Interested in a PLAGIARISM-FREE paper based on these particular instructions?...with 100% confidentiality?

Order Now

COMM3210 Media Analysis Short Paper Read the articles “Science vs Medieval Thinking” and “Air Pollution Northeast of Edmonton as Bad as World’s Largest Cities: Study.” Links to both articles are provided on our Moodle site. (Please read all the links posted. You will see, interestingly, that the initial links I provided for both articles have since become “unavailable,” and that the “Air Pollution” article underwent further editing when it was posted online.) Choose one of the articles and write a well-structured and well-developed essay (which means it includes a thesis statement and clearly organized paragraphs) in which you critically analyze (not summarize) the article and determine whether or not it is credible, and why. Performing critical analysis means you are not to simply agree or disagree with the issue itself, but rather focus on the language the articles use to develop their arguments about the issues. You might consider word choice, tone, representation of data (or lack thereof), representation of expertise, use of images, use of the headline to invoke bias, etc. Review Kent Lewis’s chapters on “Questions,” “Argument,” and “Media” for other characteristics to consider in performing your analysis, and also consider the reasons for the edit and/or removal of the article from the Edmonton Journal’s website. Remember to use APA general essay style format and citation/references format and to avoid the common writing errors outlined in World and World’s Appendix A&B. Word Count: 1000-1250 words COMM3210: Media Analysis Evaluation Category Beginning Fair Good Exemplary Score 0 – 2 3 – 5 6 – 8 9– 10 General Formatting (including Title Page and Page Numbers) Title page vague or non-existent; page numbers missing or inconsistent; sloppy look. Title page incomplete; overall appearance of carelessness with regard to pagination and formatting of document. Title page, pagination and formatting elements all present, but with some inconsistencies. All elements present and of clearly superior quality; page numbers all correct & complete, nicely formatted; clearly superior quality of work. /10 In-text citations and References No citations or references. Some citations attempted, but with missing elements or in wrong order; Reference page missing or very faulty. Most citations correctly done, and Reference page present, but with a few lapses or some consistency problems. All entries correct, and in proper order; Reference page complete and professional. /10 0 – 5 6 – 10 11 – 15 16 – 20 Thesis Statement, Paragraph Organization and Development, Conclusion Little or no evidence of thesis statement, clear, well-organized paragraphs or conclusion. Thesis statement evident, but vague or very general; paragraphs underdeveloped or unclearly organized; conclusion ill-formulated, or not clearly tied to stated topic. Fair thesis statement, fairly well-developed and clearly organized paragraphs, and fair supporting conclusion; some minor problems with clarity or structure. Strong, clearly formulated topic statement, well-developed and well-organized paragraphs and a conclusion that cogently summarizes the supports body of paper. /20 Sentence Structure, Grammar, Punctuation The paper has serious flaws in sentence structure as well as errors in style and grammar that detract from its coherence and flow. A number of errors in style and grammar detract from the paper’s coherence and flow. Some small errors in grammar and style. There are no significant errors in grammar or style. /20 0 – 10 11 – 20 21 – 30 31 – 40 Content and Use of Evidence Weak content; little or no support for thesis statement; lacks unity & coherence; no critical argument or supporting evidence. Moderate content; lacks some coherence; little evidence of critical thinking; points inadequately supported. Mostly strong content, with detailed, well stated support for topic; strong sense of unity & coherence; strong, supported arguments and some evidence of critical thinking. Fully professional with respect to content; detailed, well-articulated support for thesis statement; strong sense of unity & coherence; excellent and well-supported arguments based on sharp critical thinking. /40 TOTAL: /100

COMM3210

Media Analysis Short Paper

 

Read the articles “Science vs Medieval Thinking” and “Air Pollution Northeast of Edmonton as Bad as World’s Largest Cities: Study.” Links to both articles are provided on our Moodle site. (Please read all the links posted. You will see, interestingly, that the initial links I provided for both articles have since become “unavailable,” and that the “Air Pollution” article underwent further editing when it was posted online.)

Choose one of the articles and write a well-structured and well-developed essay (which means it includes a thesis statement and clearly organized paragraphs) in which you critically analyze (not summarize) the article and determine whether or not it is credible, and why.

Performing critical analysis means you are not to simply agree or disagree with the issue itself, but rather focus on the language the articles use to develop their arguments about the issues. You might consider word choice, tone, representation of data (or lack thereof), representation of expertise, use of images, use of the headline to invoke bias, etc. Review Kent Lewis’s chapters on “Questions,” “Argument,” and “Media” for other characteristics to consider in performing your analysis, and also consider the reasons for the edit and/or removal of the article from the Edmonton Journal’s website.

Remember to use APA general essay style format and citation/references format and to avoid the common writing errors outlined in World and World’s Appendix A&B.

Word Count: 1000-1250 words

COMM3210: Media Analysis Evaluation

 

Category Beginning Fair Good Exemplary Score
0 – 2 3 – 5 6 – 8 – 10
General Formatting (including Title Page and Page Numbers) Title page vague or non-existent; page numbers missing or inconsistent; sloppy look. Title page incomplete; overall appearance of carelessness with regard to pagination and formatting of document. Title page, pagination and formatting elements all present, but with some inconsistencies. All elements present and of clearly superior quality; page numbers all correct & complete, nicely formatted; clearly superior quality of work.  

 

 

   /10

In-text citations and References

 

No citations or references. Some citations attempted, but with missing elements or in wrong order; Reference page missing or very faulty. Most citations correctly done, and Reference page present, but with a few lapses or some consistency problems. All entries correct, and in proper order; Reference page complete and professional.  

 

    /10

  0 – 5 6 – 10 11 – 15 16 – 20  
Thesis Statement, Paragraph Organization and Development,  Conclusion Little or no evidence of thesis statement, clear, well-organized paragraphs or conclusion. Thesis statement evident, but vague or very general; paragraphs underdeveloped or unclearly organized; conclusion ill-formulated, or not clearly tied to stated topic. Fair thesis statement, fairly well-developed and clearly organized paragraphs, and fair supporting conclusion; some minor problems with clarity or structure. Strong, clearly formulated topic statement, well-developed and well-organized paragraphs and a conclusion that cogently summarizes the supports body of paper.  

 

     /20

Sentence Structure, Grammar, Punctuation The paper has serious flaws in sentence structure as well as errors in style and grammar that detract from its coherence and flow. A number of errors in style and grammar detract from the paper’s coherence and flow. Some small errors in grammar and style. There are no significant errors in grammar or style.  

                                                     

      /20

  0 – 10 11 – 20 21 – 30 31 – 40  
Content and Use of Evidence Weak content; little or no support for thesis statement; lacks unity & coherence; no critical argument or supporting evidence. Moderate content; lacks some coherence; little evidence of critical thinking; points inadequately supported. Mostly strong content, with detailed, well stated support for topic; strong sense of unity & coherence; strong, supported arguments and some evidence of critical thinking. Fully professional with respect to content; detailed, well-articulated support for thesis statement; strong sense of unity & coherence; excellent and well-supported arguments based on sharp critical thinking.  

 

    /40

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL:          /100

 

Interested in a PLAGIARISM-FREE paper based on these particular instructions?...with 100% confidentiality?

Order Now