Assignment: Physician Assisted Suicide

Assignment: Physician Assisted Suicide
Assignment: Physician Assisted Suicide
· ? Discuss the technical aspects of your topic in general terms.
· ? Discuss the public policy debates relevant to the topic you choose. This section should cover arguments
that are in favor of and opposed to the use of the techniques or products.
· ? Express your personal opinion regarding the importance of the topic and the validity of the pro and con
arguments.
· ? It is expected that you have the following:
o A title page o The body of the paper: 4-6 pages of text, double-spaced, 12 point font with clear and
understandable language with no grammar or spelling errors. Provide adequate justification that supports your response with at least three appropriate references using textbooks, websites, and articles are required.
o Subheadings (technical aspect, public policy, and personal opinion/conclusion.) o Appropriate in-text citations throughout paper o A reference page with only the sources that you used in the body of the paper. Sources should be
less than 5 years old unless there has not been recent research available. At least one reference must be a peer-reviewed article from a profession journal. Do not use Wikipedia or encyclopedia as they are not considered a reliable academic source to use.
o Appropriate formatting as per APA 6th ed. website: http://owl.english.purdue.edu Grading (300 possible points total)
Final Paper Rubric
Meets Expectations 80-100% Approaches Expectations 60-79% Does Not Meet Expectations 0-59%
Content 50% Paper demonstrates that the author fully understands and has applied course concepts.
Paper includes several high- quality, thought- provoking ideas.
Topic is focused narrowly enough for the scope of the assignment.
Paper does not demonstrate that the author fully understands and has applied course concepts.
Paper includes few, if any, thought-provoking ideas or unique insights to the discussion.
Topic is not focused narrowly enough for the scope of the assignment.
The paper indicates no understanding of the concepts in the course.
The paper lacks any exploration of the subject by the author.
The topic is unclear or too broad for the scope of the assignment.
Organization/ Cohesiveness 20% Connections among subtopics and the thesis/topic are clear without being repetitive or redundant.
Concluding remarks demonstrate analysis and synthesis of ideas.
Writing and integration of source materials is eloquent and skillful.
Connections among subtopics are missing or forced.
Conclusion is unclear or disconnected from the topic.
Writing and integration of source materials is awkward or confusing.
Connections among subtopics are missing. Subtopics are not presented.
Conclusion is missing or disconnected from the topic.
Writing lacks skill. Sources are not present.
Supporting Evidence/Research 20% Three or more appropriate sources are completely and eloquently integrated throughout the paper.
At least one source is from credible, scholarly, peer- reviewed materials.
Detailed, meaningful quotations and paraphrases aptly and accurately support the topic.
Fewer than three appropriate sources are used.
At least one source is from credible, scholarly, peer- reviewed materials.
Quotations and paraphrases are lacking or do not support several subtopics.
Sources are missing.
Paper lacks quotations and paraphrases.
Mechanics and APA 10%
The assignment consistently follows current APA format and is free from errors in formatting, citation, and references.
No grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors. All sources are cited and referenced correctly.
The assignment does not follow current APA format and/or has many grammatical, spelling, or punctuation errors.
Many sources are cited and referenced incorrectly, or citations and references are missing where needed.
No attempt to follow APA format is indicated. Sources are not used and/or there is no reference page.
Mechanical errors significantly interfere with the readability of the paper.