This assignment will be worked on by teams of 2-3 students each. It constitutes a considerable portion of your grade and will require steady progress towards a final submission.
This research-based project represents an opportunity for your team to investigate and expand your understanding of a contemporary subject related to our course providing meaningful analysis within and ethical context. The goal is for you to go beyond the areas covered and select a topic that is of interest to you, and which others in the class would benefit from learning about. Each student will initially submit a topic and brief proposal which will be vetted by the instructor. Based on the approved topics and related interests, teams will be formed.
Some potential topic areas could include but are not limited to:
Deliverables for this project are a white paper, presentation slides and a recorded presentation of 7-10 minutes in length.
The actual slide format is left up to the student, but a professionally designed slide presentation scores higher than a basic slide presentation with no design/theme. The presentation should be recorded (audio and video) and be no more than 7-12 minutes in length. Students are to cite at least three different sources of reference material.
Students will be evaluated on the quality and delivery of their presentation. Students are expected to practice their presentations in a professional manner prior to their actual presentation, and to avoid reading the slides for their presentation to their audience. The presentation should minimally consist of the following slides:
| CATEGORY | EXEMPLARY LEVEL 4 (76-100%) |
ACCOMPLISHED LEVEL 3 (51-75%) |
DEVELOPING LEVEL 2 (26-50%) |
BEGINNING LEVEL 1 (0-25%) |
TOTAL |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PAPER FOCUS: PURPOSE/POSITION STATEMENT | Identifies a relevant research topic and a thesis that provides direction for the paper that is engaging and thought provoking. The thesis clearly and concisely states the position, premise, or hypothesis and is consistently the focal point throughout the paper. | Identifies a relevant research topic and a thesis that provides adequate direction for the paper with some degree of interest for the reader. The thesis states the position, premise, or hypothesis and is the focal point for the most part. | Identifies a research topic but maybe too broad in scope and/or the thesis is somewhat unclear and needs to be developed further. Focal point is not consistently maintained throughout the paper. | Fails to identify a relevant research topic or is not clearly defined and/or the paper lacks focus throughout. | 20 |
| ANALYSIS | Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding and careful, critical analysis of ethical consequences and conflicts within the research topic and thesis (argument). Compares/contrasts perspectives, considers risks, responsibilities of key actors and counter-arguments and opposing positions, in drawing original and thoughtful conclusions with future implications. | Demonstrates an understanding and some critical analysis of ethical consequences or conflicts within the research topic and thesis (argument). Adequately compares/contrasts perspectives, counter-arguments or opposing positions, but broader connections and/or implications on risks, responsibilities of key actors are not as thoroughly explored. | Demonstrates general understanding with limited critical analysis, minimal reference of justification to ethical consequences within the research topic and thesis (argument). Summarizes perspectives, counter-arguments, or opposing positions with little depth. | Demonstrates a lack of understanding and inadequate analysis of the research topic and thesis. Analysis is superficial based on opinions and preferences rather than critical analysis. | 30 |
| EVIDENCE (SOURCES) | Provides compelling and accurate evidence to support in-depth the central position beyond the required (3) research sources. Research sources are highly relevant, accurate, and reliable and add to the strength of the paper; and are effectively referenced and cited throughout the paper. | Provides essential, accurate evidence to support the central position with the required (3) research sources. Sources are referenced and cited appropriately throughout the paper for the most part. | Provides some evidence to support the central position with the required (3) research sources. Some sources may not be relevant, accurate, and reliable and/or appropriately referenced and cited in the paper. | Lacks sufficient research sources to support the central position and/or, if included, are generally not relevant, accurate, or reliable. contains numerous factual mistakes, omissions, or oversimplifications. Sources, if included are not properly referenced and cited in the paper. | 15 |
| ORGANIZATION | Paper is effectively organized. Ideas are arranged logically, flow smoothly, with a strong progression of thought from paragraph to paragraph connecting to the central position. Includes all required components (introduction, body, conclusion, reference list, etc.) | Paper is adequately organized. Ideas are arranged reasonably with a progression of thought from paragraph to paragraph connecting to the central position. Includes required components (introduction, body, conclusion, reference list, etc.) for the most part. | Paper is somewhat organized, although occasionally ideas from paragraph to paragraph may not flow well and/or connect to the central position or be clear as a whole. Maybe missing a required component and/or components may be less than complete. | Paper lacks logical organization and impedes readers' comprehension of ideas. Central position is rarely evident from paragraph to paragraph and/or the paper is missing multiple required components. | 10 |
| WRITING | Writing is clear and relevant, with no grammatical and/or spelling errors - polished and professional. Reference section properly formatted. | Most ideas are stated clearly and are related to the topic, with only minor grammatical and/or spelling errors. Reference section adequate. | Many ideas require clarification and/or are off-topic or have marginal relevance to the assignment. Many grammatical and/or spelling errors throughout the paper. The paper is very challenging to read due to poor writing flow. Improper reference section. | Paper does not meet the criteria for the assignment (too short or incomplete, too long, and/or completely off-topic). Reference section missing. | 10 |
| PRESENTATION | All members participated. Information presented in a logical, interesting sequence which audience can follow. All areas covered effectively with slides fully supporting central topic and speakers with excellent mechanics. | Most information presented in a logical, interesting sequence. Most areas and central topic covered at an appropriate level with slides supporting speakers with a few issues with mechanics. | Audience has difficulty following presentation because it jumps around, is missing major elements or association to central topic, or had significant issues with mechanics. | The presentation had little organization, was delivered poorly, and provided little information about the central topic. | 15 |