Order Number |
636738393092 |
Type of Project |
ESSAY |
Writer Level |
PHD VERIFIED |
Format |
APA |
Academic Sources |
10 |
Page Count |
3-12 PAGES |
Click on the link below or copy and paste it into your web browser URL address box at the top of your screen and watch the brief interview of Dr. Laurence Steinberg about natures versus nurture’s impact on human development.
https://bigthink.com/videos/why-some-apples-fall-far-from-the-tree
In this video with accompanying transcript, Dr. Laurence Steinberg, Professor of Psychology at Temple University, explains the latest research findings into the nature versus nurture debate, highlighting the need to break down the false dichotomy between genes and the environment.
By Wednesday of this week, for your initial post, share your thoughts on the message from Dr. Steinberg combined with the following based your own knowledge and experience:
Think about and compare two people you know. Each one of these two individuals has what you might suspect is a genetic propensity for being a leader. In other words, you have seen evidence that both of these acquaintances of yours were born with leadership ability. However, one of your acquaintances has become a leader and the other has not.
What can you identify as the difference, today, between these two personalities? First share why you think both of them have a genetic temperament to be a leader and then why you think one became a leader and the other did not. What main cause do you believe is the reason that one of them is a leader and the other is not? Remember to take into account what Dr. Steinberg told us.
Post a minimum of 250 words
Because scholarly discussion and related student interaction within a learning community are such essential aspects of online learning, participation is graded and required. Forum post source citation is not required for forum posting in our class. This is because we are engaging in conversation that happens to be in writing form, not composing essays or research papers.
You will, however, need to paraphrase (restate in your own words) any words of published authors in parts of your posts that are based on their work. Copying of published material, which is plagiarism, is prohibited and any instances of it, including forum posts, will result in a zero score without an option for re-submission to recoup lost points and a report sent to the Registrar’s Office per University policy.
Discussion forum posts will be graded on verbal expression, critical thinking, making an effort to not just participate in but contribute to the dialog with initial and reply posts of a substantive nature commensurate with graduate level studies. Posts must have corrected grammatical construction, spelling, and punctuation with no texting or other casual style language.
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. |
Place the Order Here: https://standardwriter.com/orders/ordernow / https://standardwriter.com/