关键词 > NPSC1003
NPSC1003 Writing Portfolio – Assessment 3 – Construct Scientific Claims
发布时间：2024-05-17
Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit
UNIT: Integrating Indigenous Science and STEM
NPSC1003 Writing Portfolio – Assessment 3 – Construct Scientific Claims.
|
Assessment Learning Outcomes Identify and articulate key concepts that underpin Indigenous knowledges and cultures, Construct scientific claims related to integrating Indigenous Science and Western Science Use evidence and reasoning to support your argument Demonstrate academic integrity principles in researching, preparing and delivering evidence-based written texts. |
Introduction
In Assessment 2, you deconstructed two written papers and examined the characteristics of writing about science compared to scientific writing. You discovered that scientists prove their claim by presenting evidence or research (data, information, verified examples) to demonstrate their point. It is a type of Argument where the amount or credibility of the evidence persuades you, not the loudest voice.
In this assessment you will create a short piece of academic writing for yourself, by constructing two claims as a response to a provided visual prompt. You will support your claims with a range of credible evidence and provide reasoning to link the evidence to the claims.
This final Portfolio Assessment builds on the precious two assessments. The materials covered in this unit have been fundamental in your overall development and understanding of First Nations peoples, cultures, and knowledges. You will need to apply your knowledge developed through readings, the Snapshot videos and workshops on various forms of Indigenous Science. You will also need to consider aspects of Cultural competency, Indigenous Terminology and integrating Indigenous Science and STEM.
Please refer to the Academic Skills Lectures and Modules, and the Library APA7th Referencing Style to assist you in conducting your research, constructing your claims, describing your reasoning.
Task Description
Sign up to your Topic in Blackboard. - Choose only ONE Video linked to the Topic.
Review the Video and Research the topic to craft your response using formal academic writing.
After viewing the video and listening to the discussion of the issue, conduct thorough research on this topic and identify at least 6 credible sources of evidence beyond the video (more is better!).
a) Describe the main claims of the video and what wider event or issue that the video is referring to. This should be based on your understanding of the issues presented in the video, but DO NOT just describe what the video is about. Support your discussion with credible sources. Researchers build their arguments based on prior research and this builds background and context and the importance of the work.
b) Compose TWO claims that articulate a well-defined position. Your claims should be specific and open to debate, rather than simply stating a fact. These are YOUR claims that you will set out to support with evidence, hence do not necessarily need a citation.
c) For each claim, construct a short piece of academic writing that presents the claim. From your research describe how at least TWO forms of the evidence supports your claim (this is your reasoning).
d) Write ONE COUNTERCLAIM about the topic. Refute (prove it is incorrect) or rebut (present evidence or arguments that weaken or challenge it), which must be support by evidence/citation. If you cannot address counterclaims your argument will be weak.
e) What are your thoughts and feelings about the issue? and Explain why you have chosen these claims (you may write this section in first person). How does it connect to your understanding of Indigenous Science?
f) Evaluate your sources in an annotated Reference List using the CRAAP criteria.
Credibility: at least 3 of these sources must be peer reviewed academic papers, and
Currency: at least 2 sources from the last 2 years.
g) Complete a self-evaluation against the Rubric criteria.
Task Requirements
Write in a formal style, no dot points and use full, cohesive paragraphs for your answers to each question.
Assume your audience has some Scientific background, but any technical terms will need to be explained.
The total assignment is 1000 - 1200 words, so you will need to divide the word count between each question.
The word limit includes in-text citations but excludes the question headings and the reference list.
All ideas/evidence/examples not your own need references. Cite current, relevant and verifiable sources, including a strong variety of examples and concrete details. Claims usually will not need a reference as it will be your idea and supported by evidence in your argument.
Sources are acknowledged as In-text citations and end of text Reference list in APA 7th style.
Write a full reference list with a justification (via the CRAAP test)
Use the Word doc Template provided to answer the questions.
Meet the guidelines for Academic integrity – you must declare use of Generative AI (eg ChatGPT) on the first page and keep prompts and responses if further investigation is warranted.
Template:
NPSC1003 Writing Portfolio – Assessment 3 template – Construct Claims.
TOPIC:
|
Name: |
|
Topic: |
|
Campus: |
|
Word Count: |
Acknowledgment of Country
Please add your Acknowledgement here (remove red text)
Please see the detailed instructions doc but answer the each section here.
Word Count: 1000-1200 words; so you will need to divide the word count between questions.
Full cohesive paragraphs, all sources/examples/citations in APA7th style.
|
a) Describe the main claims of the video and what wider event or issue that the video is referring to. This should be based on your understanding of the issues presented in the video, but DO NOT just describe what the video is about. Support your discussion with credible sources. Researchers build their arguments based on prior research and this builds background and context and the importance of the work.
(min 200 words) Word Count: |
|
b & c) Construct short piece of academic writing stating your FIRST CLAIM about this event or issue that expresses a position. From your research, describe how at least two forms evidence supports your claim (this is your reasoning). Make sure your claim is specific and arguable; don’t just state a fact.
min 200 words) Word Count: |
|
b & c) Construct short piece of academic writing stating your SECOND CLAIM about this event or issue that expresses a position. From your research, describe how at least two forms evidence supports your claim (this is your reasoning). Make sure your claim is specific and arguable; don’t just state a fact.
min 200 words) Word Count: |
|
d) Write ONE COUNTERCLAIM about the topic. Refute (prove it is incorrect) or rebut (present evidence or arguments that weaken or challenge it), which must be support by evidence/citation. If you cannot address counterclaims your argument will be weak.
min 200 words) Word Count: |
|
e) What are your thoughts and feelings about the issue? and explain why you have chosen these claims (you may write this section in first person, but you will still need citations/references when referring to examples). How does it connect to your understanding of Indigenous science?
min 200 words) Word Count: |
|
f) Include at least 6 verifiable sources of evidence, evaluating these in an annotated Reference List using the CRAAP criteria. Use APA7th Reference Formatting. · Credibility: at least 3 of these sources must be peer reviewed academic papers, and · Currency: at least 2 sources from the last 2 years. Reference List (remove Red examples APA7th formatting before submission) Taçon, P. S., Thompson, S., Greenwood, K., Jalandoni, A., Williams, M., & Kottermair, M. (2022). Marra Wonga: Archaeological and contemporary First Nations interpretations of one of central Queensland’s largest rock art sites. Australian Archaeology, 88(2), 159-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2022.2084666 CRAAP evaluation: Taçon, P. S., Thompson, S., Greenwood, K., Jalandoni, A., Williams, M., & Kottermair, M. (2022). Marra Wonga: Archaeological and contemporary First Nations interpretations of one of central Queensland’s largest rock art sites. Australian Archaeology, 88(2), 159-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2022.2084666 CRAAP evaluation: Taçon, P. S., Thompson, S., Greenwood, K., Jalandoni, A., Williams, M., & Kottermair, M. (2022). Marra Wonga: Archaeological and contemporary First Nations interpretations of one of central Queensland’s largest rock art sites. Australian Archaeology, 88(2), 159-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/03122417.2022.2084666 CRAAP evaluation: Not included in word count |
d) Self-Evaluation against the Rubric – Drag the star shape for where you think you meet the expected criteria.
|
|
Absent (0%) |
Novice (20%) |
Developing (40%) |
Competent (60%) |
Proficient (80%) |
Excellent (100%) |
|
|
You have not described what the video is about, or the wider issue. |
You have described what the video is about. |
You have described what the video is about; and or poorly address the wider issue. |
You have described the event or issue that the prompt is referring to; with some evidence but may be weak or irrelevant. |
You have researched and described the wider event or issue that the prompt is referring to based on evidence. |
You have thoroughly researched and concisely described the wider event or issue that the prompt is referring to, based on evidence.
|
|
|
Your claims are absent or incoherent; and/or Your text reads like a description or explanation. |
You attempt to provide two claims; however, they are weak and/or may not be relevant. |
Your two claims are present but may lack relevance; and/or Your writing may be expository rather than argumentative. |
Your two claims are arguable and mostly relevant to the issue. |
Your two claims are arguable, clearly stated and relevant to the issue. |
Your construction of two claims reflect mature, analytical thinking; are arguable, clearly stated and are relevant to the issue |
|
|
Your claims are not supported with evidence and/or reasoning is not stated |
Your claims are insufficiently supported by evidence; and/or evidence is repetitive or irrelevant; and/or reasoning is not stated |
Your one or two claims are not supported consistently - evidence may not be sufficient or not always completely relevant to the topic; and/or explanation of why the evidence leads to the claim (reasoning) is weak. |
Your two claims are supported with appropriate evidence. You have made clear attempts at reasoning; Your writing is well-paraphrased, with no direct quotations, and shows considered use of information-prominent citations. |
Your two claims are supported with relevant evidence, and connected back to the claim with reasoning. Your writing is well-paraphrased, with no direct quotations, and with considered use of information-prominent citations. |
Your two claims are well-supported by relevant evidence and are integrated into the text with clear explanations of why the evidence leads to the claim (reasoning). Your writing is well-paraphrased, with no direct quotations, and uses information-prominent citations.
|
|
|
Your counterclaim is absent |
Your counterclaim is weak; or not supported by evidence. |
Your counterclaim may be weak; and/or may lack rebuttal. |
You have attempted to raise and address a counterclaim; and/or evidence weak |
You have raised and addressed a counterclaim using evidence. |
You have raised a relevant counterclaim supported by evidence/citation; and refuted (prove it is incorrect) or rebutted (present evidence or arguments that weaken or challenge it).
|
|
|
Your sources of information are not identified or are deficient in validity and reliability - this is plagiarism |
Your sources are insufficient in number (< 4), and/or their validity or reliability are questionable. |
Your sources are insufficient in number (4 - 5); and/or validity or reliability of some sources may be questionable; and/or justification of sources weak or absent. |
Your sources are sufficient in number (6) but validity or reliability of a few references may be questionable; Your sources are mostly justified by a statement included in the reference list, assessing them via the CRAAP criteria.
|
You have used at least 6 valid and reliable sources. Your sources are justified by a valid statement included in the reference list, assessing them via the CRAAP criteria. |
You have used at least 6 valid and reliable sources: 3 peer reviewed, 2 between 2020-2023. The credibility of your sources are justified by a valid statement included in the reference list, assessing them via the CRAAP criteria. |
|
|
Your references are absent or not formatted with any consistent style and contain numerous errors - this is plagiarism |
Your references have more than 5 errors in formatting; and/or many in-text citations are missing from reference list or vice versa; and/or in-text citations are not placed correctly. |
Your references are formatted in APA 7th style with 4 errors; and/or some in-text citations are missing from reference list or vice versa; and/or in-text citations are not consistently placed within the sentence that they support.
|
Your references are formatted in APA7th style with 3 errors; and/or most in-text citations appear in reference list or vice versa; and/or most of your in-text citations are properly placed within the sentence that they support, with a few errors. |
Your references are formatted in APA7th style with a max 2 errors; and in-text citations appear in reference list and vice versa. In-text citations are properly placed within the sentence with the evidence that they support. (Do not double penalised for same error) |
Your references are formatted in APA7th style with no errors in-text or in the reference list; All in-text citations appear in reference list and vice versa. In-text citations are properly placed within the sentence with the evidence that they support. |
|
|
Your writing style is inconsistent and informal; and /or and has many errors. |
Your writing is inconsistent and/or informal in expression. |
Your writing lacks the academic writing elements appropriate to the intended purpose and audience |
You have demonstrated acceptable use of grammar and language; and/or formality and tone, use of paragraphs, mostly appropriate to the intended purpose and audience. |
You have demonstrated proficient use of grammar and punctuation; formal language and tone; paragraphs with topic sentences as appropriate to the intended purpose and audience. |
You have demonstrated mature academic writing, grammar and punctuation, formal language and tone, well-constructed paragraphs with topic sentences, as appropriate to the intended purpose and audience.
|
|
|
You have not demonstrated the criteria required for task completion; and/or many aspects not present. |
You have barely demonstrated some of the criteria required for task completion; and/or two or more aspects not present at all. |
You have demonstrated all 'excellent criteria' but two or more aspects may be lacking or inconsistent in your document. |
You have demonstrated all 'excellent criteria' but one aspect may be lacking or inconsistent in your document. |
You have demonstrated good execution of all 'excellent criteria' required for task completion. |
You have demonstrated excellent execution of all of the following: respectful use of Aboriginal terminology and Acknowledgment; Use the template; Appropriate length (+/-10% of required word count); genuine self-evaluation against the Rubric |
