hum101 5 page apa formated essay

So again, this is the hardest professor I have ever had and gave me an 80% on a previous paper that I could find no mistakes in. For reference I have pretty close to a 100% in all of my classes but his. it is a 100 level class with 500 level expectations. not only does the content need to follow the rubric exactly but he expects MFA quality style writing.

This project is worth 100 points or almost 25% of my grade, let me know what you think is reasonable or if you have any specific questions please.

Thanks again!

Option #1: Media Bias and Propaganda

Directions:
Using the concepts learned through the readings and lecture pages, select a social issue or ethical dilemma in the news. Find three recent articles from three different media sources on the issue and then answer the following questions:
*What assumptions do you make about these articles before reading them? How is your mind already “at work”?
*What evidence of bias can you find in the articles selected? *What is the point of view expressed (if there is one) by the article?
*How do the stories favor privileged views?
*What is a peer-reviewed source? What peer-reviewed sources did you find that helped in thinking critically about your issue?

Requirements:

• Cite all claims and ideas using scholarly sources. While it is acceptable to write in the first person, be sure to cite your sources to support your inferences.
• Include at least one or two scholarly sources that are not required or recommended readings for this course. The CSU-Global Library (Links to an external site.) is a good place to find these sources.
• Your paper should be four to five pages in length and formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA (Links to an external site.).
• Papers should be double-spaced, 12-point font Times New Roman.
• Include the following in your essay: a brief introduction (Links to an external site.), a conclusion, and a reference page formatted according to CSU-Global APA requirements.

Option #2: Historical and Contemporary Examples of Media Bias and Propaganda

Directions:
The required readings this week include historical and contemporary examples of media bias and propaganda from a range of times, cultures, and countries (the United States, China, Iraq, Rwanda, etc.). Using these required readings, address the following prompts and questions:

1. Compare and contrast the propaganda and bias emerging from jihadist fighters (Klausen, 2015) and the Chinese state (King, Pan, & Roberts, 2017). What similarities do you detect? Differences? How can propaganda and bias be used to further different aims?
2. Describe two historical examples of propaganda from Murphy and White (2007) that show how governments use propaganda and the media to achieve their ends?
3. What suggestions do Murphy and White (2007) offer in terms of how the U.S. government should use information? What criticisms or critiques do you have of their approach?

Requirements:

• Cite all claims and ideas using scholarly sources. While it is acceptable to write in the first person, be sure to cite your sources to support your inferences.
• Include at least one or two scholarly sources that are not required or recommended readings for this course. The CSU-Global Library (Links to an external site.) is a good place to find these sources.
• Your paper should be four to five pages in length and formatted according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing & APA (Links to an external site.).
• Papers should be double-spaced, 12-point font Times New Roman.
• Include the following in your essay: a brief introduction (Links to an external site.), a conclusion, and a reference page formatted according to CSU-Global APA requirements.

Required

• Chapter 12 in Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life (3rd ed.).
• King, G., Pan, J., & Roberts, M. E. (2017). How the Chinese government fabricates social media posts for strategic distraction, not engaged argument. The American Political Science Review, 111(3), 484-501.
• Klausen, J. (2015). Tweeting the Jihad: Social media networks of Western foreign fighters in Syria and Iraq. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, 38(1), 1-22. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1057610X.2014.974948?scroll=top&needAccess=true
• Murphy, D. M., & White, J. F. (2007). Propaganda: Can a word decide a war? Parameters, 37(3), 15.

Recommended

• Yanagizawa-Drott, D. (2014). Propaganda and conflict: Evidence from the Rwandan genocide. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 129(4), 1947-1994.

Rubric

HUM101 Mod 5 CT

HUM101 Mod 5 CT

Criteria	Ratings	Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Requirements	10.0 to >8.0 pts Meets Expectation Includes all of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 8.0 to >6.0 pts Approaches Expectation Includes most of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 6.0 to >4.0 pts Below Expectation Includes some of the required components, as specified in the assignment. 4.0 to >0 pts Limited Evidence Includes few of the required components, as specified in the assignment.	10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Content	10.0 to >8.0 pts Meets Expectation Demonstrates strong or adequate knowledge of the materials; correctly represents knowledge from the readings and sources. 8.0 to >6.0 pts Approaches Expectation Some significant but not major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 6.0 to >4.0 pts Below Expectation Major errors or omissions in demonstration of knowledge. 4.0 to >0 pts Limited Evidence Fails to demonstrate knowledge of the materials.	10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Critical Thinking	25.0 to >20.0 pts Meets Expectation Demonstrates strong or adequate critical thinking. 20.0 to >15.0 pts Approaches Expectation Some significant but not major errors or omissions in critical thinking. 15.0 to >10.0 pts Below Expectation Major errors or omissions in critical thinking. 10.0 to >0 pts Limited Evidence Fails to demonstrate critical thinking.	25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Critical Analysis	25.0 to >20.0 pts Meets Expectation Demonstrates strong or adequate critical analysis of intellectual thinking and reasoning. 20.0 to >15.0 pts Approaches Expectation Some significant but not major errors or omissions in critical analysis of intellectual thinking and reasoning. 15.0 to >10.0 pts Below Expectation Major errors or omissions in critical analysis of intellectual thinking and reasoning. 10.0 to >0 pts Limited Evidence Fails to demonstrate critical analysis of intellectual thinking and reasoning.	25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Sources / Examples	10.0 to >8.0 pts Meets Expectation Sources or examples meet required criteria and are well chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination. 8.0 to >6.0 pts Approaches Expectation Sources or examples meet required criteria but are less than adequately chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination. 6.0 to >4.0 pts Below Expectation Sources or examples meet required criteria and are poorly chosen to provide substance and perspectives on the issue under examination. 4.0 to >0 pts Limited Evidence Source or example selection and integration of knowledge from the course is clearly deficient.	10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Demonstrates college-level proficiency in organization, grammar and style.	10.0 to >8.0 pts Meets Expectation Project is clearly organized, well written, and in proper format, as outlined in the assignment. Strong sentence and paragraph structure; few errors in grammar and spelling. 8.0 to >6.0 pts Approaches Expectation Project is fairly well organized and written and is in proper format, as outlined in the assignment. Reasonably good sentence and paragraph structure; significant number of errors in grammar and spelling. 6.0 to >4.0 pts Below Expectation Project is poorly organized; does not follow proper paper format. Inconsistent to inadequate sentence and paragraph development; numerous errors in grammar and spelling. 4.0 to >0 pts Limited Evidence Project is not organized or well written and is not in proper paper format. Poor quality work; unacceptable in terms of grammar and spelling.	10.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome Demonstrates proper use of APA style	10.0 to >8.0 pts Meets Expectation Project contains proper APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with no more than one significant error. 8.0 to >6.0 pts Approaches Expectation Few errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with no more than two to three significant errors. 6.0 to >4.0 pts Below Expectation Significant errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with four to five significant errors. 4.0 to >0 pts Limited Evidence Numerous errors in APA formatting, according to the CSU-Global Guide to Writing and APA, with more than five significant errors.	10.0 pts
Total Points: 100.0

19 mins ago

 

Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.