Traditional energy
adjahoolayemi
TermPaperandVideoProject.docxTerm Paper and Video Project
Write a paper (a scholarly paper) on your chosen energy topic. Your focus is on either electricity (if you had Nuclear, Renewable, or Conventional) or transportation. The instructor assigned your topic which will be Traditional energy . The paper must be a minimum 2500 words. On average, this will be 5-6 pages long, single spaced. (This is NOT including pictures, references, or graphs, which should also be included. See the rubric attached.) In the past, I used 5-6 pages, but the issue of formatting, etc. made this a game. YOUR PAPER MUST BE 2500 words, or more. If it is not, I will use a factor of (number of words) / 2500, before I grade. This is the work of a term, not of a few hours before it is due. Also, I would like you to use a SANS-SERIF font like Arial, or Calibri. Please, DO NOT USE TIMES ROMAN. Use 10 or 12 pitch font. I prefer 0.5 to 1 inch margins, and 0.5 to 1 inch top and bottom.
The paper must have references. There must be a minimum of 10 references, but most papers will have more. Include any work which you have taken information from. The references should be in ACS reference format, using Superscripts. (Google ACS reference format for style) I would like you to use the format where you reference with a superscript number and then reference that number in the back in the bibliography (or references). http://library.williams.edu/citing/styles/acs.php
Wikipedia is good reading, but is not a reference.
The rubric for grading the term paper is on the below.
|
Components |
Unacceptable |
Accepted |
Good |
Excellent |
|
Content & vocabulary |
• little or no use of terms or incorrect use; clichés, idioms and colloquialisms |
• minimal use of terms but in isolation or use of jargon; name dropping of authors or terms but insufficient context or explanation |
• good use and linking of terms but still lacking fluency |
• fluency, sequencing, & appropriateness of terms, concepts, practices, & authors |
|
Conceptualization |
• little or no use of concepts or practices; may show previous knowledge from career, but does not demonstrate learning related to course |
• clear presentation of sequenced concepts or practices |
• integrated concepts or practices |
• integrating or synthesizing concepts in original and innovative way |
|
Organization |
• unclear or no purpose statement or overview, few organizational cues, disorganized presentation |
• clear statement or concise overview, well organized, but with few cues (e.g., headers, bullets, indentation); unclear transitions and sequencing |
• clear statement, well organized, thesis sentences, good cues; good transitions and sequencing |
• previous criteria plus attractive layout and design; publishable format in APA style |
|
Argument |
• presentation of opinion or statement without evidentiary or logical support; illogical argument |
• support by argument and evidence but with weak sources |
• clearly sequenced steps leading to clear conclusion, logical argument with authoritative sources (not necessarily current) |
• clear statement, examples, sequencing, logical and multiple authorities, evidentiary support, current journal sources |
|
Resources |
• no resources referenced. |
• personal communication or popular sources predominate; variable citation permanence |
• Use of secondary sources, accessible references, 3-5 sources |
• predominance of sound primary authorities, recent journals, in-text citations match references, good citations, accessible references, 5+ sources |
|
Graphics |
• no graphics (may be appropriate in some cases) |
• graphics available but poor quality and content (e.g., faint, unimportant content, etc.) |
• figures, tables and text match and are explained in text; titles & numbering of graphics |
• graphics add value to text by summarizing or simplifying key ideas; original graphics |
|
Mechanics |
• several errors in spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and/or sentence structure showing carelessness |
• a few overlooked errors |
• few or no errors, but sentence structure could improve |
• no errors and excellent sentence structure and fluency |
