Your task is to explore a controversy or complex issue in human development, taking into consideration various points of view and what research has to say on the subject. It isn’t necessary to take sides. You may come to your own conclusions; just be sure your conclusions make sense given the facts you present.
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
phy writing assignment
Just from $13/Page
Important note on topic selection: “Nature vs. Nurture” is not an acceptable topic, as there is no controversy surrounding this issue. Research is clear that human development involves both biology and experience.
Also, I DO NOT want encyclopedic papers that just reports facts. You should write on a topic you are interested in thinking about.
Paper Requirements:
All papers are to have a professional appearance. They are to be typed and free of grammatical and spelling errors. Papers should be about 850 words long (3 pages). The title page and reference page is NOT included in the 3 pages. You must use the equivalent of 3 journal articles. Cite your sources using APA style. An example of APA format is attached. You do not need to include an Abstract with this paper.
Begin by introducing the topic, explaining why it is a controversy and its relevance to human development. Include relevant background information from the textbook.
Explain the different points of view in the controversy and the relevant evidence. For example, if one side argues that people are influenced by experiences they had before the age of 3, what experiments demonstrate that such memory exists? What experiments demonstrate that such memories have lingering influence?
Summarize the points of view. If you have formed a conclusion of your own, state it and state how you came to your conclusion. If you have not formed a conclusion of your own, say why not. Do you need more information? If so, what questions remain in your mind?
The writing assignment grading rubric is attached.
Grading Rubric
|
|
Source quality
|
Relevance
|
Thoroughness
|
Insight
|
Writing/mechanics
|
|
Exceeds Expectations
|
Psychology Journals only
|
Topic is complex and allows for multiple points of view; topic is clearly related to Human Development
|
Sources represent a variety of points of view, and include the results of scientific research; each is fully described; information from the textbook is integrated into the paper
|
Conclusion demonstrates thought and reflection; a synthesis of information from various sources is evident
|
Consistently follows rules of standard English; Writing is organized, clear and coherent; Sources cited using APA style correctly in text and in Works Cited
|
|
Meets Expectations
|
In-depth articles in the New York Times, news magazines, or Psychology Today and at least 1 Journal article
|
Topic has at least 2 points of view; is related to Human Development
|
Sources represent at least 2 points of view and are of high quality (describe scientific research, provide strong logic and evidence; avoid anecdotes); each source is described; the textbook is used in the analysis
|
Conclusion is logical and follows from information presented in the paper
|
No major errors in English usage; Organized for readability; Sources cited using APA style
|
|
Approaches Expectations
|
Brief articles in the New York Times, news magazines, or Psychology Today
|
Topic is “encyclopedic” (there is only one point of view to have); relation to Human Development is tangential
|
Sources represent only one point of view or are simplistic (simply listing information and not providing sources, logic, or contradictory points of view); the textbook is mentioned, but not used in the analysis
|
Conclusion does not follow from information presented or reflects no new thought
|
Significant errors in English usage; some organizational problems; Citations are inadequate
|
|
Does Not Approach Expectations
(failing grade)
|
.com sources with no author or references
|
Topic is “encyclopedic”; topic is not related to Human Development
|
Sources represent only one point of view and are simplistic; the textbook is not used
|
Conclusion is weak, unclear, or illogical
|
Multiple significant errors in English usage; poorly organized; fails to cite sources; is not stap
|
