BIOL 103 UMGC Innovations in Biology Vaccines Paper

Description

Instructions

Step 2: Paper (9%)

Addresses course outcomes 1-4:

recognize and explain how the scientific method is used to solve problems

make observations and discriminate between scientific and pseudoscientific explanations

weigh evidence and make decisions based on strengths and limitations of scientific knowledge and the scientific method

use knowledge of biological principles, the scientific method, and appropriate technologies to ask relevant questions, develop hypotheses, design and conduct experiments, interpret results, and draw conclusions

Write a paper about your chosen topic (selected in step 1)

The outline you wrote in step 1 should be your starting point, but you can make edits to the topics and details you include, and the organization of the content. Take advantage of any feedback received.

Write a paper with a title page, introduction, multiple paragraphs addressing the questions posed in the topic description as well as your ideas, conclusion and references. Prior to submitting your paper, check your completed paper relative to the grading rubric provided below to ensure that you have included all required components and employed the correct format.

Your paper must be 750-1500 words, excluding references and the title page, using the 12 point Times Roman font and must be double-spaced.

Use a minimum of three (3) reliable information sources related to your chosen topics. These may or may not be the same resources that you found in step 1 of this assignment. You are encouraged to use the UMGC library in your search: https://libguides.umgc.edu/science . All references must be provided in a list of references at the end of the paper, the words in the reference list do not count toward the total word count for the paper, and all references in the list must be cited in-text.

The majority of your paper should be written in your own words, your own writing style and structure, fully paraphrasing information from the selected information sources (just changing a few words in a sentence is not enough). Your paper should consist of less than 10% direct quotes. Quotation marks must be used at the start and end of a direct quote, followed by an in-text citation. When paraphrasing, you should also use in-text citations to acknowledge the source.

All references must be provided in a list of references at the end of the paper, the words in the reference list do not count toward the total word count for the paper, and all references in the list must be cited in-text. . Use the APA format for references.

Please visit the UMGC Citing and Writing page for citation, writing, and academic integrity help: https://sites.umgc.edu/library/libhow/gethelp-citing.cfm

Grid View

	Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Main Postinga	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