Description
it is VERY important in this course to decipher good science versus JUNK science, which abounds especially on the internet (i.e. WIKIPEDIA, WebMD, etc.). Remember, as we are beginning to learn a valid research study:
-is published by a reputable source (scientific journal, news outlet)
-shows who the authors are and their qualifications
-shows where the study was done
-shows funding (in most cases) for the study
-discusses the results of the study in specific terms (i.e. data are shown)
-shows referenced information from previous studies
Here are the directions:
Please make sure you read the “Communicating Science” powerpoint. When you are done, find an article describing a scientific research study. It doesn’t have to be physiology, but it would be good! Note: although I would like this to be a primary source article (from a journal), I will accept valid secondary sources as well. A good place to start is www.sciencedaily.com!
Once you identify an article you then need to:
- Write a brief synopsis in your own words of the study and tell me why you think that is it valid science and not “junk” science-based upon what you’ve learned so far (remember: think about who did the study, where it was done, funding, publication, other similar results elsewhere). DO NOT plagiarize and DO NOT use direct quoting– paraphrase all information and cite properly within the essay and in works cited area. You cannot resubmit an essay that was previously evaluated in this course.
- Identify the following from the information on the study:
-the researcher’s HYPOTHESIS
-the experimental plan of the researchers
-the results
-the conclusion
- Any thoughts/questions you have on the study
This is to be at least 2 FULL PAGEs of text (12 pt TIMES font, double spaced, no header.
Rubric
Did Not Meet Approached Met/Exceeded
Valid Source Used 0 6 10
All information properly
paraphrased 0 4.8 8
Well-organized, Clear Writing,
Proper Grammar 0 4.8 8
Proper Citation Methods Used 0 4.8 8
Information is Accurate, Thorough 0 8 16
Met/Exceeded: student submission exhibited proper primary source identification, all required information presented in an accurate, organized manner, and demonstrated the successful use of basic writing skills
Approached: student submission exhibited some degree of proper primary source identification, some required information presented in a fairly accurate, organized manner, and at times demonstrated the successful use of basic writing skills
Did Not Meet: student submission did not exhibit proper primary source identification, all required information presented in an inaccurate, disorganized manner, and did not demonstrate any successful use of basic writing skills