Discussion: Personal Family History

Discussion: Personal Family History

Discussion: Personal Family History

Refer to the Personal Family History Project Instructions and complete Part 2.

This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.

You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.

You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes.

Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages.

Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor.

The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument.

ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS

Discussion Questions (DQ)

Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words.
Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source.
One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words.
I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses.
Weekly Participation

Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately.
In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies.
Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work).
Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week.
APA Format and Writing Quality

Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required).
Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation.
I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition.
Use of Direct Quotes

I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly.
As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content.
It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source.
LopesWrite Policy

For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me.
Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes.
Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own?
Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score.
Late Policy

The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies.
Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances.
If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect.
I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension.
As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading.
Communication

Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me:
Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class.
Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours.

Rubric Criteria

Total80 points

Criterion

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Less Than Satisfactory

3. Satisfactory

4. Good

5. Excellent

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to as

Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style)

0 points

Sources are not documented.

3.2 points

Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors.

3.52 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present.

3.68 points

Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct.

4 points

Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment)

0 points

Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly.

3.2 points

Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent.

3.52 points

Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present.

3.68 points

Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style.

4 points

All format elements are correct.

Thesis Development and Purpose

Thesis Development and Purpose

0 points

Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing thesis.

4.48 points

Thesis is insufficiently developed or vague; purpose is not clear.

4.93 points

Thesis is apparent and appropriate to purpose.

5.15 points

Thesis is clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose.

5.6 points

Thesis is comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.

Argument Logic and Construction

Argument Logic and Construction

0 points

Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the thesis. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources.

5.12 points

Sufficient justification of thesis is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility.

5.63 points

Argument is orderly but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of the thesis. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis.

5.89 points

Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression in support of the thesis from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative.

6.4 points

Clear and convincing argument that presents persuasive evidence in support of the thesis in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.

Evaluation of the Risk of Transmission to Other/New Family Members

Evaluation of the Risk of Transmission to Other/New Family Members

0 points

Evaluation of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is not present.

16 points

Evaluation of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is present but incomplete.

17.6 points

Evaluation of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is present but done at a perfunctory level.

18.4 points

Evaluation of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is clearly present. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from scholarly but dated sources.

20 points

Evaluation of the risk of transmission to other/new family members is clearly present. Discussion is insightful. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Proposal of the Feasibility of Using This Tool in Practice

Proposal of the Feasibility of Using This Tool in Practice

0 points

Proposal of the feasibility of using this tool in practice is not presented.

12.8 points

Proposal of the feasibility of using this tool in practice is presented but incomplete.

14.08 points

Proposal of the feasibility of using this tool in practice is presented but done at a perfunctory level.

14.72 points

Proposal of the feasibility of using this tool in practice is clearly presented. Discussion is convincing. Information presented is from mostly current scholarly sources, but some outdated sources are used.

16 points

Proposal of the feasibility of using this tool in practice is clearly presented. Discussion is insightful and detailed. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Discussion of the Heredity Patterns Discovered

Discussion of the Heredity Patterns Discovered

0 points

Discussion of the heredity patterns discovered is not present.

16 points

Discussion of the heredity patterns discovered is present but incomplete.

17.6 points

Discussion of the heredity patterns discovered is present but done at a perfunctory level.

18.4 points

Discussion of the heredity patterns discovered is clearly present and convincing. Information presented is from scholarly but dated sources.

20 points

Discussion of the heredity patterns discovered is clearly present and insightful. Information presented is from current scholarly sources.

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use)

0 points

Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used.

3.2 points

Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present.

3.52 points

Some mechanical errors or typos are present but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used.

3.68 points

Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used.

4 points

Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *