Skip to main content

Posts

Sample Rankings

1. Nuclear Power Great Job establishing a background of nuclear power's history Almost spends to long trying to disprove other claims Cites very trustworthy sources to establish a clear problem Builds solid logos and ethos throughout the piece Nice flow, but almost blends together to much 2. Meal Plans Very concise and well organized Has a very creative and unique solution Is self aware of critiques of her plan and addresses them clearly Over justifies; seems to stretch out some aspects to much Could use a few more statistics to give herself more credit 3. Biodiversity Short, direct, and concise Follows the clear constructs of a proposal For the length, spends to much time on personal interest Doesn't spend a lot time on justifications Feels like lots is left out
Recent posts

Topic Proposal

For many years now, education has been on a downhill slope, fighting for funds and respect from both local and national government. It's a resource often drawn from and neglected, never truly having any sense of stability. For me, I always heard of this, but it never seemed to effect Iowa. I was under the impression that education was secure, it's funds locked up tight and invested straight into the youth. That is, until about two years ago, when Cedar Rapids schools were shocked by the city's decision. Early in 2016, my junior year, many within our high school community were shocked to hear that the district had chosen to cut a significant amount of funds from all the local high school's library budgets. At face value, it was insulting to many to see the local government taking away from our education. Was the idea had taken hold though, teachers and students alike saw this would mean many librarians jobs would go out the window, including our own Mrs. Neff, who e

Paper Notes and Critique

Notes: Preferred News Sources Notes: ·          Ab: A little bit more about the context of the research would be nice. You talk about the significance but not about any surrounding research/ lit. review material. ·          Ab: Can’t say, ‘because ….,’ your study doesn’t focus on why younger generations are turning to social media more. Instead say that your study suggests younger generations may be… ·          Intro: both the concepts of Agenda Setting and politicians come up early, but don’t seem to play a role in the research. I would early try to take that out or clarify that it’s just an example. The way you introduce and explain agenda setting makes me think that’s what the paper is going to be about. ·          Intro: second paragraph feels like it’s all quote and no content. I’d minimize the use of quotes and try to just explain the findings in a more significant way yourself. ·          Intro: I think you could definitely expand on the lit. review portion. Talk ab

IMRaD paper

Collegiate Opinions on Prenatal Genetic Engineering and its Uses University of Iowa Abstract Many scientists have written, countered, and fought over the ethics behind genetic engineering, and what its implications would be. Over the last few years genetic engineering has taken leaps and bounds forward with the creation and study of the CRISPR technique, and will only continue to become more detrimental to the fields of medicine and biology in the years to come. With so much in store for the future of genetics, what do college students, future scientists and researchers, believe about this up and coming technology? Are college students as secular and scientifically progressive as we make them out to be? A short survey was formed in order to get the opinions of college students on genetic engineering, specifically prenatal. 39 participants were ultimately recorded, all of which took the survey anonymously online. The data showed that students’ opinions were extremel

Introduction and Methods

Introduction                 In 2013, the scientific community was blown off its’ feet when they were introduced to a new biological process called clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats, better known as CRISPR. CRISPR has the potential to turn the medical world on its’ head, as it offers the ability to search for, cut out, and replace specific genes from our DNA, potentially allowing us to destroy a variety of diseases by simply erasing them from our own gene sequences. This comes with one rather large hurdle, however. This kind of technology could allow gene manipulation, eugenics, and essentially human building possibilities. Are we has a population fit to ‘play god,’ with our own genes? What kind of ethical boundaries does this cross, if any?                 It’s generally believed by scientists that we could very well control genetic engineering technologies, like CRISPR, to make large bounds in the medical field. Even at this moment, CRISPR is currently be

Topic Sources

S1. http://www.pitt.edu/~rqj1/wa3.pdf S2. https://www.cse.iitb.ac.in/~jagadish/ethics_ge.pdf S3. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Joel_Anderson5/publication/249147936_Jurgen_Habermas_The_Future_of_Human_Nature_translated_by_Hella_Beister_Max_Pensky_and_William_RehgThe_Future_of_Human_Nature/links/57ac449108ae42ba52b1f7f3/Jurgen-Habermas-The-Future-of-Human-Nature-translated-by-Hella-Beister-Max-Pensky-and-William-RehgThe-Future-of-Human-Nature.pdf S4. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/sce.10101/full S5. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471491415001562