critically analyze the concept of Political correctness and its implication. ?’Critically’, therefore from multiple perspectives
critically analyze the concept of Political correctness and its implication.
"Critically", therefore from multiple perspectives
An acceptable analysis should be 1500 words (+/- 10%) integrating a minimum of 3 academic sources (evidenced by citations).
• Your project must be APA formatted.
Paper Rubric
| Grading Rubric for EN200 Paper | |||||||||||
| Student Name: | |||||||||||
| Course: | EN200 | ||||||||||
| Assignment Name: | |||||||||||
| Scale | Below 40 | 40-49 | 50-59 | 60-69 | 70-79 | 80-89 | Over 90 | ||||
| Criteria | Weight | Overall Points | Comments | ||||||||
| 1. Content analysis | Little evidence that the student understood the issues involved, with very limited coverage of the relavant issues. Weak arguments, with irrelevant material | Descriptive work. Coverage of some material relevant to the issue, but lacks depth. | Work done competently. Good coverage of the relevant issues, with an ability to produce and integrate arguments relative to those issues. Limited analytical response. . | The task is completed very competently. Analytical approach to the relevant issues, with well reasoned arguments. | Very good quality work, idetifying all relevant issues. High degree of competence when analyzing and developing the material, with a deep understanding of the subject and what was required to do. | Excellent quality work, idetifying all relevant issues. High degree of competence when analyzing and developing the material, with a clear understanding of the subject and the assessed task.Signs of creative originality and critical independent thinking. | Work of outstanding quality. All relevant issues are identified, completely understood and analyzed with originality.Full knowledge is demonstrated. | 50% | 0 | ||
| 2. Organization and structure | Unsatisfactory paper. Little care to present the material in an acceptable and organized way, with many spelling and grammatical mistakes . Lacks structure, and the paper as a whole does not follow a logical flow. | Attempt at organization, though the material is not particularly well structured. There are some spelling or grammatical errors. | Discernible structure. Mostly, the paper is clearly worded, with only few spelling or grammatical errors. The organization of the paper is good, allowing a logical progression. | Clear and well organized structure. Concise and clear wording, with very few minor spelling or grammatical errors. | Very good structure, with an engaging development that allows to follow convincingly all the line argumentation. Virtually no spelling or grammatical errors | Excellent structure, with an engaging development that allows to follow convincingly all the line of argumentation. Virtually no spelling or grammatical errors The organization and development of the task engages successfully the reader´s attention throughout the entire paper. | Fluent and extremely well structured work. Impeccable organization, contributing to the cohesiveness and effectiveness of the argumentation throughout the entire paper. Very neatly presented with no mistakes. | 40% | 0 | ||
| 3. Citing and referencing | No citations. | Some citation is present. | Sound sources not properly referenced and incomplete | Sources properly referenced but incomplete | Most sources properly referenced | All sources properly referenced | All sources properly referenced | 10% | 0 | ||
| Total Points | 0 | ||||||||||
| * plagiarism = F for assignment! | Late Penalty | 0% | |||||||||
| Possible Points | 100 | ||||||||||
| Grade | 0.00% | ||||||||||
Presentation Rubric
| Grading Rubric for EN200 Presentation | |||||||||||
| Student Name: | |||||||||||
| Course: | EN200 | ||||||||||
| Assignment Name: | |||||||||||
| Scale | Below 40 | 40-49 | 50-59 | 60-69 | 70-79 | 80-89 | Over 90 | ||||
| Criteria | Weight | Overall Points | Comments | ||||||||
| 1. Content Analysis | Relevant issues not identified. Badly presented material. Student shows a poor understanding, with weak intellectual arguments | Covers some of the topic, in an articulated way.Lacks depth. | Good coverage of relevant issues. Abilitly to produce arguments relative to the issues under focus but with a limited analytical response. | Very well-reasoned arguments and anlytical approach, identifying the relevant issues. | Very well-reasoned arguments and anlytical approach, identifying the relevant issues. A strong analysis is developed. | Work of excellent quality, developingthe topic in full. with in-depth insights and strong analysisi. Shows creative originality and thinking. | Work of outstanding quality. In-depth insights and strong analysis. Shows creative originality and thinking. Topic completelely understood. | 40% | 0 | ||
| 2. Presentation Analysis | Unacceptably sloppy. Organization of the whole presentation is poor and does not follow logical flow. If in a team, unwillingness to actively cooperate and integrate with the other team members in the assigned task | Material not particularly well presented and structured. If in a team, some willingness to participate | Material presented with reasonable care and discernible structure. Descriptive and lacks originality. Closing missing or unclear. If in a team, integration effort. | High presentation standards, and high degree of competence. Closing is clear.If in a team, the presentation and delivery is well integrated and coordinated. | Very good presentation standards, showing skill and creativity in organization and delivery.Enhances audience interest .Closing is clear. If in a team, shows some leadership. | Excellent presentation sshowing skill and creativity in organization and delivery. Enhances audience interest.Closing well organized and effective If in a team, shows strong leadership. | Outsatnding presentation, creative and analytical. Multuple techniques to successfully create audience interest Closing contributes to a unified and cohesive presentation. If in a team, leadering it. | 50% | 0 | ||
| 3. Citing, referencing, timing | No citations. Presentation not sent on time. | Some citation is present. Presentation sent on time. | Sound sources not properly referenced and incomplete Presentation sent on time. | Sources properly referenced but incomplete Presentation sent on time. | Most sources properly referenced. Presentation sent on time | All sources properly referenced. Presentation sent on time | All sources properly referenced. Presentation sent on time | 10% | 0 | ||
| Total Points | 0 | ||||||||||
| Late Penalty | 0% | ||||||||||
| Possible Points | 100 | ||||||||||
| Grade | 0.00% | ||||||||||
Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers
Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.
Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS
Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?
Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.
We write plagiarism Free Content
Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.
Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.
