Order ID:89JHGSJE83839 | Style:APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago | Pages:5-10 |
Instructions:
The Maximizing Microbiology Harold Amos Scientist Analysis
I don’t know how to handle this Biology question and need guidance.
You will identify a living scientist that is doing research related to one of the topics covered in this course (Biochemistry, Cell Biology, Molecular Biology, Genetics, Microbiology, Genetic Engineering, or Virology.) Although he is a lovely person, do not pick Dr. Fauci.
The Maximizing Microbiology Harold Amos Scientist Analysis
Name of the person
The institution/where they work
A one sentence description of the topic of research that they are doing.
A one sentence description of how their topic relates to the course.
A one sentence description of how their topic relates to your life.
If possible, add a picture of the scientist.
Preventing Sodium Warfarin Overdose Presentation
Create a 5 page PowerPoint for a public service announcement to be run in the physician’s office on how to prevent sodium warfarin overdose.
You are to address in your PowerPoint:
Biology Article Summary Discussion
The Maximizing Microbiology Harold Amos Scientist Analysis
The Maximizing Microbiology Harold Amos Scientist Analysis
Here are the three sites
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep28730.pdf
https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1469-185X.2012.00244.x
https://besjournals-onlinelibrary-wiley-com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/doi/epdf/10.1111/1365-2435.12098
For your homework, for this week you will need to write a summary of EACH of the three papers. Like an abstract, the summary should be thought of as a brief overview of the paper but written in your own words and answering the following questions about each of the three papers. You should identify what information is important and condense that information in your summary. The summary is to be written in paragraph form, in your own words (NO direct quotes) and will need to answer the questions below with proper grammar and paragraph flow. Each paper, with a summary, is worth 5 points (total 15 points). Each summary should NOT be over one page, single-spaced. You will also need to include a citation for the paper on each summary in the format as outlined in the procedure portion of the self-paced activity this week (Week 7) and a working link to the paper.
you should include these.
What is the question the research is trying to answer? What are the hypotheses being tested?
The Maximizing Microbiology Harold Amos Scientist Analysis
What are the predictions/predicted results being made?
What is the basic experimental design? List the responding variable(s) including units, and two controlled variables. What is the manipulated variable? How many treatments were there? What are the treatments? How was the data analyzed (don’t just state the entire methods section – but remember to be brief)
Describe the results. Were they significant?
Briefly explain the key implications of the results.
Were the research’s hypotheses/explanations supported? Explain why or why not.
The Maximizing Microbiology Harold Amos Scientist Analysis
The Maximizing Microbiology Harold Amos Scientist Analysis
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
|
The Maximizing Microbiology Harold Amos Scientist Analysis