Ethical Research Writing
Peterson ENGL 235
1
Ethics Reflection 2 Purpose: Ethics reflections are designed to encourage you to think about the importance of ethics to the production of technical writing. Completing these will prepare you to be able to meet the following course and program learning outcomes:
Locate, evaluate, and integrate credible research into a written document for a specific purpose and work-world audience.
Edit for accuracy, brevity, clarity, to write an ethical document with a specific purpose and work-world audience.
Instructions: These should follow a short essay format. Please use 12 point font, single-space, skip lines between paragraphs, and use 1” margins. Finally, no research is required for these, but please make sure to cite if you do include any information that is not your own, or common knowledge. Length: Each response must be no less than 250 words (that’s about 3 average- sized paragraphs), Try to limit your responses to about 500 words max.
Prompt: For this ethics reflection, I’d like you to discuss ethics in writing from the perspective of a researcher. As you continue to conduct research, what aspects of a source will you consider when determining its ethical credibility (such as the author’s qualifications or the kind of support provided)? Discuss your plan for evaluating the information you’ll be encountering in the research process. Be sure to mention your plan for evaluating information that you find online.
Grading: Please scroll down for the grading rubric. Late assignments will receive a 1 point deduction in each rubric category. After 1 week past the due date, NO late work will receive instructor feedback,
and a rating of 0 (“well below mastery”) will be recorded in each rubric category.
Peterson ENGL 235
2
Exceeds Mastery Meets Mastery Near Mastery Well Below Mastery
Technical
Writing
Quality
meets purpose of assignment
effectively engages a professional
audience
employs varied sentence structures for
style and college-level reader interest
exhibits a precise and sophisticated
vocabulary
all sentences are factual, active, clear,
concise, and specific
remains focused on the central
research question(s) throughout in an
immediately recognizable way
shows mastery of the narrowed topic
and articulates its complexities
presents a logical progression of ideas
based on the topic
maintains focus within each paragraph
uses highly effective subheadings
provides clear and directive topic
sentences and sophisticated transitions
within and between paragraphs
includes logical paragraph breaks
does not display any serious patterns
of error
maintains a consistent point of view
and appropriate verb tense
contains very few mistakes of syntax,
grammar, and punctuation, and none
that interfere with meaning
largely meets purpose of
assignment
targets a professional audience
uses varied sentences, but may
occasionally repeat certain
structures and lengths
exhibits largely effective word
choice though there may some
misuse, ineffective repetition,
and/or a minimal use of
slang/cliché
some sentences do not meet
factual, active, clear, concise, and
specific standards
presents a largely logical
progression of ideas based on the
topic
maintains focus within most
paragraphs
uses satisfactory title and/or
subheadings
mostly provides topic sentences
and has basic transitions within and
between paragraphs
includes largely logical paragraph
breaks
may display patterns of error,
which do not significantly interfere
with meaning
rarely strays from a consistent
point of view and an appropriate
use of tense
features occasional mistakes with
syntax, grammar, and punctuation,
but not enough to significantly
interfere with meaning
may not adequately meet terms of assignment
does not consistently engage a professional audience
exhibits some lack of control over
sentence structures, possibly repeating a simple syntax or creating a needlessly
complex syntax
may be limited by an inadequate vocabulary, with word choice that is
imprecise, repetitive, and/or reliant on slang and cliché
several sentences do not meet factual, active, clear, concise, and specific
standards
relies on a progression of ideas that is not entirely logical and/or is not always
related to the topic
loses focus within some paragraphs
uses subheadings, though that use might be limited
occasionally provides topic sentences and uses transitions inconsistently
within and/or between paragraphs
breaks paragraphs in ways that may not always be logical to the reader
displays patterns of error that either distract or sometimes interfere with
meaning
tends to stray from a consistent point of view and appropriate use of tense
approaches standard written English, but significant mistakes with syntax,
grammar, and punctuation make
meaning unclear at points
does not meet terms of assignment
lacks awareness of an audience
lacks control of sentence
structures, relying on careless or
received patterns
uses an imprecise and simplistic
vocabulary that might also contain
deceptive or inflammatory
language and that might be heavily
reliant on slang and cliché
few sentences meet factual, active,
clear, concise, and specific
standards
has a progression of ideas that is
not logical and/or is not based on
the topic
does not maintain focus within
paragraphs
uses few or no subheadings
largely fails to provide topic
sentences and either does not use
transitions or uses transitions that
are ineffective
does not use logical paragraph
breaks
displays serious patterns of error
that substantially interfere with
meaning
lacks control over point of view
and tense
does not show mastery of the
conventions of standard written
English, and serious mistakes with
syntax, grammar, and punctuation
compromise clear communication
Peterson ENGL 235
3
Research Use thoroughly supports and develops the topic using relevant, credible, and richly
varied sources
synthesizes relevant source support
through effective interpretation and
analysis
consistently uses an appropriate
balance of analysis, summary,
paraphrase, and quotation
considers and convincingly responds
to varying claims
consistently introduces source
material with varied and effective signal
phrasing
maintains strict ethical standards and
avoids plagiarism through correct and
precise paraphrasing, use of quotation
marks, in-text citations and an MLA
Works Cited, APA, or IEEE References
page
sufficiently supports and develops
the topic using fairly relevant,
credible, and varied sources
provides some synthesis of
relevant source support through
interpretation and analysis
mostly uses an appropriate balance
of analysis, summary, paraphrase,
and quotation
might rely somewhat too much on
direct quotation
considers varying claims and offers
some response
introduces most source material
with signal phrasing
avoids plagiarism through
competent paraphrasing and use of
quotation marks, and mostly
correct in-text citations and an
MLA Works Cited, APA, or IEEE
References page
provides some support and
development of the topic, but may
not be entirely relevant, credible,
or varied
provides some interpretation and
analysis of source material, but
may fail to effectively synthesize
source material
has some balance of analysis,
summary, paraphrase, and
quotation
may use direct quotation where
paraphrase or summary would be
more appropriate
does not adequately consider or
respond to varying claims
largely lacks clear signal phrasing
provides minimal framing of
source material
includes some weak paraphrasing,
errors in the use of quotation
marks, and/or errors in the in-text
citations or an MLA Works Cited,
APA, or IEEE References page
provides insufficient support and development of the topic, perhaps
because of too few relevant, credible, or
varied sources
does not synthesize source material into report’s recommendation(s) and lacks
interpretation and analysis of source material
does not balance analysis, summary, paraphrase, and quotation
might rely on direct quotation to the exclusion of paraphrase and summary
lacks consideration of varying claims
lacks signal phrasing
lacks framing of source material
includes weak or inadequate paraphrasing and/or significant errors in
the use of quotation marks
includes significant errors in the in-text citations and/or an MLA Works Cited,
APA, or IEEE References page, or
lacks one or both of these
might be unintentionally plagiarizing sources because of the above
weaknesses