The USGS Pacific Coast And Marine Science Center

November 26, 2022

The USGS Pacific Coast And Marine Science Center

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

[Order Now]

Base On The Requirement, Finish The Marine Project Pt1

Part 1: Identify the Issue: (10 points) Take the time now to consider a research topic carefully, determine that your thesis is not too narrow or too broad, and find four or five good primary scientific references. The assignment will be much more comfortable when writing the research paper in Part 2 and writing three letters of appeal in Part 4. Conversely, avoiding doing a few hours of research for MPP Part 1, will make Parts 2, 3, 4 much more difficult.

The only restrictions on the choice of a MPP issue is that it must be related to the ocean. Include full citations of the preliminary references in the assignment submission. Read chapters 14 and 15 in the textbook and look online for ideas. Other places to search are the NOAA Ocean Explorer website; the NASA Oceanography webpage; the USGS Pacific Coast and Marine Science Center; and the Monterey Bay Aquarium.

I need help writing this paper. It has to be 5 pages Long and 2500 words. Single spaced

For this assignment, I want you to identify a scientific article and analyze the various arguments presented within. Often, focusing on a scientific controversy provides a fun and interesting topic for this analysis, but you don’t have to choose an article associated with a controversy. Examples of controversies include: the cathode ray, cause for dinosaur extinction, steady-state vs big bang theory for the origin of the universe, expanding earth vs plate tectonic model, etc. What’s most important here is that you analyze how the author of the text you select portrays science.

Let the following questions guide your analysis:

What is the article about? Who is it intended for?

How does the author portray science? Is it black boxed and therefore only focuses on the conclusions? Why does the author need to frame science as they have?

What rhetorical practices are at play throughout the article? What function do they serve?

Do these rhetorical practices work? Why or why not? (Use the audience and context of the article as foundations for building your argument)

Professional Plagiarism Free Paper in APA/MLA/Harvard/Turabian Format, Instant Delivery, High Quality Submissions, 100% Unique, Turnitin Report Attached

The USGS Pacific Coast And Marine Science Center

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.