1. Students, please view the "Submit a Clickable
Rubric Assignment" in the Student Center.
Instructors, training on how to grade is within the
Instructor Center.
Assignment 5: Persuasive Paper Part 3:
Possible Disadvantages, Answers, with Visuals
Due Week 10 and worth 250 points
Using feedback from your professor and
classmates, revise Parts 1 and 2, and add Part 3.
Plan to include visuals to illustrate the advantages
of your proposed solution.
Write an eight to ten (8-10) page paper in which
you:
Provide Part I: Revision of A Problem Exists (3-4
pages)
1. Revise your Persuasive Paper Part 1: A
Problem Exists, using feedback from the
professor and classmates.
Provide Part 2: Revision of Part 2: Solution to
Problem and Advantages (3-4 pages)
2. Revise your Persuasive Paper Part 2:
Solution to Problem and Advantages, using
feedback from the professor and classmates.
Develop Part 3: Possible Disadvantages, Answers,
with Visuals (1-2 pages, for 7-9 total pages)
3. Included a defensible, relevant thesis
statement in the first paragraph.
4. State, explain, and support the first
disadvantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral,
etc.) to your solution and provide a logical
answer. This should be one (1) paragraph.
5. State, explain, and support the second (and
third if desired) disadvantage (economic, social,
political, environmental, social, equitable,
ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution and provide
a logical answer. This should be one or two (12) paragraphs.
6. Include one or two (1-2) relevant visuals that
help illustrate an advantage.
7. Use effective transitional words, phrases, and
sentences.
8. Provide a concluding paragraph to
summarize the proposed solution, its
advantages, possible disadvantages, and
answers to the disadvantages. Repeat or
paraphrase your thesis statement.
9. Develop a coherently structured paper with
an introduction, body, and conclusion.
10. Use one (1) or more rhetorical strategy
(ethos, logos, pathos) to explain claims.
11. Support disadvantages and answers with at
least two (2) additional quality relevant
references. Use at least eight (8) total for Parts
1, 2, and 3. Note: Wikipedia and other Websites
do not qualify as academic resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting
guidelines:
•
•
Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman
font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides;
citations and references must follow APA or schoolspecific format. Check with your professor for any
additional instructions.
Include a cover page containing the title of the
assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s
name, the course title, and the date. The cover page
and the reference page are not included in the
required assignment page length.
Note: Submit your assignment to the designated
plagiarism program so that you can make revisions
before submitting your paper to your professor.
The specific course learning outcomes associated
with this assignment are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Recognize the elements and correct use of a thesis
statement.
Associate the features of audience, purpose, and
text with various genres.
Analyze the rhetorical strategies of ethos, pathos,
logos in writing samples and for incorporation into
essays or presentations.
Correct grammatical and stylistic errors consistent
with Standard Written English. Prepare a research
project that supports an argument with structure and
format appropriate to the genre.
Revise drafts to improve clarity, support, and
organization.
Recognize how to organize ideas with transitional
words, phrases, and sentences.
Incorporate relevant, properly documented sources
to substantiate ideas.
Use technology and information resources to
research selected issues for this course.
Write clearly and concisely about selected topics
using proper writing mechanics.
Click here to view the grading rubric for this
assignment
Rubric Detail
A rubric lists grading criteria that instructors use to evaluate student work. Your instructor linked a
rubric to this item and made it available to you. Select Grid View or List View to change the rubric's
layout.
Content
Top of Form
Name: ENG215 Week 7 Assignment 4: Persuasive Paper Part 2 - Solution and Advantages
Description: ENG215 Week 7 Assignment 4: Persuasive Paper Part 2 - Solution and Advantages
Grid View
List View
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
ENG215-A41
1. Revise,
using
feedback
from the
professor
and
classmates,
your
Persuasive
Paper Part
1: A
Problem
Exists.
Weight: 5%
Meets Minimum
Expectations 60- Fair 70-79% C
69% D
Proficient 8089% B
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 5.98
(2.99%)
Points
Range: 6
(3%) - 6.98
(3.49%)
Points
Range: 7
(3.5%) - 7.98
(3.99%)
Points
Range: 8
(4%) - 8.98
(4.49%)
Did not
submit or
incompletel
y revised,
using
feedback
from the
professor
and
classmates,
your
Insufficientl
y revised,
using
feedback
from the
professor
and
classmates,
your
Persuasive
Paper Part
Partially
revised,
using
feedback
from the
professor
and
classmates,
your
Persuasive
Paper Part
Satisfactoril
y revised,
using
feedback
from the
professor
and
classmates,
your
Persuasive
Paper Part
Exemplary 90100% A
Points: 9.5
(4.75%)
Points
Range: 9
(4.5%) - 10
(5%)
Thoroughly
revised,
using
feedback
from the
professor
and
classmates,
your
Persuasive
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
Persuasive
Paper Part
1: A
Problem
Exists.
Meets Minimum
Expectations 60- Fair 70-79% C
69% D
Proficient 8089% B
Exemplary 90100% A
Paper Part
1: A
Problem
Exists.
1: A
Problem
Exists.
1: A
Problem
Exists.
1: A
Problem
Exists.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
ENG215-A42
2. Include a
defensible,
relevant
thesis
statement
clearly in
the first
paragraph.
Weight: 5%
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 6
(3%) - 6.98
(3.49%)
Points
Range: 7
(3.5%) - 7.98
(3.99%)
Points
Range: 8
(4%) - 8.98
(4.49%)
Insufficientl
y included a
defensible,
relevant
thesis
statement
clearly in
the first
paragraph.
Partially
included a
defensible,
relevant
thesis
statement
clearly in
the first
paragraph.
Satisfactoril
y included a
defensible,
relevant
thesis
statement
clearly in
the first
paragraph.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 5.98
(2.99%)
Points
Range: 6
(3%) - 6.98
(3.49%)
Points
Range: 7
(3.5%) - 7.98
(3.99%)
Points
Range: 8
(4%) - 8.98
(4.49%)
Did not
submit or
Insufficientl
y explained,
Partially
explained,
Satisfactoril
y explained,
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 5.98
(2.99%)
Did not
submit or
incompletel
y included a
defensible,
relevant
thesis
statement
clearly in
the first
paragraph.
Feedback:
ENG215-A43
3. Explain a
detailed,
viable
solution
that
supports
your thesis.
This should
Points: 9.5
(4.75%)
Points
Range: 9
(4.5%) - 10
(5%)
Thoroughly
included a
defensible,
relevant
thesis
statement
clearly in
the first
paragraph.
Feedback:
Points: 9.5
(4.75%)
Points
Range: 9
(4.5%) - 10
(5%)
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
be one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Weight: 5%
incompletel
y explained,
in one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs,
a detailed,
viable
solution
that
supports
your thesis.
Meets Minimum
Expectations 60- Fair 70-79% C
69% D
Proficient 8089% B
Exemplary 90100% A
Thoroughly
explained,
in one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs,
a detailed,
viable
solution
that
supports
your thesis.
in one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs,
a detailed,
viable
solution
that
supports
your thesis.
in one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs,
a detailed,
viable
solution
that
supports
your thesis.
in one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs,
a detailed,
viable
solution
that
supports
your thesis.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
ENG215-A44
4. State,
explain, and
support the
first
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution.
This should
be one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Weight:
10%
Feedback:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 11.98
(5.99%)
Points
Range: 12
(6%) - 13.98
(6.99%)
Points
Range: 14
(7%) - 15.98
(7.99%)
Points
Range: 16
(8%) - 17.98
(8.99%)
Did not
submit or
incompletel
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the first
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
Insufficientl
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the first
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
Partially
stated,
explained,
and
supported
the first
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
Satisfactoril
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the first
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
Points: 19
(9.5%)
Points
Range: 18
(9%) - 20
(10%)
Thoroughly
stated,
explained,
and
supported
the first
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Meets Minimum
Expectations 60- Fair 70-79% C
69% D
Proficient 8089% B
Exemplary 90100% A
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
(1-2)
paragraphs.
(1-2)
paragraphs.
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
ENG215-A45
5. State,
explain, and
support the
second
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution.
This should
be one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Weight:
10%
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 11.98
(5.99%)
Did not
submit or
incompletel
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the second
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Feedback:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 12
(6%) - 13.98
(6.99%)
Points
Range: 14
(7%) - 15.98
(7.99%)
Points
Range: 16
(8%) - 17.98
(8.99%)
Insufficientl
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the second
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Partially
stated,
explained,
and
supported
the second
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Satisfactoril
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the second
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points: 19
(9.5%)
Points
Range: 18
(9%) - 20
(10%)
Thoroughly
stated,
explained,
and
supported
the second
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Feedback:
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
Meets Minimum
Expectations 60- Fair 70-79% C
69% D
Proficient 8089% B
Points:
ENG215-A47
6. State,
explain, and
support the
third (and
fourth if
desired)
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution.
This should
be one or
two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Weight:
10%
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 12
(6%) - 13.98
(6.99%)
Points
Range: 14
(7%) - 15.98
(7.99%)
Points
Range: 16
(8%) - 17.98
(8.99%)
Insufficientl
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the third
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Partially
stated,
explained,
and
supported
the third
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Satisfactoril
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the third
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 11.98
(5.99%)
Points
Range: 12
(6%) - 13.98
(6.99%)
Points
Range: 14
(7%) - 15.98
(7.99%)
Points
Range: 16
(8%) - 17.98
(8.99%)
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 11.98
(5.99%)
Did not
submit or
incompletel
y stated,
explained,
and
supported
the third
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Feedback:
ENG215-A48
7. Provide a
concluding
paragraph /
transitional
paragraph
Exemplary 90100% A
Points: 19
(9.5%)
Points
Range: 18
(9%) - 20
(10%)
Thoroughly
stated,
explained,
and
supported
the third
advantage
(economic,
social,
political,
environmen
tal, social,
equitable,
ethical/mor
al, etc.) to
your
solution in
one or two
(1-2)
paragraphs.
Feedback:
Points: 19
(9.5%)
Points
Range: 18
(9%) - 20
(10%)
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
that
summarizes
the
proposed
solution and
its
advantages.
Weight:10%
Did not
submit or
incompletel
y provided a
concluding
paragraph /
transitional
paragraph
that
summarizes
the
proposed
solution and
its
advantages.
Meets Minimum
Expectations 60- Fair 70-79% C
69% D
Proficient 8089% B
Exemplary 90100% A
Insufficientl
y provided a
concluding
paragraph /
transitional
paragraph
that
summarizes
the
proposed
solution and
its
advantages.
Partially
provided a
concluding
paragraph /
transitional
paragraph
that
summarizes
the
proposed
solution and
its
advantages.
Satisfactoril
y provided a
concluding
paragraph /
transitional
paragraph
that
summarizes
the
proposed
solution and
its
advantages.
Thoroughly
provided a
concluding
paragraph /
transitional
paragraph
that
summarizes
the
proposed
solution and
its
advantages.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points: 19
(9.5%)
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 11.98
(5.99%)
Points
Range: 12
(6%) - 13.98
(6.99%)
Points
Range: 14
(7%) - 15.98
(7.99%)
Points
Range: 16
(8%) - 17.98
(8.99%)
Did not
submit or
incompletel
y developed
a coherently
structured
paper with
an
introduction
, body, and
conclusion.
Insufficientl
y developed
a coherently
structured
paper with
an
introduction
, body, and
conclusion.
Partially
developed a
coherently
structured
paper with
an
introduction
, body, and
conclusion.
Satisfactoril
y developed
a coherently
structured
paper with
an
introduction
, body, and
conclusion.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
ENG215-A49
8. Develop a
coherently
structured
paper with
effective
transitional
words,
phrases,
sentences
and an
introduction
, body, and
conclusion.
Weight:
10%
Points
Range: 18
(9%) - 20
(10%)
Thoroughly
developed a
coherently
structured
paper with
an
introduction
, body, and
conclusion.
Feedback:
Unacceptable
Below 60% F
Meets Minimum
Expectations 60- Fair 70-79% C
69% D
Proficient 8089% B
Exemplary 90100% A
Feedback:
ENG215-A410
9. Support
advantage
claims with
at least
three (3)
additional
quality
relevant
references
(at least six
(6) total for
Parts 1 and
2).
Weight:
10%
ENG215-A411
10. Clarity,
writing
mechanics,
and
formatting
requirement
s
Weight:
25%
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 12
(6%) - 13.98
(6.99%)
Points
Range: 14
(7%) - 15.98
(7.99%)
Does not
meet the
required
number of
references;
all
references
poor quality
choices.
Does not
meet the
required
number of
references;
some
references
poor quality
choices.
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points:
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 29.98
(14.99%)
Points
Range: 30
(15%) 34.98
(17.49%)
Points
Range: 35
(17.5%) 39.98
(19.99%)
Points
Range: 40
(20%) 44.98
(22.49%)
More than 8
errors
present
7-8 errors
present
5-6 errors
present
3-4 errors
present
0-2 errors
present
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Feedback:
Points:
Points
Range: 0
(0%) - 11.98
(5.99%)
No
references
provided
Feedback:
Show Descriptions
Points:
Points
Range: 16
(8%) - 17.98
(8.99%)
Meets
number of
required
references;
most
references
high quality
choices.
Feedback:
Points: 19
(9.5%)
Points
Range: 18
(9%) - 20
(10%)
Meets
number of
required
references;
all
references
high quality
choices.
Feedback:
Points: 47.5
(23.75%)
Points
Range: 45
(22.5%) - 50
(25%)
Show Feedback
ENG215-A4-1
1. Revise, using feedback from the professor and classmates, your Persuasive Paper Part 1: A Problem
Exists.
Weight: 5%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 5.98 (2.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely revised, using feedback from the professor and classmates, your
Persuasive Paper Part 1: A Problem Exists.
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 6 (3%) - 6.98 (3.49%)
Insufficiently revised, using feedback from the professor and classmates, your Persuasive Paper Part 1: A
Problem Exists.
Fair 70-79% C 7 (3.5%) - 7.98 (3.99%)
Partially revised, using feedback from the professor and classmates, your Persuasive Paper Part 1: A
Problem Exists.
Proficient 80-89% B 8 (4%) - 8.98 (4.49%)
Satisfactorily revised, using feedback from the professor and classmates, your Persuasive Paper Part 1: A
Problem Exists.
Exemplary 90-100% A 9 (4.5%) - 10 (5%)
Thoroughly revised, using feedback from the professor and classmates, your Persuasive Paper Part 1: A
Problem Exists.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-2
2. Include a defensible, relevant thesis statement clearly in the first paragraph.
Weight: 5%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 5.98 (2.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely included a defensible, relevant thesis statement clearly in the first
paragraph.
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 6 (3%) - 6.98 (3.49%)
Insufficiently included a defensible, relevant thesis statement clearly in the first paragraph.
Fair 70-79% C 7 (3.5%) - 7.98 (3.99%)
Partially included a defensible, relevant thesis statement clearly in the first paragraph.
Proficient 80-89% B 8 (4%) - 8.98 (4.49%)
Satisfactorily included a defensible, relevant thesis statement clearly in the first paragraph.
Exemplary 90-100% A 9 (4.5%) - 10 (5%)
Thoroughly included a defensible, relevant thesis statement clearly in the first paragraph.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-3
3. Explain a detailed, viable solution that supports your thesis. This should be one or two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Weight: 5%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 5.98 (2.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely explained, in one or two (1-2) paragraphs, a detailed, viable solution that
supports your thesis.
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 6 (3%) - 6.98 (3.49%)
Insufficiently explained, in one or two (1-2) paragraphs, a detailed, viable solution that supports your
thesis.
Fair 70-79% C 7 (3.5%) - 7.98 (3.99%)
Partially explained, in one or two (1-2) paragraphs, a detailed, viable solution that supports your thesis.
Proficient 80-89% B 8 (4%) - 8.98 (4.49%)
Satisfactorily explained, in one or two (1-2) paragraphs, a detailed, viable solution that supports your
thesis.
Exemplary 90-100% A 9 (4.5%) - 10 (5%)
Thoroughly explained, in one or two (1-2) paragraphs, a detailed, viable solution that supports your
thesis.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-4
4. State, explain, and support the first advantage (economic, social, political, environmental, social,
equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution. This should be one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Weight: 10%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 11.98 (5.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely stated, explained, and supported the first advantage (economic, social,
political, environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 12 (6%) - 13.98 (6.99%)
Insufficiently stated, explained, and supported the first advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Fair 70-79% C 14 (7%) - 15.98 (7.99%)
Partially stated, explained, and supported the first advantage (economic, social, political, environmental,
social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Proficient 80-89% B 16 (8%) - 17.98 (8.99%)
Satisfactorily stated, explained, and supported the first advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Exemplary 90-100% A 18 (9%) - 20 (10%)
Thoroughly stated, explained, and supported the first advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-5
5. State, explain, and support the second advantage (economic, social, political, environmental, social,
equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution. This should be one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Weight: 10%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 11.98 (5.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely stated, explained, and supported the second advantage (economic,
social, political, environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 12 (6%) - 13.98 (6.99%)
Insufficiently stated, explained, and supported the second advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Fair 70-79% C 14 (7%) - 15.98 (7.99%)
Partially stated, explained, and supported the second advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Proficient 80-89% B 16 (8%) - 17.98 (8.99%)
Satisfactorily stated, explained, and supported the second advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Exemplary 90-100% A 18 (9%) - 20 (10%)
Thoroughly stated, explained, and supported the second advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-7
6. State, explain, and support the third (and fourth if desired) advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution. This should be one or two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Weight: 10%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 11.98 (5.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely stated, explained, and supported the third advantage (economic, social,
political, environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2)
paragraphs.
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 12 (6%) - 13.98 (6.99%)
Insufficiently stated, explained, and supported the third advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Fair 70-79% C 14 (7%) - 15.98 (7.99%)
Partially stated, explained, and supported the third advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Proficient 80-89% B 16 (8%) - 17.98 (8.99%)
Satisfactorily stated, explained, and supported the third advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Exemplary 90-100% A 18 (9%) - 20 (10%)
Thoroughly stated, explained, and supported the third advantage (economic, social, political,
environmental, social, equitable, ethical/moral, etc.) to your solution in one or two (1-2) paragraphs.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-8
7. Provide a concluding paragraph / transitional paragraph that summarizes the proposed solution and
its advantages.
Weight:10%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 11.98 (5.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely provided a concluding paragraph / transitional paragraph that
summarizes the proposed solution and its advantages.
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 12 (6%) - 13.98 (6.99%)
Insufficiently provided a concluding paragraph / transitional paragraph that summarizes the proposed
solution and its advantages.
Fair 70-79% C 14 (7%) - 15.98 (7.99%)
Partially provided a concluding paragraph / transitional paragraph that summarizes the proposed
solution and its advantages.
Proficient 80-89% B 16 (8%) - 17.98 (8.99%)
Satisfactorily provided a concluding paragraph / transitional paragraph that summarizes the proposed
solution and its advantages.
Exemplary 90-100% A 18 (9%) - 20 (10%)
Thoroughly provided a concluding paragraph / transitional paragraph that summarizes the proposed
solution and its advantages.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-9
8. Develop a coherently structured paper with effective transitional words, phrases, sentences and an
introduction, body, and conclusion.
Weight: 10%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 11.98 (5.99%)
Did not submit or incompletely developed a coherently structured paper with an introduction, body,
and conclusion.
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 12 (6%) - 13.98 (6.99%)
Insufficiently developed a coherently structured paper with an introduction, body, and conclusion.
Fair 70-79% C 14 (7%) - 15.98 (7.99%)
Partially developed a coherently structured paper with an introduction, body, and conclusion.
Proficient 80-89% B 16 (8%) - 17.98 (8.99%)
Satisfactorily developed a coherently structured paper with an introduction, body, and conclusion.
Exemplary 90-100% A 18 (9%) - 20 (10%)
Thoroughly developed a coherently structured paper with an introduction, body, and conclusion.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-10
9. Support advantage claims with at least three (3) additional quality relevant references (at least six (6)
total for Parts 1 and 2).
Weight: 10%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 11.98 (5.99%)
No references provided
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 12 (6%) - 13.98 (6.99%)
Does not meet the required number of references; all references poor quality choices.
Fair 70-79% C 14 (7%) - 15.98 (7.99%)
Does not meet the required number of references; some references poor quality choices.
Proficient 80-89% B 16 (8%) - 17.98 (8.99%)
Meets number of required references; most references high quality choices.
Exemplary 90-100% A 18 (9%) - 20 (10%)
Meets number of required references; all references high quality choices.
Feedback:
ENG215-A4-11
10. Clarity, writing mechanics, and formatting requirements
Weight: 25%-Levels of Achievement:
Unacceptable Below 60% F 0 (0%) - 29.98 (14.99%)
More than 8 errors present
Meets Minimum Expectations 60-69% D 30 (15%) - 34.98 (17.49%)
7-8 errors present
Fair 70-79% C 35 (17.5%) - 39.98 (19.99%)
5-6 errors present
Proficient 80-89% B 40 (20%) - 44.98 (22.49%)
3-4 errors present
Exemplary 90-100% A 45 (22.5%) - 50 (25%)
0-2 errors present
Feedback:
Raw Total: 190.00 (of 200.0)
Feedback to Learner
Name:ENG215 Week 7 Assignment 4: Persuasive Paper Part 2 - Solution and Advantages
Description:ENG215 Week 7 Assignment 4: Persuasive Paper Part 2 - Solution and Advantages
Bottom of Form
Professor’s Feedback
Nice job here!, I see this meets the 6-8 page minimum, and you have the revisions from part
one.
In part two, you explored the solution and advantages well. You included a relevant
thesis in the first paragraph with a detailed solution that supported it in the next
paragraph. You explained the first, second and third advantages to your solution in the
subsequent three paragraphs, you use effective transitional words, and your concluding paragraph
summarizes your solution along with the advantages. Overall, your paper is nicely structured with an intro, a
body, and a conclusion, and your References Page contains the appropriate six total references. You also
have little grammatical/spelling errors here. Great work with this!
Running head: PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
Problems Associated with Exam Cheating
Fanessa M. Sellers
Professor Rachel Gruskin
ENG 215 Research and Writing
November 23, 2017
1
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
2
Problems Associated with Exam Cheating
More than 60% of college students have cheated in college examinations at one point in
their lives. More than 20% do not regret it and thus become regular cheaters attaining GPAs that
are not rightfully theirs (Beasly, 2014). This trend is very worrying because the industries get
more than 20% of cheaters and a workforce that does not rightfully qualify to be where it is.
Therefore, the problem of cheating in colleges is a big one, and it deserves serious actions. The
most severe punishment that a student can get for cheating is discontinuation from the program
that he or she is undertaking and out of the university as well. Expelling students who cheat in
examinations will help to bring a serious consideration of the consequences of cheating and thus
discourage the malpractice.
Examination cheating can be simply explained as an effort to acquire grades using
shortcuts and the failure to depend on one's knowledge to pass tests. According to Dick et al.
(2002), examination cheating is a result of attaching a lot of value to the tests that are
administered to students. Further, it can also be viewed as a response to the pressure to perform
whereby people who feel pressured to provide positive results are more likely to cheat on their
tests than those who feel less pressured. In a wider view, examination cheating can be viewed as
a result of the challenges associated with obtaining higher education.
As a means of getting into depth with the issue of cheating, it is necessary to examine
several fundamental questions. The first problem that requires exploring is how the hardships of
getting a higher education may contribute towards the malpractice. This first issue is more of an
economic problem. Secondly, it is necessary to understand the ethical implications of cheating
and how it may affect the morals of both the perpetrators and other students. Finally, it is also
necessary to know the organizational challenges such as enablers in the school environment that
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
3
may foster cheating in the first place. These three wide problems must be considered if cheating
is to be curbed in colleges and other institutions of higher learning.
First and foremost, the economic problem of the challenges of obtaining higher education
in the country can be said to be a major contributing factor towards the issue of cheating. There
are several difficulties in obtaining a higher education that may foster the development of the
malpractice. Most universities in the U.S are expensive for an average citizen. Therefore, once a
person is in such an institution, it becomes extremely important to retain their position.
Therefore, non-performing students may be tempted to result in cheating as a means of helping
them to achieve better grades. This desperate situation is what Hamlin et al. (2013) dictate as the
leading factor in cheating. When students have invested a high amount of time and money into
their education, they feel obliged to perform because failing would mean a failed investment.
The second problem affecting cheating malpractices is the ethical and moral implications
that cheating may produce. It is evident, according to Kusnoor and Falik (2013), that a cheater
erodes the morals in the test and rids himself of integrity. The lack of integrity in any activity
means that a person cannot be trusted and they are often more likely to be corrupt than do the
right and just thing. Therefore, when a person cheats, it shows they cannot be trusted and must be
under close supervision in whatever he does. Employers also lose faith in the graduates that the
institutions provide. When cheating is rampant, employers are in constant fear of employing
unqualified employees. Further, they fear that the people that they employ may apply the same
unprofessional methods of achieving results. Therefore, it is necessary that the integrity of the
systems is preserved so that employers have trust in higher education systems.
The students' economic statuses and the moral repercussions contribute towards cheating,
but the organizations contribute to the problem as well. The third issue associated with cheating
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
4
is the economic resources of the institutions of higher education. This is a major contributor
towards cheating. Institutions that lack enough funds to pay their lecturers well may discourage
them from delivering quality education. Members of the faculty who are not well motivated may
end up presenting insufficient content to their students. In that case, when students are not well
equipped for their tests, they are more likely to panic and try to achieve results through other
means. According to Kusnoor and Falik (2013), the pressure for students to perform is partly
because of the inability to perform well under normal circumstances.
While still on the organizational challenges, the social scope of higher education
institutions appear as a result of cheating and sometimes lead to cheating. For instance, Hamlin
et al. (2013) discovered that the course organization affects the students’ willingness to cheat in
their examinations. When the course is poorly organized, students are more likely to lose hope in
making anything out of the course content and result in cheating instead. This disorganization of
the course material is just one of the many enablers that direct students to cheating. Another
example would be the sitting arrangement whereby crowding allows the malpractice to develop
in the examination setting. Issues such as the lack of supervision are also to be faulted for
enabling students who partake in the malpractice. It is thus evident that the institutions play a
critical role in the cheating habits of the students.
A serious reconsideration of expulsion as a punishment for cheating in tests may present
the malpractice as critical thus gaining the attention of the students. Several problems arise from
cheating. The first is the ethical issue that arises from the cheating parties. It is often seen as
unfair when a student does their best but gets a worse grade than another student who just
cheated on their test. Further, employees lose their confidence in graduates who come from
institutions which have been linked with exam cheating. Another problem that could be causing
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
5
cheating is the economic implications of the education system. Getting a degree in the U.S is
expensive. People invest a lot of money in their education, and that leads them to use any means
to pass their tests and make their money count. Furthermore, institutions that struggle with poor
pay for lecturers encourage cheating because unmotivated educators are likely to be reluctant to
supervise students or even teach efficiently. A critical approach to the issue of cheating in higher
education institutions can provide a solution to the current problems in the system.
Solution to Cheating in College
The workforce is receiving less than satisfactory results from institutions of higher
education due to the rampant cheating that has been witnessed. Therefore, the biggest problem is
that there is a general loss of faith in the graduates that are joining the industry. Therefore, to
curb this problem, expelling students who are caught cheating will serve as a warning to others
and also reduce the issue of cheating. This solution is tough, but it presents the only available
solution to save the reputation of colleges and universities and restore the dignity that was once
accustomed to receiving a degree from an institution of higher education. Expelling cheating
students will restore the dignity of higher education, increase the economic returns of educational
institutions, and promote equality in the society.
Expelling students who cheat is one sure way of ensuring that the reputation of the
students, institutions and even the system as a whole is restored. According to Abasi and Graves
(2008), employers shy away from admitting graduates who come from institutions that have been
associated with cheating scandals in the past. This effect goes on for many years, and even the
students who graduate with genuine grades are tarnished due to the scandals that the dishonest
students created. This adverse effect paints institutions and their students in a bad light and thus
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
6
they lose market in the job industry. Expelling exam cheaters could solve this problem hence
allowing graduates to compete fairly in the industry.
Other than the graduates themselves, institutions of higher education are painted as
lacking morals and ethics. This ethical problem is an issue that arises from the accommodation of
cheating students, no matter how little the scandals may seem. According to Hayes (2017), more
than 40% of employers in the manufacturing industry are employing workers who have not
attended these institutions and preferred to offer on-job-training. If the reputation of higher
institutions is saved through the failure to entertain cheating, graduates will be more marketable
and the institutions will also be marketable to people who consider joining them. Therefore, it is
evident that expelling students who are caught cheating will sanctify the reputation of institutions
of higher learning and thus increase their social acceptance and that of the graduates who come
from them.
Other than making institutions and their graduates more socially acceptable and
recognized, expelling cheating students will also present positive economic repercussions for the
students and the institutions as well. Students who invest in their education often expect an
economic gain from the expertise that they get from school (Fendler and Godbey, 2016).
However, cheaters fail to realize that getting genuine grades means that they get the relevant
knowledge and expertise required in the industry. For instance, a business management student
who cheats misses the chance to obtain crucial business management skills that he or she
requires running businesses well in the industry. Abolishing cheating and taking a tough stand on
it as Abasi and Graves (2008) suggest makes the students realize that the only way to obtain the
grades is through the proper channels. Eventually, the economic value of the money and
resources that they or their parents invest in the education is realized in the skills that they get
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
7
through hard work. All this chain reaction and consequences can be viewed as a result of
expelling students who cheat in exams tests and making a tough stand against cheating.
Institutions that expel cheating students also gain economically from the tough stand
against cheating. The policies in institutions of higher learning market or spoil the market for
them. For instance, as a parent, one would not like to enroll their child in an institution that
encourages cheating; they feel cheated and their children corrupted. Therefore, if an institution
has a good track record set by the tough stand they have on cheating, it is likely to attract more
applicants. Similarly, when a person is applying to an institution, they like to know that their
investment will not be compromised by negative publicity. Essentially, as Fenler and Godbey
(2016) discuss, institutions sell themselves to potential consumers when they implement policies
that point towards promoting ethical conduct. This case of cheating is similar to any other issue
that could bring negative publicity such as student or employee abuse. That way, if the policy of
zero tolerance to cheating is implemented, the institution attracts more applicants which translate
to an economic gain.
Cheating students find a short way to achieve their life dreams of education, better job
opportunity, and even a lifestyle. All this may be based on a lie that is the cheating that they do
in their higher education courses. While these people base their entire lives on gaining
advantages unfairly, there is another category of people that struggle to make it in life and attain
their goals. This arrangement is unfair and promotes inequality in every aspect of life. Therefore,
if cheaters are not allowed to have their way unfairly, the policy promotes equality in the society.
Expelling cheaters promotes equality in education because every person in the institutions gets
their educational certificates rightfully and they, therefore, compete equally in life. Hayes (2017)
argues that people who get undeserved credits in school are more likely to be corrupt in other
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
8
aspects of the society. Such people are annoying, and they promote inequality. If expelling
cheaters are authorized, such people will be limited in the society.
Expelling cheaters is one of the sure ways of promoting equality, increasing the economic
benefits of the education system, and saving the reputation of institutions. It is evident that
employing graduates from institutions faced with scandals is a thing that most employers do not
prefer. Therefore, saving the reputation of institutions creates a positive image in the society.
Further, a cheater lies to himself that they gain any advantage through the certificate, but the
critical knowledge is not gained. Expelling them will allow people to gain skills and knowledge
that match their investment. Finally, equality in tests translates to equality in the society and thus
expelling the perpetrators of cheating malpractices will increase equality in the society.
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH EXAM CHEATING
9
References
Abasi, A. & Graves, B. (2008). Academic literacy and plagiarism: Conversations with
international graduate students and disciplinary professors. Journal of English and
Academic Purposes, 7(4), 221-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.10.010
Beasley, E. M. (2014). Students reported for cheating explain what they think would have
stopped them. Ethics & Behavior, 24(3), 229-252.
Dick, M., Sheard, J., Bareiss, C., Carter, J., Joyce, D., Harding, T., & Laxer, C. (2002, June).
Addressing student cheating: definitions and solutions. In ACM SigCSE Bulletin (Vol. 35,
No. 2, pp. 172-184). ACM.
Fendler, R. & Godbey, J. (2016). Cheaters Should Never Win: Eliminating the Benefits of
Cheating. Journal of Academic Ethics, 14: 71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10805-0159240-8
Hamlin, A., Barczyk, C., Powell, G., & Frost, J. (2013). A comparison of university efforts to
contain academic dishonesty. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues, 16(1), 35.
Hayes, D. (2017). Beyond McDonaldization: Visions of Higher Education. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Kusnoor, A. V., & Falik, R. (2013). Cheating in medical school: the unacknowledged
ailment. South Med J, 106(8), 479-83.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment