PHI210 Anderson University RN As a Jumping Off Point for A Critical Response

A critical response paper is one that summarizes and evaluates. So, roughly the first half of the paper will be a summary of the author’s argument, and the second half will be an evaluation of the content discussed in the first half. The paper should demonstrate a thorough understanding of the author’s argument and include carefully reasoned arguments in defense of the student’s point of view. The paper should also make as many connections as possible to course materials, including quotes from the book(s), as well as from other essays and articles when relevant. Students may use a previously written RN as a ‘jumping off’ point for a critical response.

For the first critical response paper, the student will respond, critically (where ‘critically’ means ‘with substantive engagement’, and not necessarily ‘with disagreement’), to any one of the readings from UNIT 3. Students should not do any outside research. Rather, limit your research to the readings found in UNIT 3.

  • 600 – 800 words
  • Double-spaced
  • 12 point font
  • 1 inch margins
  • No cover page
  • Saved as a Word .doc
  • Proper citations (Chicago/Turabian)
  • Must be uploaded through CANVAS on or before the due date.
  • There will be a deduction of one full letter grade (that is: 11%) for every day the assignment is late.

The paper must be argumentative within a critical response framework.

Critical Response Papers

Critical Response Papers

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality of WritingGrammar and style are polished = 27 – 30; Grammar and style are good = 24 – 26.5; Grammar and style are acceptable, but some problems may make reading difficult = 21 – 23.5; Grammar and style obstruct reading = 1 – 20.5

30.0 pts

Excellent Quality

Grammar and style are polished = 27 – 30

26.5 pts

Good Quality

Grammar and style are good = 24 – 26.5

23.5 pts

Acceptable

Grammar and style are acceptable, but some problems may make reading difficult = 21 – 23.5

20.5 pts

Poor Quality

Grammar and style obstruct reading = 1 – 20.5

30.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeMeets minimum requirementsPaper is not an argumentative response essay = 0; Paper is not on a relevant topic = 0; Paper is either under or over the required word count = 0

20.0 pts

Full Marks

0.0 pts

Does not meet minimum requirements

Paper is not an argumentative response essay = 0; Paper is not on a relevant topic = 0; Paper is either under or over the required word count = 0

20.0 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality and Clarity of ArgumentExcellent summary of author’s arguments; excellent evaluation of author’s arguments; multiple and relevant connections with other course materials; logical argumentation is employed in defense of student’s point of view = 45 – 50; Good summary of author’s arguments; good evaluation of author’s arguments; some connections with other course readings; logical argumentation is employed in defense of student’s point of view = 40 – 44.5; Acceptable summary of author’s arguments; acceptable evaluation of author’s arguments; few connections with other course readings; logical argumentation is employed in defense of student’s point of view = 35 – 39.5; Summary may be seriously deficient; evaluation may be seriously deficient; connections to other course materials may be lacking; logical argumentation and coherence may be lacking = 1 – 34.5

50.0 pts

Excellent summary and excellent evaluation

Excellent summary of author’s arguments; excellent evaluation of author’s arguments; multiple and relevant connections with other course materials; logical argumentation is employed in defense of student’s point of view = 45 – 50

44.5 pts

Good summary and good evaluation

Good summary of author’s arguments; good evaluation of author’s arguments; some connections with other course readings; logical argumentation is employed in defense of student’s point of view = 40 – 44.5

39.5 pts

Acceptable summary and evaluation

Acceptable summary of author’s arguments; acceptable evaluation of author’s arguments; few connections with other course readings; logical argumentation is employed in defense of student’s point of view = 35 – 39.5

34.5 pts

Seriously deficient summary and evaluation

Summary may be seriously deficient; evaluation may be seriously deficient; connections to other course materials may be lacking; logical argumentation and coherence may be lacking = 1 – 34.5

50.0 pts

Total Points: 100.0

Please ensure that the paper is not a full summary of the reading. Briefly summarize “an” argument from the reading and spend the rest of the time evaluating it.

“Get 15% discount on your first 3 orders with us”
Use the following coupon
FIRST15

Order Now