Medical Marijuana

1. Give me a more attention-grabbing opening sentence.
2. Review the assignment instructions for the proper formatting of the thesis statement.
3. Your first sentence of paragraph 2 is awkward. You’ll want to fix that.
4. If you don’t use sub-headings, make sure you use transitional words and phrases (Some argue that… However… On the other hand…) so the reader can follow the counterarguments and your rebuttals.
5. Make sure you back up all claims with outside sources.
6. Review APA rules for the capitalization of article titles. Sometimes you get these right, and other times not.
Instructions
This week, you will complete the final draft of your Pro-Con Position Paper. Review the template provided and consider the feedback from your instructor and peers as you make edits and finalize your work.
The final draft should apply the following:
An APA formatted title page
An attention grabbing introduction to draw in the audience
A well-written thesis that acknowledges both pro and con topics
A formal tone, avoiding both 1st (I, me, my, we, our, us, mine) and 2nd (you, your) person point of view – no slang or contractions
Either the alternating or divided pattern of organization, presenting both counterarguments and rebuttals
Body paragraphs that include topic sentences, evidence, and concluding/connecting sentences
Five incorporated scholarly sources, including at least two peer-reviewed sources, that support all assertions
A conclusion that resolves the argument and applies a thought-provoking concluding technique
In-text and reference page citations in APA format
Writing Requirements (APA format)
Length: 4-5 pages (not including title page or references page)
1-inch margins
Double spaced
12-point Times New Roman font
Title page
References page (minimum of 5 scholarly resources, including at least two peer-reviewed sources)
Pro-Con Position Paper Grading Rubric – 175 pts
Pro-Con Position Paper Grading Rubric – 175 pts
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Length
5.0 pts
Meets length requirement
0.0 pts
Does not meet length requirement
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Point Analysis
30.0 pts
The central idea is developed and expanded with depth of critical thought.
25.5 pts
The central idea is discernible and developed.
22.5 pts
The central idea needs more development with points tying back to the thesis.
18.0 pts
The central idea is not developed, and the analysis lacks critical thought.
0.0 pts
No effort
30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Support
30.0 pts
The writing supports claims with several detailed and persuasive examples. The paper effectively demonstrates academically credible research including two peer-reviewed resources to support the claims and examples.
25.5 pts
The writing supports claims with examples, but additional analysis or examples could strengthen the argument. Peer-reviewed and academic level resources are present, but could be strengthened through number and use to support claims and examples.
22.5 pts
The writing supports claims with examples, but the examples are not well-developed or examined. Additional examples and analysis are needed to make the argument more persuasive. Some quality research is present, but overall effectiveness and reliability in research and support are not fully demonstrated.
18.0 pts
The central idea is not well-supported by claims and/or examples. Credibility in research and resources has not been well established to support claims and examples.
0.0 pts
No effort
30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Counterpoint
30.0 pts
The paper effectively introduces counterpoints by establishing credibility of sources and detailing the evidence from the sources and presents concessions of the counterpoints.
25.5 pts
The paper introduces counterpoints by establishing credibility of sources and detailing the evidence from the sources and presents concessions of the counterpoints but may need to strengthen analysis.
22.5 pts
The paper introduces counterpoints but may not establish credibility of sources or detail the evidence effectively or may not present concessions.
18.0 pts
The paper does not introduce counterpoints clearly, omitting the credibility of the sources or providing little detail of the evidence No concession is present or the concession is ineffective.
0.0 pts
No effort
30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Organization
30.0 pts
Paper is clear and cohesive. Introduction and conclusion support the overall flow of the paper.
25.5 pts
Paper is basically clear and well-organized with a minimum of non-related material present.
22.5 pts
Paper has some issues with clarity, flow, and cohesion. Paper lacks organization.
18.0 pts
Paper lacks organization and has difficulty staying on track. Central themes are difficult to identify.
0.0 pts
No effort
30.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Revision & Refinement
10.0 pts
The writing reflects the feedback received from instructor.
0.0 pts
The writing does not reflect feedback received from instructor.
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Writing: Mechanics & Usage
10.0 pts
The writing is free of major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that would detract from a clear reading of the paper.
8.5 pts
The writing contains a few major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation, but the errors do not detract from a clear reading of the text.
7.5 pts
The writing contains some major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that need to be addressed for a clearer reading of the paper.
6.0 pts
The writing contains several major errors in grammar, spelling, and punctuation that impede a clear reading of the paper.
0.0 pts
No effort
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Clarity & Flow
10.0 pts
The writing contains strong word choice that clarifies ideas and masterful sentence variety aids with the flow of ideas.
8.5 pts
The writing contains varied word choice and sentence structures that clarify ideas and aid with the flow of ideas.
7.5 pts
The writing contains word choice and sentence structures that can be revised for better clarification of ideas and flow of ideas.
6.0 pts
The writing contains wording and sentence structures that are awkward and/or unclear, impeding the clarity and flow of ideas.
0.0 pts
No effort
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Voice
10.0 pts
The writing maintains third-person point of view/objective voice throughout the entire text.
8.5 pts
The writing maintains third-person point of view/objective voice throughout much of the text.
7.5 pts
The writing has some deviation from third-person point of view/objective voice that needs to be revised so as not to sound biased or patronizing.
6.0 pts
The writing deviates significantly from third-person point of view/objective voice that needs to be revised so as not to sound biased or patronizing.
0.0 pts
No effort
10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome APA Format
10.0 pts
All sources are properly integrated and cited in the text and references page demonstrating a mastery of integrating resources and APA format.
8.5 pts
Most sources are integrated and cited in the text and references page. Some minor errors may exist in integration and/or citation, but it does not interfere with understanding the source of the information.
7.5 pts
Most sources are integrated and cited in the text and references page. Some errors may exist in integration and/or citation that need to be addressed to clarify the source of information.
6.0 pts
Sources are not properly integrated/cited in the text/references page. Formatting contains several errors that suggest a lack of understanding of the integration of resources and APA format.
0.0 pts
No effort
10.0 pts
Total Points: 175.0
The post Medical Marijuana ACADEMIC ASSISTERS. ACADEMIC ASSISTERS.

>>>Click here to get this paper written at the best price. 100% Custom, 0% plagiarism.<<<

The post Medical Marijuana appeared first on First Class Essay Writers.

- collegepaperslab.com