which discussed that information. You may use the source you found for your Annotated Bibliography. You may use a video or a podcast.
Your assignment is to write a critical analysis report analyzing both pieces. You will need to critically analyze:
The raw science content (that which is found in your main science article).
How the science is framed in the non-academic source (how is it referenced? What is the connection?).
The ways in which the material is modified, changed, or used to modify meaning.
You should use the CARS model of introductions to frame your research, and ensure that you clearly outline your methods of analysis. Your paper should detail all the sections of the IMRaD format (introduction, method, results, and discussion) but you can structure your work as either a traditional essay or using IMRaD format.
Remember to include a References page in APA style.
Your paper should be about 3 pages in length, double-spaced or approximately 1000 words.This assignment consists of two parts.
Criteria
The following criteria are used to assess your analysis:
An understanding of the goals and nature of the assignment
Use of the CARS method to frame your research and effective organization of the material
Use of IMRaD materials
A targeted analysis of the works
Clear, persuasive, original, and effective arguments
Demonstration of critical and applicable research
Strong writing skills, i.e. no errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation
Options for Analysis
Choose ONE of the following aspects or create your own to focus your argument of how the material is translated to non-academic sources. You do not need to address every subpoint.
Titles
Are any of the words, terms, ideas used in the article title the same as the public material title?
Does the title shift focus from results or data to implications of the study?
Does the title mislead the audience or focus only on one area of the work?
Audience
What is the audience for each source and how does it differ?
Does the audience change the way the material is presented?
How does the text use rhetoric to persuade a particular audience?
Visuals
What visuals from the main article does it use or modify?
What other visuals are brought in and how does this indicate an audience awareness?
Do the visuals used demonstrate a different interpretation of the material?
Quotations
What quotations from the main article is it using?
Is it using quotes from other sources?
Is it using epigraphs to effectively convey a message?
Statistics
How are statistics used in each text?
When are they used? What particular ones were chosen from the original document?
Were any statistics found in the non-academic articles which were not present in the main article? (Created, translated, etc.)
Narrative
What is the narrative of each piece?
Is there evidence of the IMRaD format in the non-academic sources?
What is the morale of each text and how does medium shift this message?
Complexity
What has been removed, lost, or simplified in the non-academic materials?
Does the different level of complexity suggest a different goal of the piece?
Sources
How are sources used rhetorically in each text?
What kind of sources are used?
How easy is it for the reader to access the main article?
Publisher
Who is the publisher of each piece and what are their overall mission statements/goals?
How has the publisher impacted the format, tone, goals, etc. of each piece?
State of Science Report Assignment Help
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 |