Order ready-to-submit essays. No Plagiarism Guarantee!
Note: All our papers are written from scratch by human writers to ensure authenticity and originality.
SUS 102 Winter 2017
Check your essay before you submit. See exactly what your professor sees.
See your AI and plagiarism results before your instructor does.Get the exact same report your professor uses. Trusted by 50,000+ students worldwide.
CRITICAL WRITING GUIDELINES AND RUBRIC
Use the instructions below when submitting a Critical Writing assignment. The rubric for scoring is included at the end.
Each critical writing assignment will consist of two parts, a response to the prompts or questions posed, including supporting citations from your own independent research, and a critical evaluation of the sources that you chose to use.
SUMMARY OF GUIDELINES
Each submission should include:
I. CRITICAL WRITING RESPONSE TO PROMPTS AND QUESTIONS (10 pts)
Follow the instructions provided for the assignment. Be sure to put everything in your own words. Summarize the topic and the content of any sources you cite.
II. CRITICAL EVALUATION OF SOURCES (10 pts)
Publisher/Organization/Author (2 pt)
1. Name/Title of organization/publisher
2. Type (government, educational, NGO, etc.)
3. Name of author
4. Authors qualifications, credentials
5. Is this source credible?
Purpose/Agenda/Bias (3 pts)
1. Does the source have an obvious purpose?
2. Does this lead to a biased view of the issue?
3. Does this bias affect the credibility of their position?
4. If you believe the source is unbiased, explain why
Skepticism (3 pts)
1. Are you skeptical about anything in this source?
2. Is any information confusing or misrepresented?
3. Is anything missing?
4. Does the author provide sources? Are they credible?
Citations (2 pts)
1. Author’s name, Title of article/video, Year published, URL
CRITICAL WRITING SCORING RUBRIC
Critical Writing Rubric
Full Marks
Acceptable
No Marks
Response to prompts/questions
Full Marks: Student thoughtfully and clearly discusses topic, summarizes sources effectively
Acceptable: Student contributes original thought, but the writing is unclear due to punctuation and grammar errors or the student clearly misunderstands material.
No Marks: Student does not address topic.
Points
10
5
0
Critical Evaluation of author/publisher
Full Marks: Assignment includes information about the author’s educational background and/or professional expertise; and/or about the publisher’s mission and purpose. Student provides some suggestions for potential biases the author/publisher may have.
Acceptable: Info on either expertise or bias is missing or lacking detail.
Inadequate: Info on both expertise and bias is missing.
Points
5
2
0 pts
Skepticism
Full Marks: Student identifies statements or conclusions of the article that are suspect due to bias, questionable interpretation of evidence, lack of expertise, and/or provides concrete examples of information that was lacking in the article.
Acceptable: Statement of skepticism is nonspecific or indicates an incomplete reading of article (e.g., asks for information that was presented in the article).
Inadequate: Statement of skepticism is missing.
Points
3
1
0
References
Full Marks: Student uses and properly cites information from information sources external to course materials
Acceptable: Student includes information from external sources, but references are incomplete
No Marks: Student does not include information from external sources
Points
2
1
0
GUIDELINE DETAILS
Below is a more detailed explanation of the expectations.
I. CRITICAL WRITING RESPONSE TO PROMPTS AND QUESTIONS
Respond thoroughly and succinctly, using citations, including news stores, research articles, websites, or videos, to support your position. IF A SPECIFIC READING WAS ASSIGNED, DISCUSS IT EXPLICITLY. Summarize the main points of the source(s) that you cite. Use complete sentences and correct grammar. Please note that a submission that is poorly written will be returned to the student ungraded until it is revised. If you would like help improving your writing, please contact me! I am happy to go over assignments and provide detailed feedback if requested.
Keep in mind that I take plagiarism very seriously and will report academic dishonesty. Feel free to work with other students, but be sure to submit your own work in your own words. NEVER COPY-PASTE MATERIAL FROM THE INTERNET; paraphrase the source in your own words and cite it.
II. CRITICAL EVALUATION OF SOURCES
In addition to responding to the prompts or questions, you will be asked to provide an evaluation of the source(s) you used. This is intended to help you practice your information literacy. Use the template below to complete this portion of the assignment.
Publisher/organization
Name/Title
Type: government (.gov), educational institution (.edu), organization/ industry (.org, .com), individual (.com), spoof or fake (.com.co, etc.)
Author
Name (if there is no specific author, as on some government websites, use the organization name)
Education, credentials, experience in this field
o Is this author qualified?
Note that reporters are often not science ‘experts’ but it is their job to present the information accurately.
Purpose/agenda/bias
Each of us bring a certain level of bias along with our worldview; whether or not this hinders our ability to make rational, evidence-based choices depends upon the situation. It is thus critical that we are able to not only identify bias, but understand where it comes from and why.
Does the author have a specific agenda?
Sometimes this is implicit, sometimes explicit (i.e., ‘discrediting myths about GMO’s, or ‘promoting conservation’, or ‘promoting economic prosperity in America’, etc.)
Are they trying to discredit another group or argument? This can lead to emotional appeals that lack credible evidence.
If you believe the author/publisher is not biased, provide a second article that confirms the information in the first (this is how fact checking is done).
I invite you to find sources with positions that differ from your own and evaluate them!
Skepticism
Skepticism is not the same thing as doubt or cynicism; it is the first step to evaluating gaps in knowledge and how we can fill them! It is critical that we each apply skepticism to every issue, including those we hold most dear. Without critical evaluation our arguments can be too easily discredited.
When evaluating an article, please consider:
Does the author leave anything out? Key evidence, a crucial viewpoint?
o For instance, if the article is exposing an environmental issue, does the author consider the economic and social impact, and vice versa?
Does the author misrepresent anything, either by intent or ignorance?
Is there anything you did not understand, or that you think needs to be investigated more deeply?
Citations
Author/organization, year, title, URL
For example:
