Bio 100 AU Sexual Experience Research Paper

Description

Specific instructions for this journal assignment:

For this journal assignment, you will use the AUM Library Course Guide for Introductory Biology to help you get started on your fruit fly research. You will also complete a tutorial on avoiding plagiarism when you are summarizing information from a source you are using in your research.

Exercise 1, Avoiding Plagiarism, Instructions:

First, navigate to: https://libguides.aum.edu/biol1010 (This link is on Blackboard too.)
Next, click on the “Avoiding Plagiarism” tab.
Then, click anywhere in the box labeled “Plagiarism Tutorial”. A new window will open.
Complete the Plagiarism Tutorial, including the quiz at the end. Enter your name in the textbox at the beginning of the quiz.
At the end of the quiz, send a copy of the results to your instructor by entering their email address in the textbox. This is required to get credit for completing the tutorial. Note: You can find your instructor’s email address on the first page of the BIOL 1011 Syllabus.

Exercise 2, Identifying a Peer-Reviewed Scientific Journal Article, Instructions:

Click on “Types of sources” at the top of the library course guide and review the difference between scholarly and popular sources, and primary and secondary sources.
· Next, click on the “Biology Databases” tab. You will then see a list of databases that the AUM library subscribes to. You can search these databases to find scientific journal articles that publish original research in biology. The good thing about accessing these library databases is that you can get a copy of the article in PDF form for free! This is why the library pays for these subscriptions—so that you can access the latest research without hitting a paywall.· Select one of the databases to use for your search. (You can always go back and try more than one. You will likely get some different search results in each database because the databases differ in which scientific journals are included in the database.)· Now you will need to enter search terms. These should be keywords for topics of interest to you that will help you identify appropriate articles in the database. You want to choose keywords that will be specific enough to filter out irrelevant articles but are not so specific that you narrow your search too much and cannot find any articles. This can be tricky to accomplish and may require some trial and error in your keyword choices!o You may enter keywords related to your research questions/hypotheses developed in the previous journal assignment.o You may also want to try some of these subjects/keywords along with the term “Drosophila”, “Drosophila melanogaster”, or “fruit fly”:§ Aging§ Foraging behavior§ Courtship behavior/mating§ Aggression§ Resource competition§ Learning and memory§ Sleep§ Disease/sickness§ Nutrition§ Habitat preference§ Food preference§ Sense of smell§ Sense of taste§ Sense of touch§ Vision§ Predator avoidance§ Toxicology/chemical effects§ Parasites§ Diapause§ And many more! This is not an exhaustive list! What else can you brainstorm?
o Here’s an example of how to combine keywords in a search. Type exactly the following: “Drosophila” AND “vision”o The “AND” here is a Boolean operator, which will tell the computer to look for articles that include “Drosophila” and “vision” somewhere in the article title or abstract.· Select an article of interest from one of your database searches. Write down which database and search terms you used to find the article. You will need to include this in your journal assignment.· Click on the article. You may see the full text of the article or need to click on another link to access the full text. Find a PDF of the article and download it. Include the PDF when you upload your journal assignment to Blackboard.· Once you have the article, read it (yes, the whole thing!) and write a 1-2 paragraph summary of the article. This should be in your own words! Also, describe why you picked this article. Why is it interesting to you? Do you think it would be possible for you to do something similar for your research?

Grid View

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Main Posting	45 (45%) – 50 (50%) Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Supported by at least three current, credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	40 (40%) – 44 (44%) Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth. Supported by at least three credible sources. Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	35 (35%) – 39 (39%) Responds to some of the discussion question(s). One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed. Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Post is cited with two credible sources. Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Contains some APA formatting errors.	0 (0%) – 34 (34%) Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately. Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria. Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis. Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. Contains only one or no credible sources. Not written clearly or concisely. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors. Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness	10 (10%) – 10 (10%) Posts main post by day 3.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not post by day 3.
First Response	17 (17%) – 18 (18%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	15 (15%) – 16 (16%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	13 (13%) – 14 (14%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 12 (12%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Second Response	16 (16%) – 17 (17%) Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings. Responds fully to questions posed by faculty. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources. Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	14 (14%) – 15 (15%) Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings. Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed. Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources. Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	12 (12%) – 13 (13%) Response is on topic and may have some depth. Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed. Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 11 (11%) Response may not be on topic and lacks depth. Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication. Responses to faculty questions are missing. No credible sources are cited.
Participation	5 (5%) – 5 (5%) Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%) Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100